Liberalism. nationalism, demokrati, hållbar utveckling, värden, maskin intelligens/artificiell intelligens/robotik/digitalisering och lokalisation

Liberalism, nationalism, demokrati, hållbar utveckling, maskin intelligens/artificiell intelligens/robotik/digitalisering, lokalisation och värden

Som ni bästa läsare kan upptäcka tar jag denna gång upp en hel massa olika och, i alla fall enligt min åsikt, viktiga ärenden, som alla har sina goda samt mindre goda sidor.

Låt oss snabbt börja i början:
Liberalism tror jag på stenhård men detta gäller endast om man kan sammankoppla liberalism med värden som man vill försvara, om det behövs, även med yttersta medel. Medan nationalismen sammanbinder jag med äldre värden som jag vill och kan inte försvara. Avseende demokratin är det för tillfället det bästa alternativet vi har men anseende t ex blivande kyborgs, lär vi bli tvungna att ha ett nytt samhällssystem som kan vida accepteras och strävas efter, hellre än demokrati, en herres välde, kungarike,kommunism osv. I framtiden bör vi ta hänsyn även till röster av AI-enheter samt kyborgs.

Jag förstår mycket väl strävandena efter en hållbar utveckling och kampen mot omgivningskatastrof, men frågan kvarstår om vi redan gått över gränsen och vi borde egentligen kämpa för att nå en så bra värld som vi nu förmår för de kommande generationerna med våra nuvarande och blivande resurserna. Vill vi och vågar vi?

Med lokalisation menar jag att det mesta intresset faller på en plats dvs. så långt ögat ser. Jag anser detta som en förenkling av de globala problemen som ändå måste åtgärdas. Alltså därmed är mitt svar ett blankt nej till lokalisation.

Som alla kan förstå av rubriceringen är jag ingen matematiker då jag sätter ihop så olika spörsmål som t ex maskin och artificiell intelligens. Dessa båda begreppen tillhör människans medel likaväl som olika slags robotar och även digitaliserinsgprocesser men vi kan och får inte bortse från att människan kan ändå vilja utnyttja dessa nya resurser på ett sätt som endast få har förståelse för i dag.

Mainokset

Finland is no longer a nonaligned country

Since there have been some demands saying that Finland could still be categorized as a nonaligned country or a State which is militarily nonaligned let us make it here very clear how the matter is in reality. Finland is a Member State of the EU and thus it can no longer be a nonaligned country. Furthermore, most of the EU Memberstates have lately agreed to develop together the defence cooperation between these Memberstates of the EU. Thus, Finland may not be any longer considerede as a militarily nonaligned country. Finland has also together with the Nato agreed upon the Memorandum of Understanding regarding the provision of Host Nation Support for the execution of NATO operations / exercises / similar military activity in Finland. Thus, it would be non-advisable to claim that Finland may be categorized as a nonaligned country.

The interesting questions remain:
a. Should Finland try to join the Nato, if Sweden would do so;
b. How long time would be given to Finland, by the Member States of the Nato, to consider for a possible application for the membership of the Nato; and
c.How far could it be considered as reasonable and as acceptable to the Member States of the Nato for Finland to evaluate a possible future development of security politics in the area in question?

The populist nationalists in Europe

We have been wondering the amount and quality of state violence used by the police in Spain against Catalans while they wanted to vote in the referendum regarding the possible independence of Catalonia. I would like to argue that the Spanish police went too far by its use of violence against Catalan people or that maybe the Spanish government overreacted in case it ordered Policia National and Guardia Civil troops to intervene in the referendum. It might have been easier just to declare that the refendum is illegal and thus non-valid.Thereafter it might have been possible to start negotiations between the parties involved.

However, things turned out differently and the Spanish Government decided to act in a rather tough way. In my understanding this way of action created a large space for the separatist powers of Catalonia to act and keep on claiming a variety of things.

At the moment it would be advisable by the EU Commission to step in and act as a go-between in order to get the negotiations between Spanish authorities and Catalan authorities going before it will be much more difficult. In the end the matter may be only solved permanently through negotiations and this should be kept in mind also in Brussels.

About the development of the international political situation

It is not difficult to understand for everyone that we are at the moment living in the international political situation that is becoming worse everyday. We may state some examples here: the dilemmas of climate change, sustainable development, pollution and so on, migration of the people of Africa and overpopulation of the world, cyberattacks and other new ways of warfare, worsening relations between the US and the EU, Russia and China, and North Korea and Iran.

