STATEMENTS, REMARKS

Based on the Global Society as we have described it, we observe and highlight what is right or wrong in today’s world. Who and which (nations, ideas, politics, institutions) are on the right path? Who or which are off course?

TITLES

Never the Same Again

Our Own Position and Mission

USA, EU, CHINA, AND RUSSIA

NEVER THE SAME AGAIN

Once the world has perceived and discovered the Global Society, it will never be the same again. The focus will shift from the old world—the nation-state world and its actions—to the new one. A spirit of hope, light, trust, and faith in the future will emerge.

Governments, presidents, ministers, monarchs, and others will move from being appointed, authoritarian, patriarchal, and controlling to becoming humble, thoughtful, reconciliatory, and cooperative.

The academy, especially the social sciences, which has always supported and served the state but also stood for truth and science, will finally choose the scientific path. It will speak about the Global Society, especially to students who want it so. The students demand it because it is the future and the time they will live in.

The media, which in the West holds a strong position and continuously scrutinizes power, will continue in the same manner but with a shift toward and hand in hand with the Global Society. People are curious about this and have great interest.

All people will gain a new outlook on life.

The world will never be the same again.

OUR OWN POSITION AND MISSION

In this world of change, we must first clarify where we ourselves stand.

We have left the sphere surrounding state power and established ourselves outside of it. At the core of this sphere is the state power, and around it move the media, academia, interest organizations, opinion makers, think tanks, and others. We no longer exist within this sphere, or as it is also called, the box.

We have established ourselves outside this environment and created our own base, founded on what can be called the human social formation, its ideas and theories. Here we stand firmly with both feet, searching for and formulating the new order, The Global Society.

We are independent and answer only to our principles. We do not modulate our message to powers, interests, or anyone else. We shall lay the foundation for a new field of knowledge and a new social construction, and we shall do this truthfully. Only then will it be whole, healthy, and enduring.

In relation to other sciences, we commit ourselves to Darwinism, to the struggle for life and survival, and to a materialistic view of history. We do not believe in a power conjured out of thin air or in unwritten social contracts.

Thus, we have left the box and its sphere of thought. We do not think in national terms and are certainly not politically correct. We have settled outside society and have begun to shape thoughts about the next world, that is, The Global Society. For that reason, we are not hermits, perhaps emigrants or pilots, and we still maintain a relationship to the old world. From our position, we reflect the old nation-state world. We raise a beacon that shows the direction the world should take. The beacon also sheds light on the political and human landscape, making everything much easier when one must move forward. One avoids groping in the dark, colliding, stepping wrong, getting hurt, or groaning.

How each individual step should be taken is best known to the nations and their leadership themselves. The entire people must be included. In the light, everything becomes much simpler.

Our language is simple and something the average person can understand. We are clear, not least because new ideas can cause many follow-up questions. It takes time before the new has settled and before the new meanings have found their meaning.

USA, EU, CHINA, RUSSIA

Our entire world is moving toward The Global Society. It is especially interesting to find out how the truly great powers—USA, EU, China, and Russia—are moving and what conditions they have to move forward.

Most depends on how large and dominant the state administration itself is in each country. The state usually means what exists in the capital city. If many people sit there controlling and managing, it becomes difficult to move forward. It is precisely these that need to be removed and are hard to phase out.

USA

The superior and most adapted power for the ongoing journey toward The Global Society is the USA. The history of the USA is about building a non-state; people themselves should create their own future, and together with others. The state itself was to be minimal. The goal was to break away from the lords of the old country and their control, surveillance, and reprimands. The same went for the state church, which with its pomp, rituals, and preaching only led to hopelessness.

Oppression was many people’s reason for emigrating, but most, of course, sought a better material life. In America, there were opportunities; in America, one was free.

This remains true today. For a long time, there was an attempt to turn their back on Europe and isolate themselves, but it was not possible, and they were drawn into Europe’s intrigues and wars. In this role, they have developed into a world power—but all this is managed by Washington. The rest of America lives as before, in original condition, built from the ground up by the people and without lordly power.

