Professor Stubb's videos are a highlight of my week. Each time he confirms some of my thoughts while also spurring my thinking with new insights. I hope he continues to make these.
Very structured, informative and to the point, as always. The entire series helps with the analysis and clarifies the chain of current sorrowful, disgraceful events a lot. I'm Russian, living in Finland.
Hi Mr Stubb I am from Turkiye and love your short lectures. Thanks a lot. It is amazing that you are covering many different aspects of international politics.
As an 11th Instrument of Power, I would like to suggest “Adaptability”. Things change, stuff happens. Successful individuals, groups, corporations or nations find ways of accommodating these changes and moving forward. Rigid players try to double down on something that worked in the past, when circumstances were different, and end up with very suboptimal solutions. Change can be uncomfortable, but stasis can be really harmful.
Thank you for your insights. Your number 10 is the key to civil society. A legal framework without corruption together with a focus on quality education are essential for any society to progress. The lack of these two fundamentals results in under performing economies. The clearest examples where these factors are missing can be found in Latin America. Finland and Canada are examples on the correct path.
Great lectures, Professor Stubb! I would like to suggest that you add Demography to your list; larger and younger populations will allow countries to exert more power. Countries that are strong today will likely slowly lose power as their societies age and depopulate. Also, I would merge Climate and Geography into a single category, so you can keep a total of 10. :)
sir, your mini lecture series is one of the best on the internet. and I am a big fan of it and of your's. unfortunately, the latter episode are becoming increasingly abstract. and I would like to kindly ask you to take into consideration that you are not addressing this miniseries to your students but to an educated still general public. so, please continue your lectures and make some references to concrete situations and facts so we can better understand it. with respect, Silviu M.Dascalescu
I wonder if these categories could be combined/compressed a bit, as there seems to be some overlap, and some topics receive more attention than others. But maybe this also reflects what aspects of power are seen as most important or interesting currently (i.e., digital). But Stubb does seem to do best, analytically, when he has his 3 points to work with. On the other hand, this being the first time, it stands to reason that he can also learn to use another number of points than 3. Anyway, a great lecture! Thanks for sharing.
@@jesseaffiliate6328 I have nothing against ditching the 3-points, although I think it is kind of cool. Reminds me of my own high-school history teacher and her instructions on how to write an essay. He is of course a professor now. I just think that the 10-points are a bit repetitive, but I am not an expert that could suggest something better. So maybe 7-points? It is also a prime number?
I'm quite found of some former Swedish and Finnish politicians: Tage Erlander, Per-Ahlbin Hansson, Olof Palme, Juho Paasikivi and maybe UKK. Of course they weren't "one man show's" -a broad public opinion forced them to take reasonable policy position's (or maybe they were selected by the material conditions of the times as were their policies). You have Paasikivi's "fact based foreign policy (towards the Soviet Union) and his rethinking/thinking on why the Soviet Union had attacked Finland in 1939 connected with the Finnish posture towards the Soviet Union in the interwar year's. In Sweden Olof Palme (Aristocratic background) articulated why he was a democratic socialist. Sweden upheld reasonable good relations with many 3rd World countries (supported them in question's of national liberation and aid, was anti-apartheid, had relations with Cuba etc), remained neutral during the Cold War, condemned the US aggression in Vietnam, as well as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Of course both Sweden and Finland was Western leaning countries. Our economy was mixed-capitalist economies and we remained "Liberal democracies". Finland signed the Friendship treaty (YYA treaty, 1948) with the Soviet Union, neither countries entered NATO. My Grandfather fought the Soviet Union as a Swedish volunteer in Finland between 1939-44. In my opinion, an honourable act of solidarity that I have no problem to defend. With that said Finland was later on fighting alongside Nazi-Germany between 1941-44, more problematic but to some degree understandable. I'm less found of our present politicians. Social-Democrat's sit on the board of big companies. I see a fundamental clash between serving ordinary ("working class") people and serving big capitalist interests. Something already pointed out by Jesus, when he talked about the impossibility of having two master's (God and Mammon -in his example, Mathew 6:24). Why the above? In my opinion Alexander Stubb and people like Carl Bildt, in Sweden, are representing the interests of Big Business (capitalist interests). They have a reckless, arrogance for the safety of ordinary citizens. If you have one potential enemy is it in your countries interest to heighten or lower the tension! Especially if you share a 1300 km border with that neighbour. War is not in the interest of ordinary citizens. War and/or heightened tension may however be in the interest of finance capital. In my opinion the main causes for the war in Ukraine is "imperialism"/competing capitalist interests and inter state rivalry (search: "John Mersheimer + Ukraine" or "Stephen F Cohen + Ukraine + Russia or "Lenin + Imperialism"). In my opinion this series explains nothing. It's a fairy tale with the aim of directing propaganda at the political class, academics and to some degree ordinary people. Stubb is spinning a tale, explaining why the world is the way it is. I don't by it! I'm 100% against us joining NATO! It's reckless and it's dangerous. Finland and Sweden joining NATO is what might trigger a war with Russia! We don't have to like them (I Don't) but we have to recognise that they are a potential threat and that it's possible for them to feel threatened by our actions. NATO didn't protect the Ukraine! +Just look at the record: on the scale of things have NATO started or prevented more war's (Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia...).
I'm saddened to hear your politicians are sitting on the boards of companies! I thought the US was the most corrupt western government! You need to get your democracy and your press back from these deluded neoliberals! Siding with the US is a mistake at this juncture as it's a dying empire! Why would you designate your country as a a US proxy on Russian border? This is what you are doing by joining NATO! Relinquishing your sovereignty!
@@fwfeo Thanks for your reply. Sweden is still behind the US when it comes to corruption (poliitiscan's taking illegal bribes is almost unherd of). I was more referring to "harm to society" or talking through both sides of your mouth. But that wasn't your main point! -I agree it's insane to allow yourself to be a proxy of the US and to willingly put yourself in the crossfire! I was at a demonstration yesterday against NATO. I ran into an elderly Finnish couple (nice people), tourists, who just happened to pass the demonstration. Their argument for Finland joining NATO was "Putin is mad and can't be trusted" + long border etc It's crazy! Do you think the Russian military, administration, population and/or the sk Oligarch's would allow the country to be governed by an insane person! Look at the interview with Oliver Stone. If anything President Putin is more frank (maybe because he's more autocratic, don't know) than Western poliitiscan's. I don't defend Russia, I don't defend President Putin but I do think he is worth listening to. Russia is a real, material, power. Usually it's better to have good relations with your neighbours. The US/Western media has gone insane. I stand by that we need a mass mobilisation against NATO in Sweden = only way to stop our entry. I let the Russian people deal with Putin. Sincerely yours
@@mirekslechta7161 I have listened to him quite a bit already. He has a very interesting perspective that I appreciate and almost agree with. I am aware of the missteps of the US and the west with Russia in the 90's and early 2000's.Ultimately I don't agree that the west and NATO are responsible for the actions of Putin. Putin is an evil narcissist and has been for decades. I've read many books about Putin. I believe that he bombed his own people shortly after he took office to go to war against the Chechnyans. It all started there. If you believe that NATO is a strictly defensive organization, you must also not be threatened by it. In fact from a security perspective Russia should appreciate NATO's boarder.
@@tomfortner3023 I do not agree that NATO is defensive. USA attacked many countries in past and USA is NATO leader... One more point: Did you know, that USA is killing civilians in thousands ( between 5000-6000 including children) in third world countries? Did you ever try to google "USA drone strikes" ? If you do, you might have a luck to open only some of those pages, because USA government is closing the most agly once. It was started by Obama in 2014 and it goes on till this year. USA goverment killed by this disgusting way probably many more civilians, than Russia did in this war so far.(this is not to defend Putin, it is a matter of fact) Bear in mind , USA is doing this mostly in countries where is no war at all.. It is well known fact, that USA is sentencing civilians to death and executing them without any judge and even outside USA- many times including their children once they are around their parents... NATO leader is killer of civilians- NO WAY NATO could be considered as defensive organisation once such a nation is a member, let alone leader...
I'm somewhat missing engineering on the list 🤔 Historical superpowers like the Romans or modern Russia or China never excelled both in science or technology (like the historical Greece, or the the modern US). But they managed to gain superpower status by building things on a massive scale like nobody else.
