An interesting take of the war in Ukraine. What is the Russian strategy? What about the US strategy? Are they compatible with a settlement? And if not, what exit can be found? Ukraine will break sooner or later. This was obvious from the beginning but by now it should be obvious even to the hard core supporters of NATO. So will NATO disband? Unthinkable? I think we're going to see quite a few unthinkable events in the coming years. Follow the link below to the YouTube interview.
A fun article to read until you experience it yourself and it becomes all so real: "The decay of western society.” as Jim Carrey would put it encapsulate the essence of what's going on. Life in Pompeii was actually quite nice before the eruption. Enjoy the good times while it last.
I’m sure some of you saw that recent op-ed about airport lounges.
It was written by David Mack for The New York Times. He laments the decline of airport lounges, recalling a grim experience at Orlando’s Club MCO: long waits, sad buffets, and weak drinks that hardly justify the hype.
Lounges used to feel special, a perk reserved for business travelers. Now they’re overcrowded, uninspired, yet somehow more coveted than ever—thanks to social media flexes and pricey credit card perks. Access has become so common that no one feels special anymore, even as airlines and banks keep building ever-fancier spaces while quietly raising fees to thin the crowds.
Far be it from me to agree with anything in The New York Times, but honestly? That piece nailed it. Airport lounges are a disaster. But here’s the thing: it’s not just lounges. It’s not just airlines. It’s not even just travel. It’s every. single. industry.
I’m not being hyperbolic. Everywhere you go, everything you do, every service you pay for—it feels like customer service simply no longer exists. And even worse, most places you go actually make you feel like an asshole for daring to be a customer in the first place. I catch myself constantly asking, “Why am I putting up with this shit?” right before looking down at the Cheez-Doodles or baseball cap I’ve somehow convinced myself I can’t live without.
Because here’s the ugly truth: service is dead. The only thing still alive is the endless, humiliating upsell and self-service. The drugstore, the bank, the dentist—it doesn’t matter. On a given day I interact with supposedly “best-in-class” businesses, and nearly every time I walk away feeling bent over a barrel. And this is when I’m choosing the premium option. The premium experience is still garbage.
Which is why, when I think about the future, I don’t see the next big opportunity as another buzzy app or sleek new product. It’s customer service. Full stop. Any company, in any industry, that actually treats its customers like human beings will have me throwing money at their doorstep. Charge me a premium, I don’t care. Just don’t interrogate me for my phone number every time I buy a bar of soap. Don’t act like handing you a credit card is some bizarre ritual you’ve never seen before. Pretend, at the very least, that you want my business.
Take something as simple as buying a pair of running shoes in Philadelphia. First, I can’t make it two blocks to the store without being ambushed by clipboard warriors trying to rope me into saving the whales, curing baldness, or whatever today’s cause-of-the-day is. Like Jim Carrey in Liar Liar said: “I just want to get from my car to the office without being confronted by the decay of western society.”
“Can I ask you a question?” they always begin, standing directly in my path. No, you f*cking can’t. Now get out of my way before I plow through you like Frank Gore running over a junior high linebacker.
When I finally reach the store, it takes 15 minutes to find an employee. When I do, I tell them what I want, and their response? “Why don’t you just buy it online? We’ve got more colors there.” I don’t know, maybe because I want to go for a run in an hour and would like shoes on my feet instead of in an Amazon box next Tuesday?
The associate eventually trudges into the back, gets me the shoes, and I head to checkout. I hand the cashier my credit card. She looks at me like I’ve just asked her to barter goats for spices.
“Can I have your name?” she asks. “No,” I reply. “You can have my money.”
Then comes the phone number. Then the email. Then a stool sample and the name of my favorite childhood pet. I decline. Finally, after this interrogation,“That’s 25 cents,” she says. Excuse me? I just bought two shoeboxes the size of microwaves. What did you think I was going to do—balance them on my head down Walnut Street like I’m in a National Geographic special? Why can’t stores just build the damn bag into the price instead of insulting me at checkout? I’m not asking to be hand-fed grapes like Julius Caesar. I’m asking for a bag. Basic service. The stuff that used to be, you know, normal.
