There are great expanses of oceans not owned or controlled by any nation, they are literally the open sea, free for anyone to fish in or sail across. It is an oddity in a world where even Antarctica has degrees of ownership.
I’m not going to bother with numbers, but the oceans are massively populated by beings who are not us. They are mostly undisturbed and barely notice our traverses. But our fishing and pollution cause immense harm and those species have no way of stopping us. Well, until now.
Introducing the newest nation on Earth, simply called Oceans. Its citizens are the birds, mammals, fish, molluscs, plants and anything else that is alive. Because they cannot speak for themselves (yet), we will nominate humans to speak for them – one reverse diplomat from every country.
A reverse diplomat advocates for the country they are allocated to, not the country they represent, but obviously there will be some allegiances.
In case of apathy, doing nothing to fix any oceanic issue is not an option, the only decision is how much do we help.
The good news is that container shipping is bad for the environment, so they can be taxed according to emissions x miles. Initially the numbers involved won’t matter much at all to each ship, but will add up to worthy amounts.
Fishing is much harder to police and tax, but there will be ways, including good nations voluntarily paying up.
As a nation, Oceans will have its own seat in the UN, it will have finances and a rudimentary navy, possibly using volunteers, or training exercises.
As a nation, Oceans will provide research grants. That would include great efforts to communicate with dolphins and whales.
Being an absurd idea, there will be pushback, and many poorer countries will decide not to recognise it as a state. Which means they do not get a reverse diplomat.
I would like to see a UN Ocean council, like the UN Security Council, with Oceans as a permanent member. It could resolve differences regarding, for example, who gets to have trade routes through the Arctic ocean. Something like this already exists, but it is more akin to COP
With time I would want the ocean perimeters of countries to be reduced, and seceded to Oceans. That would involve grandfathering in things like fishing rights.
I actually have a soft spot for some of Trump’s initiatives, but with caveats!
Trans children is so wrong. But soon Trump will be demonising gays.
Smaller government is good. But DOGE is outright lying about its wins
Getting rid of illegal immigrant gang members is good, if done correctly
But his tariffs and bullying are counter-productive, globally, frankly, at levels nobody has seen before. Both within the US and in other lands, Donald Trump is a disturbance that almost everyone would prefer no longer existed.
Unlike the UK, Australia and so on, there is no mechanism for ditching the president of the US, as long as he has the support of his party. And the Republican politicians are, almost everyone, scared of going against Trump because their precious jobs would be at risk. They are spineless.
His numerous current crimes, especially enriching himself and others, don’t matter, he has the immunity from SCOTUS. So prison cannot happen.
To my mind, that leaves three options:
Embarrassment – this is a stretch, but potentially something so bad emerges (perhaps Epstein related, or released by Putin), that he cannot continue.
Health – he is remarkably healthy considering his diet and age, and very on the ball, doing amazing hours of work. But he is old, and almost certainly on Viagra (can I say the word Loomer), and not necessarily going to stay alive for the full term.
Assassination – maybe that is why he is so cozy with Russia and Israel, the GOATs of murdering opponents. Of course he does have enemies overseas, but his murder would almost certainly come from within. A lone wolf (at least two have tried already), a rogue unit of the FBI or CIA, a disgruntled employee, or JD Vance – I wouldn’t put it past him. Trump is very careful with his food – he orders McDonalds for a reason – safer. But someone with Israel/Russia experience in the chain of food/drink custody could easily poison Trump.
Unfortunately, that would leave us with Vance, so he needs to go as well. That would make Mike Johnson president, which would be sane and tolerable
This is my prediction for the “western world” 10 years from now, politically.
Existentially it will still be left v right, woke v bigots. But the lefties will need to keep things fresh, become better defined, and have more fun.
The woke left already embrace the queerest of people, and the rainbow is pretty much their symbol. Meanwhile, especially with Trump, the direction is clearly Handmaid’s Tale, a lack of color. In South Africa (and the US), famously, non-whites have been called colored. It has been hard for woke whites and blacks/coloreds to join as one, but I reckon calling myself colorful (I am white) and giving them the opportunity to do the same, could work.
Meanwhile beige has long been a bit condescending, so that works well as a new insult.
We already know the left/right divides of opinion and policy. But there are some grey areas that the colorfuls can aim to claim.
Crypto – let the beige folk have NFTs and memecoins, while we claim the coins that do not waste electricity to create, and have at least a spirit of non-profit.
Climate Change – take active measures of preparation, and let the beiges feel inadequate when the worst comes. Same for taking vaccines and not getting sick.
Clothing – let’s make what you wear to be unambiguous, starkly so. Colorfuls can claim colors, given the rainbow precedent. Incorporating minor aspects of the rainbow, like a multi-colored stripe that is in the corner like a logo, can mean ownership of color. The beige folk could/should end up being afraid of wearing anything with multiple colors. We can have men wearing kilts, body piercing, dyed hair, and footy umpires wearing pink. They can retreat into the murk of boring.