Traditionelly you have two different approaches that are still fighting for supremacy today. You had the Greece where the upper class marveled in science and people like Pythagoras and Archimedes are still household names today and you had the Romans who had a get the shit done attitude and marveled in doing things at large scale which ultimate allowed them to dominate Greece. Today any European automatically puts science into his top ten list. While China seems more bothered with ramping up their industrial capacity and being able to build nuclear submarines, destroyers, airplanes and rockets faster than anybody else.
Personally I would merge data and information into a single item. Because with the rise of algorithms and artificial intelligence the distinction between the two is making less and less sense.
Another wonderful presentation. Spot on as always. It would be very informative and interesting to share your insights into the workings and aims of the EU. As a European African I find the EU structure very interesting as I believe its the way forward for Africa - as in the present form the AU is not functioning as it should. As a South African I would like to see far more close cooperation within African states, but there is so much rivalry that there are constant breakdowns along the decision making process.
I'm curious as to why population isn't on the list? It's constantly referred to as a strength of countries like China, and also in the curious obsession with population decline in places like Japan. How important is population? Your analysis makes a lot more sense to me, using Denmark as an example of a country with power even though it doesn't have a large population.
I read the book The Weaponisation of Everything: A Field Guide to the New Way of War by Mark Galeotti. Today everything can be weaponised from lobbying to social media.
@@mirekslechta7161 I have and he makes some interesting truthful points at times although I don't always agree with his point of view on several topics. Mearsheimer claim about Russia (or should I say Putin) invaded Ukraine in the first place is blatantly wrong in my view.
Great Lectures, I want to thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts with the world, and I believe this type of high quality education for the public is what needed today. Greetings
The Finnish-Swedish, Cai-Göran Alexander Stubb is finlands former Minister of Foreign Affairs 4 april 2008 to 24 juni 2014, Finlands Minister for Europe 22 juni 2011-24 juni 2014 it was combined with the Minister of Foreign Affairs. He was Finland's primeminister from 24:th of june 2014 to 29:th may 2015, he also was Finland's Minister of Finance 29:th of may 2015 to 22 of june 2016 . Now he is making youtube videos for EUI's School of Transnational Governance, there he is the STG Director since 1 of may 2020 I like it.
I'd like to ask about history/heritage/reputation of a country. Can it be considered an instrument of power as well? or does it play a role in one of the 10 instruments of power?
What you are highlighting is something that I discussed with my Professor 35 years ago! As what goes on the Plus (advantages) or Minus (Disadvantages) columns. The definition that we cane up with is "Traditions" the example that I used 35 years ago was the Prussian military traditions that over time have influenced the Germanic military traditions and have been infused to the greater culture beyond the gates of military garrisons. When I look at the Germanic nations (as defined by shared linguistic and religious connections) those societies have developed some shared values and ingrained cultural habits that emanate from their traditions such as work ethics, expectations of transparency be it in government, commercial entities and right down to the family unit that is a fundamental building block of each society. The collection of those traditions combined with other factors such as geography, availability of natural resources for basically steady food production... have enabled these societies to excel and exceed in many respects. I appreciate the Germanic societies achievements and their general approach to life. So, to your point, I think traditions matter greatly and collectively it is one of the independent variables that fuels and manifest itself in other factors that the great professor has included on his list! Please let me know if you agree or not.
It's been touched upon. It's called 'Information' or 'Instruments of PR'. All countries have good sides and bad sides, it may be important which side becomes known in times of conflict. And whoever controls the narrative, controls the 'reputation'
@@johndewey6358 thank you for the reply. After I wrote the question I thought a little more to this and, yes, I agree with you. Also, it might be considered as a passive status that contributes to power, rather than an active instrument. One more thing should be considered: it is a subjective thing. Example: if a collective or a person enjoys war, violence and exploitation, it will find attractive countries with these characteristic in its history/heritage. I keep on thinking on this :)
When he talked about institutions, yes very much. I'll give you examples: Russia's leadership right now is using the (national) Orthodox Church of Russia as an instrument of power and "stability" as well as "justification" for their brutal invasion of Ukraine. Basically the church patriarch (leader) Kirill says that "we are in a war against the West and it's values" and thus the regime of Russia uses the church as both domestic stability by allying with the church and faith and using it in an outward sense and projecting a justification for a brutal invasion. The U.S.A. used both the "Manifest destiny" and the Monroe doctrine to advance it's own interests by both soft power and hard power. They reached the Western coast and used military might to put down native rebellions and crush Mexico in the region. They invested into railroads and infrastructure to make the West coast, otherwise crossable for weeks from the Cape Horn, to just a few days or a week by railroad. Then they used hard power to get Panama away from Columbia and used soft and hard power (investing and money) and military support (navy stations) to build the Panama Canal. These are institutions used for hard and soft power. The church in nations is an institution, so are long doctrines of foreign and domestic policy, like I highlighted the Monroe doctirne.
Great video, like always. Would it be possible to make a video about veto rights in the UN Security Council, NATO and the European Council (particularly regarding foreign policy in the EU)? How are these rights effecting the war in Ukraine and is it time to change them?
Mr. Stubb is doing pro USA and pro NATO propaganda- for you to understand better to Ukraine war and to be able to find out what is real true about this war and what is propaganda, you would need to see several of videos made by Professor Mearsheimer about it in past 2 or 3 months.. So am not going to teach you, Professor Mearsheimer can teach far better if you like anf if you dig for it and listen to him. My personal opinion on Mr. Stubb is this: Mr. Stubb is for joining NATO while he is not a military expert. In reality, it would bring just grave danger to Finland. My points A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.
@@mirekslechta7161 Mr. Stubb is speaking about power in general, with the occasion of War In Ukraine. His view is of course the view of a person which base his opinion on the fight to autocracy. Autocracy is a system followed by many countries (Russia, North Corea, Cuba and so on). The EU background of Mr. Stubb represent the position of EU democracy (also GB, UK and Japan are democratic countries). As an educated person, I follow many Russian sources (State and exiled ones) and I still do no catch your point of view, a par from simple “propaganda” speach … also, the nuke shit is not a focus, Russian side has always in the mouth but it really does not fit or benefit. Finland and Sweden join NATO as democratic countries that want to stand with their friends in defence… nobody is attacking Russia … Russia does attack its bordering countries
I think that History, Culture and Language are important instruments of power. But the biggest one missing here is Religion which is part of Culture and History but far exceeds it in power. Current events in Northern Ireland and Ukraine are connected to all these (including language).
Fully agree! Religious (or more generally "spiritual") power play a very important role in many parts of the world. Maybe his 10th point about "life style" could be extended to "beliefs" that would include both religion, life style, etc.
Riveting content as always. Question, how does your ten top level taxonomy of the instruments of power relate to the more conventional 4 instruments of power (DIME) Diplomacy, Information, Military, and Economic. By the way, I loved your number 10 lifestyle, made me think of a "Happy Ship".
10:55 error: "information moves around the globe in a nanosecond". At the theoretical maximum speed of light - 300.000.000m/s - information would move 0.3m in a nanosecond. In practice, information moves always somewhat slower.
Great mini lecture on types of power. You mentioned AI and AlphaGo… a really great eye opening documentary. I think Machiavelli would have enjoyed and appreciated your lecture also..🌻
Let me reflect those ten points on Taiwan. It seems that we have most of those on a good path, but still have more to improve. However, the most disadvantage category might be institutions, there is little progress made, or even deteriorated in joining international organizations and others in decades.
I think you forgot media and culture. Media can be used to control the flow of information. Culture (tv, movies, music, plays, sports, etc) present an image and outlets for your lifestyle instrument.
Thank you for stating the obvious. Not sure why you think these are some earth shattering revelations, but from a simplistic definational perspective, it is useful to at least define your terms...
Great video. But why not include demography as one of the instruments of power? That is a huge determinant of state power. You could even incorporate immigration as a subcategory of demography, with nations that have particularly sound immigration policies to attract the right talent for their labor needs (Canada and Australia come to mind) having a significant advantage. Though I suppose good immigration policy could fall under the umbrella of institutions.
the only thing better than strong bureaucracy is no bureaucracy. (and by that I mean local automation which bypasses the need for bureaucracy altogether)
06:45 Carbon neutrality. How that specific issue can be of any relevance? Maybe, waste recycling is also an instrument of power? Apparently, the technological advancement, economy agility and having many options of pooling and utilising many alternative natural resources to power your economy is important. But decarbonisation in particular?!!