However, making and showing examples does not help us out of these dilemmas. We need comon understanding and common solutions based on these understandings found together. Thus we need a common ground and a worldwide acceptance of the solutions to these dilemmas. There is no military solution to these dilemmas that could be acccepted as a sustainable solution. Military solutions tend to be more or less coercive and temporary in their character.

One might think that the meeting between our president and the president of the US would give us a huge amount of goodwill. However, in my opinion the necessity of the creation of this meeting illustrates well how serious the situation in the world politics is today. We will very soon have the large military exercise called Zapad2017 and even other military activities close to our borders. Thus, I will wish that our president will use very wisely his words and knowledge so that a common ground for a continued peace may be created between all the parties involved, at least in our neighbourhood.

The EU and Brexit

Let us think about what should be done during the process of Brexit. For the first there are basic factors that both the UK and the EU must establish in this process, for their survival: The EU must make it clear for all its member states that they are doing better while staying in the EU than if they left the EU, and the UK must get to a position where it may claim that its position is better for its voting citizens after Brexit than before it. This shouldn’t be a too hard for a job to get accepted, right! We still might have some obstacles on our way, but nevertheless, let us face what we must agree on, on the both sides of the Channel:

1. Let us agree that the UK is utmostly important for the defence of the EU, which will have difficult times without defence cooperation with the UK also after Brexit;

2. Let us also agree on that the agriculture of the UK will have very hard times to survive without the support of the EU; and

3. Let us understand that the British finance world will be missing at least as much the EU market as the EU finance world will miss the UK market.

And let us simply nderstand that the times of the UK being a great power are over, for now being at least, and for a long, long time ahead.

This may not be enough for the deal but at least about these things we could agree NOW.

Some benefits of the migration process

As we stand today facing serious problems with the handling of migration from Africa to Europe, we shoud understand better the good sides of the whole process taking place whether we want it or not. We must for the first understand that for the large amount of African people the migration is the only means to keep on existing as live human beings. They are alltogether an enormous resource for the whole of mankind. Let us not waste them but let us educate them to be a substantial part of our wellbeing together.

What are the benefits of the migration process? For the first the most important single benefit is to understand all of these migration-ready people as an enormous resource to the rest of the mankind, and to themelves as well. Let us make the whole of Africa our new place to export our goods, services and knowledge for the benefit of every one.

2. Let us make these migration-ready people to accept the best and most bearable and sustainable values of our societies and let us at the same time understand, recognize and accept the winning values these new people bring us from their societies. Let us thereby assimilate these migrating people and their knowledge as well as their ideas and customs to our systems, and let them prospere here or where they want to.

3. Let us agree internationally through a treaty for the next 50 years about the so-called one child policy, otherwise we will simply be too many on Earth.

Behovet att sätta ihop flera av landskap/provinser i Finland

Vi i Finland har ju en himla massa olika landskap och ska enligt NUVARANDE planer även ha landskapsval någon gång under hösten 2018. Man har talat om att dessa val vore bra framförallt för centerpartiet, men enligt min åsikt kan det mycket väl ligga bakom tanken en hel del andra konservativt tänkande också, alltså att det skulle behövas i detta arma land även avsevärt mera landskapsbeslutsfattare.

Jag anser emellertid att detta land borde effektiviseras markant för att allt mindre mängd arbetande människor kan bära ansvaret om de icke-arbetande människorna i Finland som det finns mer och mer varje dag – i alla fall om vi vill satsa på framtiden och utbildningen av yngre människor i Finland. För att kunna effektivisera vårt system bör vi ha ett avsevärt mindre antal byråkrater/kontrollanter och andra sorts offentligt anställda ämbetsmän. Vi måste helt enkelt få kostnaderna nere och använda pengarna till välmående av de som redan finns här = finskarna. Därmed har vi absolut inte råd med att sätta upp en ytterligare dyrbar nivå av administratörer i Finland. Därmed bör vi i början absolut förminska antalet av landskap i Finland t ex till ca 11 och efteråt ytterligare minska antalet landskap så att det ska bli ekonomiskt kunniga och bärbara dvs. självständigt stående centra i detta land. I slutändan kunde det bli landskap eller deras huvudstäder som kunde forma nya självstyrande och -bärande områden i Finland.

Samtidigt vore det klokt att inse att det nuvarande EU kan inte hållas ihop mycket längre till utan systemet måste brja nyutformas på en gång. Kanske kunde vi ha följande fem värden som grund till det nya EU:

1. Hållbar utveckling
2. världsfred
3. människorättigheter
4. välmående
5. accepterandet av AIs existens.