On the path toward TGS (The Global Society), the overarching power is to be dismantled. The USA hardly has such a power and is in an absolutely best position on the outlined path forward.

Europe

Europe, including Russia, today consists of about 30 nations, and that is far too many. Communications allow for one and only one nation. The production apparatus also wants it that way. It wants to be able to produce fully in millions if it is to be cheap. Then there should be no obstacles or brakes.

The EU, the European Union, works toward a united and borderless Europe, which is completely in line with current realities. However, the work is progressing slowly. They have succeeded in legally establishing a norm for a borderless business community with the four freedoms: free movement across borders of goods, capital, services, and people, which is naturally good. Much else has also been legally established, but in practice, progress is slow. Nations do not want to give up themselves just like that; they want to remain. The roots are deep, and each nation is precisely a nation with its own language and culture. Identity cannot be switched arbitrarily.

They also have their own people to answer to, among other things by ensuring that the nation’s interests are considered. Nationalism easily awakens when problems arise, such as with migration. Some nations in Central Europe also want to assert that they are sovereign and deserve full respect. These are nations that in history have had their borders moved back and forth and trampled by boots and caterpillar tracks.

In Europe, the old social order also remains, the one created during the “agricultural era,” with a ruling elite and a subordinate people. Previously, the ruling elite existed for itself, but through democracy, it has become for the people, whose wishes are to be fulfilled. The structure thus remains but with a different mission. The structure as such does not fit into The Global Society and therefore must be reshaped, something that cannot be done just any way but can be expected to be strenuous.

CHINA

When the West meets the East, their different characters become clear. The West is warlike and ideological, whereas the East (China) is peaceful and pragmatic.

It is sometimes said that ideologies cause wars. This could explain why wars mainly happen in the West, almost exclusively in Europe. (However, the main cause of war, as we see it, is the desire to seize more fertile land.) In the West, there are ideologies. When a nation in the West is governed, there are different ideologies to choose from, different “-isms.” Every government follows its own “-ism,” which is supposed to lead to an ideal society. This applies in the physical world. In the metaphysical world, it is the same. There is religion, which by its nature is also ideological. Religion explains existential questions such as where do I come from and what am I supposed to do here?

In China, it is different. China is peaceful, perhaps because there is nothing nearby to take. It is surrounded by desert, sea, and mountains. Their neighbors, the Mongols, on the other hand, had much to gain from China and therefore stormed in every autumn to feast on the year’s harvest. China does not strike back but builds a wall.

Historically, China is described as a dynasty—that is, it was not really a state with a central power. It is a nation, which means people share the same language, look alike, think and behave in the same way. Culturally, they are a unit. Politically, they have not been as unified, not enough to be called a state. The country is too large and has a huge population. It is communications that determine a country’s size. Ancient China could hold, let’s say, five states, which led to disputes about borders and rights. This was where wars occurred, i.e., internal conflicts; outwardly there was nothing to gain.

Today, with well-developed communications, there are conditions for central governance, and such a system has been established. It manages the new China. The old still remains, and the regions can still be sensed as strong. Therefore, China should still be seen, or not ignored as, a regionally existing entity beneath the surface.

Outwardly, China is peaceful and also does not have any major state-affiliated religion. Instead, it has a philosophy of wisdom—i.e., accumulated experiences are built into a manual from which actions are taken. One adapts to the situation.

Pragmatism means China can switch from communism to capitalism overnight without problems. This may seem strange, but if one is not ideologically obsessed, it is completely natural to choose what has proven to work best.

The transition to capitalism and market economy and the acceptance of WTO terms was the start of a powerful economic development for China. They have the potential to become the largest, something China’s leadership knows and maneuvers toward. They do so pragmatically in a defensive and compliant manner. They avoid confrontations and say yes to most things. Agreements are just a way to neutralize the situation and move forward. Why take risks on the road to becoming the largest?

