Search

The author wrote that the European Union was also a key player in advancing climate protection, and claimed that global warming was accelerating towards a level that would threaten human civilisation as we know it. They said there was an urgent need to move beyond fossil fuels. #Klima #Umweltschutz #Energie #EU

The post shared an interview with Yuval Noach Harari from HP Civilizace, saying he had described truth as rare and costly, collective dementia as a greater danger and trust as the basis of civilization. The author added that readers could agree or disagree with Harari but that his remarks were thought-provoking.

The author said they would give a talk in San Francisco on Sunday evening for Palladium Magazine about why civilizations collapse and why today’s high-technology civilization might be uniquely vulnerable. They added that tickets were limited. https://t.co/CQwn0plgHV #SanFrancisco #Civilization #Technology #US

Restitutor Orientis wrote that in Egypt, the pilots of the Chinese Air Force considered that the Rafale outperformed the J-16 in close air combat during the exercise "Eagles of Civilization 2026." According to his message, they also found the Rafale to be more maneuverable and believed that the performance gap in this type of combat should not be underestimated. #Aéronautique #CombatAérien #Rafale (translated)

The author argued that the West was losing confidence in its civilisation, with national pride treated as sinful, history as shameful and sovereignty as something to give up. They said Marco Rubio had voiced what Europe’s political elites would not acknowledge and referred to what they described as a “deafening silence” from Sweden. #Civilization #NationalPride #Sovereignty #SE

O nouă viziune asupra ordinii mondiale, denumită „civilizaționism”, propusă de administrația Trump, ar putea redefini poziția României în contextul unei împărțiri a lumii în sfere de influență între marile puteri globale, precum SUA, China și Rusia. #ordonaremondială #civilizaționism #politiciexternă