And God forbid I need to call anyone about anything. Changing an airline ticket? Calling my credit card company? Forget it. Every road leads to an automated voice system with the warmth of a Soviet switchboard. Look, I get it. It’s 2025. Most stuff can be handled online, and that’s great—I don’t want to talk to anyone if I don’t have to. But when I do need a human being—because no, chatbot Karen, you cannot solve this problem with a “help article”—there should be a way to reach one without descending into phone tree purgatory.
Then there’s the pièce de résistance: self-checkout. Bill Burr has a bit about stealing from self-checkout as payback for being conscripted into a job you never applied for. And honestly, he’s right. You’re not a customer anymore—you’re an unpaid employee scanning your own groceries while the one overworked human employee hovers like a prison guard, ready to pounce if you don’t place the cantaloupe in the “bagging area” fast enough. You’re damn right I’m stealing a bag. And I dare your lazy ass to chase me down Market Street to stop me.
So yes, customer service isn’t dying—it’s dead. Buried. Cremated. Scattered to the wind. What’s left is a charade where companies pretend to offer “premium experiences” while nickel-and-diming you, automating you into oblivion, and treating your desire for basic service like an outrageous demand.
The opportunity is there for any business bold enough to zig while everyone else zags. Charge me more, fine. But make me feel like a customer, not a nuisance. Make me feel like I’m buying something, not auditioning for an FBI background check. Because until that happens? We’re all just paying top dollar to be reminded—daily—of how little most corporations actually think of their customers.
Agree or not with Pepe Escobar vision, the world is changing fast with the fall of Europe mirrored by the rise of BRICS.
This unfortunately is also extremely dangerous as the transition will not, cannot be smooth. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to understand that the war drums we hear in Europe are entirely related to the financial cataclysm the continent is facing. Why show any restrain at all when you understand that whatever you do, down the road your policies are doomed?
Europe could follow the example of the US and at least try to reform, but even that is unthinkable, The boat is too far gone and taking too much water to return safely to port. The only option left to these extremists is to pat each other on the back and double down.
The Tianjin extravaganza followed by the giant victory parade in Beijing should be a wake-up call although I am afraid there is no one left to wake-up on the other side of the continent mesmerized as they are by the Ukrainian army being crushed day after day.
In the US, President Trump more aware of the media is arranging a show, off the coast of Venezuela. Will invade? Won't invade? Probably won't but at least it will keep the press guessing while the Chinese march in Beijing.
And so the world like a drunken sailor staggers along the pier ready to fall over into the water at any time.
Three – interlocked – dates ahead of us could not be more crucial in shaping the next configuration of the currently incandescent geopolitical chessboard.
1. August 31/September 1st. Tianjin – half-an-hour by high-speed rail (120 km, roughly $8) from Beijing. The annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), with all 10 member-states, two observers (Afghanistan and Mongolia) and 14 dialogue partners (plenty from Southeast Asia). Crucially, Putin, Xi and Modi (his first visit to China in 7 years) will be on the same table, as well as Iran’s Pezeshkian. That’s a compounded BRICS/SCO heavyweight show. This summit may be a turning point for the SCO as much as the summit in Kazan last year was for BRICS.
2. September 3. The Victory Day Parade in Tian’anmen Square, officially celebrating the 80th anniversary of “the Victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression and the World Anti-Fascist War”. No less than 26 heads of state will be present, including Putin (on a 4-day state visit). They come from all over the Global South, but none from the Global North.
3. September 3. Vladivostok. The start of the 10th Eastern Economic Forum (EEF), a must-go to understand the finer points of the Russian national strategic priority to develop the Arctic and the Russian Far East, including vast tracts of Siberia; that’s a mirror policy of the Chinese effort to “Go West”, which started in 1999, to develop Tibet and Xinjiang. A who’s who of corporate and business circles from all latitudes across Eurasia will be present in Vladivostok. Putin addresses the plenary session right after his return from China.