Cash – Trump et al will want to control people. We can be the leaders of anti-surveillance and pro-cash.
New Age – lots of MAGAs are getting into natural therapies and yoga. We need to have our own varieties that are differentiated. It will at least confuse them, and disenfranchise them.
Vaccines – easy win. Colorful schools can simply require full vaccination.
Fossil Fuels – easy. Be 100% off them, be loud about it. Force the beiges to try and be different. See them give in, embarassed, when it costs more and is less fun.
Sponsored Events – because most actors/musicians/artists are colorful, then they can flaunt that, and make the beige folk feel unwelcome at their displays of artistry. Sponsorship from a prominent colorful brand should be enough, you know, like Bud Light.
Clubs and Themes and Identity and DEI – laws forbid exclusion based on race, gender, sexuality. The Beige will adjust laws so they can get around this. To go the other way, exclude the Beige, is already legal, if you are clever. You can have a private “smokers club” to get around laws regarding smoking in a bar. A gym can be only for anyone without a penis, instead of “women”. (Freebie for the Beige). You can have a school where scholarships are given to people who demonstrate a passion for queer culture, or black culture, or writing about feminist history. That is not discrimination. But nearly is.
Simply Being Us – a cinema (for example) with overtly colorful staff will scare away beiges. They don’t want to be infected. But a colorful won’t care as much going to a beige cinema, and having popcorn from a beige container. We can make them, here and there, feel like the oppressed.
Democracy – even if the federal democracy becomes one-party, there are other levels, especially in the US. States and counties can bring in new ideas like mixed-member-proportional voting, and anything else progressive.
Drugs – all psychedelics are cool, and marijuana. Own them. Flaunt them. Let MAGA do coke and oxy.
Media – presume that the authoritarian government will try to shut down consenting voices. And fight it ahead of time. That will scare them off and let the colorfuls feel empowered.
Have numerous methods of accessing the liberal media. For example, hosted in overseas territories beyond the control of your government. Launch a satellite service that bypasses terrestrial interceptions. Make it possible to 3D print receivers. Start a culture of peer-to-peer offline data sharing (basically copying thumbdrives and distributing)
Ultimately this is counter-culture and hippies, 50-60 years later, a new cycle of rebellion.
Woke went too far, but that is not surprising, left and right politics either go moderate to get elected, or go radical if they feel daring. Society ends up with a balance between the two. The right sold off government assets (Reagan, Thatcher) which was extreme, and woke went too far:
going light on crime like shoplifting
letting children make gender decisions
DEI
But let’s look at DEI for a moment. It is ultimately a decision to raise the earnings and potentials of peoples who are historically marginalised and suffered from racism, and to a degree still are today. The goal was equality.
DEI only did wrong in racist terms. While it is logical to say everyone should have equal chances, that is the equivalent of “all lives matter” which ignores that some people don’t start from the same place.
DEI has been shut down for targeting races. So, all they need to do is change the definition of who they help. This is not new. Want to smoke in a bar? Form a “cigar club”.
Woke 2.0 will simply refine the criteria. Instead of giving scholarships to Hispanics, you simply make them available to people who show a deep understanding of Hispanic culture. And then only award them to Hispanics. Very defensible, because we are talking about the opinions of academic admins, not something measurable.
I can envisage a DEI-esque scoring system.
First, get someone to write a paper proving that diversity in the workplace equals greater success and profits. Then come up with a multimodal scoring system that looks at 100 criteria, including such things as:
economic background
non-typical ethnic and cultural backgrounds – these are non-typical relative to the current school or workplace make-up, and not defined specifically
non-typical gender and sexual orientation. Again, not specified. so if there are too many gays it will go the other way
height, weight, hobbies, family structure, age, good preferences, IQ, EQ, etc etc
The idea is that the overwhelming factor is a mixing bowl of characteristics, but nothing on its own. That will rend it immune from any Supreme Court decisions. As long as it is backed by one piece of science. Schools and employers can use their own judgement around which studies they trust.
Common-sense will fix the transgender issues. Children under 18 won’t be able to get anything done physically, but they will get all the help, care and consideration possible.
And with crime, hopefully the US looks at typical sentencing in other advanced economies and learns. Too much or too little doesn’t work.
Black Lives Matter can be reignited with just one atrocity. So expect it to return. The only solution is that (hopefully) America standardises hiring and training across all of law enforcement and gets rid of the crazy idea of voting for DAs and sheriffs.
Public protests are not new, and not uncommon. These days they are evolving, perhaps sparked by the Reclaim Our Streets happy protests who were very prescient in their anti-car advocacy. Rather than simply being seen and heard, protests are increasingly aiming to be disruptive. The Extinction Rebellion regularly makes the new in this regard.
