Erhalten Sie Zugang zu diesem und mehr als 300000 Büchern ab EUR 5,99 monatlich.
- Herausgeber: BoD - Books on Demand
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
Not created with AI If you look at our planet, you can actually see that there is a willful attempt to destroy it. Whether it's through military conflicts or economic power plays. But that doesn't even begin to address global warming and its consequences. Only when you look at the increasingly frequent natural disasters should humanity finally get moving to counteract this development. And that doesn't just mean politics, but every single individual.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 104
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025
Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:
Ähnliche
Foreword
Far be it from me to attack anyone here or to judge anyone. Rather, it is my view of things, as I interpret it below. It may well be that one or the other thinks that this is a radical view of things. But sometimes it seems to me that you bury your head in the sand. Not reacting will solve itself. I believe that this thread runs through the entire writing. As I said, this is not paternalism of anyone, but my opinion on various things at home and abroad.
Content
January 2025
25 years of Putin: From beacon of hope to bitter opponent
Russia's population clearly rejects the use of nuclear weapons
State of emergency declared in New Orleans after attack with 15 dead
Special operation with expiry time?
coalition negotiations and the media
Abolition of democracy?
Despite international sanctions, North Korea continues to test nuclear-capable missiles
As was to be expected
Generational change announced
Elon Musk and his influence
Convicted – Unpunished – President
EU "censorship" for online giants
Digital Commissioner wants to consistently enforce EU rules
Sanctions seem to be taking effect
Are there still fire walls?
Is your own infrastructure to be ignored?
What remains of Biden?
Endless War
Mini-nuclear power plants – great dangers?
Deportations on a large scale
Almighty President
Electricity from space?
Europe as a pioneer
What we can do
Disaster and AFD (Alternative for Germany)
Trump wants to resettle people from Gaza to Egypt and Jordan
Trump and his blackmails
Private jets and Davos
Vučić wants to decide on new elections in Serbia in ten days
Firewall or disaster?
Desire Object Greenland
March 2025
Perpetrator-victim reversal
Absurd rethinking of nuclear energy
Bureaucracy and Elon Musk
And another attack in Germany
Avoid plastic or not?
Special EU summit in Brussels
Russia bankrupt?
Politics or blackmail
Billions for the arms industry
Asylum policy in the Union
Negotiations for peace in Ukraine
Europe a land of milk and honey
Automotive industry in crisis
Perpetrator-victim reversal
Family reunification right?
Do we need autocrats?
Are we facing a world war?
Trillions instead of billions
Pointless phone call
Peacekeepers after ceasefire
When will the next pandemic come?
Turkish peacekeepers in Ukraine
Protective tariffs and alternative energy production
Interim balance of destruction
Incorporate all of Europe
State secrets necessary?
25 percent tariffs on cars
Estonian presidency of the EU
Power at any price
When will the next pandemic come?
Is politics a game?
January 2025
25 years of Putin: From beacon of hope to bitter opponent
Since New Year's Eve 1999, Vladimir Putin has ruled Russia in various positions. What did he promise at the beginning and where does this state stand today? There he meant to observe freedom of the press and freedom of speech and much more. But there is actually nothing left of it. On the contrary, in this state you have to think very carefully about what you are saying. If one or the other disagrees, he or she will be immediately brought to justice with a corresponding end up to death. The logical conclusion was that he also did not make any friends with his special operation against Ukraine. His travel diplomacy to supposedly friendly states does not help either. And he also repeatedly points out that nothing can harm him and the Western states, but the sparse information shows that this is not the case. But it is also difficult to determine what his next actions will be, certainly not peaceful ones.
Russia's population clearly rejects the use of nuclear weapons
Only a short time ago there was talk of a limited nuclear use. This was said by the aggressor Putin. The only question is how he wants to limit such a one, if you think of the 2nd World War, for example. But the fact that you hear such sayings from him again and again is not new. Only at the end of the month will a president of the USA come to power, who also has a large arsenal of nuclear weapons at his disposal. You might have thought that the time of the Cold War was over, but apparently rulers have to pour oil on the fire again and again in order to prove or assert themselves on this planet. What the individual citizen thinks about this is shown by international studies that categorically reject such weapons. But what does that matter to such decision-makers? There are probably people who still live in the "good old days" but who have little to do with the present. It is only extremely dangerous if it occurs to you to press the red button, so the other side will not wait long to react to it.
