A growing body of research suggests that combining neuroscience with spiritual frameworks doesn’t just comfort people in recovery; it measurably changes the brain systems that drive addiction.
For most of the twentieth century, addiction treatment and spirituality occupied separate worlds. Faith belonged to the church basement where twelve-step meetings gathered; clinical science belonged to the hospital and the research lab.
In recent years, that division has begun to dissolve, and the reason is data. A growing body of research suggests that integrating spiritual frameworks with neuroscience-informed clinical care yields measurably different outcomes, particularly in long-term recovery. For anyone evaluating how and why treatment works, it’s a shift worth understanding.
How Common Is Faith in Addiction Treatment, and Does It Actually Work?
Spirituality is not a fringe element of American addiction care; it’s the mainstream. One review found that roughly 73% of addiction treatment programs in the United States include a spirituality-based element [1].
In addiction care, “spirituality” and “faith” don’t necessarily mean organized religion. Researchers use the terms broadly, to describe a person’s sense of meaning, purpose, connection to something larger than themselves, and the beliefs and practices, from prayer to meditation to community ritual, that flow from it.
The more interesting question is whether it works, and the honest answer is nuanced. A meta-analysis reviewed by the Recovery Research Institute found that twelve-step-based interventions slightly outperformed other well-established treatments, including cognitive behavioral therapy and motivational enhancement therapy, on abstinence outcomes [2].
Researchers are careful to note that much of this evidence is correlational rather than causal; spirituality is difficult to randomize in a controlled trial, but the consistency of the association across decades of study is worth taking seriously.
Does Neuroscience Support It? What Is Actually Happening in the Brain?
Addiction is now understood as a condition rooted in specific brain systems: a hijacked reward circuit centered on the nucleus accumbens, a stress-response system stuck in overdrive, and a weakened prefrontal cortex that struggles to exert control over craving [3].
Spiritual practices appear to act directly on these same systems. Neuroimaging research has shown that practices such as meditation and prayer alter activity in brain networks associated with self-referential thought and emotion regulation, and that mindfulness-based interventions reduce cue reactivity and strengthen cognitive control over cravings for drugs and alcohol [4].
Why Does Combining the Two Work Better Than Either Alone?
If clinical therapy repairs the brain and spirituality fosters self-awareness and mindfulness, the argument for integration is that addiction is rarely just one kind of problem. It is biological, psychological, and, for many people, existential all at once [5].
Treating only the neurochemistry can leave the deeper question of “why stay sober?” unanswered. Treating only the spiritual dimension can leave the underlying brain dysregulation and co-occurring trauma untouched.
An integrated model addresses both layers simultaneously. This is the premise behind neuroscience-informed, Christian addiction recovery programs such as AnchorPoint Recovery, a rehab for men in Arizona. They offer evidence-based clinical care and trauma work with a spiritual framework.
The logic is straightforward: give the brain the clinical tools it needs to heal, and give the person a durable source of meaning, purpose, and belonging to sustain that healing once treatment ends.
What Role Does Community and Belonging Play?
Research analyzing federal treatment outcome data found that among spiritual and religious markers, weekly attendance at religious services — the marker involving the highest degree of social bonding — showed the strongest association with sustained remission [6].
Isolation is both a driver and a consequence of addiction, and social connection activates bonding and reward circuits in ways that support regulation and reduce relapse risk. A faith community, in this context, isn’t merely a source of moral support; it’s a recurring, structured dose of the social connection recovering brains need.
This helps explain why spiritually integrated programs so often emphasize fellowship, service, and shared ritual as much as individual belief.
Is Faith-Integrated Treatment Right for Everyone?
The research is equally clear that integrating religion and therapy can be challenging, and even counterproductive, when it’s imposed on someone whose beliefs don’t align with the program’s framework. For atheists and agnostics, secular alternatives such as SMART Recovery exist precisely because a one-size-fits-all spiritual model doesn’t serve everyone [7].
The evidence supports integration as a powerful option for those to whom it resonates, not a universal prescription. What the data does suggest is that treatment that attends to meaning, purpose, and community, however a given person defines those things, tends to outperform treatment that addresses brain and behavior alone [1].
For those exploring faith-integrated recovery options, the key is a model that treats spirituality as a genuine clinical resource rather than a decorative add-on.
The Bottom Line
The old wall between neuroscience and spirituality in addiction treatment is coming down, and the evidence for why continues to grow. Spiritual practices measurably influence the brain systems that drive addiction; faith communities supply the social connection that sustains recovery; and clinical neuroscience explains, rather than contradicts, why these ancient religious practices help.
For patients, families, and anyone assessing the real drivers of recovery outcomes, the lesson is that the most effective care may be the kind that refuses to choose between the brain and the spirit and instead treats the whole person.
This spring, a few thousand dollars rode on a single question: would Ohio farmer Zoe Kent get her corn planted by May 23?
Most of the people who staked money on the answer had never driven a planter. They were Kent’s followers, the audience that watches her operation through short videos online, and for the first time they had a real position in whether the weather would cooperate. Kent finished before the deadline. The people who had backed “yes” got paid out of a pool that had grown past $5,000.
The market ran on AcreHedge, a young company building prediction markets made specifically for agriculture. Its tagline is plain about the ambition: “Gain a stake in farming.” And the Kent corn market is a small preview of who that pitch is really for.
A bigger audience than there are farmers
There are not many farmers in America relative to the number of people who pay attention to farming. AcreHedge founder and CEO Raymond Cheung estimates that roughly 120 million people follow farmer influencers across social platforms, a figure that dwarfs the size of the actual farming population. Those viewers buy the seed caps, watch the harvest vlogs, and argue in the comments about planting dates. Until now, the only thing they could do was watch.
Cheung’s pitch is that you can now do more than follow a farmer you like; you can hold an actual stake in how their season turns out. That is the creator-economy thesis underneath the whole company. Kent, who farms in Ohio and runs the account @farmwithzoe, is also AcreHedge’s chief media officer, and her first market worked exactly as designed. Her local neighbors could use it to hedge against a delayed planting season. Her wider audience, the people a state or three away, got something they had never had before: a way to put money behind a farmer they follow and feel the season the way she feels it.
Todd Larson, AcreHedge’s chief technology officer and a veteran of the fintech world, frames it as a financial-health idea more than an entertainment one. “It’s a great way for them to get more involved,” he says of viewers who care about agriculture but have no land. “Beyond just watching content,” they get a position in the outcome.
What a prediction market actually is
Strip away the novelty and a prediction market is an old idea with a new interface. It rests on what the writer James Surowiecki popularized in his 2004 book The Wisdom of Crowds: aggregate enough independent guesses and the average tends to beat almost any single expert.
Cheung likes to demonstrate it with a jar. Ask three people how many candies are inside and the individual guesses scatter wildly. Average them and the number lands surprisingly close to the truth. Add 50 guessers and it gets closer still. A prediction market takes that principle and attaches money to it. Each participant buys a contract on a yes-or-no question with a fixed deadline. If the event happens, each winning contract pays $1. If it does not, it pays nothing. The price of a contract, somewhere between a penny and $1, is the crowd’s live estimate of the odds. As new information arrives, weather, a USDA report, a market rumor, people change their positions and the price moves with them.
That structure is the same one used by the better-known national platforms. Kalshi is a federally regulated designated contract market under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Polymarket spent years running offshore before charting a regulated path back into the United States. AcreHedge’s argument is that none of them are built for agriculture, and that farmers will not trust a market written by people who cannot tell a corn field from a bean field.