In a european pov (very little natural gaz nor oil and almost no coil left in the continent), decarbonisation lower your reliance on foreign powers and supply chains disruptions. Conventional oil extraction peaked in the world around 2008, so your ability to decarbonize your economy is probably a necessity for great powers in the 21st century. With fracking, north america is a little bit diferent, but if you want your state (any state, even USA) to last more than 50 years, and considering the outcome of a +2.5/3°C climate (or more)... A well driven and well planned decarbonisation should be considered seriously. I'm not even talking about a moral/ecological point of view. It's about survival. You can't use your crude, even with a very good fracking industry, if every bit of carbon released in the air kills you. Tanks/planes/soldiers can't shoot at your thermometer/sun when your crops start failing, and your population riots. Your powers (soft and hard) mean nothing if your country faces a civil war. "economy agility and having many options of pooling and utilising many alternative natural resources to power your economy is important" --> yeah, which means : decarbonisation ^^ It's not a real conventional "power", but we could argue that its absence could result in a huge loss of power (middle term for EU/China/India, long term for north america).
@@philipkuttner7945, 1. Prof Stubb calls it 'carbon neutrality', not 'lack of carbon dependency'. 2. Even if we assume 'independence from carbon resources' is meant, it's better to call it 'agility in using different resources' meaning all sorts of resources can be replaced with an alternative, not only carbon. 3. Carbon emission that cause 'floods, fires, hurricanes and draughts' is a global problem that countries should collectively deal with, not an 'Instrument of power'; countries can't weaponise it, it doesn't fit into any conflict formula, countries should cooperate to deal with this issue
@@kit6088, exactly, the phrasing is wrong. It's not "carbon neutrality", it's "alternating resources" or "having technologies to overcome global problems, such as scarceness of oil and gas". The term "Carbon neutrality" can only be applied to concerted efforts of the global community to solve the problem of global warming. Prof Stubb is talking about confrontation between countries, not cooperation, - in the context of the war in the Ukraine. And the "Carbon neutrality" does not fit into this context. Tommorow the war is going to be over, and the European countries will look at Russia, supposedly, their enemy, a reckless agressor and a destabilising element in the word security, saying "now you have to reduce your carbon emissions". And this awful Russia, scourge of the Earth, will listen? You see - you have to completely abandon confrontational rhethoric to start discussing the issues relevant to global survival. But it's important that this issue is raised. Because it also shows the perspective. It shows that the security is not limited to military alliances like the NATO, and democratic goverments like in Europe and North America. Within these alliances you have the USA who basically is not at all "carbon neutral" and is yet to show its adhearance to the principles of sustainable developement
@@NTraveller Yes i agree with you, Stubb phrasing isn't great here. However, i think it's not irrelevant. As i see it, carbon neutrality means getting rid of carbon in a country's economy, and it doesn't need to be a global community thing. Short term + Russia/Ukrain war perspective: carbon dependency allows Poutine to weaponize his economy against EU. So being low on carbon dependency is a great (and needed) "defensive weapon". Long term economic/industrial prism: when oil will be missing, having a better energetic complex than everyone else could be weaponized (militaro-industrial pov). Good tech (maybe cheap(er)/safe(r) nuclear plants? or/and renewable energy tech) could be a great competitive asset (trade pov). So I wouldn't use "alternating resources" neither, and i think "getting rid of carbon dependency" would have been more relevant. But maybe we don't have the same understanding of these terms. As I understand it: it's not about finding an other carbon supplier, and consequently diversifying your energetic portfolio, it's about getting rid of carbon dependency. Do you use "alternating resources" implying "without carbon"? If so, then i agree with you. About climate change: It's prisoner's dilemma (kind of): at one point, someone needs to take the risk to move before everyone else, and therefore be the first one to stop profiting from a high carbon economy (which means losing a lot of your economic power). In a perfect world, we would come together, and solve this common issue. In the real world, we can't even all agree on the meaning of a simple word like "war" ("""military special operation""" >_
@@palamidagheo4520 i think yes. russian speaking audience is really lack of adequate information about war. there is pro war propaganda jistifying the horror of war, on the other side there is anti war propahanda which is in fact not objective enough so sound not trustworthy.
@@timm_Rudiger well i never been in russia so i might be wrong but even if they are informed and agree with this side of the story still is not much they can do about it/ reaching critical mass is far away
I think with "Science" you are referring to the applied sciences, right? Generally the process of doing science doesn't seem like it would directly give power to a nation.
10 Instruments of Power (UKRAINE) 1.Azov 2.Right Sector 3.Svoboda 4.National corps 5.Governmental initiative of Yarosh 6.Patriot of Ukraine 7.Ukrainian National Union 8.Stepan Bandera 9. UK 10. USA Azov’s Andriy Biletsky: “Ukrainian nation's mission is to lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against Semite-led Untermenschen".
The one thing I think I've seen over a long life is that all of the things he listed depend on the spiritual underpinnings of the society. If the spiritual situation of a significant part of a population is good then success in these areas and even in spite of things like geography (Texas is a wasteland in large part, for example) will result. If the spirituality of a people is not good than all the natural advantages and attempts to create the other bases for successful society will fail (education, for example, will simply become pedantic indoctrination as we saw in the old Soviet Union). "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin condemns any people." - Proverbs 14:34 NIV . Righteous behaviour springs from righteous thinking which springs from a correct spirituality, methinks. Not a new story. Cain thought he could get a blessed life-style by ever-increasing unrighteous behaviour but it didn't work out that way. Ironically the path to a blessed lifestyle was open to him but it required accepting things he refused to. The foundation is important, and spiritual.
Re science. "...some ethical limits are going to be the ones with strong competitive advantage." Are you saying that ethics in science will give strong competitive advantage? I don't think the ethical nature is important in determining competitive advantage BUT the best scientific progress has probably been made in countries where ethics are stronger because of the more open culture, where ideas can be openly discussed, and freedom of information is greater, with education that promotes a questioning mind. Collaboration is stronger than competition when there is a perceivable shared reward for all who collaborate, regardless of individual success. Historically, the most 'useful' (debatable) rapid science and technology advancement has occurred in war time because of the perception of a shared threat and shared reward for all who help. People no longer work just for their pay packet and people work their hardest whatever they are doing. This is when real socialism works for a while and a key reason why, erroneously called, socialist countries are so desperate to create a fantasy of a constant external threat. The other main reason is, of course, to keep the masses fearful and so more controllable and why there must be a suppression and distortion of available information, particularly from the outside.
Democraphic is also important. How many people? Are there many old people of fighting young people? And science is not only working in an open society. What about nazi Germany or Soviet Union?
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his POWER, and his SEAT, and GREAT AUTHORITY.
They don't want religion, in a liberal democracy, they want the government to be the new religion, hard to do as even Karl Marx wrote that communism would could for fill humans material wealth, but humans would suffer a spiritual death, via materialism. These neo liberals are barking up the same tree.
13:12 - 13:16 - 13:35 - 13:42 💯 13:42 - 13:53 💯 13:53 - 14:00 💯Real Life even in America 🇺🇸which can be abused through delayed legislation/regulation/etc to unregulated/etc monetization and incentivization/etc that leads to excessive abuse of power by and or within systemic design 💯naturally legislation/regulation/etc lags behind the evolution of big data/tech/etc.. but the lobbying to further the gap between legislative on/etc and evolution(in negative directions/impacts/etc) to maximize profits with intentional ignorance to societal effects can be a choice of profits at the cost of negative impacts on society/etc 13:12 - 14:09 💯Real Life 💯
I can't see Renewables being an instrument of power. Having an energy grid, supported by any sort of power source, dirty coal, nuclear, gas, oil or renewables is sufficient. Renewables aren't exclusive for power, hence as long as my country is provided for, the rest of the world can go HOT or COLD. I still have my instrument of power = energy sufficiency
Renewables ensure long run independence as well as the ability to, in perpetuity, be self reliant as well as export and so exert soft power upon neighbours, especially if your nation has better tech or conditions to make renewables more effective
Renewables can have very different supply chains and maintenance. Very important for energy security. Example russia cutting energy exports to Finland.
There has to be an energy transition, so I believe he means that the base resources, expertise, manufacturing to switch is an instrument. China has been catching up on an old European lead, once the consequences of burning coal became clear.