Taken together, these three dates span the whole spectrum of the Russia-China strategic partnership; the increasingly interlocked geopolitical and geoeconomic aspects of Eurasia integration and Global South solidarity; and the concerted push by Eurasia actors to accelerate the drive towards a multi-nodal, equanimous system of international relations.
It’s impossible to overstate how important the Victory Day parade is for the People’s Republic of China. The Chinese in a thousand years – and more – will never accept WWII American revisionism such as “the US and Japan jointly ended a war 80 years ago”. And much less European revisionism: “Europe’s commemorations of the Normandy Landings also involved a shocking rewriting of the history of the Eastern Front. These actions remind us that the September 3rd military parade’s attendance list has become a criterion for identifying which countries remain steadfast in their anti-fascist stance.”
So Putin in Beijing on the Chinese Victory Day parade is a mirror image of Xi in Red Square on May 9, when Russia officially celebrated the 80th anniversary of the USSR victory in the Great Patriotic War.
No wonder the Chinese Foreign Ministry is adamant: the historical victory of WWII cannot be distorted. And this shared historical memory – vehemently against Nazi-fascism and its resurgence in the West – is a guiding light for the Russia-China multilateral, multipolar, and multi-nodal coordination, from the UN – unfortunately sliding towards irrelevancy – to the dynamic BRICS and SCO.
Modi talking directly to Xi on Sunday, on the sidelines of the SCO summit, seals the sorry fate of the tariff war on India – part and parcel of the Empire of Chaos Hybrid War on BRICS, and for that matter, a great deal of the Global Majority.
The latest mantra spun by Trump 2.0 circles is that New Delhi is supporting Moscow’s war on Ukraine by buying Russian oil, thus helping to enrich Putin even more.
End result: the original RIC (Russia-India-China), all of them sanctioned/tariffed, locked up in a tight embrace.
Vladivostok may carry a few surprises – but on the US-Russia business front.
First of all, speculation is rife on whether Trump might have decided to turn the planned EU theft of Russian foreign assets upside down, and instead force the funds to be invested in the American economy. If that would be the case – after all Trump himself proclaims “I can do anything I want” – there’s absolutely nothing the chihuahua EUrocracy can do to prevent it.
Then there’s the enticing possibility of US-Russia deals being discussed. One option would be ExxonMobil returning to the Sakhalin-1 mega gas project. There’s also immense American oil industry interest in re-starting the sale of equipment for LNG projects, including the Arctic LNG-2; and the US purchasing Russian nuclear icebreakers.
That would be beyond ground-breaking, in more ways than one – because it would enable the US to directly compete with the Northern Sea Route (or Arctic Silk Road, in Chinese terminology), which is being built by Russia as an alternative to the Suez Canal.
On the Ukraine front – and that will be discussed in excruciating detail at the SCO summit – there are no illusions among the members, according to Central Asian diplomatic sources. And that mirrors the predominant Russia-China interpretation. The Empire of Chaos will never desist from conforming Ukraine as a strategic buffer against Russia; keep a key foothold in Eurasia; and keep raking in solid profits (in euros) for the industrial-military complex.
That’s what permeates everything from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI) and the Pentagon’s Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) to NATO’s Comprehensive Assistance Package (CAP), launched nine years ago and de facto running the military backbone of the Kiev/NATO armada. Add to it US Navy P-8 Poseidon spy planes circling over the Black Sea on a daily basis – watching everything happening in the waters from Novorossiysk to Sevastopol.
As much as we’ll be absorbing new moves on the chessboard during the next crucial week, in the end we all circle back to the Mackinder-drenched “The Grand Chessboard” as outlined by the late Brzezinski.
Before the end of the millennium, the fear was that an alliance of Russia, China – and Europe, prior to the consolidation of the EU – would manage to control Eurasia, and thus the world, following Mackinder.
Well, now we can picture the ghost of Mackinder listening to the latest remix of Deep Purple’s Made in Japan – the greatest live rock album ever, which was recorded in the early 1970s… in Asia. In this new, Asia-centered world, the top Global South actors at BRICS/SCO exhibit over twice the US GDP, and are paving the way to de facto replacing the US dollar by increasing trade in their own currencies.