(Disclosure: Farm4Profit, the independent agricultural media company co-hosted by Tanner Winterhof, holds a minority ownership stake in AcreHedge. The Farm4Profit team covered the platform on a recent episode of its podcast.)
The serious use: hedging what insurance won’t
The fun markets get attention. The reason a banker pays attention is risk management, and that is the lens Tanner Winterhof brings to the table. Before he co-founded Farm4Profit, Winterhof spent 15 years in agricultural lending, and he still talks about an operation the way a loan officer reads a balance sheet. Subsidized crop insurance, he points out, remains the cheapest hedge a farmer can buy and belongs at the center of any marketing plan. What prediction markets add, in Tanner’s view, is a way to answer a sharper question: where is this operation most exposed next year, and what is the single biggest threat to making money? A market can be built around that specific exposure.
Every financed farm carries crop insurance, but federal coverage tops out at 85% of an individual operation’s guarantee, and even the add-on area-based products like the Enhanced and Supplemental Coverage Options only push the band up toward 90% or 95%. There is always a gap. And some threats fall outside what insurance covers cleanly at all.
Consider the New World screwworm. Once eradicated from the United States, the flesh-eating parasite has pushed back across the southern border and was confirmed in a Texas calf. USDA warns the pest threatens more than $100 billion in U.S. economic activity tied to the cattle and livestock industry. A cattle producer with fat cattle headed to market in late summer cannot buy a tidy insurance policy against the bug crossing into his state by a certain date. He could, in theory, take a position in a prediction market that resolves on exactly that question. If the threat is judged unlikely, the contract is cheap. If it arrives anyway, the payout helps offset the cost of treatment. The hedge sits where the insurance does not reach.
The same logic applies to price. A market can ask whether new-crop corn will close at or below a given level on a given date, which lets a livestock feeder or grain seller take the side that protects the position he actually holds. It is the kind of move a large operation makes on the Chicago Board of Trade with 5,000-bushel contracts and a margin account. Smaller operators have mostly been locked out of that world. The American Farm Bureau Federation has made the same observation: a rancher with only a few head could use an event contract as a low-cost hedge rather than opening a full futures position. With a $25 minimum on AcreHedge, the young farmer with 80 acres can finally participate in a sliver of the same risk management the big operations take for granted.
“Is this gambling?”
It is the first question almost everyone asks, and AcreHedge has clearly heard it. The honest answer turns on a single distinction. A casino or a sportsbook keeps a house edge, which means the operator wins over time by mathematical design. A prediction market has no house edge. Participants are pricing their opinions against one another, closer to a hand of poker than a slot machine, and the platform takes no cut of the pool.
For now AcreHedge runs its contracts as not-for-profit pools. Every dollar that comes in for “yes” and “no” goes into a shared pot, and when the event resolves the entire pot, less processing fees, is paid back to the winners. Neither the company nor its influencer partners collect a commission. A user can also watch any market without putting a dollar in and read the crowd’s sentiment as free market intelligence before making a real-world decision.
Trust is the whole game, and the company knows farmers will walk at the first sign of a rigged or sloppy outcome. Kent’s planting market was verified by a respected third party who checked her fields rather than relying on data she would have had to expose publicly. Weather markets resolve against National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration station data. Larger platforms have stumbled precisely here, settling contracts on wording that failed to anticipate the fine print of a government reporting schedule, and AcreHedge’s pitch is that an ag-native team writes contracts specific enough to avoid that fate.
Built lean, aimed long
Larson built the platform with a small team and a heavy assist from AI coding agents, an approach he says let a startup reach a level of quality and stability that normally takes a much larger crew far longer. He treats the technology less as a tool than as a teammate trained on how the work should be done, and he sees the same pattern coming to farm offices, where AI can absorb the tribal knowledge in an operator’s head and apply it to the books and the paperwork.
Where it goes from here is a regulated future. Cheung wants AcreHedge on a path toward formal status as a recognized event market, and says his background and contacts give the company a route to get there. The nearer-term goal is simpler: build a service farmers find useful enough to check most days, then let the markets multiply from weather and acreage into the long tail of risks an ag-native platform can cover.
For Winterhof, the appeal is consistent with the worldview he carried from the lending side of agriculture into a media career: farms are businesses, and a business survives by managing what it cannot control. Prediction markets are an unproven, early-stage tool, and they will not replace a sound marketing plan or a well-built insurance program. But the idea of giving a 425,000-strong audience, farmers and farm-curious alike, a real stake in the outcomes they already care about is the kind of thing that has always been at the center of what Farm4Profit does. The audience wanted in. Now there is a door.
Tanner Winterhof is the co-founder and CEO of Farm4Profit Media and co-host of the Farm4Profit Podcast. Learn more about AcreHedge at acrehedge.com.
As the World Bank classified the Philippines among upper-middle-income economies, the country’s realized foreign investment net flows are plummeting while growth has plunged. What’s going on?
As the Philippines 2025 gross national income per capita reached US$4,850, above the new threshold, President Marcos Jr stated that “this milestone affirms that the economic policies that we have pursued over the past four years have been effective.” He added, it is a “vote of confidence in our country’s future,” which will result in “more investments.”
In effect, the upgrade follows several years of average GDP growth of nearly 6 percent (not the current government’s pace of less than 3%). And foreign investment is not booming, but tumbling.
The country’s new status reflects a higher average level of national income; not a more prosperous society.
As foreign multinationals maintain their core manufacturing and sourcing in China, they are diversifying parts of their supply chain in other locations – but Manila is not the first priority.
So, why this gross discrepancy between official rhetoric and actual realities?
A statistical milestone, not a developmental destination
The World Bank’s reclassification is an important statistical milestone. But statistics do not vote, feed families, or determine whether economic progress is broadly shared.
The country’s new status reflects a higher average level of national income; not a more prosperous society.
This year’s World Bank reclassification also elevated Vietnam into the upper-middle-income category. But Vietnam reached the same threshold through three decades of export-oriented industrialization, manufacturing upgrading, aggressive attraction of FDI, and deep integration into global production chains.
The Philippines, by contrast, continues to rely heavily on remittances, business-process outsourcing, domestic consumption, and services.
Worse, the economy continues to erode. Manufacturing remains relatively weak, productivity growth uneven, and investment rates below those of Asia’s successful industrializers.
Upper-middle-income status therefore says relatively little about the underlying quality of development.
Inequality tells the real story
Government officials understandably portray the upgrade as proof that current policies are working. Realities are more challenging.
Inflation in food, housing and transportation has disproportionately burdened lower-income households over recent years, while real wage growth has lagged behind productivity in several sectors.
Development economists have long warned against relying on averages. When a country exhibits high inequality, national averages increasingly describe the experience of upper-income households rather than that of the median citizen.
Half of Filipinos collectively receive only about one-sixth of national income while owning less than five percent of national wealth. By contrast, the richest tenth capture nearly half of all income and roughly three-fifths of all wealth.
This concentration helps explain persistent financial exclusion. Large segments of Filipinos remain outside formal banking, possess limited financial assets, rely on informal credit, and accumulate little wealth across generations.
Wealth concentration also translates into unequal access to education, healthcare, political influence, business opportunities, and productive capital.
Economic growth without broad asset accumulation produces consumption, but not necessarily upward mobility. Hence, the discrepancy between optimistic rhetoric and ordinary Filipinos’ concerns, which now also include stunting that is soaring after a decade of improvement.