The very nature of disruptive protests mean that costs are borne by many, from everyday folk having their progress through the city hindered, to business, and of course policing. Climate protesters would argue that the hindrances they cause are an important aspect, to make their point heard. Yet the same people would argue that a white supremist rally would wrongly interfere with their day.
In the western world, where protesting has been generously allowed (and rightfully so) in recent history, the trend is towards punishment for disruptions, especially those that are purposefully designed to affect business operations. I expect that in the near future there will be codified controls and regulations that allow protests but in a more restricted way.
In-situ protests, outside a particular location that is meaningful, would probably continue unchanged. But for marches, I can see a new way emerging, a compromise between visibility and order.
Dedicated march journeys, from A to B
The journeys are in prominent places, with many viewers, like inner city pedestrian malls
Permits are required
Minimum numbers are required. Say 100 named people of which 80 need to attend or will be fined.
Names are confidential unless a crime is committed.
Ultimately it would not be too different to how buskers are often regulated and controlled. Initially there might be a great increase in the number of protests, but in the long term mostly only the larger, important rallies would be occurring.
While this sounds overly bureaucratic, it can also codify the right to protest, especially in cities like London where public spaces are increasingly being operated by corporations who can issue trespass notices.
Israel and continually gone against prior agreements and keep taking more and more Palestinian land, because they think God said it was theirs.
Palestinians rightly are angry, not just about the land but by effectively being in a prison (Gaza) and a substantial number of them have lives that hinge on absolute hate of the Israelis (the Jewish ones).
Israel don’t want a two-state solution with an enemy right next door, who will continue (with the support of Iran) to keep attacking and terrorising them. Israel (half of the population) loves the expansion into the West Bank by “settlers”.
This is what Israel will bring to the table, and a future Palestinian leadership will agree to:
West Bank continues as normal. Any land without houses is free for Israelis to build on, and the West Bank will effectively be a part of Israel, and existing Palestinians can continue to live there, as they do now.
Gaza becomes its own state. It will have full access to the outside world, via the sea and air. Land connections and workers crossing the border will continue as before. However, terrorism needs to end. An international task force will be there – potentially forever – to run democratic elections, co-ordinate aid, and to shut down any terrorism. No anti-Israeli sentiment is allowed. No murals of martyrs. All history taught in schools is carefully worded and monitored. The end result is peace and freedom with hate for their neighbours snuffed out. Any rebels are deported, somewhere.
I never write about wars. Mostly because there are so few these days, but also because they do not interest me, and I don’t have much understanding of how they work.
But for an everyday person like me, it is becoming abundantly clear that the west wants the Ukraine war to take a long time. Last week the US sent missiles that could travel twice as far as the previous ones. This week:
The PM has now ordered the defence secretary to examine ways that the UK can provide Ukraine with fighter jets.
The RAF has a limited number of aircraft it could theoretically provide Ukraine – including about 20 older Typhoon jets.
This at a time when Russia is starting to win again. Not when Russia was retreating and such gifts could have ended things. Not at the beginning of the war. It is as if they give Ukraine only enough to keep the war going, and never enough to win.
And it makes sense. A war that takes 2-3 years will keep weakening Russia in all sorts of ways – militarily and economically of course. They will be less of a threat for a decade or more, as long as they don’t get to take over all of Ukraine.
Meanwhile, despite protests of how they cannot afford it, the West loves giving their weapons industry business.
Unless Putin does something crazy, or gets toppled, or gives up, the result seems to be incredibly obvious – in a year or two Russia will have some of east Ukraine, and the war will be over. But to get there 100K+ more people need to die. Truly sickening that men playing games can do so much harm.
Presuming that Donald Trump avoids the humiliation of contending for the Republican 2024 nomination, and losing to DeSantis… what other options does Trump have?
We know that he wants to be in the limelight, and we know he likes winning, even if it is only himself who thinks it.
Meanwhile NewsMax is being sued (rightfully so) by Dominion Voting Machines.
NewsMax settles out of court for a hefty sum, and goes bankrupt. Why? Well, they are worth more without the negative publicity of a court case, and they’ll all get rich from it somehow.
Trump buys NewsMax and acts as if he is America’s leader with a regular time slot
TruthSocial gains traction after people leave Twitter. It is the same as Mastodon, but “American”
He uses NewsMax and TruthSocial to cross-promote each other
Trump keeps on endorsing politicians, keeps using MAGA.
A new conspiracy theory will turn up – we are overdue – and America’s right will become more splintered than ever
DeSantis wins in 2024, because either a) Biden lingers and is way too old, b) Harris runs and is not likeable (and not male and not white), c) the infighting over who else runs causes damage and they end up with someone sub-standard
However, enough MAGA candidates are elected to hold a balance of power, and Trump pulls their strings
Dirt on DeSantis comes out (Trump says he has some), and there is a push to replace him with Trump
Trump will buy NewsMax, finally, and aim to rule the US in his own way, pulling strings and taking credit. And not run for POTUS again. He will stay smugly content until his final days, with his new young wife.