China is a one-party state, and this is not good. It is not a democracy, and the leadership is fully aware of this. They know they must get there sooner or later. The 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising remains deeply ingrained and haunts like a ghost. That time it was managed, but if there is a contemporary uprising in all regions or major cities, it would be the end. So far, it is calm, and as long as they deliver an ever-higher standard of living to their citizens, nothing happens. When people want to “consume” democracy, it becomes more serious.

The most dangerous hotspots, such as Hong Kong and Taiwan, are either suppressed or warned off. They know what awaits in the long run and play “The South African Game,” meaning they do not relinquish power until it starts burning under their feet. That is several decades away.

RUSSIA

Russia is backward, and this may be because it was outside European cooperation for over 70 years. That was when the communist experiment was conducted. It may have been well-intentioned but became restrictive. People could survive but not live.

In the beginning, there were great hopes for communism, which was supposed to lead to everyone’s happiness. Over time, hope faded, and in its later stages everything stalled. The economy did not want to grow despite the five-year plans calling for it.

The cause of failure was the planned economy. The planned economy focused on people’s basic needs and not, like the market economy, on what people wanted. The planned economy prescribed what should be done, not what could be done. For example, planners could not understand why everyone should have a car when public transport was much more efficient. They could only see physical needs, not virtual ones. As a result, the planned economy could never reach the volumes of the market economy and only managed halfway.

The planned economy was difficult to handle. All production was predetermined in quantity, and if there was a shortage of something, it affected the entire production chain and its branches. A component shortage could delay the completion of all products that included the component, which in turn reduced the total quantity, planned growth, usefulness, etc.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union was heavily strained. War production demanded a lot and took priority over private consumption. People had to settle for a simple survival existence.

The Soviet Union had several satellite states that included Russia. These often had their own culturally diverse views on how communism should be implemented, which led to constant discussions and problems for the Kremlin.

When China changed systems and the West grew richer, it was no longer sustainable; the USSR was at a dead end. Step by step, attempts were made to negotiate a new relationship with the West, but the openings led to a collapse. Yeltsin came to power and cleared everything out. A liberal-democratic society à la West was introduced. At the same time, all satellite states became free.

Now Russia had to change its social body, and it might have worked if the newborn had been allowed to grow up to take over from the old. An implementation phase, in other words. This was overlooked, which led to a kind of counter-revolution. It came from the powerful KGB (now FSB), which, using fear as a tool, had the task of keeping order over the people and their thoughts. Like a usurper (cuckoo chick), it put its man Putin next to Yeltsin. Putin was appointed president—elected in name only, as elections in Russia are nothing but predetermined confirmations.

On site, Putin secured his position by signaling to his inner circle that he was the one in charge, using both legal and illegal methods. Meanwhile, the newly established democratic institutions were cut down so they no longer interfered.

As an autocrat, Putin could now do as he pleased, namely restore the ideals of his youth, working as a young KGB officer for Russia’s greatness and honor. The Kremlin should have a leading role on the world stage and be a pole around which the action revolves. Outside, the world’s leaders should line up to meet Putin.

As part of the strategy, Russia militarily attacked Ukraine, mainly to install a puppet in the capital Kiev. This has failed, so currently the focus is on territorial gains in the southeast.

In connection with the war, the West abandoned Russia and became its opponent, as in Soviet times. Russia is therefore back to square one and must eventually make a fresh start.

Russia has, of course, no chance—just like any other power—against the emerging global society. It is just a matter of trying to keep up and adapt; otherwise, one loses in development. Putin’s dreams and actions mean that Russia hopelessly falls behind. The damage is incalculable; there are no territorial gains that can compensate. Russia’s future, at least this century, will only be as a raw material supplier. The Western companies that once established themselves in Russia and promised more will likely be cautious going forward.

Summary

How the different great powers relate to the Global Society we thus summarize and rate as follows:

USA — Completely positive. The foundation to move forward to the Global Society is already in place.

EU — Positive. Working towards a borderless Europe, which is the right path.

China — Not negative. Constantly adapting to developments.

Russia — Negative. Going in the wrong direction, falling behind and shrinking.