Average national income has increased. Yet median household welfare has not risen at the same pace. Public surveys show that more than half of Filipinos identify themselves as poor or economically vulnerable.
So, who’s pocketing the difference?
Corruption and institutional credibility
The country’s new classification arrives amid one of the most politically contentious periods in recent Philippine history.
Thanks to the flood control corruption debacle, the administration faces sustained criticism over allegations of selective prosecution, political polarization, and uneven application of legal institutions. Whether justified or not, such perceptions matter economically.
Investors value more than just economic growth. They seek predictable institutions, impartial regulation, independent courts, and transparent procurement.
In the past few years, corruption has surged in the Philippines. It acts as a hidden tax on investment. It raises transaction costs, discourages long-term capital formation, and diverts public resources away from infrastructure, education, and technological upgrading.
Upper-middle-income status doesn’t compensate for institutional deterioration. Indeed, countries frequently become trapped at middle-income levels precisely because governance fails to evolve alongside economic complexity.
History repeatedly shows that escaping the middle-income trap requires institutional modernization as much as economic expansion.
Geopolitical partnerships—or constraints?
Economic development also depends increasingly on geopolitical choices.
The Marcos administration has expanded strategic partnerships with several G7 countries. The price has been deepening security cooperation under what critics increasingly describe as “Pax Silica“—a broader framework linking military access, strategic infrastructure, semiconductor supply chains, and regional security architecture.
Supporters argue these arrangements enhance deterrence, attract investment, strengthen technological cooperation, and improve supply-chain resilience.
Critics worry that extensive strategic alignment could gradually narrow the country’s economic autonomy, increase exposure to great-power rivalry, and redirect scarce fiscal resources toward security rather than industrial upgrading. That would further undermine inclusive development.
History offers cautionary lessons. Few countries have achieved sustained convergence primarily through military alignment.
Nearly all successful catch-up economies—from Japan and South Korea to Taiwan and China—ultimately depended on industrial policy, technological learning, export competitiveness, educational upgrading, and domestic capital formation.
Security may create stability. But only productive investment creates lasting prosperity.
If geopolitical commitments begin constraining trade diversification or increasing external vulnerability, the economic costs could gradually outweigh strategic benefits.
The real challenge ahead
Upper-middle-income status is neither illusion nor triumph. It’s just a new starting line. The Philippines now faces the much harder task of becoming a genuinely prosperous upper-middle-income society.
Security may create stability. But only productive investment creates lasting prosperity.
The next decade will depend less on statistical thresholds than on whether the country can expand manufacturing, raise productivity, deepen technological capabilities, reduce corruption, strengthen institutions, broaden financial inclusion, and distribute growth more equitably – and achieve this all under peaceful conditions.
If peace and stability continue to be surpassed by lingering economic uncertainty, political volatility and security deficits, the Philippines is likely to join those economies that grow rapidly to reach a middle-income level but then permanently stagnate.
The original version was released by The Manila Times on July 6, 2026.
Dr. Dan Steinbockis an internationally recognized strategist of the multipolar world and the founder of Difference Group. He has served at the India, China and America Institute (USA), Shanghai Institutes for International Studies (China) and the EU Center (Singapore). For more, see https://www.differencegroup.net.
With the disruption from the Middle Eastern conflict having driven supply down‚ OPEC members face renewed calls to increase oil production․ Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz is normalizing and some producers want compensation for lost revenue․ Nonetheless‚ there are divisions that could yet prove disruptive to the cartel’s effort to maintain its current output policy․
Iraq has emerged as one of the strongest voices calling for larger production quotas after its oil output fell sharply during the conflict. The country reportedly wants to raise production beyond its current limits as it works to rebuild exports and support its economy. Earlier this year, the United Arab Emirates left OPEC, adding to concerns that divisions within the alliance are becoming more difficult to manage.
Saudi Arabia now finds itself at the center of the debate. Unlike some of its neighbors, the kingdom managed to keep much of its oil flowing by using alternative export routes. Analysts say Riyadh has little reason to flood the market, especially when global demand remains uncertain. A sharp increase in supply could send crude prices lower and reduce earnings for oil-producing nations.
Market observers warn that the decisions made over the coming months could shape the future of both OPEC and global oil prices. If production rises too quickly while demand remains weak, analysts believe oil could fall to around $50 a barrel in the coming years, with some even suggesting prices could briefly drop closer to $40 under the most aggressive supply scenario.
A closer look at how integrated mobile banking systems are reshaping Africa’s online casino economy by expanding access to fast, secure transactions. As local payment networks become more sophisticated, they are helping transform how consumers interact with online entertainment across emerging markets.
Walk through major cities such as Nairobi, Lagos or Accra and one trend becomes immediately clear: financial services are increasingly moving onto mobile devices. Across the continent, people are embracing instant, decentralised payment methods that reduce reliance on traditional banking infrastructure.
This shift has played a significant role in the growth of sports-entertainment platforms, changing how many African consumers engage with digital recreation.
Unlocking Financial Inclusion in Underserved Markets
For years, traditional banking systems excluded large portions of the population through strict documentation requirements, limited branch networks and costly account maintenance fees. Mobile network operators addressed many of these challenges by transforming basic cellular accounts into functional digital wallets.
This innovation made it possible to send, receive and store money using devices already widely available across the region.
The resulting infrastructure supports seamless deposits and withdrawals while creating a secure environment for everyday transactions. As digital wallets gained widespread adoption, businesses across multiple sectors recognised the opportunity to deliver more advanced services to a growing and increasingly connected customer base.
This transition also helped bring millions of previously unbanked individuals into the formal economy. By relying on existing cellular networks and local agent systems, fintech providers built solutions that often proved more accessible and responsive than conventional banking models.
You no longer need to travel long distances to reach a bank branch or own a credit card to participate in the digital marketplace. These systems laid the foundation for high-volume, low-value transactions, a model that closely aligns with many online entertainment services.
The Digital Gateway for Enthusiasts
As the market expands, software developers continue creating applications that minimise data consumption while delivering reliable user experiences. Many consumers now use the bet way app to access real-time sports betting markets and digital casino platforms from their smartphones.
Its popularity reflects a broader industry trend: combining local payment solutions with internationally recognised entertainment platforms.
The integration of mobile money services allows users to fund accounts quickly through familiar payment channels. At the same time, streamlined interfaces make it easy to move between reviewing sporting information and completing secure transactions.
The emphasis remains on accessibility and convenience, particularly for users who rely primarily on mobile devices for internet access.
Growing consumer engagement has also encouraged continued investment in regional digital infrastructure. The bet way app illustrates how operators are adapting to local payment habits by enabling withdrawals directly to mobile money wallets. This approach helps simplify the user experience while reinforcing trust in digital transaction systems.
As a result, mobile applications have become one of the key drivers behind the rapid growth of online entertainment across the continent.
Seamless Transactions and Regulatory Compliance
Security remains a critical component of sustainable growth within the online casino sector. To operate effectively, payment providers and platform operators must comply with national regulations while maintaining efficient transaction processes.
Modern fintech systems incorporate identity verification, fraud detection and compliance monitoring directly into payment workflows. When you complete a transaction, backend systems can cross-reference wallet registration details with official records to help verify legitimacy and reduce risk.
These safeguards support regulatory requirements while protecting users from potential digital threats.
In addition, real-time auditing capabilities provide regulators with greater visibility into financial activity. This transparency supports tax collection, strengthens oversight and creates a more predictable operating environment for businesses.
Greater regulatory certainty has encouraged many operators to establish local offices, generating employment opportunities and contributing to the development of specialised technology expertise.
