War and Business E-Book

Georg von Goldbach

• Herausgeber: BoD - Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Deutsch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024

Seitenzahl: 72

Beschreibung

CONTENT OF THE BOOK This book will encourage readers to let go of illusions and say goodbye to deceptions. The main illusion and deception we often indulge in on a global scale is to believe that much of what happens on a global political and economic level is due to chance. We often think that many of the armed conflicts and events, in which the U.S. is involved or engaged, are to its detriment and harm it. This may be the case in the long term. In the short and medium term, however, the United States, with all the wars and conflicts it has initiated and waged globally since centuries, has always pursued its economic and geopolitical interests in a very targeted manner and has obviously achieved them to a considerable extent. This can be seen in its globally dominant role over the past century. It's like in a casino, where they use to say that "the bank always wins". This short book shows why this is the case and how the mechanisms that have ensured the dominant role of the USA are functioning effectively.

Leseprobe

Inhalt

The Book put into context

FOREWORD

THE SPIRITUAL FATHERS OF THIS BOOK

THE U.S. STRUGGLE FOR GLOBAL HEGEMONY AS A BUSINESS MODEL

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

CLARIFICATION OF CONCEPTS AND THE LOGIC OF THE US APPROACH IN ITS QUEST FOR GLOBAL HEGEMONY

INTERDEPENDENCIES AND MAIN ELEMENTS OF THE MODEL OF AMERICAN HEGEMONY

PRACTICAL GUIDE & THE LOGIC OF THE MODEL

THE STRATEGIC SPHERES OF INFLUENCE: THE GEOPOLITICAL WORLD VIEW OF THE USA

STRUCTURED OVERVIEW: THE GEOPOLITICAL SPHERES OF INFLUENCE

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Book put into context

This book can confirm what many have known for a long time, namely that historiography... is the record of the crimes and madness of humanity. It is no help for prophecies.

The Age of Extremes, World History of the 20th Century Eric Hobsbawm

What's at stake: the Apocalypse

"If – God forbid – such a war takes place, it will not follow the scenario of a special military operation. It will not be conducted in trenches with artillery, armored vehicles, drones and radio-electronic defense."

For the NATO-Russia war to be fought in a conventional way, the balance of power between NATO and Russia is too unequal – NATO is a huge military bloc with a military budget of up to one and a half trillion dollars, i.e. US$1,500,000,000,000,--and a population of almost one billion people. Because of this incomparability, Russia has no choice but to give an "asymmetrical response":

"Ballistic missiles and cruise missiles with special warheads are being used to defend the territorial integrity of our country."

Security Council of the Russian Federation, 06.02.2024 Warning of a Nuclear War, Dmitry Medvedev

FOREWORD

The personal motivation for this book comes from my realization that the creation of peace is, in our time, the most important concern of humanity. I was born in Germany and can therefore say that war is in my blood, as it is the case for most Europeans. A great number of wars have been waged on European ground among the European nations over the past 600 years. In response to that, the European Union has been created and has progressively been shaped after the End of the Second World War as a “peace project”. This hope is waning more and more, and Europe does not seem capable of escaping the claws of the evil of war.

In the decades after 1993, I had increasingly worked as a consultant for the European Union (EU). In the beginning, I was very happy and even enthusiastic to do this, as long as the EU’s credible intention for "international partnership" was still the guiding principle for the work of our advisory services activities abroad. After 2001, however, I had noticed how an intentional effort for dominance had increasingly come to the fore within the foreign policy of the EU. Relations with partner countries became increasingly political, less characterized by friendship and the honest dealings among partners. Of course, this change in attitude had also become obvious to many of our partners in the countries in which we worked. I am more of a free and liberal spirit by nature, and ideological narrow-mindedness has never been one of my personal traits. However, I have always endeavored to consciously guide my actions based on my ethical convictions and moral principles.

I can say that peaceful development among people and nations based on shared values and principles has always been a matter close to my heart. That is why I didn’t feel challenged in particular when I was asked to consciously and with conviction, but without personal zeal or even fanaticism, to work for the healthy development of Europe and its relations with other countries in the world. My anxiety therefore increased more and more as certain authoritarian tendencies in the EU and the European Commission became more frequently apparent to me. I then drafted an essay in 2017, essentially for myself, to clearly articulate my own thoughts, entitled "How Europe Lost Her Sovereignty". In it, I showed how, in the interplay between Germany and France, which had become a second spiritual home for me, the European Commission usurped the sovereignty of the nation states and increasingly restricted their national responsibility. In addition, as a "participating observer", I had recognized that a war was being prepared on European soil. Of course, that was not easy to see at the time. All the friends, acquaintances and business partners I wanted to point out only looked into the air when I talked about it. Nobody wanted to know anything about it. I myself did not investigate this question and, of course, could not know in what form this war would then begin and take place. I was also personally surprised by the way, with a flick of the wrist, Germany and Europe were driven into this war, which was foreseeable by 2014 at the latest and then turned into an open war in 2022.

Personally, this experience has shaken me very much, also in my trust in people as a whole. I didn't want to believe how sensible and intelligent people could get involved in such stupidity. The experience of this irrationality still pains me very much. My grandfather was sent into the First World War in 1914 with the motto "Cannon thunder is our greeting". My father went to war in 1939 for the Hitler regime, from which he was not to return home from Russian captivity until the end of 19471, severely damaged in physical health and also mentally. And now, at the end of my life, the war was to haunt me and perhaps plague my children as well.

I have always consciously enjoyed and never despised the great fortune of growing up in peace and being able to shape my life peacefully. Peace had always seemed to me to be a great and precious good that had to be carefully preserved. Unfortunately, we did not succeed in this.

1 At a time when Russia is once again under strong ideological attack, it is necessary to confess that I have not developed any negative attitude or resentment from my father's experience in the mines of Russia. My father had been a prisoner of war (Kgf) and his imprisonment was therefore the result of a war that had arisen and been waged in a criminal way.

THE SPIRITUAL FATHERS OF THIS BOOK

The intellectual authorship of this book is held by two American thinkers and visionaries. The two have never met in person, but what they have in common is that they derive their thinking from cybernetics in order to understand and explain this world2. This is obvious with Gregory Bateson3, because he speaks of it quite openly in his writings. In the case of R. Buckminster Fuller4 , the reference to cybernetics is visible everywhere in his writings and also in his works, but he was more of a pragmatist and generalist nature. "Bucky" Fuller strove to live a life, in which he fought for the practical implementation of his ideas, mainly through the use and application of his design artefacts, while Gregory Bateson limited himself to theoretical and epistemological reflection and teaching.

What they both have in common is that they were very sharp observers of what was going on in the world and always keen to understand how people acted. Both have always put people at the centre of their efforts and have always put people in a larger, comprehensive context and under a system view. In Buckminster Fuller's case, it was "man in the universe." For Gregory Bateson, it was the systemic relation between man and nature. What both have in common is that they saw the fundamental fallacy in human thought and action in the fact that man saw himself disconnected from these necessary systemic relations with nature and the universe. Both explained this as the result of the one-sided emphasis on the development of the natural sciences since the 17th century, which has led to a mechanistic world view. This paradigm of human isolation from nature and the universe, as both saw it, slowly dissolved again since the early 20th century with quantum mechanics and the understanding of the meaning of the "uncertainty principle". A door had opened. It had become possible to reconnect with the nature of man and his importance in the cosmos.5 This sums up the experience shared by Gregory Bateson and Buckminster Fuller.