@@inso80 But I believe Alexander is looking at the disruptive effects as fossil fuel transitions to carbon neutral. Those who master change emerge from transitions stronger. The consequences of not transitioning will be even more expensive, the recent UN report sets 2030 as a critical date for 1.5C limit
5:39 - 5:57 unfortunately yes, and with the given power… comes abuses of that power with financial incentives to constantly innovate/evolve abuses of power at a faster rate than the legislatory/regulatory/etc powers choose to regulate (which is only further slowed by big tech lobbyists and special interest groups). 5:57 - 6:05 Europe’s values are obviously stronger than us in this sense, America is stronger than China in this sense, but when it comes to America we are lagging behind European values in this sense. The damage snd negative impacts of big data/big tech can be prolonged based off of fun financial motivators, where a rapid rate of evolution can be exacerbated based off an individual’s greed before our legislators/regulators/etc catch them (that is if lobbyists don’t persuade the legislators/regulators/etc to hold off regulations in an obviously negative portion of an evolutionary growth in big data/tech… and or lobby them to turn a blind eye until the public catches up with the negative impacts of a portion of our rapid evolutionary growth in big data/tech). When it comes to big data/tech, paraphrasing the saying “with added power comes great responsibility” evidently Europeans seem to have a stronger grasp/base on those values than us in America
One needs to look at it from a long term perspective. This is a RACIAL war which can go on for years where the white Imperialist countries cannot come to terms with other countries prospering. The UN charter of fundamental human rights was created in 1948 but race segregation laws remained in effect until the late 1960s and several institutions across the US still have racial segregation in place. Most countries gained independence not because racism had ended but only because after WWII the west could not afford to maintain their colonies. What was the need for NATO after the collapse of the USSR? One only needs to look at the past of NATO with all these men such as Hans Speidel, Adolf Heusinger, Friedrich Guggenberger, Hennig Strumpell, Franz Josef Strauss. NATO is no longer a defensive alliance but an offensive military alliance and its scope is not just limited to NATO member countries but has interfered in countries such as Korea, Serbia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya, Bosnia and Herzegovina to name a few. Instead of being disbanded after the collapse of the USSR and being integrated into UN peacekeeping, it now has ulterior racist motives. NATO was supposed to limit its influence over just the North Atlantic and yet it has invaded and destroyed countries around the world. Moreover it is not a legitimate military alliance as it has no support from neither the United Nations nor the global south. The preamble to the NATO treaty clearly states its objectives of protecting the 'white race' and 'civilization'. Article 5 says that an attack on one is an attack on all and hence it also implies that an aggression by one NATO country is an aggression by all NATO countries and NATO strives for the racial hagemony of the whites around the world. Also there is no separate inventory of weapons and an army of NATO. So an aggression by any of the EU countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America should be considered as NATO aggression. USA and Ukraine are the only two countries who voted against the resolution, entitled "Combating Glorification Of Nazism, Neo-Nazism And Other Practices That Contribute To Fueling Contemporary Forms Of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, And Related Intolerance". The former leader of Azov, Andrew Biletsky had said in 2010 that the nation’s mission was to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade… against Semite-led Untermenschen [subhumans]” and NATO/EU have been supporting such forces in Ukraine. A solution to Ukraine will just buy some time before the west makes their next misadventure to destroy China to create a Christian white empire in the northern hemisphere and dominate the world and reinforce imperialism. If Russia and China fall, there are no other countries to protect the global south. Non-whites in EU/NATO countries are minorities and the most downtrodden communities and they can easily be wiped out. If a genocide could take place in the last century then it is more than possible in the near future. Non-whites (Arabs, Iranians, Africans) all can be victims, but they cannot be freedom fighters, they cannot take up arms to violently repel an attack on their people, they are only allowed only to wave signs and a flag, chanting for the West to save them. The Ukrainians, on the other hand, have the right to defend themselves, they can throw Molotov cocktails at the Russians, use weapons and the west will glorify that and even supply more weapons. Wasn't it enough to treat non-whites like slaves, colonization, imperialism, and the exploitation of non-whites?
The irony is that science is so badly paid and the conditions are so annoying, that even if you'd love to do it, at some point you'd ask yourself "why?". Just like schooling and care, societies don't assign the importance these areas deserve.
Who fact checks the EDMO, who elected them, for how long and what are you charged with when you make a mistake? ...oh, you're a member of the World Economic Forum, never mind.
A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.
This video was disappointing in comparison to the others which were good. Apparently Mr. Stubbs believes that energy resources such as oil and other natural resources are not a source of power. He’s also bought into the idea that green energy is somehow more powerful than oil despite all evidence to the contrary. And it is quite disturbing that he wants the government to combat misinformation and the government is the primary source of misinformation. That is the road to autocracy. I think this video is completely off the rails.
YOU ARE MISSING TWO MAJOR SOuRCEs! Political power(core political structures) and Theological (religious) power....wow totally inadequate basic defintions...
Professor Stubb's videos are a highlight of my week. Each time he confirms some of my thoughts while also spurring my thinking with new insights. I hope he continues to make these.
If this guy is the highlight of your week, your life must be so sad, your intellect must be highly handicapped.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
@@mirekslechta7161 I'll also check out Prof Mearsheimer. It's good to have multiple perspectives. Thx
@@mirekslechta7161 Thank you, will check this out !
@Neil Macfarquhar it does not require a bright mind to see through propaganda and biases
Very structured, informative and to the point, as always. The entire series helps with the analysis and clarifies the chain of current sorrowful, disgraceful events a lot. I'm Russian, living in Finland.
Morjesta sinne !:)
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Hi Mr Stubb I am from Turkiye and love your short lectures. Thanks a lot. It is amazing that you are covering many different aspects of international politics.
Turkiye???
@@HeadhuntexGamer Chicken
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
As an 11th Instrument of Power, I would like to suggest “Adaptability”. Things change, stuff happens. Successful individuals, groups, corporations or nations find ways of accommodating these changes and moving forward. Rigid players try to double down on something that worked in the past, when circumstances were different, and end up with very suboptimal solutions. Change can be uncomfortable, but stasis can be really harmful.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
A fantastic insight into the world of today..................much obliged!!!
Very interesting - thank you from Canada.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Thank you for your insights. Your number 10 is the key to civil society. A legal framework without corruption together with a focus on quality education are essential for any society to progress. The lack of these two fundamentals results in under performing economies. The clearest examples where these factors are missing can be found in Latin America. Finland and Canada are examples on the correct path.
Great lectures, Professor Stubb! I would like to suggest that you add Demography to your list; larger and younger populations will allow countries to exert more power. Countries that are strong today will likely slowly lose power as their societies age and depopulate. Also, I would merge Climate and Geography into a single category, so you can keep a total of 10. :)
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
My favourite lecture so far! It helps with thinking about power and influence around the world.
I look forward to these lectures every week, thank you thank you Mr. Stubb and your team!! Well done :) !!
Stubbs videos are super well thought out. Modern politician. We need import these ones to the States. Good man.
I'm writing this all down just in case I decide to pursue global domination as a career path.
Funny! 😂
Thank you for warning us, @Osiris Rex
Same here. I'm shopping around for a remote Pacific island for my secret lair.
You are imagining things that have always been.
Very good commentary. Thanks professor
Incredibly valuable for those of us from other fields (science) grappling to understand world events without training in the subject. Thank you.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
sir, your mini lecture series is one of the best on the internet. and I am a big fan of it and of your's. unfortunately, the latter episode are becoming increasingly abstract. and I would like to kindly ask you to take into consideration that you are not addressing this miniseries to your students but to an educated still general public. so, please continue your lectures and make some references to concrete situations and facts so we can better understand it. with respect, Silviu M.Dascalescu
That would be welcome, but difficult to fit into ~15 minutes.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
I wonder if these categories could be combined/compressed a bit, as there seems to be some overlap, and some topics receive more attention than others. But maybe this also reflects what aspects of power are seen as most important or interesting currently (i.e., digital). But Stubb does seem to do best, analytically, when he has his 3 points to work with. On the other hand, this being the first time, it stands to reason that he can also learn to use another number of points than 3. Anyway, a great lecture! Thanks for sharing.
😁 in recent Finnish interview Stubb argued to avoid using "3points" but the reporter"forced him to do it once again 😁🤭
@@jesseaffiliate6328 I have nothing against ditching the 3-points, although I think it is kind of cool. Reminds me of my own high-school history teacher and her instructions on how to write an essay. He is of course a professor now. I just think that the 10-points are a bit repetitive, but I am not an expert that could suggest something better. So maybe 7-points? It is also a prime number?
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
👏🏾Thank you for spending the time to create and share this content on your perspectives🙏🏾Much appreciated for your time💙
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
So basically an updated version on the Piramide of Maslow. Or would you more consider this points to be pilar's that support power?