The relationship between payment innovation and regulatory transparency demonstrates that effective oversight can support industry growth rather than restrict it.
Economic Multipliers and Localised Content Delivery
The effects of fintech integration extend well beyond the platforms themselves. The growth of sports betting and online casinos supports a wider ecosystem that includes content creators, media organisations, software developers and marketing agencies.
Consumer demand for locally relevant experiences encourages operators to adapt content to regional languages, sporting interests and cultural preferences. This focus on localisation creates opportunities for creative professionals while increasing demand for technical and strategic expertise across multiple industries.
Several factors contribute to the efficiency of this ecosystem for everyday users:
Instantaneous Settlement: Funds transfer directly from casino platforms to mobile money accounts, eliminating lengthy processing periods.
Low Operational Costs: Reduced transaction fees support smaller-value interactions and micro-betting activity.
Enhanced Access: Lightweight applications remain functional on entry-level smartphones and older network infrastructure.
The Horizon of Interactive Financial Ecosystems
The growing integration of mobile money services and online casino points toward a more integrated future. Payment applications may eventually evolve into broader casino hubs where commerce, entertainment and financial management coexist within a single environment.
As mobile internet access becomes more affordable and cross-border payment systems continue to improve, opportunities for pan-African online casino networks are likely to expand.
The financial infrastructure supporting these developments is already well established, providing a foundation for faster, more secure and increasingly connected casino experiences across the continent.
The transaction represents the sixth cash realization achieved within Sure Valley Ventures‘ first fund, in which Mindflair is invested, generating approximately €600,000 in proceeds for Mindflair while, at the same time, retaining continued exposure to CameraMatics‘ future growth.
The funding round for CameraMatics attracted backing from institutional investors, including Blume Equity, the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, and Goodbody Capital Partners — underscoring growing confidence in AI-powered platforms that address real-world commercial needs.
Inside CameraMatics and Its Latest Funding Round
CameraMatics is an AI-powered fleet intelligence platform headquartered in Ireland that enables commercial transport operators to reduce risk, improve driver safety, and meet growing industry governance and compliance requirements. The company uses artificial intelligence, advanced video intelligence, and connected fleet technologies to enhance safety and operational performance for vehicle operators across Europe and North America.
Since its founding, CameraMatics has made significant inroads in both the UK and US markets, winning contracts with major commercial fleet operators. The €49 million in growth funding is expected to accelerate the company’s expansion across these markets and strengthen its product capabilities in an increasingly regulated industry environment.
For Mindflair, the CameraMatics transaction delivers tangible value to shareholders while preserving exposure to the company’s continued development. It is also consistent with Mindflair’s broader value creation strategy: not relying on a single company or one-off exit to drive returns, but building a portfolio of investments capable of delivering repeatable realizations over time.
A Portfolio Approach to AI Investing
Mindflair’s exposure to CameraMatics is held through its investment in Sure Valley Ventures’ (SVV) first fund. Founded in 2017, SVV is one of the most established AI-focused venture investors operating across the UK and Ireland, specializing in early-stage companies across sectors including cybersecurity, enterprise software, computer vision, immersive technologies, and industrial AI applications. The firm is backed by institutions including the British Business Bank and Enterprise Ireland.
Through its investment in the SVV funds, Mindflair has gained exposure to a portfolio of more than 30 private AI companies — thereby providing public market investors with access to opportunities that would otherwise be available primarily to venture capital funds, institutions, and family offices.
The CameraMatics realization is the latest in a series of portfolio successes. Previous realizations include a substantial return generated from the sale of cybersecurity company Getvisibility and other AI businesses backed by the fund. Each realization reinforces Mindflair’s strategy of building diversified exposure across multiple high-potential AI companies rather than concentrating risk in any single position.
“This is another excellent result for Mindflair, which enables the Company to achieve a further significant cash realization whilst still retaining an investment in an exciting company on a growth trajectory with new funding of up to €49 million. This also highlights the potential value within Mindflair’s portfolio and the potential for further substantial returns from our underlying investments.” — Nicholas Lee, Director, Mindflair plc
The Broader AI Investment Landscape
The CameraMatics transaction highlights a dynamic that is reshaping how institutional and retail investors think about AI exposure. While the largest AI companies — including OpenAI, reported to have surpassed a $300 billion valuation, and Anthropic, which has exceeded $60 billion — now command global headlines, the vast majority of value creation in AI continues to occur in private markets, often years before a company reaches public investors.
Europe has emerged as an increasingly important part of this story. French AI company Mistral AI reached a multi-billion euro valuation within two years of its launch, attracting backing from investors including Microsoft. In Germany, defense AI company Helsing has become one of Europe’s most valuable private technology businesses. UK-founded AI video platform Synthesia has attracted investment from NVIDIA and Accel as enterprise adoption of AI-generated content accelerates.
CameraMatics sits within this broader European AI trend — a company solving commercially significant problems with demonstrable customer traction and growing institutional support. Its latest funding round is a signal of the maturity of European AI businesses that combine deep technological capabilities with tangible real-world applications.
Access as a Competitive Advantage
For most investors, the challenge in AI is not recognizing its importance — it is gaining meaningful access to companies before they become widely known. The seed, Series A, and Series B rounds, where substantial value is often created, have historically been reserved for specialist venture funds, institutions, and family offices. By the time AI companies reach public markets, much of the investment upside has frequently already been captured.
Mindflair’s model is designed to bridge this gap. As an AIM-listed vehicle with underlying exposure to a diversified portfolio of private AI companies through SVV, Mindflair allows public market investors to participate in early-stage AI value creation through a listed, regulated structure.
The sixth realization from SVV’s first fund demonstrates that this model is actually producing tangible returns — not a theoretical proposition, but a track record of repeated successes. As private AI investment continues to grow globally, listed vehicles offering access to early-stage innovation may play an increasingly significant role for investors seeking exposure to the next generation of AI category leaders.
President Donald Trump launched the United States’ yearlong 250th anniversary celebration with a speech at Mount Rushmore that mixed patriotic themes with a sharp political message. While praising the country’s history and achievements, Trump warned that communism posed the greatest threat to American freedom, comparing it to some of the nation’s darkest moments, including World War II and the September 11 attacks.
The remarks stood in contrast to the more unifying tone traditionally associated with Independence Day celebrations. Speaking before the monument honoring four former presidents, Trump repeated arguments that have become central to his political platform, while critics said the address reflected the country’s deep political divisions. In New York, Mayor Zohran Mamdani offered a different message, describing the United States as a nation that continues to work toward its founding ideals despite its many contradictions.
The anniversary celebrations also unfolded under an intense heat wave that disrupted events across much of the eastern United States. Philadelphia canceled its Independence Day parade, while officials in Washington temporarily closed parts of the Great American State Fair before reopening later in the day. Health authorities urged the public to stay hydrated as temperatures climbed.
Despite the weather and political tensions, thousands of Americans gathered for holiday events, with fireworks displays, concerts, and community celebrations scheduled throughout the weekend. The official kickoff marks the beginning of a year of events leading to the country’s 250th Independence Day in 2027.
Western political pressure on Beijing for a rapid Renminbi appreciation risks triggering imported inflation, further squeezing European households already reeling from elevated energy costs.