Even the previous US autopen administration authorizing the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines – to make sure Europe would be dependent on expensive US natural gas and not Russia’s – did not substantially alter the chessboard.
Apart from the fact that Europe is committing serial harakiri; is advancing its own de-industrialization; and for all practical purposes is now dead as a geopolitical actor. It’s all about the Empire of Chaos versus BRICS/SCO.
So let next week rock: call it the sound of the Eurasia heartland re-affirming its sovereignty. Play it loud.
There is the war in Ukraine, the one we see and the shadow war as described below with SWIFT at the center. But the "real" war is even deeper. It is a war of economic might between Europe and Russia and for now Russia is winning that war. The risk is that as we spiral down the drain, the war will inflate and may end up nuclear. Some people like Martin Armstrong think it is unavoidable. I think he has a point although I am not completely convinced yet. China and India have not yet flexed their muscle. Can BRICS reshape the world before the West brings it down crashing with its everything bubble? We will know soon enough.
Authored by Tanvi Ratna via The Epoch Times,
When European leaders gathered in the Oval Office last week—Macron, von der Leyen, Starmer, Merz—the photo quickly made the rounds. President Trump sat behind the Resolute Desk, flanked by figures from across the Atlantic. The posture, the optics, the framing—it appeared to confirm a familiar narrative: Washington leads, Europe follows.
But the real balance of influence isn’t captured in images. It resides in quieter mechanisms, the systems beneath the surface that increasingly shape negotiations. At the center of that unseen power structure is a little-discussed institution headquartered in Belgium: SWIFT.
In the context of the Ukraine conflict, SWIFT—the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication—has become a decisive lever.
Though often mistaken as merely a messaging platform, it is now a strategic instrument with capabilities to screen, freeze, and exclude.
And in this war, exclusion from SWIFT has proved more economically consequential than any single battlefield loss.
One case illustrates the stakes clearly: Russia’s Rosselkhozbank.
Obscure to most outside financial circles, Rosselkhozbank plays a pivotal role in Russia’s rural economy.
It finances roughly 15 percent of the country’s agribusiness sector, including fertilizer exports and grain shipments.
Moscow has consistently made its reconnection to SWIFT a condition for extending Black Sea grain deals—highlighting just how critical access is to maintaining even non-military economic flows.
Yet its access remains cut. Without SWIFT, Rosselkhozbank cannot reliably process cross-border payments.
Alternatives such as Russia’s SPFS are limited, flagged for sanctions risk, and avoided even by some of Moscow’s closer partners.
Chinese and Turkish financial institutions have grown wary.
OFAC scrutiny makes participation costly. In practical terms, without SWIFT, Russian exports must navigate workarounds fraught with uncertainty and delay.
Washington has signaled flexibility.
Since the Trump–Putin summit in Alaska, the White House has floated the idea of targeted relief—trial exemptions tied to progress on humanitarian issues, resource trade, or even a ceasefire roadmap. This approach reflects a broader strategy: use selective sanctions relief as leverage, not as concession.
But Europe takes a different view.
At a meeting in Paris earlier this year, EU leaders reaffirmed their stance: no access to SWIFT for any Russian bank until full withdrawal from occupied Ukrainian territory.
The policy is not merely a negotiating tactic—it is treated as foundational.
The European Commission reiterated this position, calling Russia’s withdrawal a “non-negotiable precondition” for financial reintegration.
This divergence is significant. While Washington treats sanctions as a fluid tool, Brussels sees them as a principle. And in the case of SWIFT, it is Brussels that holds the administrative key. Despite American influence, SWIFT operates under EU jurisdiction. Decisions about membership, reconnection, and compliance flow through Belgium, not Washington.
That matters, because the Kremlin sees Rosselkhozbank as more than a bank—it sees it as a wedge. If one entity can be reconnected under humanitarian grounds, the door opens for others. Gazprombank. Sberbank. Each new reconnection becomes a precedent, each exception a potential erosion of the sanctions wall.
