by Summary:
This is an interesting analysis from the POV of globalization, the global economy, geopolitics, geostrategy and political economy. I am not endorsing the analysis itself, although it is plausible and makes many good points such as the geopolitical conflict between sea-power or thalassocracy, and land-power or tellurocracy. While the specifics are interesting, the method of analysis is much more significant. The chief reason I am posting it is to show how developing an entire economic outlook based on microeconomics, as conventional economics tends to do, is insufficient, since there are many non-economic factors and forces in play that need to be taken into account. Political economy has to take much more into account. Any such analysis is contingent on decisions taken in
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: China, France, geopolitics, geostrategy and political economy, Germany, global economy, Globalization, Iran, land-power, Russia, Saudi Arabia, sea-power, tellurocracy, thallasocracy, US
This could be interesting, too:
This is an interesting analysis from the POV of globalization, the global economy, geopolitics, geostrategy and political economy. I am not endorsing the analysis itself, although it is plausible and makes many good points such as the geopolitical conflict between sea-power or thalassocracy, and land-power or tellurocracy. While the specifics are interesting, the method of analysis is much more significant. The chief reason I am posting it is to show how developing an entire economic outlook based on microeconomics, as conventional economics tends to do, is insufficient, since there are many non-economic factors and forces in play that need to be taken into account. Political economy has to take much more into account. Any such analysis is contingent on decisions taken in
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: China, France, geopolitics, geostrategy and political economy, Germany, global economy, Globalization, Iran, land-power, Russia, Saudi Arabia, sea-power, tellurocracy, thallasocracy, US
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Skidelsky writes Lord Skidelsky to ask His Majesty’s Government what is their policy with regard to the Ukraine war following the new policy of the government of the United States of America.
Robert Skidelsky writes House of Lords Speech – Ukraine: “A wake up call” (International Relations and Defence Committee Report)
Robert Skidelsky writes The American Conservative – Why Is the UK So Invested in the Russia–Ukraine War?
Robert Skidelsky writes The American Conservative: Skidelsky on Russia, Ukraine and the Future of European Security
This is an interesting analysis from the POV of globalization, the global economy, geopolitics, geostrategy and political economy. I am not endorsing the analysis itself, although it is plausible and makes many good points such as the geopolitical conflict between sea-power or thalassocracy, and land-power or tellurocracy.
While the specifics are interesting, the method of analysis is much more significant.
The chief reason I am posting it is to show how developing an entire economic outlook based on microeconomics, as conventional economics tends to do, is insufficient, since there are many non-economic factors and forces in play that need to be taken into account. Political economy has to take much more into account.
Any such analysis is contingent on decisions taken in the future as the players adapt to each others' moves on the grand chessboard.
Gavekal On The Coming Clash Of Empires: Russia's Role As A Global Game-Changer
Charles and Louis-Vincent Gave of Gavekal Research
Charles and Louis-Vincent Gave of Gavekal Research