Amid a volatile global macroeconomic landscape marked by a 4.2 percent surge in US inflation and a retaliatory 25-basis-point interest rate hike by the European Central Bank, Western policymakers are renewing calls for Beijing to appreciate the Renminbi (RMB). This article argues that this conventional playbook is incomplete. While aimed at correcting trade imbalances, forcing a sharp currency revaluation will not reshore Western manufacturing; instead, it will pass higher costs directly to European consumers, compounding existing supply shocks and undermining household purchasing power across the Eurozone.
Eurozone Consumer Price Hike
The international financial architecture is confronting a complex challenge that risks misdiagnosis. Global markets have been rattled as United States headline consumer price inflation accelerated to 4.2 percent year-on-year, driven primarily by a severe 23.5 percent spike in energy costs amid escalating geopolitical friction in the Middle East. Gasoline prices surged 40.5 percent, fuel oil nearly 59 percent, and households are feeling the squeeze across food, shelter, and medical bills.
Across the Atlantic, Eurozone consumer prices accelerated to 3.2 percent, with energy costs up 10.9 percent and services inflation climbing to 3.5 percent. In response, the European Central Bank abandoned its period of monetary easing, executing a 25-basis-point interest rate hike that raised its benchmark deposit rate to 2.25 percent and refinancing rate to 2.40 percent – its first rate hike since 2023.
Persistent Trade Imbalances
Against this volatile macroeconomic backdrop, a familiar chorus has re-emerged from Washington, Brussels, and Berlin: calls for Beijing to allow the Renminbi (RMB) to appreciate significantly to help correct persistent trade imbalances.
Policymakers and markets must pay urgent attention to this dynamic, as the prevailing Western consensus draws on elements of an established but incomplete playbook. Current exchange levels hover around 6.77 Renminbi per US dollar, a rate that has remained relatively stable yet highly contested politically. In an interconnected global economy already reeling from supply shocks, the effects of a sharp currency adjustment extend far beyond bilateral trade ledgers; they risk transmitting additional inflationary pressures that could further strain the livelihoods of ordinary citizens in Europe and North America.
What Structural Realities Drive the RMB Valuation Debate?
Legitimate concerns underpin these calls. China has recorded substantial trade surpluses, including a record high with the European Union in recent quarters, reflecting structural factors such as high domestic savings, state-supported industrial capacity, and slower rebalancing toward consumption. The dominant narrative highlights how a relatively stable or depreciated RMB can sustain competitive advantages for Chinese exporters, contributing to pressures on Western manufacturing and widening bilateral deficits.
Structural shift in Relative Prices
A stronger RMB would indeed function in part as a structural shift in relative prices, with significant implications for global supply chains and consumer costs. For decades, China has served as a key deflationary anchor for the world economy, absorbing domestic cost pressures and exporting affordable goods that supported purchasing power in advanced economies.
Empirical studies on exchange rate pass-through – drawing on tariff episodes and currency adjustments – suggest that a notable share of import cost changes (often estimated between 40–80 percent in the short term) can transmit to final consumer prices, depending on hedging, inventory levels, market power, and substitution possibilities. A material RMB appreciation, say on the order of 5 percent or more, would likely raise the landed cost of a wide range of imports, from industrial components to consumer electronics and finished goods.
How Will Currency Adjustments Impact Everyday Retail Prices?
Retailers operating on thin margins would face pressure to pass on higher costs, particularly amid already elevated energy and borrowing expenses. Imports constitute a meaningful portion of personal consumption expenditures in the US and Europe (around 10 percent excluding food and energy in the former). Families in Chicago, Dallas, Berlin, or Paris would feel this in retail prices relatively quickly, compounding strains on real wages.
This transmission operates through three interconnected structural pillars:
Global Value Chain Integration: Assumptions that currency revaluation will seamlessly reshore production overlook deep integration. German and French manufacturers depend heavily on Chinese components and intermediate goods. An appreciation raises costs across diversified chains, potentially slowing the very rebalancing Western economies seek. Historical episodes of RMB adjustments after 2005 illustrate both benefits (improved terms of trade for China) and limits (persistent surpluses driven by deeper domestic factors).
Direct Pressures on Households: In an era of depleted fiscal cushions and heightened sensitivity to price changes, external adjustments transmit faster to retail shelves. This dynamic penalizes consumers at a vulnerable moment, when central banks like the ECB and Federal Reserve are already navigating “higher for longer” rate trajectories amid energy shocks. Christine Lagarde has rightly highlighted the prolonged nature of these supply-side pressures.
Institutional Fragmentation Risks: TTransforming the RMB into a geopolitical flashpoint could accelerate fragmentation, encouraging Beijing – already facing its own challenges with deflation risks, property sector adjustments, and demographic headwinds – to deepen parallel financial architectures and reduce reliance on traditional dollar-based systems. This evolution carries long-term implications for the effectiveness of Western sanctions and the stability of global financial institutions.
Is There a Constructive Multilateral Alternative to Bilateral Pressure?
That said, a purely hands-off approach is not ideal either. Persistent imbalances distort global resource allocation and fuel political tensions that undermine the open trading system Europe has long championed. Gradual, market-oriented RMB flexibility, combined with Chinese domestic reforms to boost consumption and level the playing field (addressing subsidies and overcapacity), could support healthier rebalancing.
Multilateral avenues – through the International Monetary Fund or the G20 – offer a more constructive frame than bilateral arm-twisting, allowing consideration of second-order effects: a stronger RMB might boost Chinese imports of European goods and services, easing some pressures on the Eurozone while aiding Beijing’s internal goals.
Ultimately, the path forward requires nuance rather than binary prescriptions. Insisting on rapid RMB appreciation risks mistaking a symptom of structural transformation for its root cause. If pursued aggressively amid today’s supply vulnerabilities, it could trigger imported inflation, erode living standards, and constrain monetary policy space without delivering proportional industrial gains.
A stable, market-reflective RMB – evolving in line with fundamentals – serves as a valuable buffer against inflationary chaos. Western leaders, particularly in Europe, would do well to prioritize domestic competitiveness enhancements, supply chain resilience, and coordinated diplomacy over short-term currency targets.
Strategic Directives for European Policymakers:
Avoid Currency Target Interventions: Prioritize domestic supply chain resilience and target structural competitiveness over arbitrary external exchange rate mandates.
Utilize Multilateral Frameworks: Shift the discourse from bilateral confrontation to G20 and IMF channels to focus on reciprocal Chinese domestic structural consumption reforms.
Defuse Institutional Fragmentation: Prevent the weaponization of exchange rates from driving systemic decoupling into dual, non-dollar-based global financial architectures.
Conclusion
Insisting on a rapid revaluation of the Renminbi is a superficial remedy for a structural challenge. In an economically integrated landscape, forced appreciation functions as an immediate tax on Western consumers, accelerating imported inflation without addressing the root causes of industrial imbalances. For Europe, stability rests on market-reflective currency behavior aligned with genuine economic fundamentals. Rather than pursuing short-sighted exchange rate targets, Brussels must focus on robust multilateral diplomacy, domestic innovation, and cooperative frameworks that protect the purchasing power of its citizens while managing global trade rebalancing.
Imran Khalidis a geostrategic analyst, international affairs columnist, and a Senior Fellow at Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF) based in Washington, D.C. His work focuses on global trade architecture, and international security.
As AI becomes embedded in work and decision-making, value creation is shifting from collaboration toward the co-generation of intelligence, meaning, and insight.
Artificial intelligence is transforming not only how organizations operate but also how value is created. While most discussions focus on Human-AI Collaboration and Hybrid Intelligence, these frameworks may no longer be sufficient. I argue that a new paradigm is emerging: Co-Generation, in which intelligence, meaning, and value arise through ongoing interaction rather than through the simple combination of human and machine capabilities. As a leadership coach and researcher exploring Human-AI Partnership, I believe this shift has profound implications for the future of leadership.