It’s not difficult to see the contours of the strategy. Russia ties grain exports to banking access. Ceasefire proposals are linked to transaction routes. By framing financial connectivity as humanitarian necessity, Moscow attempts to turn operational requirements into bargaining leverage.
Yet the transatlantic gap on this issue is real. The Trump administration, wary of indefinite escalation, favors measured flexibility to extract concessions. European institutions, less convinced by Moscow’s signals, remain committed to hard conditionality.
That difference could become more than rhetorical. EU sanctions require unanimous renewal every six months.
Hungary, already an outlier on Ukraine policy, continues to threaten vetoes. Some European capitals fear that if U.S. pressure for flexibility increases, internal EU cohesion may weaken. Quiet voices now warn that sanctions unity is not a given—it is conditional and finite.
That is the paradox.
The United States commands NATO forces, leads diplomacy, and provides the lion’s share of financial aid to Ukraine. But Europe—by controlling access to SWIFT—holds the more durable power over Russia’s economic reentry.
It is, in essence, statecraft by infrastructure. Not force of arms, but force of systems.
This is why the Rosselkhozbank issue, seemingly marginal, carries strategic weight. It tests whether sanctions policy remains intact or begins to splinter under political and economic pressures. It measures whether transatlantic unity is resilient or conditional. And it challenges whether Europe’s commitment to sanctions is compatible with Washington’s push for deal-making.
Trump’s photo with European leaders may dominate headlines, but the decisions that shape the war’s endgame may be happening in conference rooms thousands of miles away—in Brussels, not Washington.
In that quiet divergence lies a deeper contest: over timelines, terms, and tools.
And perhaps, ultimately, over control.
Well, where is all this going?
I now spend hours in the evening discussing endless subjects with multiple AIs on my phones and computers. From animal intelligence to artificial intelligence, from economic patterns analyzing the Bronze age crash and looking for parallels up to and including our time. From trying to understand the emergence of time, space, life, humankind and AI and more importantly weaving all this together into a fractal of recurring emergent characteristics.
The subjects I am exploring may be more complex than average, game of life, Mandelbrot set, Menger Cubes but likewise, I am slowly building a web around myself which I realize increases the distance with other people. Why have messy and mostly confrontational contacts with other people when I can have much richer interactions with sycophantic but brilliant AIs?
I may be a couple of years ahead since I have been using AI for almost 20 years now, so long, long before transformers transformed the field. I also have adapted over the years and now usually input 2 to 5 pages of text for a new question. And often stay for weeks in a specific talk to benefit from the build-up of a richer context. But all this will be discovered sooner than later by other people. Either directly or more likely by interface apps which will structure the interactions with AI to make them richer.
Then what? When most of the people start spending most of their time with AI, what happens?
Will this solve the loneliness epidemic discussed below or exacerbate it?
Although I spend my time thinking about the future because mostly that's where I live, for the first time, I don't know what's going to happen. Worse, I don't think anybody knows. We are unleashing forces that clearly we cannot control on a society which in the end may be more fragile than we expected.
Authored by Kay Rubacek via The Epoch Times,
America’s loneliness epidemic has been headline news for years. We’ve seen study after study confirming what many feel in their bones: more people are isolated, disconnected, and struggling to find meaning in daily life.
Older Americans often chalk this up to technology or to the social scars of COVID. They aren’t entirely wrong, but the deeper story is much larger.
The culprit is not just phones, or screens, or even the internet.
The real driver of this new loneliness is algorithms—the invisible rules and processes that now govern how we live, connect, and even think.
This may sound abstract, but it isn’t. Algorithms are the silent presence shaping your news feed, recommending your next purchase, deciding which job application gets reviewed, and filtering which posts you see from family or friends. They don’t just show you the world; they decide which world you see.
And the most important thing to understand is that algorithms have not touched every generation equally.
Baby boomers and many Gen Xers remember life before algorithms. They grew up with solitude as a normal part of existence: long walks, time alone with books, evenings without distraction. Their social lives were local and embodied. If they were lonely, it was the ordinary kind of loneliness, the kind that might drive someone to call a friend, join a club, or just take a walk and kick around some stones along the way.