State of emergency declared in New Orleans after attack with 15 dead
Is this only to be seen in this state or is there an international problem? It is certainly not possible to trace what motivates individual people to commit such acts of terrorism. Above all, what do they want to achieve with it? Innocent people have to pay with their lives, up to and including children. What have they done there? It is obvious that such terrorists cannot create an Islamic state with their attacks. But they are running after a form of government that has already failed to prove itself today, if you think of Afghanistan. Unfortunately, it is also a reality that such people cannot be easily dealt with, because that would probably end in total surveillance of the individual and that cannot exactly be the goal of a democracy. But the whole thing should be looked at from the ground up. How easy is it to get weapons and explosives in different countries? But as always, such liberal tendencies were and are imported from abroad again and again. This is very clearly shown in the USA, where there are more weapons in private than inhabitants. This raises the question of what the individual citizen has to defend by force of arms?
Special operation with expiry time?
If you look at the economy of Russia, you can see that it is in a downward spiral. Not only is the national currency, the ruble, slipping further and further, but there is also a lack of income from oil and gas deliveries. At the end of the year, Ukraine stopped the transit of Russian oil via pipelines to the West. Russia is thus missing another five billion dollars in revenue for the war economy. One could almost think that such economic disasters would bring this ruler to his knees. If the individual citizen in his country also lacks the most necessary things, or he can no longer afford it, then this is an extremely precarious situation. You can certainly rally the army behind you for some time, but the past has shown again and again that such repression can be maintained for a while. Will it then be time for this aggressor to finally sit down at the negotiating table and negotiate an end to the war with Ukraine? It seems that this person can only be dealt with with economic restrictions, he is not amenable to rational thought. However, since this state is also a great power, economic restrictions in this country unfortunately do not only affect this state, but it is also not exactly beneficial to the world economy if investments are only made in arms production and other areas are ignored. However, this applies not only to Russia, but to all current crises and wars. As long as one can still speak of billions in aid for various states, the belligerence of some people is unlikely to change. One might think that the year 2025 could bring major changes, hopefully for the benefit of the population.
coalition negotiations and the media
The fact that there is no new stable government for Austria after almost 100 days is fateful for our country, but you have to accept it. But what happens next? In this context, it is only necessary to note how much this fact is exploited by the print media as well as by the public broadcaster ORF. On a Saturday evening, you are overwhelmed with opinions and statements for hours, where you might think that there are probably more important agendas to devote yourself to. They rummage through the coffee brew to predict the future, but without results. This cannot be in the interest of the sovereign.
With his vote, he has elected people where he thinks they also represent him. However, this citizen also assumed that within a very short time he would see a government that would also govern in his interest. However, it can also be seen that this promotes the population's disenchantment with politics even more. The fact that each party only satisfies its sheep in such coalition negotiations is certainly not in the interest of the people. In addition, such failed negotiations are also widely publicized in the media, which certainly does not interest the citizen. Finally, with his vote, the citizen has also empowered the parties to create something for him as a citizen. Such actions are hardly important to the people, who want a government capable of acting and not statements about what the opponent wants or doesn't want. However, since this is no longer only the case in Austria, but also in other countries, such as the Federal Republic of Germany, this can only lead to an influx of radical fringe groups. Whether this is then beneficial to the mass of the population is questionable.
Abolition of democracy?
Is this form of government on the verge of extinction or is it being worked on reforming it? Across the globe there are tendencies to the right and left. With each election, such parties as well as their representatives are strengthened. And what about freedom of speech, an independent judiciary and a free media? These are the cornerstones of a liberal democracy. Are you trying to undermine this form of government through the back door or are you revising it? Since democracy is something movable, one should always question whether it still corresponds to the times. It must certainly not only serve the ideas of individual people, but one should also think about the basics of this form. For example, there is the thesis that in a democracy, power comes from the people. Whether this is still done by individual regents is more than questionable. There is intervention in the judiciary, the media is influenced in favor of individual rulers and much more. Is that what you call democracy? After all, this governance has not existed since yesterday, which can hardly be said of other forms. However, it is certainly desirable that this must be addressed, whether it corresponds to today's conditions.
Despite international sanctions, North Korea continues to test nuclear-capable missiles You can't perceive very much of this state, for example, as far as the individual citizen is concerned. With an iron hand, absurd ideas of the rulers are pushed through without regard for the population. Among other things, you send your own compatriots into a war that has almost nothing to do with your own country in order to die in a foreign country. Furthermore, the ambitions of the rulers are fueled by arms deliveries and know-how from "friendly states". If you were to reduce or stop support, you wouldn't be able to produce weapons like long-range weapons. Such imports are certainly not conducive to peace on this planet. But apparently it is always about money, power and influence on the respective regime.