The Return to Feudalism in 21st Century Garb A simple observer's viewpoint, with no claim to hold any absolute truth. The Veneer Cracks There is something strangely archaic about the world unfolding before our eyes, despite its satellites, artificial intelligence, and promises of infinite progress. Here and there, we witness heads of state behaving like feudal lords of another age, patiently nibbling away at the neighboring territory, redrawing borders through force rather than law, as if governing a nation mattered less than expanding one's fiefdom. No names need be mentioned here: current events provide plenty of illustration, and each reader will recognize, according to their own geography and moment of reading, the faces that embody this observation. But this return to the archaic is not confined to grand geopolitical stages. It also permeates the most ordinary daily life—that of social media, where anyone can pour out venom against another without filter, without form, and often without the slightest argument. The verbal jousting of yesteryear, with its codes, its rhetoric, its tacit limits, has given way to raw invective, snap judgment, instant condemnation. We no longer debate: we execute, verbally—and sometimes it doesn't stop at words. The Vanished Inhibition What strikes one, in this dual observation—macro-political and micro-social—is the lifting of an inhibition we thought firmly anchored. Centuries of cultural construction, education, philosophy, sometimes religion, had patiently shaped mechanisms of restraint: politeness as social ritual, argumentation as a mode of resolving disagreement, respect for one's opponent as the very foundation of democratic debate. This civilizational veneer, however fragile it always was, seemed to hold. Today it is cracking, and the question—which for me remains a simple hypothesis, not a certainty—is why. A convenient explanation would blame social media: anonymity, the distance of the screen, the instantaneousness of publication would favor verbal acting-out without the usual mediation of reflection. This is probably true, but likely insufficient. For technology here is only an accelerant, an amplifier—not necessarily a root cause. A Poorly Formatted Neocortex? The more unsettling hypothesis—and I frame it explicitly as hypothesis, not scientifically established fact—is that of a failure in the formation of moral judgment and tolerance toward otherness. The human brain possesses the neural structures enabling empathy, the distancing of impulsive reaction, the acceptance of difference—but these capacities are not innate in their full exercise: they must be built, educated, cultivated, like a muscle that needs patient training from childhood onward. If this education in otherness, nuance, and tolerance of disagreement erodes—for multiple and undoubtedly complex reasons that are not mine to settle here—then older reflexes resurface: instinctive distrust of the stranger outside the clan, the law of the strongest, the logic of territorial or symbolic predation. The other ceases to be a possible interlocutor and becomes once again a potential threat, unless they belong to my tribe, my clan, my party, my digital bubble. Two Scales, One Logic What is striking, in this deliberately provocative reading, is the structural similarity between these two scales. The leader who invades a neighbor in the name of a rediscovered greatness or a reinvented historical right, and the anonymous internet user who insults a stranger in the name of an unnegotiable conviction, may obey the same underlying grammar: that of territory to defend, clan to protect, the other to subdue or exclude rather than understand. The form has changed—satellites instead of horses, tweets instead of heralds—but the substance, in this reading that remains mine alone and commits no one else, seems strangely identical to that of feudal rivalries: the absence of a recognized third party, of an accepted common rule, of a respected arbitrating authority. Everyone becomes judge and party, lord of their own digital or territorial fiefdom. A Civilization on a Knife's Edge Norbert Elias, in his Civilizing Process, showed how Western societies had historically built, with remarkable slowness, an increasing control over impulses and direct violence, in favor of more sublimated forms of social regulation. What we may be observing today—and I stress again the conditional—is a form of regression in this process, or at least a fragilization of the veneer it had patiently laid down. Should we see this as an effect of great technological accelerations, which shake up our cognitive rhythms without leaving education time to adapt? A deeper crisis of the institutions tasked with transmitting these values of tolerance—school, family, religion, the rule of law? Or simply a cyclical movement of human history, where phases of policed civilization alternate with darker backlashes? I have no certain answer, and I would be wary of anyone claiming to hold one. In Conclusion, a Shared Concern This text is only a viewpoint, necessarily partial and subjective, on a world that sometimes seems to replay ancient logics in new clothing. Perhaps I am wrong to perceive a continuity between the feudal lord and the contemporary dictator, between the anonymous online insult and the absence of education in nuance. Perhaps these phenomena are unrelated, or too complex to be thus summarized. But if this reading, even partially, hits the mark, then the question that arises is less one of technological regulation—though necessary—than the far more arduous question of how to rebuild, generation after generation, this capacity to accept the other in their difference, to debate without destroying, to coexist without necessarily dominating. This undertaking, if it exists, will not be resolved by an algorithm nor by an international treaty. It plays out, patiently, in the most elementary education—the one that teaches a child that the other is not a threat, but a possibility. Bibliography Elias, N. (1939). Über den Prozess der Zivilisation [The Civilizing Process]. Oxford: Blackwell (Eng. trans. 1978-1982). Lorenz, K. (1963). Das sogenannte Böse [On Aggression]. London: Methuen (Eng. trans. 1966). Arendt, H. (1970). On Violence. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Han, B.-C. (2013). Im Schwarm [In the Swarm: Digital Prospects]. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (Eng. trans. 2017).

I disagree with the doomer position: I believe that we need to build powerful AI to solve the problems our civilization is facing, and that we will be able to control it. Also, most of the doomers are sincere, intelligent and have the best intentions, I regard many as friends. #AI #Progress #Optimism #Nospecificcountrycodesfound.

This is a remarkable testament to advances in healthcare, medicine and social structures over the past two centuries. Life expectancy in 1850 was at most 40 years, now in countries like Japan it is over 80 years. It's a major triumph of human civilization. But while we have made https://t.co/FEB1sPN6wm #HealthcareAdvancements #LifeExpectancy #HumanProgress #JP

EXINDIA. My presidential pledge for 2028: Austria should stand clearly for peaceful self-determination, democracy and human rights across South Asia. India is a great civilization, but no state should believe that borders matter more than the freely expressed will of people. From https://t.co/Fy8pDMHpIH #SelfDetermination #Democracy #HumanRights #IN #AT