Millennials came of age as algorithms entered their lives through the rise of social media and smartphones. For them, the shift was gradual. They still remember analog childhoods, but their adult lives became increasingly tethered to devices. They learned to straddle both worlds, sometimes nostalgically recalling life before algorithms, but never recognizing algorithms as the new driving force in their lives.
Gen Z and Gen Alpha, however, have never known life without algorithmic curation. From childhood, their identities, friendships, and even their sense of self have been shaped inside systems designed to maximize engagement.
They are the most connected generation in history and yet, paradoxically, the loneliest. Studies confirm that they report higher levels of isolation and depression than their parents or grandparents did at the same age. For them, solitude is almost unimaginable. Their sleeping hours have diminished, and their waking hours have been saturated with algorithmic nudges, performance demands, and invisible comparisons.
This is why blaming “phones” or “tech” misses the point. A phone is just a tool. The deeper cause of today’s epidemic of loneliness is the system of algorithms that runs on those devices and quietly governs the lives lived through them.
At their core, algorithms are simply instructions, step-by-step rules for solving a problem. A recipe is an algorithm. Your mental meal plan for the week and your decisions that lead to each choice of ingredient or food order are an algorithm. A GPS system calculating the fastest route from your home to your summer vacation rental is an algorithm.
But in today’s digital ecosystem, algorithms are far more than recipes or maps. They are adaptive, learning systems. They feed on vast pools of data—everything from your shopping habits to your search history, to the measured, minuscule pause you make when you scroll past a video. They compare that data with billions of other users and then predict what you’re most likely to click, watch, buy, or believe.
And because these systems are built by companies that profit from your attention, the algorithms are not neutral. They are designed to keep you hooked, whether by showing you an ad, an argument, or a carefully tuned video feed. The effect is subtle but relentless: instead of you using technology, technology uses you.
This is the deeper driver of the loneliness epidemic. It’s not the devices themselves, but the algorithmic logic that turns every human interaction into a transaction of engagement.
To see the scale of this system, we have to understand how algorithms interact with big data and artificial intelligence. I like to think about it this way:
Big Data is the raw material. It’s the massive flow of information generated by billions of people every second, such as texts, clicks, GPS signals, online purchases, etc.
Data Science is the discipline of interpreting that flood of information, using statistical models to find patterns and predictions.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the set of systems that act on those patterns—generating responses, steering cars, translating languages, diagnosing illnesses.
And weaving through all of this are algorithms. They are the connective tissue that directs how data flows, how patterns are recognized, and how AI responds.
This system is bigger than any single app or gadget. It’s not just “social media” or “smartphones.” It’s a body. It’s a living digital body that touches every aspect of our lives.
The scale and complexity of this system are hard to grasp. We can understand pieces, such as big data here, AI there, a billionaire’s investment somewhere else, but it’s nearly impossible to see the whole picture. Using a human body as an analogy provides a familiar framework that makes the invisible visible. Think of it this way:
Blood = Big Data. Every click, swipe, and GPS ping is a drop in the digital bloodstream. It circulates endlessly, feeding every organ.
Brain = Data Science. Like the cortex, data science interprets signals, prioritizing some and ignoring others.
Muscles and Nerves = AI. Artificial intelligence carries out actions, reacting to the world, learning through repetition.
Fascia = Algorithms. Just as fascia is the connective tissue that binds the body, algorithms link every system, invisible but essential.
Skeleton = Infrastructure. The bones are the servers, chips, and cloud systems that hold the structure upright.
Hormones = Billionaire Funding. Money acts like growth hormones, directing where and how the body grows.
Immune System = Regulation and Ethics. Governments and watchdogs try to keep the system healthy, but they are slow compared to the pace of growth.
This is not a metaphor for metaphor’s sake. Thinking of technology as a body helps us see the interdependence of data, algorithms, AI, funding, and infrastructure. They are not separate silos. They are systems working together, coordinated and integrated. They are a whole organism with enormous power.
