Europeans are being forced into an energy transition through debt-fueled spending that will lead to permanently higher energy prices and stifle European competitiveness.
Reflections on the modern world from a libertarian point of view, covering politics, philosophy, international relations, foreign policy and culture. I am publishing more frequently now on my Substack blog : finnandreen.substack.com
After the overview intro to this series, it’s time to dig
deeper into Europe’s eclipse of intelligence. The notion of lack of intelligence
highlights that the decline of Europe is not inevitable or natural, but on the
contrary, could have been avoided - and can be remedied - through the
application of intelligence broadly defined.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn used the term “Eclipse of Intelligence” in order to describe Europe’s loss of values amidst what he saw as an ever-growing soulless materialism. Though in hindsight it seems like a somewhat exaggerated criticism of Europe of the time, the Russian author’s formula seems particularly apt today, considering the continent’s seeming death wish.
The recently FoIA released Bush-Putin verbatim transcripts provide interesting insights into US-Russia relations during the presidency of George W. Bush. Considering the on-going tragedy in Ukraine, the details of the meeting between Bush and Putin in Sochi, Russia on April 6, 2008 is of particular historical interest.
Many pundits are talking about a split between the United States and Europe, a sort of falling out among thieves, as it were. It may look that way superficially, but is it so? Of course, geography and History will never align the two in terms of strategy and outlook, so the commonality of views are always to some extent imposed and superficial. Nevertheless, the combination of the Five Eyes Anglo-Saxon countries with continental Europe is referred to as the “Collective West” for a reason. In particular in Europe, the US has been involved as peace-maker and political stabilizer since 1945, though sometimes by subterfuge and far from peaceful means.
A strong argument against modern ethics of natural rights is the skepticism these often elicit, even among libertarians. If one of these doctrines actually were unassailable, then it presumably would receive overwhelming support in the libertarian community, if not more widely.
A critical review of the normative
arguments and the empirical evidence for natural rights seems relevant,
therefore, and could lead to a more nuanced and less principled approach. The
common modern definition of “natural rights” is used in this context, namely
the universal right to self-ownership, homesteading, and private property.
As a year of tragic events and fraught international relations comes to a close, it’s time to look back on 2025 and prepare for 2026. Our world is in the midst of radical upheaval, the significance of which we generally can only fully grasp in retrospect. Antonio Gramsci’s often quoted sentence seems more apt than ever: “The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters.”
Indeed, let us expose again these monsters, one by one. First, it must be admitted that these monstrous entities are mostly Western, with an enormous propensity for lying.