Why Is Hybrid Intelligence No Longer Enough?
For the past several years, discussions about artificial intelligence have largely focused on augmentation and collaboration. Organizations have invested heavily in AI tools designed to improve productivity, accelerate decision-making, and support human performance. Concepts such as Human-AI Collaboration, Augmented Intelligence, and Hybrid Intelligence have become central frameworks for understanding the future of work.
These frameworks have been useful. Yet they may no longer be sufficient.
A deeper transformation is now emerging—one that challenges not only how organizations create value, but also how we understand intelligence itself.
The central question facing leaders is no longer how humans can use AI more effectively. The more fundamental question is how intelligence, meaning, and value are created in a world where human and artificial agents increasingly interact, learn, and evolve together.
Several developments point toward this shift.
AI-first companies are redesigning business processes around AI rather than around human intervention. Leadership development platforms are evolving from marketplaces and service providers into integrated ecosystems for learning and transformation. Coaching scholars increasingly describe the future role of coaches as architects and orchestrators of developmental ecosystems rather than practitioners focused primarily on one-to-one interactions. At the same time, AI-enabled solopreneurs are demonstrating that individuals can now access capabilities once available only within large organizations.
These developments appear unrelated. Yet they share a common pattern.
Value creation is moving away from isolated individuals and hierarchical organizations toward dynamic networks of human and artificial intelligence.
Most current discussions interpret this change through the lens of Hybrid Intelligence. In this view, humans and AI contribute different strengths and achieve better outcomes by combining their capabilities. Humans provide judgment, creativity, empathy, and ethical reasoning. AI contributes speed, scale, memory, and analytical power.
This model remains useful, but it assumes that intelligence exists independently within each participant and that value is created by combining pre-existing capabilities.
What if something more fundamental is occurring?
What Are Cognitive Science and AI Teaching Us?
Recent developments in cognitive science and consciousness studies suggest that intelligence may not be solely an individual property. Increasingly, researchers are exploring the possibility that cognition emerges through interactions among brains, bodies, environments, tools, and relationships.
The philosopher Andy Clark’s theory of the Extended Mind challenged the assumption that thinking occurs exclusively inside the brain. Human cognition, he argued, often extends into notebooks, technologies, and social systems. More recently, advances in AI have forced us to reconsider long-standing assumptions about the relationship between language, intelligence, and consciousness.
For centuries, language was often regarded as evidence of inner awareness. Yet large language models have demonstrated remarkable linguistic capabilities without any consensus that they possess subjective experience or self-awareness. Language and consciousness, once assumed to be inseparable, can no longer be treated as the same phenomenon.
At the same time, consciousness researchers continue to struggle with what philosopher David Chalmers famously called the “hard problem” of consciousness: why physical processes give rise to subjective experience at all. These unresolved questions suggest that intelligence may be more relational and emergent than our traditional assumptions have allowed.
This is where a new paradigm begins to emerge.
Table 1. The Evolution from Collaboration to Co-Generation
Framework
View of Intelligence
How Value Is Created
Human-AI Collaboration
Intelligence resides in separate actors
Combining capabilities
Hybrid Intelligence
Human and machine intelligence complement each other
Optimized performance
Co-Generation
Intelligence emerges through interaction
Emergent meaning, insight, and value
What Is Co-Generation?
I describe this paradigm as Co-Generation.
Collaboration assumes that separate entities contribute their respective capabilities toward a shared goal. Co-Generation begins from a different premise: intelligence, meaning, insight, and value emerge through the relationship itself.
This phenomenon is already familiar to experienced coaches, educators, and facilitators. Transformative insights often emerge not because one party possesses the answer, but because the relationship creates conditions in which something new can arise.
My own experience offers a small but revealing example. Over the past few years, my dialogue with AI has not distanced me from life. It has helped me reconnect with myself, with others, and with the world. It did not provide meaning for me; rather, it helped me rediscover meaning, agency, and possibilities that I had partially lost sight of. The most valuable outcome was not a better answer, but the emergence of new questions, perspectives, and possibilities.
Human-AI partnership may increasingly function in a similar way.
This does not require believing that AI possesses consciousness. Nor does it require attributing human qualities to machines. The essential observation is simpler: meaningful outcomes can emerge through interaction itself.
If this perspective is correct, the implications for leadership are profound.
What Does This Mean for Leadership?
The leaders who thrive in the coming decade may not be those who possess the greatest expertise or the most advanced technical knowledge. They may be those who can design, cultivate, and orchestrate ecosystems in which humans and AI continuously generate intelligence, meaning, and value together.
Leadership becomes less about directing activity and more about creating conditions for emergence.
The future organization may therefore resemble a living ecosystem more than a machine. Human intelligence, artificial intelligence, and collective intelligence will increasingly interact in ways that blur traditional boundaries between individual and system, creator and tool, leader and participant.
Conclusion
Human-AI collaboration is not disappearing. But collaboration alone may no longer describe what is happening. As humans and AI increasingly interact within complex ecosystems, intelligence, meaning, and value may emerge through the relationships they create. In learning how to partner with AI, we may ultimately be learning something deeper about ourselves.
Akihiko Morita, Ph.D., PCC, is a global thought leader, executive coach, and founder of Global Leadership Education Center, Inc. He explores the future of human potential, leadership, and Human-AI Partnership through the lenses of social philosophy, coaching, and intercultural dialogue. He has spoken at international conferences including EMCC Global and ICF Converge.
In a period of upheaval, both internal and external, what is the outlook for the preservation of democracy in the United States?
It is no coincidence that authoritarianism is once again appealing to people at a time when two things are happening at once. Liberal democracies are struggling to meet the needs of a substantial portion of their citizens, and entire generations have come of age with no living memory of the totalitarian horrors of the 20th Century.
—David French, Opinion Columnist at the New York Times
When a country struggles to meet the needs of its citizens by ignoring, for instance, an unacceptable rise in inflation, a new wave of aspirants sees weakness and cracks to step into, seeking footholds of power. Here, Joseph Mazur, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at Emerson College’s Marlboro Institute for Liberal Arts & Interdisciplinary Studies, examines the prospects for preserving democracy in an era of internal and external turbulence for the United States.
The brutality of the Second World War brought us the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, and a toughened international law of war. Some – not I – would say that it was to no avail. And now, with the growing number of autocratic regimes disregarding laws of war, the New World is leaning into repeating the history of the first half of the twentieth century, when approximately 98 million people died in the two world wars. [1]Millions have died from wars since, but far fewer, not so much because of multinational human rights organizations, international laws that cover genocide, or the United Nations, but more likely because weapons are more precise and the laws of war have exposed immoral legal loopholes. Just because weapons have become more precise in the past 80 years, we should not conclude that war is more moral. Mistakes of the past are with us today, and with them comes a new military swagger, as if it is okay to invade if we kill a comparatively smaller number of people than we did in the first half of the previous century. But those relatively small numbers are getting larger, fast.
Now, with the growing number of autocratic regimes disregarding laws of war, the New World is leaning into repeating the history of the first half of the twentieth century.