Very clear. Very current. Very helpful,
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
I'm quite found of some former Swedish and Finnish politicians: Tage Erlander, Per-Ahlbin Hansson, Olof Palme, Juho Paasikivi and maybe UKK. Of course they weren't "one man show's" -a broad public opinion forced them to take reasonable policy position's (or maybe they were selected by the material conditions of the times as were their policies).
You have Paasikivi's "fact based foreign policy (towards the Soviet Union) and his rethinking/thinking on why the Soviet Union had attacked Finland in 1939 connected with the Finnish posture towards the Soviet Union in the interwar year's. In Sweden Olof Palme (Aristocratic background) articulated why he was a democratic socialist. Sweden upheld reasonable good relations with many 3rd World countries (supported them in question's of national liberation and aid, was anti-apartheid, had relations with Cuba etc), remained neutral during the Cold War, condemned the US aggression in Vietnam, as well as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Of course both Sweden and Finland was Western leaning countries. Our economy was mixed-capitalist economies and we remained "Liberal democracies". Finland signed the Friendship treaty (YYA treaty, 1948) with the Soviet Union, neither countries entered NATO.
My Grandfather fought the Soviet Union as a Swedish volunteer in Finland between 1939-44. In my opinion, an honourable act of solidarity that I have no problem to defend. With that said Finland was later on fighting alongside Nazi-Germany between 1941-44, more problematic but to some degree understandable.
I'm less found of our present politicians. Social-Democrat's sit on the board of big companies. I see a fundamental clash between serving ordinary ("working class") people and serving big capitalist interests. Something already pointed out by Jesus, when he talked about the impossibility of having two master's (God and Mammon -in his example, Mathew 6:24).
Why the above?
In my opinion Alexander Stubb and people like Carl Bildt, in Sweden, are representing the interests of Big Business (capitalist interests). They have a reckless, arrogance for the safety of ordinary citizens.
If you have one potential enemy is it in your countries interest to heighten or lower the tension! Especially if you share a 1300 km border with that neighbour. War is not in the interest of ordinary citizens. War and/or heightened tension may however be in the interest of finance capital.
In my opinion the main causes for the war in Ukraine is "imperialism"/competing capitalist interests and inter state rivalry (search: "John Mersheimer + Ukraine" or "Stephen F Cohen + Ukraine + Russia or "Lenin + Imperialism").
In my opinion this series explains nothing. It's a fairy tale with the aim of directing propaganda at the political class, academics and to some degree ordinary people. Stubb is spinning a tale, explaining why the world is the way it is.
I don't by it!
I'm 100% against us joining NATO!
It's reckless and it's dangerous.
Finland and Sweden joining NATO is what might trigger a war with Russia!
We don't have to like them (I Don't) but we have to recognise that they are a potential threat and that it's possible for them to feel threatened by our actions.
NATO didn't protect the Ukraine!
+Just look at the record: on the scale of things have NATO started or prevented more war's (Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslavia...).
I'm saddened to hear your politicians are sitting on the boards of companies! I thought the US was the most corrupt western government!
You need to get your democracy and your press back from these deluded neoliberals! Siding with the US is a mistake at this juncture as it's a dying empire! Why would you designate your country as a a US proxy on Russian border? This is what you are doing by joining NATO!
Relinquishing your sovereignty!
@@fwfeo Thanks for your reply. Sweden is still behind the US when it comes to corruption (poliitiscan's taking illegal bribes is almost unherd of). I was more referring to "harm to society" or talking through both sides of your mouth.
But that wasn't your main point!
-I agree it's insane to allow yourself to be a proxy of the US and to willingly put yourself in the crossfire!
I was at a demonstration yesterday against NATO. I ran into an elderly Finnish couple (nice people), tourists, who just happened to pass the demonstration.
Their argument for Finland joining NATO was "Putin is mad and can't be trusted" + long border etc
It's crazy!
Do you think the Russian military, administration, population and/or the sk Oligarch's would allow the country to be governed by an insane person!
Look at the interview with Oliver Stone. If anything President Putin is more frank (maybe because he's more autocratic, don't know) than Western poliitiscan's.
I don't defend Russia, I don't defend President Putin but I do think he is worth listening to.
Russia is a real, material, power.
Usually it's better to have good relations with your neighbours.
The US/Western media has gone insane.
I stand by that we need a mass mobilisation against NATO in Sweden = only way to stop our entry.
I let the Russian people deal with Putin.
Sincerely yours
Very interesting and informative, as always . Thank you!
You are brilliant! Thank you for the education.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
@@mirekslechta7161 I have listened to him quite a bit already. He has a very interesting perspective that I appreciate and almost agree with. I am aware of the missteps of the US and the west with Russia in the 90's and early 2000's.Ultimately I don't agree that the west and NATO are responsible for the actions of Putin. Putin is an evil narcissist and has been for decades. I've read many books about Putin. I believe that he bombed his own people shortly after he took office to go to war against the Chechnyans. It all started there. If you believe that NATO is a strictly defensive organization, you must also not be threatened by it. In fact from a security perspective Russia should appreciate NATO's boarder.
@@tomfortner3023 I do not agree that NATO is defensive. USA attacked many countries in past and USA is NATO leader... One more point: Did you know, that USA is killing civilians in thousands ( between 5000-6000 including children) in third world countries? Did you ever try to google "USA drone strikes" ? If you do, you might have a luck to open only some of those pages, because USA government is closing the most agly once. It was started by Obama in 2014 and it goes on till this year. USA goverment killed by this disgusting way probably many more civilians, than Russia did in this war so far.(this is not to defend Putin, it is a matter of fact) Bear in mind , USA is doing this mostly in countries where is no war at all.. It is well known fact, that USA is sentencing civilians to death and executing them without any judge and even outside USA- many times including their children once they are around their parents... NATO leader is killer of civilians- NO WAY NATO could be considered as defensive organisation once such a nation is a member, let alone leader...
thanks for your condescension
I'm somewhat missing engineering on the list 🤔 Historical superpowers like the Romans or modern Russia or China never excelled both in science or technology (like the historical Greece, or the the modern US). But they managed to gain superpower status by building things on a massive scale like nobody else.
Don't be silly - who's ever heard of a top eleven list??? :D
Which come first, Science or Engineering. Or Science is inclusive of engineering. Law of Physic ?? Material science ?? 🤔🤔🤔
Traditionelly you have two different approaches that are still fighting for supremacy today. You had the Greece where the upper class marveled in science and people like Pythagoras and Archimedes are still household names today and you had the Romans who had a get the shit done attitude and marveled in doing things at large scale which ultimate allowed them to dominate Greece. Today any European automatically puts science into his top ten list. While China seems more bothered with ramping up their industrial capacity and being able to build nuclear submarines, destroyers, airplanes and rockets faster than anybody else.
Personally I would merge data and information into a single item. Because with the rise of algorithms and artificial intelligence the distinction between the two is making less and less sense.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Very wise words- especially the conclusion
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Another wonderful presentation. Spot on as always. It would be very informative and interesting to share your insights into the workings and aims of the EU. As a European African I find the EU structure very interesting as I believe its the way forward for Africa - as in the present form the AU is not functioning as it should. As a South African I would like to see far more close cooperation within African states, but there is so much rivalry that there are constant breakdowns along the decision making process.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Another great lecture
love this channel
I'm curious as to why population isn't on the list? It's constantly referred to as a strength of countries like China, and also in the curious obsession with population decline in places like Japan. How important is population? Your analysis makes a lot more sense to me, using Denmark as an example of a country with power even though it doesn't have a large population.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
I read the book The Weaponisation of Everything: A Field Guide to the New Way of War
by Mark Galeotti. Today everything can be weaponised from lobbying to social media.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
@@mirekslechta7161 I have and he makes some interesting truthful points at times although I don't always agree with his point of view on several topics. Mearsheimer claim about Russia (or should I say Putin) invaded Ukraine in the first place is blatantly wrong in my view.
Very nice and insightful video. Really enjoy it.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
great finish
Great Lectures, I want to thank you for sharing your experience and thoughts with the world, and I believe this type of high quality education for the public is what needed today.
Greetings
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Thx!
The Finnish-Swedish, Cai-Göran Alexander Stubb is finlands former Minister of Foreign Affairs 4 april 2008 to 24 juni 2014, Finlands Minister for Europe 22 juni 2011-24 juni 2014 it was combined with the Minister of Foreign Affairs.
