In other news, Japan is planning to restart a nuclear power plant that has been shut down for about fifteen years. A few days ago, I also saw a speech in which Friedrich Merz admitted that abandoning nuclear energy was a mistake—something I was already wondering about on this forum some time ago. Shutting down a perfectly functioning source of energy so abruptly, especially one that is relatively safe and clean, was short-sighted. Yes, pursuing green and zero-emission strategies is absolutely the right direction, but if one is sensible, one must also consider whether such a rapid shift makes a country vulnerable and less competitive in the global economic arena. There are many adversaries out there, yet this aspect was largely ignored.
I’m not a political scientist or an economist, so I can’t frame this in perfectly precise terms. Still, it often feels to me that much of the Western elite has forgotten some very basic truths about the world we live in: history is not over, primal instincts still exist, and there are plenty of bad actors out there. You can’t rush to embrace every new, appealing ideology just because it sounds good to the masses. I fully support the movement toward a cleaner planet and cleaner energy—but it must be done gradually and carefully. If China, the world’s manufacturing powerhouse, is not playing by the same rules, Europe will be economically crippled. Much broader global coordination is needed to avoid massive energy-production imbalances. The wolf will not care if all of Europe becomes environmentally friendly—the wolf will simply eat them. That doesn’t mean we should pollute or trash our own countries. Environmental protection is the right course, but it must be pursued with caution and realism. Nuclear energy, with proper maintenance and oversight, is relatively clean and safe.
European and global elites should implement innovation, but they should stay away from loud, fashionable ideologies. Those who shout the loudest are often the most dangerous. Some of them may even be funded by Europe’s adversaries. This may sound paranoid, but every idea must be examined from all angles and implemented carefully.
Continuing on the theme of what Western elites seem to have forgotten: almost all European countries now have very small armies—even the UK, if I’m not mistaken. This alone shows that something is deeply wrong. How can nations so drastically reduce the very forces that guarantee their independence? Was it considered too expensive? Was it the result of an overwhelming pacifist movement? It’s hard to understand. Perhaps this is paranoia again, but it sometimes feels as if there was a long-term malicious intent operating in the background—a russian special operation unfolding over decades, funding anti-war movements or neo-Marxist ideas. I have no proof; I’m simply raising the question.
It’s as if the world entered the 2000s and collectively said: “The age of brutal geopolitics is over for good. We can relax now—only innovation and prosperity ahead.” Europe, meanwhile, behaved like a kindergarten: “The U.S. will handle security and do the heavy lifting for us.”
Oops.
A Lord of the Rings analogy fits perfectly. Europe as King Théoden of Rohan—sleepy, dormant, convinced that all is good and all is well… until it suddenly isn’t.
Colleague, I see how you’re trying to spin my words in your favor, but I respectfully disagree. The increased police presence at festive markets proves the opposite: the watchdogs were not present when bad actors entered Germany. Of course, you won’t catch everyone, but you have to try harder.
thegrayzone.com