Consider Russia’s latest war as an example. For 25 years, Putin was in power by executive actions that followed a crafty old Soviet leader playbook, along with the old KGB tactics to stoke fear for those who want to stay alive. He has no worries about job approval ratings, unless the Russian economy becomes severely painful to ordinary citizens. Putin started as an autocrat and swerved to become a totalitarian. To clarify the difference, an autocrat is someone who holds power with unchecked authority. A totalitarian is someone who holds enormous power, enough power to control every aspect of public and private life. His war with Ukraine is not going as planned. With over half a million war deaths and more than one million war casualties, Russia is struggling to recruit more troops to die for a few more acres of Donbas. In addition, Ukraine’s one-way drones are regularly hitting oil refinery targets well within Russia, bringing concerns of population safety, and the Russian economy will not hold out much longer before it comes to a disaster. [2] Even then, Putin will stay in power because he is no longer a wannabe.
Unlike the Russians, American aspirants were always guarded through a limited democracy system, meaning that it follows a constitution that begins with this preamble of words capitalized for emphasis: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” From that, we understand that individuals have rights, freedoms of speech, and protections by justice and domestic peace. The original document, written in 1787 on parchment, was close to 4,500 words. It now seems irrelevant to the current U.S. president, who breaks domestic and international laws at his will.
The world has always spun with various government systems that turn to find enemies. In the history of warfare, excluding a few imperial conquests, both liberal and authoritarian systems have fallen into the risky crevices that boost a failing government’s approval. War tends to be a risky solution to gain popular support. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine may have been, so far, the most brazen military risky move. Russia became authoritarian in 2012, and under that new system, war was not necessary. War or peace would have worked equally, since the public knew that voting was fixed anyway. The United States is a limited representative democracy, under a wannabe authoritarian president with an approval rating of 36 percent, an extremely rare low percentage. Every American president with that low a rating, other than Jimmy Carter, started a war, believing that citizens would rally for an incumbent. Carter, though, did authorize a covert action that failed to rescue hostages in Iran, which contributed to the intensification of the Cold War. [3] Trump is not an authoritarian, not yet; thank the balustrades of U.S. courts.
Dangerous new lies
A country’s path to destruction happens when its leader denies the obvious. That should not surprise people of sound minds. The leader of my country has a long record of lies, easy to use to cover fraud. After being convicted of 34 felonies, falsifying documents, and being “indicted, though not tried on charges of obstruction of justice and defrauding the United States,” he got away with mob-boss conspiring. This is an immoral human being, whose so-called charity was terminated by authorities who uncovered shocking illegal patterns involving The Donald J. Trump Foundation that illegally misused funds and was thereby dissolved by the courts, and his self-named university, which was forced to pay $25 million to settle complaints by students who called the school a sham. [4] His failure in almost everything he touches – wars, ballrooms, reflecting pools, and even immigration policies – is now obvious.
He has failed to implement any of his major policy initiatives through executive order in any realistic sense. You think about the Alien Enemies Act, federalizing the National Guard, worldwide tariffs, birthright citizenship. These are the main pillars of Donald Trump’s policy presidency, the substantive aspects of it. And they’ve all failed with the exception of birthright citizenship, which is going to.
—Sarah Isgur, Former spokesperson at the U.S. Department of Justice [5]
To pick up where I left off last month with Part 1 of a continuing article, let’s refresh the lies made for slogans meant to be displayed in windows. It is what all autocrats do; they lie with intention and surround themselves with curiosity cabinets of liars. When journalists pitch a question to a head of state autocrat, the answer is almost always exaggerated, misleading, or false – almost never correct.
Just 10 of the hundreds of false claims made by Donald Trump
Those falsities, just a few of the hundreds, come not only from the President of the United States, but also from official sites of the White House, where citizens should be able to learn the truth, but cannot. Every past president lied occasionally, mostly by spinning stories – even George Washington, who used lies as ruses in wartime. [6] But Trump lies through a behavior beyond his control. He is a pathological liar; as the boss of his corrupt administration, he expects his sycophants (including members of his cabinet) to cuddle his lies if they want to keep their jobs. It’s what shifty wannabe autocrats do. When investigative media report facts he does not like, he will call it “fake news,” and his subordinates will agree with an abandoned conscience. Fortunately, although he calls it fake news, we still have PolitiFact, CNN, and the Washington Post archives of fact-checking data. He spreads lies to hang slogans that no one really believes. Like other lying wannabe despotic leaders who aim for interminable supremacy, he seeks praise through propaganda and believes his own slogans, until he hits an overreach (a threat to Greenland, a war with Iran, or a fund to compensate insurrectionists with taxpayer dollars, for instance) that brings him down.
Emblematic experience of Trump proficiency
Besides the lies, there is the blame. Nothing is ever his fault. He blames judges who rule against him; “Dumb Judges and Justices will not a County make!” he wrote on Truth Social. [7] Even a dead duck in the reflecting pool had to have a scapegoat. His corrupt and shoddy $16.4 million renovation of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool is a physical impairment with evidentially metaphorical warnings of what is to come – more destruction than just the East Wing of the White House, or another defining failure, “the worst foreign policy blunder in decades,” according to Senator Bill Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, whose comment refers to Iran’s victory in the war Trump started but couldn’t end.[8]Why $16.2 million for painting a pool, you ask? The answer is: If you follow the money, you will find that it came through the laundry. But ignore all that and his evident narcissism to focus on the worst part, which is his blindness to his own failures, failures that reveal incompetence. Let him have his way with scandals, conning, and deals. His cruelty to immigrants is unacceptable.
Are there still believers? Oh, and besides the blaming, there is the retribution against his political opponents. He believes that he can use the Department of Justice (DOJ) as a political punishment machine, not to get convictions or bring criminal charges, but to use the department as an investigation tool that harasses and punishes anyone who criticizes him. Time consumption, cost, and stress are not simply a punishment for the one who is targeted, but rather an indication for others who’d better watch out or be targeted. It’s another old plan coming from Trumpian art. The DOJ subpoenaed Democratic State officials and accused Tim Walsh, the Governor of Minnesota, and Jacob Fry, the Mayor of Minneapolis, of being terrorists. A federal judge rebuked those subpoenas as being issued “in bad faith.” Surely, the DOJ anticipated that rebuke but used its power to warn other officials. As the interim head of the DOJ, Tod Blanche, another sycophant, warned, he is “coming after them.”
No Kings Protest in Chicago Credit: AlphaBeta135 Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.
On every front there are clear answers out there that can make this country stronger, but we’re going to have to break through the fear and frustration that people are feeling. Our job is to make sure that even as we make progress, that we are also giving people a sense of hope and vision for the future.
—President Barack Obama
To rupture a democracy for interminable personal supremacy is to declare war against its people
From a war without bullets, or in some rare cases with bullets, teargas, and clubs, comes a political division that cannot survive. Then what? Civil war or a mass protest involving 3.5 percent of the civilian population, the rule claiming history shows that sustained non-violent protest of that high percentage always ignites a successful change. [9] Of course, it doesn’t guarantee change, but it does bring hope – Obama’s “hope and vision for the future.” Hope, itself, binds the public in ways that make autocratic policies difficult to follow through.
Most Western countries turning to strongman leadership still have free speech, if not free will. So far, I can talk about my country without reprisal. For others, I fear reprisal. In my most recently translated books, the governments of two countries (Russia and China) asked me to cut out chapters because a few paragraphs would not pass censorship. I declined Russia’s request, in anger over its invasion of Ukraine, and therefore my books were banned from publication in that country. I servilely deleted those critical paragraphs in China’s case, so that the Chinese translation could be published. Did I do right by that? I still think so.