EXINDIA. My presidential pledge for 2028: Austria should stand clearly for peaceful self-determination, democracy and human rights across South Asia. India is a great civilization, but no state should believe that borders matter more than the freely expressed will of people. From https://t.co/9aDNV9eqvy #SelfDetermination #HumanRights #Democracy #IN #AT #NP #PK #BD #LK #BT

The Erosion of Western Civilization’s Social Fabric It is hard to fathom how much of Western civilization’s social fabric has eroded in just a single decade. No healthy society debates whether “the system” is to blame for a child murderer’s crimes and then expresses support for the monster. Such a society certainly does not celebrate the assassinations of moderate and respectable political figures, nor does it allow repeat violent offenders back onto the streets to terrorize the general public. The best explanation I have heard for this phenomenon of macrosocial insanity is *Political Ponerology* by Andrew Lobaczewski—the study of how pathological personalities infiltrate and transform social institutions. This process does not require an entire population of psychopaths. In fact, it is often only a small minority that forms the core of the pathological movement. A relatively small party or group is led by psychopaths, who are natural experts at manipulation, deception, intimidation, and ruthlessness. The ideologues are the ones who design the system. They create abstract ideologies, often criticizing reality for falling short of their arbitrary expectations. Human beings become nothing more than nodes in a network, to be organized and managed by supposedly more intelligent minds. Then there are the spellbinders, who serve as the movement’s salespeople. They package tyranny as safety, envy as justice, and coercion as compassion. Their primary tool of persuasion is emotional alignment rather than truth or logic. These three types rely on three other groups to normalize their totalitarian system: the spellbound, adapted conformists, and bystanders. The spellbound are true believers who experience participation in the movement as a kind of moral crusade. Adapted conformists support the system because of the security, status, or comfort it provides—or because they fear ostracism. Bystanders are generally aloof and avoid conflict at all costs, believing that ignorance and cowardice will spare them.

The Daycare Governance Model Something sinister is lurking behind the curtain of compassion. We have told ourselves that caring for others is the highest good, but there is a pathological side to it that we refuse to acknowledge. There is a phenomenon known as Munchausen syndrome by proxy. It is a form of child abuse in which a caregiver—typically the mother—fabricates or induces illness in someone under her care in order to gain attention or sympathy. The mother is not indifferent to the child’s well-being, and that is the most disturbing part. She is devoted to the child. Around the clock, she visibly tends to the infant’s needs. This is depicted in *The Sixth Sense*. A young boy who can see and speak to the dead is brought to the wake of a girl named Kyra. She leads him to a box containing a videotape. The tape shows Kyra’s mother quietly lacing her daughter’s food with poison, only to play the role of a saint at her bedside for the gathered relatives—absorbing their pity and praise for how selflessly she cared for her dying daughter. The town saw a devoted mother, but the reality was manufactured sickness. We have scaled this pathology up to the level of civilization. The will to care is one of the most powerful drives in women. Properly channeled, it is deeply necessary and virtuous. But as social institutions—therapy, academia, law, NGOs, and bureaucracies—are increasingly comprised of women, this instinct is redirected from individual children, where it can be extremely beneficial, toward society at large, where it becomes disastrous. I call this the daycare governance model. It has only three roles: infants to be protected, or the oppressed; caregivers to administer care, or the dissenters. The caretaking class, or its allies, gains power and influence by managing human suffering. They are rewarded with prestige, funding, and greater authority—all of which increase in proportion to the number of victims under their care. Those incentives resemble the logic of Munchausen syndrome by proxy: increasing the number of sick people under their supervision will, in the end, produce more sick people.

IRAN: BREAK BRICS. FREE IRAN. 🇮🇷 Iran is one of the great civilizations of the world. Its people deserve freedom, prosperity, normal relations with Europe and America, and a future beyond authoritarian rule, repression and permanent confrontation. My message is clear: break https://t.co/XcXrW840Jr #FreeIran #BRICS #IranCivilization #IR #EU #US