These days the news are often frightening: tariffs, embargo, war, various forms of violence amongst people, violence against nature as form of self-destruction and not least increasing material deprivation of large groups of the population especially in many rich countries and extreme inequality. Obviously it does not only sound frightening but it is in actual fact frightening, for many a question of life or death:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the headlines we read about the occupation of Greenland, the anti-migration measures launched by the US administration, the closure of borders and the like. It is like a political plague that takes hold of part of the globe. However, we easily forget some more fundamental questions, namely a shift, becoming especially clear if we look at the World Economic Forum <\/em>and its annual meetings in Davos, and equally the annual conferences, convened as Munich Security Conference <\/em>\u2014 two think-tanks and their events that are widely known, at least if we look at the media coverage. Other think-tanks are in some way comparable, in other respects different:<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the opening of the MSC, before commencing the opening speech, we saw on the on the left side an elephant \u2014 it may be taken metaphorically, taking the elephant on the one hand as a very subtle, sensitive creature, being on the other hand extremely strong, allowing to overcome all obstacles. Continuing this metaphor we learn that elephants try to avoid fighting: displaying their strength is often sufficient to obtain or maintain a dominant position. However, if it comes to a fight,<\/p>\n\n\n\n Elephants use their size, strength, and tusks to assert dominance or defend themselves. Here\u2019s how:<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Tusks as Weapons: Elephants use their tusks to jab, thrust, and lock with their opponent. Larger tusks can cause significant injuries, though elephants are cautious not to risk fatal harm unnecessarily.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Head and Body: Elephants rely on their powerful heads to ram or push against their rivals. Their massive size often determines the victor in physical struggles.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Trunks:\u00a0While primarily used for feeding and communication, trunks can also strike opponents or grab at sensitive areas.<\/em> (TsavoTrust: How Do Elephants Elephants Fight; https:\/\/tsavotrust.org\/how-do-elephant-fight\/; marted\u00ec 17 febbraio 2026)<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n D\u00e9j\u00e0 vu? Perhaps recently as human behaviour?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Much could be said, many examples could be given. One seems to be especially remarkable, namely the speech by Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. His remarks had been especially reactionary as he referred to the supposed European roots of \u201cUS-American civilisation\u201d, emphasising the existence of strong historical links; from such presumed foundation he argued that whatever happens now, namely politics and policies of the Trump administration, is in place as protectionism in the sense of securing these traditional values. In other words: The United States of Northern America are the true Europe. Reprehensible arrogant claims? While we must keep also in this case Joe Finnerty\u2019s \u201cThree Avoids\u201d<\/a> in mind, there are good reasons to look a bit more in detail at Rubio’s remarks: a first hesitation may come up, when we look at the applause he gained \u2014 then the follow-up question is coming up, demanding to look at the difference between gaining and deserving. In other words, perhaps the applause must be understood as agreement with Rubio\u2019s statement \u2014 an agreement not as expression of diplomatic politeness but as expression of honest agreement. In the next step we must ask if Rubio isn\u2019t correct when he classifies the politics of the Trump administration as having its roots in Europe. Let\u2019s have a look at a few issues, keeping again the 3 As in mind:<\/p>\n\n\n\n To conclude, we see an extremely dangerous situation, of course by considering the War and Peace, but perhaps even more dangerous is the understanding of peace, i.e. the understanding of civilisational model.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" These days the news are often frightening: tariffs, embargo, war, various forms of violence amongst people, violence against nature as form of self-destruction and not least increasing material deprivation of large groups of the population especially in many rich countries and extreme inequality. Obviously it does not only sound frightening but it is in actual … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-829","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-debates"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/829","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=829"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/829\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":833,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/829\/revisions\/833"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=829"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=829"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.hrug.legal\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=829"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
\n
Democracy is one of the claimed European values. Defining democracy is surely difficult. Main criteria are commonly seen in
\u2022 parliamentary representation, resulting from elections with the right to vote and stand for election for every citizen and
\u2022 equal access to the polity for all citizens and fundamental openness of the system to all citizens\u2019 concerns.
If accepting that these are the relevant criteria it must be asked whether they are actually met. Governance is over the last years widely discussed, seen as alternative to a rigidly closed system, as elections are only taking place every four years or so. Interim influence is needed but there are various problems as long as it is not democratically institutionalised. Mass media are widely seen as fourth estate, added to legislative, executive, judiciary \u2014 the problematique of such an \u201cextended version of the separation of power\u201d, i.e. its limitations, is widely discussed; lobbyism is a second channel, allowing to influence political processes \u2014 however, WEF, MSC, Bilderberg Conference, Cato Institute, Heritage Foundation and others are examples of extremely strong, resource-rich organisations, influencing processes without any democratic legitimation. Though governance is surely a matter that is not something that can be assessed by applying a black&white scheme, looking at such major events and institutions show that accessibility of governance institutions is not democratically regulated. Though it is true that decisions cannot be taken, a fertile ground is established, decisive for what can be called re-feudalisation (see also Herrmann, Peter: World\u2019s New Princedoms. Critical Remarks on Claimed Alternatives by New Life; Amsterdam: Rozenberg Publishers, 2010; 206 pages; New edition: Bremen\/Oxford: EHV academic press, 2012)<\/em><\/li>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato.\u201d (Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality, p. 39 [Free Press, 1979]) \u2014 <\/em>https:\/\/www.age-of-the-sage.org\/philosophy\/footnotes_plato.html<\/em><\/a>)
<\/em>into a tombstone inscription: Whitehead continued, writing
His personal endowments, his wide opportunities for experience at a great period of civilization, his inheritance of an intellectual tradition not yet stiffened by excessive systematization, have made his writing an inexhaustible mine of suggestion.\u00a0\u2026 (ibid.)
This is obviously forgotten when permanent reference is made to Plato, though applying that wealth in a mechanical way. Such perception of Plato contradicts to some extent the thinking of the ancient philosopher who rejected the dichotomy Greeks-barbarians; however, while he rejected the dichotomy, he nevertheless applied it, when writing about the barbarians in The Seventh Letter. <\/em>We see exactly this when we hear those the \u201cWe find this already in the ancient philosophy, for instance reading Plato \u2026\u201d. At the end statements that lack any real substance, replacing substance by stubborn proclamation of the need to Make Europe Great Again. <\/em>Such presidential statement is only one example, comparable missteps are plentiful \u2014 and just as embarrassing as the applause from an otherwise silent crowd.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n