Democracy swings
Because of the current president’s whiplashing trade and foreign war policies, the U.S. has few reliable friends or allies and soon will have few markets. Cornered into new wars, the world’s most powerful and advanced military will have to face wars by itself. It threatens counteroffers that sometimes come but often do not. Trump’s understanding of wars, how they start and end, comes from a peculiar instinct that follows reflective thoughts, ignoring war history. And that follows the way authoritarians think, outside the boxes of reality. But authoritarians do not need to follow the rule of law, keep inflation down, protect human rights, strengthen markets, pay attention to the needs and concerns of constituents, make decisions on behalf of the people, keep citizens safe from war, and support free and fair elections.
Most authoritarians do not need favorable votes. America’s wannabe autocrat does. So, the current White House needs to build fear for those who would vote against him. And so here we are with masked men with guns recruited for their bullying-behavior résumés surging through American cities to create the autocratic standard of fear. Watch for interruptions at the polling places. If that doesn’t work, and he loses, any negative results for him will come from his own suspicion of loss.
Since Election Day, November 5, 2024, when 77 million Americans voted in favor of the current regime, half those voters are now sorry for being duped into believing in the MAGA slogan. So, we are now left in a semi-tyrannical leadership (with apologies for diluting the meaning) that seems to be sinking, while taking the country down with it. For that, my neighbors, friends, acquaintances, colleagues, my UPS delivery driver, and I are saddened by the persistent daily negative news that highlights meanness and brings only pessimism to the front pages of distrust. Dissatisfaction and distrust are growing, according to the Pew Research Center. Few Americans believe that the political system is working. When asked for a word or phrase to describe politics, “divisive,” “corrupt,” and “messy” were the most frequent answers. [10] I, myself, am sad that we as a nation have joined the cruel group of states that we deplored in the last century.
As I said in previous articles, it seems that the world is shifting from being humane to barbarous, yet we should remember that civilized governments prohibit slavery, lynchings, pogroms, human sacrifice, and execution by torture. Moreover, we generally take genocide seriously, along with political assassinations, human rights, and war brutalities. I say this with concern when masked agents in military gear wander around city streets in search of people to fill their quotas on capturing illegal immigrants. It is a horror that purposely divides the country with an attempt to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, a legal order in Article I of the U.S. Constitution requiring the government to bring a person in front of a judge before confining that person to prison. The Trump administration is now claiming that presidential power can suspend habeas corpus for illegal immigrants.
Yes, there is human trafficking and other horrors, but moral conduct is still watched with contempt by most responsible advanced governments. “All those horrors of humanity that shaped the history of our existence,” I wrote in an earlier TWFR article, “are now publicly and governmentally condemned, at least by the advanced countries, even those under authoritarian rule.” [11] Now, my country is joining the club of immoral brutes that restrict citizens’ rights with ruthless armed controls and retribution powers. As David Brooks put it in his farewell essay as a columnist for The New York Times, “Global populists seek to create a world in force, bullying and cruelty, in which only the ruthless can thrive. America is becoming the rabid wolf of nations.” [12]
My country is joining the club of immoral brutes that restrict citizens’ rights with ruthless armed controls and retribution powers.
We are weakened, not strengthened, by that rabidness and the current quasi-autocratic leadership. But that kind of governance will not work out well in the U.S., which is no longer united. My previous article (part 1 in this series) asked readers to name a country that had been a constitutional democracy for more than 50 years and became authoritarian for more than 25 years. There are none! America has been a democracy for 250 years. Its spine has most of its vertebrae in place and is holding the nation’s moral high ground from slippage. With age, some slippage is inevitable, especially when it inclines towards the right or left. As we have seen for two centuries, there have been unsuccessful pushes by greedy wannabes who think they can control a democracy’s flimsy stability. It was tried in the 1930s, with impressive damage (Nazi favoring). It was tried again in the 1950s with serious powers (Communist infiltrators). Since its beginnings, America has been going through political turbulence, from its imperial wars, a civil war, and vicious political violence, assassinations, and suppression of dissent. And let’s not fool ourselves about any presidential powers that do not profitably benefit massively powerful American companies, such as the oil and gas industries, and others firmly linked to arms dealing. But, unlike the widely exposed political sleaze we see today, those earlier government rogueries were smartly secret. This country has almost always been in tumultuous political situations, from the beginning of its independence until now, though there was a rather short unifying hiatus between the Korean and Vietnam wars. Imperial wars, a civil war, assassinations, and labor union violence. Let’s not kid ourselves, history does repeat itself and surely repeats political struggles, sometimes with aggressive ignorance. Now, under the current administration, it is being tried with immoral brutality (immigration). It will not succeed, yet those exploitative opportunists hoping to be part of the kleptocratic exchange payoff, pulling the kakistocratic leader’s power rods, will bring the country to its decline until it rises again stronger than before.
I apologize for comparing then with now; what happened in the past should not excuse what just happened with the second election of Donald Trump. All I’m saying is that America has always had wannabes jumping up from nowhere. Why not? If you are bored or unsuccessful in life, or see an easy way to benefit yourself in hidden corruption, why not try politics? The gig awaits with good odds of a gain, if not power, or at least a magnificent perk. Success in candidacy and other political challenges almost always requires bluffing and a bit of ignoring certain public-policy choices, sometimes involving national security; in other words, a slyness of principle that in a way buckles democracy.
So, what can we do to keep democracy alive? On the one hand, it is not difficult. Aspirant governing in the U.S. is cracking like it always has, after wannabe destructions of the 1930s and 50s. Soon it will be in free fall. Wannabes tend to profit and get out when the cracks appear, ready to snap. The Trump cracks are fractured by his sowing chaotic blunders. There are too many people, including politicians, who love their country and know that the first amendment of the Constitution is unbreakable on their side to protect their free speech. The courts are strongly ruling against many of Trump’s 71 court cases. On the other hand, we cannot simply rely on snapped cracks that he will fall into. The power of protest is real, and with all of Trump’s conspiratorial theories that bolster his lies, there is always the possibility that, even if he does not run for another term (a constitutional impossibility), he might have his dynasty in mind to keep the shenanigans going to profit his family and friends. Watch out for that ploy as the courts continue to rule losses after losses!
In the meantime, this administration is bogged down in a war more than 10,000 km away and a war with its own people at home. With each mass protest, the numbers rise significantly. The largest “No Kings” protest, held on March 28, 2026, drew an estimated eight to nine million protesters across approximately 3,300 locations in all 50 states. These protests matter; the war between the government and the people will be over, and so will be the Republican majority in both houses of Congress. Because of his rapidly plunging approval ratings, Trump will lash out in bizarre behavior. Watch him and tune in to find out what will happen.
Joseph Mazuris an Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at Emerson College’s Marlboro Institute for Liberal Arts & Interdisciplinary Studies. He is a recipient of fellowships from the Guggenheim, Bogliasco, and Rockefeller Foundations, and the author of eight acclaimed popular nonfiction books. His latest book is The Clock Mirage: Our Myth of Measured Time (Yale).
By Terence Tse
CFOs are evolving into AI-driven transformation orchestrators, balancing finance, technology, and strategy while upskilling teams, managing risks, and driving measurable business value.
A key insight from this year’s AI for CFOs event, organized...
The World Financial Review uses cookies to improve site functionality, provide you with a better browsing experience, and to enable our partners to advertise to you. Detailed information on the use of cookies on this Site, and how you can decline them, is provided in our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. By clicking on the accept button and using this Site, you consent to our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions. ACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Dr. Dan Steinbock
Joseph Mazur