He was Finland's primeminister from 24:th of june 2014 to 29:th may 2015, he also was Finland's Minister of Finance 29:th of may 2015 to 22 of june 2016 .
Now he is making youtube videos for EUI's School of Transnational Governance, there he is the STG Director since 1 of may 2020 I like it.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
I'd like to ask about history/heritage/reputation of a country. Can it be considered an instrument of power as well? or does it play a role in one of the 10 instruments of power?
What you are highlighting is something that I discussed with my Professor 35 years ago! As what goes on the Plus (advantages) or Minus (Disadvantages) columns. The definition that we cane up with is "Traditions" the example that I used 35 years ago was the Prussian military traditions that over time have influenced the Germanic military traditions and have been infused to the greater culture beyond the gates of military garrisons. When I look at the Germanic nations (as defined by shared linguistic and religious connections) those societies have developed some shared values and ingrained cultural habits that emanate from their traditions such as work ethics, expectations of transparency be it in government, commercial entities and right down to the family unit that is a fundamental building block of each society. The collection of those traditions combined with other factors such as geography, availability of natural resources for basically steady food production... have enabled these societies to excel and exceed in many respects. I appreciate the Germanic societies achievements and their general approach to life. So, to your point, I think traditions matter greatly and collectively it is one of the independent variables that fuels and manifest itself in other factors that the great professor has included on his list! Please let me know if you agree or not.
It's been touched upon. It's called 'Information' or 'Instruments of PR'. All countries have good sides and bad sides, it may be important which side becomes known in times of conflict. And whoever controls the narrative, controls the 'reputation'
@@johndewey6358 thank you for the reply. After I wrote the question I thought a little more to this and, yes, I agree with you. Also, it might be considered as a passive status that contributes to power, rather than an active instrument. One more thing should be considered: it is a subjective thing. Example: if a collective or a person enjoys war, violence and exploitation, it will find attractive countries with these characteristic in its history/heritage.
I keep on thinking on this :)
History is often misused … I would rather say that “experience” may be some kind of power
When he talked about institutions, yes very much. I'll give you examples:
Russia's leadership right now is using the (national) Orthodox Church of Russia as an instrument of power and "stability" as well as "justification" for their brutal invasion of Ukraine. Basically the church patriarch (leader) Kirill says that "we are in a war against the West and it's values" and thus the regime of Russia uses the church as both domestic stability by allying with the church and faith and using it in an outward sense and projecting a justification for a brutal invasion.
The U.S.A. used both the "Manifest destiny" and the Monroe doctrine to advance it's own interests by both soft power and hard power. They reached the Western coast and used military might to put down native rebellions and crush Mexico in the region. They invested into railroads and infrastructure to make the West coast, otherwise crossable for weeks from the Cape Horn, to just a few days or a week by railroad. Then they used hard power to get Panama away from Columbia and used soft and hard power (investing and money) and military support (navy stations) to build the Panama Canal.
These are institutions used for hard and soft power. The church in nations is an institution, so are long doctrines of foreign and domestic policy, like I highlighted the Monroe doctirne.
Great video, like always. Would it be possible to make a video about veto rights in the UN Security Council, NATO and the European Council (particularly regarding foreign policy in the EU)? How are these rights effecting the war in Ukraine and is it time to change them?
The power of veto … for good and for bad
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
@@mirekslechta7161 what propaganda in Mr. Stubb lecture ? I am very curious
Mr. Stubb is doing pro USA and pro NATO propaganda- for you to understand better to Ukraine war and to be able to find out what is real true about this war and what is propaganda, you would need to see several of videos made by Professor Mearsheimer about it in past 2 or 3 months.. So am not going to teach you, Professor Mearsheimer can teach far better if you like anf if you dig for it and listen to him. My personal opinion on Mr. Stubb is this: Mr. Stubb is for joining NATO while he is not a military expert. In reality, it would bring just grave danger to Finland. My points A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.
@@mirekslechta7161 Mr. Stubb is speaking about power in general, with the occasion of War In Ukraine. His view is of course the view of a person which base his opinion on the fight to autocracy. Autocracy is a system followed by many countries (Russia, North Corea, Cuba and so on). The EU background of Mr. Stubb represent the position of EU democracy (also GB, UK and Japan are democratic countries). As an educated person, I follow many Russian sources (State and exiled ones) and I still do no catch your point of view, a par from simple “propaganda” speach … also, the nuke shit is not a focus, Russian side has always in the mouth but it really does not fit or benefit. Finland and Sweden join NATO as democratic countries that want to stand with their friends in defence… nobody is attacking Russia … Russia does attack its bordering countries
I think that History, Culture and Language are important instruments of power. But the biggest one missing here is Religion which is part of Culture and History but far exceeds it in power. Current events in Northern Ireland and Ukraine are connected to all these (including language).
Great point
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Fully agree! Religious (or more generally "spiritual") power play a very important role in many parts of the world. Maybe his 10th point about "life style" could be extended to "beliefs" that would include both religion, life style, etc.
@@abroadobserver, should Turkey be in the NATO, anyway?
Riveting content as always. Question, how does your ten top level taxonomy of the instruments of power relate to the more conventional 4 instruments of power (DIME) Diplomacy, Information, Military, and Economic. By the way, I loved your number 10 lifestyle, made me think of a "Happy Ship".
It is about the oil/Natural gas. It is always about the oil.
How would you explain the difference between Information and Data as instruments of power?
10:55 error: "information moves around the globe in a nanosecond".
At the theoretical maximum speed of light - 300.000.000m/s - information would move 0.3m in a nanosecond.
In practice, information moves always somewhat slower.
omg
10 points!!? Holy sh*t, he’s really going for it this time.
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
consider
(11) religion
(12) spirit (creativity, imagination, mindfulness, wisdom, will)
11:30 some ethicals limits is a really important topic... should we outsource unethical research an risk a world pandemic or do it ourself?
11. Religion
12. Political ideology
13. Cultural hegemony
What is the difference between information and data?
Great mini lecture on types of power. You mentioned AI and AlphaGo… a really great eye opening documentary. I think Machiavelli would have enjoyed and appreciated your lecture also..🌻
You should listen to Professor Mearsheimer videos to understand the war in Ukraine... Far more true, far more realistic, no propaganda.
Let me reflect those ten points on Taiwan. It seems that we have most of those on a good path, but still have more to improve. However, the most disadvantage category might be institutions, there is little progress made, or even deteriorated in joining international organizations and others in decades.
Geography and realpolitik gets in the way, i am not sure how much Taiwan itself can improve these.
It's interesting that he doesn't mention resources.
I think you forgot media and culture. Media can be used to control the flow of information. Culture (tv, movies, music, plays, sports, etc) present an image and outlets for your lifestyle instrument.
Thank you for stating the obvious. Not sure why you think these are some earth shattering revelations, but from a simplistic definational perspective, it is useful to at least define your terms...
Look here mr man , it don't matter how wicked a man maybe, there always someone that supported him .
Attention on this channel, uncomfortable comments are removed that want to argue with Alex. Only those who praise him leave!
Great video. But why not include demography as one of the instruments of power? That is a huge determinant of state power. You could even incorporate immigration as a subcategory of demography, with nations that have particularly sound immigration policies to attract the right talent for their labor needs (Canada and Australia come to mind) having a significant advantage. Though I suppose good immigration policy could fall under the umbrella of institutions.
At 12:10: The Ministry of Truth?
US pretty much dominates all of them, except 10 I think, inequality is pretty bad in the US.
the only thing better than strong bureaucracy is no bureaucracy. (and by that I mean local automation which bypasses the need for bureaucracy altogether)
06:45 Carbon neutrality. How that specific issue can be of any relevance? Maybe, waste recycling is also an instrument of power? Apparently, the technological advancement, economy agility and having many options of pooling and utilising many alternative natural resources to power your economy is important. But decarbonisation in particular?!!
In a european pov (very little natural gaz nor oil and almost no coil left in the continent), decarbonisation lower your reliance on foreign powers and supply chains disruptions.
Conventional oil extraction peaked in the world around 2008, so your ability to decarbonize your economy is probably a necessity for great powers in the 21st century.
With fracking, north america is a little bit diferent, but if you want your state (any state, even USA) to last more than 50 years, and considering the outcome of a +2.5/3°C climate (or more)... A well driven and well planned decarbonisation should be considered seriously. I'm not even talking about a moral/ecological point of view. It's about survival. You can't use your crude, even with a very good fracking industry, if every bit of carbon released in the air kills you. Tanks/planes/soldiers can't shoot at your thermometer/sun when your crops start failing, and your population riots. Your powers (soft and hard) mean nothing if your country faces a civil war.
"economy agility and having many options of pooling and utilising many alternative natural resources to power your economy is important" --> yeah, which means : decarbonisation ^^
It's not a real conventional "power", but we could argue that its absence could result in a huge loss of power (middle term for EU/China/India, long term for north america).
Floods. Fires. Hurricanes. Droughts. All caused by carbon dependency.
@@philipkuttner7945, 1. Prof Stubb calls it 'carbon neutrality', not 'lack of carbon dependency'. 2. Even if we assume 'independence from carbon resources' is meant, it's better to call it 'agility in using different resources' meaning all sorts of resources can be replaced with an alternative, not only carbon. 3. Carbon emission that cause 'floods, fires, hurricanes and draughts' is a global problem that countries should collectively deal with, not an 'Instrument of power'; countries can't weaponise it, it doesn't fit into any conflict formula, countries should cooperate to deal with this issue
@@kit6088, exactly, the phrasing is wrong. It's not "carbon neutrality", it's "alternating resources" or "having technologies to overcome global problems, such as scarceness of oil and gas". The term "Carbon neutrality" can only be applied to concerted efforts of the global community to solve the problem of global warming. Prof Stubb is talking about confrontation between countries, not cooperation, - in the context of the war in the Ukraine. And the "Carbon neutrality" does not fit into this context.
Tommorow the war is going to be over, and the European countries will look at Russia, supposedly, their enemy, a reckless agressor and a destabilising element in the word security, saying "now you have to reduce your carbon emissions". And this awful Russia, scourge of the Earth, will listen? You see - you have to completely abandon confrontational rhethoric to start discussing the issues relevant to global survival.
But it's important that this issue is raised. Because it also shows the perspective. It shows that the security is not limited to military alliances like the NATO, and democratic goverments like in Europe and North America. Within these alliances you have the USA who basically is not at all "carbon neutral" and is yet to show its adhearance to the principles of sustainable developement
@@NTraveller Yes i agree with you, Stubb phrasing isn't great here. However, i think it's not irrelevant.
As i see it, carbon neutrality means getting rid of carbon in a country's economy, and it doesn't need to be a global community thing.
Short term + Russia/Ukrain war perspective: carbon dependency allows Poutine to weaponize his economy against EU. So being low on carbon dependency is a great (and needed) "defensive weapon".
Long term economic/industrial prism: when oil will be missing, having a better energetic complex than everyone else could be weaponized (militaro-industrial pov). Good tech (maybe cheap(er)/safe(r) nuclear plants? or/and renewable energy tech) could be a great competitive asset (trade pov).
So I wouldn't use "alternating resources" neither, and i think "getting rid of carbon dependency" would have been more relevant. But maybe we don't have the same understanding of these terms.
As I understand it: it's not about finding an other carbon supplier, and consequently diversifying your energetic portfolio, it's about getting rid of carbon dependency. Do you use "alternating resources" implying "without carbon"? If so, then i agree with you.
About climate change:
It's prisoner's dilemma (kind of): at one point, someone needs to take the risk to move before everyone else, and therefore be the first one to stop profiting from a high carbon economy (which means losing a lot of your economic power). In a perfect world, we would come together, and solve this common issue. In the real world, we can't even all agree on the meaning of a simple word like "war" ("""military special operation""" >_
i've made Russian subtitles for the first video of this series of mini lectures. how can i send it to admin so that he\she would upload it?
do you think that is a large audience for this type of content on russian/non english speaking community ?
@@palamidagheo4520 i think yes. russian speaking audience is really lack of adequate information about war. there is pro war propaganda jistifying the horror of war, on the other side there is anti war propahanda which is in fact not objective enough so sound not trustworthy.
@@timm_Rudiger well i never been in russia so i might be wrong but even if they are informed and agree with this side of the story still is not much they can do about it/ reaching critical mass is far away
Very good videos, exept the beginning and the end. Those are horrible!
I think with "Science" you are referring to the applied sciences, right? Generally the process of doing science doesn't seem like it would directly give power to a nation.
10 Instruments of Power (UKRAINE)
1.Azov 2.Right Sector 3.Svoboda 4.National corps 5.Governmental initiative of Yarosh 6.Patriot of Ukraine 7.Ukrainian National Union 8.Stepan Bandera 9. UK 10. USA
Azov’s Andriy Biletsky: “Ukrainian nation's mission is to lead the white races of the world in a final crusade against Semite-led Untermenschen".
A ungodly divided nation will distroy itself no matter the power, in time.
So like Russia as in this is happening over in the Soviet Union correct
The one thing I think I've seen over a long life is that all of the things he listed depend on the spiritual underpinnings of the society. If the spiritual situation of a significant part of a population is good then success in these areas and even in spite of things like geography (Texas is a wasteland in large part, for example) will result. If the spirituality of a people is not good than all the natural advantages and attempts to create the other bases for successful society will fail (education, for example, will simply become pedantic indoctrination as we saw in the old Soviet Union). "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin condemns any people." - Proverbs 14:34 NIV . Righteous behaviour springs from righteous thinking which springs from a correct spirituality, methinks. Not a new story. Cain thought he could get a blessed life-style by ever-increasing unrighteous behaviour but it didn't work out that way. Ironically the path to a blessed lifestyle was open to him but it required accepting things he refused to. The foundation is important, and spiritual.
I have been listening to so many of his lectures I am becoming tired of hearing his voice, kind of like when you have had too much cake 😃
Re science. "...some ethical limits are going to be the ones with strong competitive advantage." Are you saying that ethics in science will give strong competitive advantage? I don't think the ethical nature is important in determining competitive advantage BUT the best scientific progress has probably been made in countries where ethics are stronger because of the more open culture, where ideas can be openly discussed, and freedom of information is greater, with education that promotes a questioning mind. Collaboration is stronger than competition when there is a perceivable shared reward for all who collaborate, regardless of individual success. Historically, the most 'useful' (debatable) rapid science and technology advancement has occurred in war time because of the perception of a shared threat and shared reward for all who help. People no longer work just for their pay packet and people work their hardest whatever they are doing. This is when real socialism works for a while and a key reason why, erroneously called, socialist countries are so desperate to create a fantasy of a constant external threat. The other main reason is, of course, to keep the masses fearful and so more controllable and why there must be a suppression and distortion of available information, particularly from the outside.
Democraphic is also important. How many people? Are there many old people of fighting young people? And science is not only working in an open society. What about nazi Germany or Soviet Union?
Very nice 10 points but what about Religion?
2nd order effect yes as basis of culture. Not by actual practice of religion. Westerm culture is based on Christian values for example.
And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his POWER, and his SEAT, and GREAT AUTHORITY.
lol what about it. Its cheesecake.
They don't want religion, in a liberal democracy, they want the government to be the new religion, hard to do as even Karl Marx wrote that communism would could for fill humans material wealth, but humans would suffer a spiritual death, via materialism. These neo liberals are barking up the same tree.
👍👍👍
Does No 10 include having half the population obese?
13:12 - 13:16 - 13:35 - 13:42 💯
13:42 - 13:53 💯
13:53 - 14:00 💯Real Life even in America 🇺🇸which can be abused through delayed legislation/regulation/etc to unregulated/etc monetization and incentivization/etc that leads to excessive abuse of power by and or within systemic design 💯naturally legislation/regulation/etc lags behind the evolution of big data/tech/etc.. but the lobbying to further the gap between legislative on/etc and evolution(in negative directions/impacts/etc) to maximize profits
with intentional ignorance to societal effects can be a choice of profits at the cost of negative impacts on society/etc
13:12 - 14:09
💯Real Life 💯
💯
I can't see Renewables being an instrument of power. Having an energy grid, supported by any sort of power source, dirty coal, nuclear, gas, oil or renewables is sufficient. Renewables aren't exclusive for power, hence as long as my country is provided for, the rest of the world can go HOT or COLD. I still have my instrument of power = energy sufficiency
Renewables ensure long run independence as well as the ability to, in perpetuity, be self reliant as well as export and so exert soft power upon neighbours, especially if your nation has better tech or conditions to make renewables more effective
Renewables can have very different supply chains and maintenance. Very important for energy security. Example russia cutting energy exports to Finland.
There has to be an energy transition, so I believe he means that the base resources, expertise, manufacturing to switch is an instrument.
China has been catching up on an old European lead, once the consequences of burning coal became clear.
@@RobBCactive Robust energy infrastructure in general.
@@inso80 But I believe Alexander is looking at the disruptive effects as fossil fuel transitions to carbon neutral.
Those who master change emerge from transitions stronger.
The consequences of not transitioning will be even more expensive, the recent UN report sets 2030 as a critical date for 1.5C limit
An American here. Find it embarrassing that you would include Joe Biden in your intro. He is not what America is about. In fact the opposite.
5:39 - 5:57 unfortunately yes, and with the given power… comes abuses of that power with financial incentives to constantly innovate/evolve abuses of power at a faster rate than the legislatory/regulatory/etc powers choose to regulate (which is only further slowed by big tech lobbyists and special interest groups).
5:57 - 6:05 Europe’s values are obviously stronger than us in this sense, America is stronger than China in this sense, but when it comes to America we are lagging behind European values in this sense. The damage snd negative impacts of big data/big tech can be prolonged based off of fun financial motivators, where a rapid rate of evolution can be exacerbated based off an individual’s greed before our legislators/regulators/etc catch them (that is if lobbyists don’t persuade the legislators/regulators/etc to hold off regulations in an obviously negative portion of an evolutionary growth in big data/tech… and or lobby them to turn a blind eye until the public catches up with the negative impacts of a portion of our rapid evolutionary growth in big data/tech).
When it comes to big data/tech, paraphrasing the saying “with added power comes great responsibility” evidently Europeans seem to have a stronger grasp/base on those values than us in America
The White House approved more than $40 billion more aid for Ukraine, as Congress races to keep military aid.
I have bought $SKYH
This is so pointless. Good analysis, inconsequential.
One needs to look at it from a long term perspective. This is a RACIAL war which can go on for years where the white Imperialist countries cannot come to terms with other countries prospering. The UN charter of fundamental human rights was created in 1948 but race segregation laws remained in effect until the late 1960s and several institutions across the US still have racial segregation in place. Most countries gained independence not because racism had ended but only because after WWII the west could not afford to maintain their colonies. What was the need for NATO after the collapse of the USSR? One only needs to look at the past of NATO with all these men such as Hans Speidel, Adolf Heusinger, Friedrich Guggenberger, Hennig Strumpell, Franz Josef Strauss. NATO is no longer a defensive alliance but an offensive military alliance and its scope is not just limited to NATO member countries but has interfered in countries such as Korea, Serbia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya, Bosnia and Herzegovina to name a few. Instead of being disbanded after the collapse of the USSR and being integrated into UN peacekeeping, it now has ulterior racist motives. NATO was supposed to limit its influence over just the North Atlantic and yet it has invaded and destroyed countries around the world. Moreover it is not a legitimate military alliance as it has no support from neither the United Nations nor the global south. The preamble to the NATO treaty clearly states its objectives of protecting the 'white race' and 'civilization'. Article 5 says that an attack on one is an attack on all and hence it also implies that an aggression by one NATO country is an aggression by all NATO countries and NATO strives for the racial hagemony of the whites around the world. Also there is no separate inventory of weapons and an army of NATO. So an aggression by any of the EU countries in Africa, Asia, Latin America should be considered as NATO aggression. USA and Ukraine are the only two countries who voted against the resolution, entitled "Combating Glorification Of Nazism, Neo-Nazism And Other Practices That Contribute To Fueling Contemporary Forms Of Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, And Related Intolerance". The former leader of Azov, Andrew Biletsky had said in 2010 that the nation’s mission was to “lead the white races of the world in a final crusade… against Semite-led Untermenschen [subhumans]” and NATO/EU have been supporting such forces in Ukraine. A solution to Ukraine will just buy some time before the west makes their next misadventure to destroy China to create a Christian white empire in the northern hemisphere and dominate the world and reinforce imperialism. If Russia and China fall, there are no other countries to protect the global south. Non-whites in EU/NATO countries are minorities and the most downtrodden communities and they can easily be wiped out. If a genocide could take place in the last century then it is more than possible in the near future. Non-whites (Arabs, Iranians, Africans) all can be victims, but they cannot be freedom fighters, they cannot take up arms to violently repel an attack on their people, they are only allowed only to wave signs and a flag, chanting for the West to save them. The Ukrainians, on the other hand, have the right to defend themselves, they can throw Molotov cocktails at the Russians, use weapons and the west will glorify that and even supply more weapons. Wasn't it enough to treat non-whites like slaves, colonization, imperialism, and the exploitation of non-whites?
The irony is that science is so badly paid and the conditions are so annoying, that even if you'd love to do it, at some point you'd ask yourself "why?". Just like schooling and care, societies don't assign the importance these areas deserve.
The Bible is the book to follow, I know I ain't there .
Who fact checks the EDMO, who elected them, for how long and what are you charged with when you make a mistake?
...oh, you're a member of the World Economic Forum, never mind.
Good video although a bit of a click-bate as it has nothing to do with Ukraine.
Who is Russia and who is Ukraine
A G A I N S T joining NATO : 1) Joining NATO means to serve as a target for Russia´s or China´s strategic nuclear missilles all the time in future, certainly not just untill Ukraine war would end. 2) USA may back off in case of nuclear war in Europe to save hundreds of their cities- than NATO would loose nuclear war in Europe. 3) USA would appreciate every new NATO land(Finland) to absorb some of Russia´s nukes, which otherwice would probably explode above USA´s cities in case of nuclear war between USA and Russia... 4) Finland managed alone in past, could manage in future. It is still far better option than to be incinereted instead of some USA´s cities one day...USA likes to be nuclear armed nation, on the other hand they can not defend themself against Russia´s nuclear forces, let alone to defend Europe against it! Finland would better to rely on Finish defensive means and not to mess with counting on USA and kind of stand up against nuclear superpowers like Russia and China to "fight" them one day... To "fight" them means - to absorb some of nukes which would otherwise explode above USA´cities very harmlessly for Finland.... 5) Joining NATO is the way how to assure the tottal destructin to Finland during a nuclear war between USA and Russia, or even between European NATO members and Russia... 6) If anybody thinks that USA is a morally "OK" NATO leader- kind of a "good guy" , than please try to google: "USA drone strikes" . You will find horrible crimes committed by USA on civilians including children in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen an other third world countries... 7) Pro NATO propaganda sounds like this: „No NATO country has ever been invaded. “ Russia has not been invaded either. It certainly does not prove, that NATO and Russia will not destroy each other one day without any invasion. 8) In case of nuclear war the destruction would be gruesome, but also very limited geographically to states involved. Joining NATO is possibly signing of a completely unnecesarry death sentence, since it is signing of being targeted by SATTAN II and more of similar machines of death instead of some USA´s mainland, which is warmly welcomed by USA.
I think Russia only scores 1 out of 10 in that lot.
Thank God we finally discovered America, is this a joke video.
And why does Biden act like he's president sometimes in Trump acts like he's president sometimes
Will come to Russian to all of you foreigners volunteer fighter's.😅🤣😂
Bla bla..i thought this was about the actual "war"
I feel like doing a supercut of every time this dude says "power", but that is a serious time commitment for a worker drone.
Turkey understands peace.🌍
If you don’t understand economics and democracy, peace won’t help.
@@jansix4287 will the West challenge by recruiting more members???
No it doesn’t
It is not supporting the joining of NATO
Because he seems to spend an awful lot of time around Biden and Trump
This video was disappointing in comparison to the others which were good. Apparently Mr. Stubbs believes that energy resources such as oil and other natural resources are not a source of power. He’s also bought into the idea that green energy is somehow more powerful than oil despite all evidence to the contrary. And it is quite disturbing that he wants the government to combat misinformation and the government is the primary source of misinformation. That is the road to autocracy. I think this video is completely off the rails.
Oil will run out, and using it creates a great cost to clean up pollution and to deal with more extreme weather, floods, and fires.
@@philipkuttner7945 Apparently you are not aware that batteries are a mobile toxic waste dump.
@@philipkuttner7945 ok I am not interested in baseless diatribes. Good luck
You are also missing Social Power and Ethnic Power...I could go on and on..please revise your list..
7. SCIENCE...Yes the Taliban used this power to overthrow the US in Afghanistan....
YOU ARE MISSING TWO MAJOR SOuRCEs! Political power(core political structures) and Theological (religious) power....wow totally inadequate basic defintions...