The digital body does not grow in a vacuum. It is shaped by human ambition, institutional power, and the money that fuels its expansion. Mathematicians and statisticians lay down the theories that become its hidden code, while researchers and engineers turn those theories into systems that now operate at a planetary scale. Corporations then carry these systems into daily life, embedding them in banking, medicine, entertainment, and government services until opting out is almost impossible.
At the top, a handful of billionaires act as both financiers and architects.
Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Peter Thiel do not simply fund research, they steer its direction. Their money determines which projects thrive, which disappear, and which values are built into the foundations.
Whether it is Musk’s warnings of existential risk paired with his own competing ventures; Gates’s drive to integrate AI into healthcare and education; Zuckerberg’s insistence on open access to AI while keeping access reliant on his platforms; Bezos’s control of the cloud that almost every AI startup relies on, or Thiel’s focus on military and intelligence dominance, their priorities set the course for us all.
Governments claim to act as a counterweight, but their record shows otherwise. Regulations arrive years late, toothless or compromised, while public agencies themselves increasingly depend on the very systems they are meant to restrain. In action, many governments have chosen acceleration over accountability, trading away oversight for short-term advantage in the global race for dominance.
The result is stark. This body is not guided by democratic will or collective conscience. It is guided by the concentrated power of a few men, driven by their personal visions, and fed by the data of billions who never gave meaningful consent.
We have faced moments of massive social transformation before. The Industrial Revolution restructured labor, uprooted communities, and filled cities with both opportunity and despair.
The nuclear age handed humanity weapons so destructive that entire doctrines of deterrence had to be invented to keep civilization intact. But today’s transformation is different in ways that strike at the core of what it means to be human.
We have never had an industrial revolution that drove youth loneliness to epidemic levels. According to the U.S. Surgeon General’s 2023 Advisory on the Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation, young adults are now twice as likely as seniors to report feeling lonely.
We have never had a technological revolution coincide with the highest youth suicide rates ever recorded: the CDC reports that suicide among Americans ages 10–24 surged 62 percent from 2007 to 2021.
Unlike the past, where machines amplified our physical abilities, this revolution claims it will amplify our mental ones. And yet, while promising to expand our intelligence, it has narrowed our attention, eroded our solitude, and dismissed our most basic human needs.
No previous age of invention told us that our inner lives—our thoughts, our longings, our silences—could be reduced to data points, packaged, analyzed, and monetized.
And unlike in past upheavals, where governments scrambled to erect guardrails, this time many regulators have stepped aside. Meanwhile, the human costs mount, and the immune system of conscience that once tried to protect society is barely functioning.
This is not simply another revolution. It is an entirely new phenomenon. For the first time, we are living inside a system we cannot see in full, operated by stakeholders we do not know, shaped by algorithms that coldly strip away our individuality. We are not merely workers adjusting to new machines; we are human beings being recast as data points, dehumanized inside a body that grows without us.
That is why we must force ourselves to see the body whole. Not just apps or devices. Not just billionaires or companies. But the full organism: blood, brain, fascia, skeleton, muscles, hormones, and the silent forces driving it.
Only then can we understand why loneliness has become epidemic, why young people (our future) are struggling under pressures older generations never knew, and why humanity itself feels unsettled. We cannot continue to dismiss these harms as side effects of “new technology.” They are the natural outcome of a system that feeds on our data, reduces us to abstractions, and values engagement over flourishing.
If we do not recognize this body for what it is, we will continue to live as isolated organs serving it rather than as people with dignity, free will, and conscience.
The digital body is here. It is powerful, fast-growing, and largely invisible. The question is whether we will remain passive tissue inside it, or whether we will reassert our humanity and demand a body that serves us, not the other way around.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.
A stunning interview of Alex Krainer which illuminates a completely different aspect of the Alaska "deal" which makes a lot of sense and may be scaring the European to death literally.
The war in Ukraine is almost over. Now is the time for a deal. Zelinsky has to go and Trump must have offered an exit ramp. The problem is that there is absolutely nothing for the Europeans in the deal. No wonder they are not looking at the prospect of peace with optimism. It is literally a catastrophe for Europe!
I find this take quite convincing. Have a look:
