2Semana·

Why Big Tech is forcing Donald Trump to achieve world peace

Okay, I don't know how to start this. This is going to be a lot of information in a very dense text and it can be confusing, but it's worth sticking with it. Even if it will take me a while to get to what exactly this means for investors.


So ... I recently read through the official White House National Security Strategy and there are some really revolutionary things in there.


For the first time there is a separate chapter on the EU and also on Germany. So the fact that Germany is officially considered a threat to the security interests of the USA would be something one would like to read in the newspaper - provided, of course, there were honest and capable journalists in the country.


Basically, the paper hails criticism: our governments violate basic democratic values, censor freedom of expression, suppress the opposition and let lots of migrants into the country who are not on good terms with either Europe or the USA. Nothing new, but still interesting. What is much more exciting, however, is that Donald Trump is saying something that no president has dared to say since John F. Kennedy - for well-known reasons: namely that the Americans a) no longer want to expand NATO and use it as their primary instrument of power b) want peace with Russia.


There has already been much speculation about the closeness between Trump and Putin. But no one has ever written about the real economic reason why peace with Russia is in the actual interests of the Americans. And that's because you all haven't understood how much AI has really changed foreign policy.


It definitely used to be the case that wars were in America's interests. At least since they got involved in the Second World War - actually without necessity - and were able to increase their prosperity considerably as a result - wars were seen as something great or at least necessary in America. In the 1930s, the USA was at an economic low point. However, after they had supplied half the world with weapons and loans and also plundered important patents, human capital and raw materials, the true rise to superpower status began.


From this moment on, a business model was born: create chaos, sabotage enemies and ultimately sell weapons to both sides. A typical left-wing phrase says that there is no war in which the Americans have not made money.


This has fundamentally changed under Trump. War for the sake of war should no longer be waged - at least not where it is important, in Europe. While Biden still saw the liberation of Ukraine and the destruction of the Nordstream II pipelines as the highest civilizational goal, the Trump administration sees it as an existential threat to Germany that the chemical industry $BAS (+1,6%) which is dependent on Russian gas, no longer receives it in Germany and is therefore migrating entirely to China, where the pipelines are still located.


In other words, while Biden still saw selling us American LNG as a net positive, Trump considers the economic erosion of the ally to be more serious than financing Russia.


And while previous presidents would have praised the fact that the Federal Chancellor is putting our country into debt for generations to build up its armed forces, the White House condemns this approach with the words "lack of self-confidence"


Incidentally, even the Americans themselves are financing Russia and now we are finally getting to what AI has to do with it. Because not many people may have noticed it yet, but the total market cap of all US defense companies $LMT (+0,94%)
$BA (+0,25%)
$NOC (+0,43%)
$RTX (+0,64%)
$GD (+0%) and co. is now only 1.3 trillion dollars - you don't even get 1/3 of $GOOGL (+2,37%)


The big money is no longer made with weapons, but with technology. And while Biden and Obama were mainly concerned with moving oil and weapons, Trump is concerned with a) raw materials b) energy and c) supply chains.


I'm lucky that I'm dealing with intelligent readers here who don't need me to explain how microchips are made, so I can cut the supply chain thing short. In short, Trump of course needs the lenses from Zeiss and the EUV lithography from $ASML (+1,34%) and therefore has an interest in ensuring that Europe doesn't sink into chaos. At the same time, of course, chips also need rare earths such as palladium - 50% of the global supply is currently in Russian hands. Incidentally, more palladium is believed to be in the Arctic, i.e. in the hands of Russia, Canada and ... Greenland.


The fact that AI needs a lot of energy is also a widely explained and already understood thesis here. What is less in the spotlight is that, in addition to $IREN (+0,36%) with their solar panels, there is another important energy source for AI, namely small modular reactors (SMRs). I think I also shared a news item 1-2 years ago that the Big Techs are starting to build nuclear-powered data centers.


Now these are very special power plants. SMRs are essentially the latest generation of nuclear power plants, which are more efficient and, above all, much cleaner than conventional nuclear power plants. There's just one catch: you need specially enriched uranium and guess where you can get it: Russia. Specifically, the uranium comes from the ROSATOM group which, incidentally, has not yet been sanctioned as a result of the war in Ukraine. Other countries such as Kazakhstan with its Kazatomprom group also have plenty of uranium, but are not allowed to enrich it like Russia because they do not have nuclear power status.


Ok, I may have promised a bit too much in the title. I don't know whether we will really end up with world peace now, but at least we have overcome the age where it was simply claimed that some dictator had used weapons of mass destruction and the country was then reduced to rubble over a period of years. All in all, there is a good chance that the US government and the US military will in future work hard for the welfare of all shareholders of $NVDA (-2,35%)
$AMZN (+1,9%)
$GOOGL (+2,37%)
$GOOG (+2,56%)
$META (-0,93%)
$MSFT (-0,94%) and $TSLA (-1,35%) shareholders.

attachment
70
51 Comentários

imagem de perfil
2Semana
I also think that the Trump administration is committed to the interests of tech companies. Nevertheless, I don't see that his policies will lead to a net reduction in conflicts. The disregard for international law by Russia, Israel and, more recently, the USA is widening the corridor of injustice, along which other states will also let off steam. India, Saudi Arabia and China are delighted to see the USA's imperial power play. In this respect, a raw materials agreement with Russia at the expense of Ukraine will certainly be profitable in the medium term. In the longer term, however, many other concentrations of power are gaining strength worldwide, possibly even united by their antipathy towards the USA. We have been seeing free trade agreements in the Asian region for some years now, as well as bold self-confidence on the part of South American and African states.
17
imagem de perfil
@T-Dax Conflicts will probably not become fewer, but smaller in scale, because wars are now bad for business. Iran and Venezuela in particular show what the future looks like - quick, precise strikes instead of material battles and positional fighting.

International law is becoming obsolete and, in fact, the legitimacy of the International Court of Justice in The Hague has never been recognized by any US president. International law has always been cynically designed so that only Western countries could invoke international law.

The fact that the law of the strongest now applies quite openly is of course bad for the Western and European states that want to be humanistic and liberal in their self-image, because it is repugnant to them to justify themselves with national interests. European foreign policy can only take place under the pretext of doing good and helping everyone else.

As you rightly say, the other pragmatic states are also totally up for this new world. China alone, with its half-dozen border conflicts, naturally feels emboldened to enforce them militarily and violently if the USA's willingness to go to war declines.

The Asian free trade agreements are a good thing for everyone involved, aren't they? And South America and Africa can beat their drums a lot, but are not in a position to set anything in motion for the foreseeable future.
2
imagem de perfil
denouncing the erosion of democracy and freedom of expression while doing what you want without any checks and balances, disregarding international law, sending the justice department after unwelcome "opponents", invading countries and threatening others... exactly my humor. be careful what you wish for
11
imagem de perfil
I wouldn't be sad if Donald kidnapped all the politicians from the Bundestag 😂
9
imagem de perfil
Interesting perspective, I would be happy if that were all and we could now make peace 😁
5
imagem de perfil
@Klein-Anleger So European peace is actually only failing because of the Europeans - the Americans say "A large European majority wants peace, yet that desire is not translated into policy, in large measure because of those governments' subversion of democratic processes"

So the majority of people want peace, but the governments previously described as "unstable minority governments" undermine democratic processes. Whew.
3
imagem de perfil
@Soprano And if the Americans say so, it must be true!
4
Thank you for the article. The connections are fascinating. Unfortunately, you won't get much encouragement on this platform. You can imagine why.
5
imagem de perfil
@user5ca946a11b6a4278 Oh, it's fine. GQ is one of the few platforms besides X and in parts Tiktok where people are willing to look beyond their own nose or inform themselves about things that are not part of general knowledge.

There are also a few people here who don't like me at all, but I think they've blocked me anyway.
3
imagem de perfil
@Soprano As soon as I posted my comment that I liked Donald's action in Venezuela, almost 300 people unfollowed/blocked me 😂 but I also blocked some Israel haters and Free Palestine Hamas sympathizers right here
4
imagem de perfil
@Simpson But now you have a new follower :-) Did you actually reset your account somehow, Homer? I was just wondering a) why I don't follow you anymore and b) where all your posts are - I couldn't find the one about Venezuela either
1
imagem de perfil
@Soprano Thought about ending my social media "career" 😂
About Venezuela it was just a comment 😂
1
imagem de perfil
Trump and peace are two oxymorons
4
imagem de perfil
@tom_finance I maintain that Trump himself is an
oxymoron ... without the oxy 😅
6
imagem de perfil
Steep thesis but imho unfounded. Basically, it's about America First and continued global dominance. However, the big competitor is China. And in the long term, they will be self-sufficient and technically on a par with the US economy. In some cases, they are even further ahead. In the end, the question is who will win the race. Russia likes to see itself as a great power, but it doesn't play a role economically. India could become the next global player in the game or is on the way to becoming one. A disunited, weak Europe helps everyone else to achieve their goals.
4
imagem de perfil
@market_whizkid_2675 I would actually agree with you on almost all points. I don't understand where you specifically contradict my thesis. The conflict with China is certainly pre-programmed because China is pursuing a similar policy and because they are the only competitor in the world that also wants to (and possibly can) be a leader in future technologies. The question is how the conflict should and will be fought out.
1
imagem de perfil
I understand your first sentence a bit in the direction that peace serves economic dominance and is therefore the goal.

I believe that it is solely about dominance. There is pragmatic action, but peace efforts are only a pretext and even that only as long as it brings a benefit.
imagem de perfil
@market_whizkid_2675 No, no, I realize that it will always be a means to an end. It's more about the fact that war is no longer the end in itself.
1
imagem de perfil
The conflict with China is already inevitable because of Taiwan and Venezuela. Venezuela owes China quite a bit of money and the usa has been asked to release the oil if this does not happen Taiwan will be annexed, the rest is anyone's guess.
1
imagem de perfil
@Leogharie I predict - and I am referring to Trump's former national security advisor John Bolton - that Trump will simply "sell" Taiwan to China. Ultimately, China has been conspicuously quiet in recent months and has reacted with little outrage to the kidnapping of Maduro.

It is possible that the biggest "deal" in world history will soon be struck. China allows the USA to assert its interests in South America (or elsewhere) and in return the USA waives security guarantees for Taiwan. The result will be official permission for China to make its One China Policy a reality.
1
imagem de perfil
That's exactly what I fear.
@Soprano You are grossly overestimating Trump. The man is increasingly demented, which is obvious to Americans and parts of his administration.
And you overestimate the influence of deliberate grand strategies on people's concrete actions. Proof? :
Approx. 2000 years of reasonably solidly documented human history on all continents.

People are not rational. They are emotional. It runs in our genes.
imagem de perfil
@Gomerdoc That doesn't matter at all. If Trump is demented to you, then just replace Trump with "the shadow government behind Trump"

That doesn't change the fact that the administration is pursuing very specific and focused goals, which I wanted to explain.

By the way, if you think that way, you're on the losing side of history. All things in history are the result of planning, nothing happened by accident and anyone who believes that just doesn't know the background. Nero wasn't just "crazy" and set fire to Rome.
@Soprano that there are other people behind Trump: I didn't want to deny that at all: he is merely the loudspeaker in the front row who has been chosen and who, because of his increasing mental and physical insufficiency, is less and less controllable and then has to be "caught" again (by Rubio and others).

The string-pullers in the background have often believed that they could keep such people in check and control them in the long term: that didn't work in Germany in the 1930s either, and it no longer does in the USA: because exercising control in this way would damage the great Zampano at the top. You can't afford to make a fool of yourself.

And it may be that there are plans elsewhere too.
But if there is and has been a grand master plan behind almost all decisions in human history, then the plan has always been crap 💩.

In cases of doubt, the people behind the plan don't even realize what strongly influences and controls their decisions. At least that's what psychology teaches us.
imagem de perfil
@Gomerdoc Just because the plans of the past didn't benefit you doesn't mean that they didn't benefit anyone. Or rather, it's not "one big master plan" behind the whole story, but almost everything happened for a reason. So cause and effect. At least nothing just happened by chance or because the people behind it were stupid.

Trump certainly doesn't do stupid things either. You only think that if you don't recognize the pattern. He's not crazy or a loose canon either - he does things that benefit some people, you and I just aren't one of them.
Ver mais uma resposta
imagem de perfil
World peace would of course be nice, after Afghanistan, Iran, Israel, Venezuela ... I doubt that Trump is planning a change of strategy
3
imagem de perfil
@Aktienfox The change in strategy is already here. Trump has ended the Afghanistan campaign and created facts in Iran and Venezuela without expanding this into an invasion. This is a return somewhere to the Kennedy era, who wanted to avoid open confrontations in Cuba and Vietnam (and West Germany), but was of course anything but a pacifist.
imagem de perfil
Thank you very much for the article! It's always good to zoom out and try to understand a plan. I agree with a lot of the context, especially the emphasis on the supply chain strategy and the resources around uranium. Now the point that bothers me a little: you describe that Trump wants to strengthen Germany, because peace with Russia will strengthen industry in Germany again and thus reduce the migration to China. It would be a point, but basically he (or the US) has also described the EU as a geostrategic enemy. He welcomes the rise of national parties, which are very often also in favor of leaving the EU or want to create a special form of the EU. Don't you think that a destabilized EU with individual, less strong nations is Donald Trump's goal? Maybe your reasoning doesn't match mine either. My thesis: Russia and Germany have a connection again, gas becomes cheaper, the (chemical) industry becomes stronger and does not migrate to China, Germany depends more on exports to the USA and is dependent on a good deal with the USA, as the EU is weakened and we no longer have the internal market in its current form? Another point is that Trump pushed Germany very hard into LNG gas from America at the time. At the very least, it would be a 180 degree turn on that point. In any case, the USA should not have any interest in a previously existing EU with cheap Russian gas and his policy may push the EU countries into the hands of China or create new connections, thereby compensating the USA as much as possible. Don't even get me started on his domestic policy.
2
imagem de perfil
@Herr-Horn Correctly recognized. Trump sees the EU as an alliance of weak states that are strong together and regulate the big techs, for example. Trump would prefer to see very strong European states that each stand for themselves. So the goal is that the EU must go, but Germany and co. must return to their old economic strength and national identity and then they will get a deal. An ideal ally is a country like Japan, which has no power bloc but is strong enough in itself to be a regional power.
imagem de perfil
What is not possible, however, is simply to destroy the EU, because even Germany and France are far too weak in their current state to be useful to the USA.
imagem de perfil
@Soprano In particular, Japan also has the potential and the function to keep China in check. After all, it is Japan that is also preventing China from entering the Pacific region with a chain of islands extending to Taiwan. Germany is facing a tour de force to keep the EU together, expand foreign trade relations with other countries and avoid upsetting China and the USA. What is not so clear to me is why only Europe should have an interest in the war in Ukraine. It can't be because of Ukraine's economic strength. There are resources, but are they worth the "investment" in Ukraine? Or have they gone into it with such a high budget that they need a whatever-it-takes? :D The double standards of Friedrich Merz (representing the government) Ukraine/Venezuela became apparent.
1
imagem de perfil
1
imagem de perfil
I think a strong, united Europe has a stronger position internationally (compared to China and the USA).
1
imagem de perfil
@Herr-Horn Von der Leyen and Merz are concerned with globalization and the European empire. They believe that countries can be inoculated with liberal Western ideology in order to draw them into their sphere of influence. In other words, what has already failed in Hungary, Poland and Turkey. It's not about money or raw materials, but about soft power.

Specifically, the aim is for the 🏳️‍🌈 flag to fly on the roof of St. Mary's Palace in Kiev rather than the 🇺🇦 flag. Ukraine is being asked to do no more - but also no less - than turn its back on tradition, national pride and family and embrace feminism, globalism, diversity and climate protection.
imagem de perfil
Good post, you forgot to mention something, America is not ruled by the left or right, the deep state enforces its interest. Trump is also just an actor in the interest of the USA
2
imagem de perfil
Well, the deep state was more evident in the Biden administration, I think. Trump is more guided by his sponsors like Peter Thiel.
imagem de perfil
@rfid986 Who knows, maybe it's not the Deep State, but the lizard people from the Earth's core 😆
imagem de perfil
I had a look around for companies that mine palladium in Canada. Interestingly, there are two South African companies among them. One even has one of the few pure palladium mines in the world.

- $IMP (pure palladium mine).

- $SSW

- $GLEN ✌🏻
1
imagem de perfil
Only this one company can produce this specially prepared uranium?
1
imagem de perfil
@MrStonkss Yes. At least the only ones who can produce high-assay low-enriched uranium on a large scale. The next thing is that Russia is also a leader in the technology for SMRs.
1
imagem de perfil
@Soprano $CCO can't do that?
1
imagem de perfil
@MrStonkss I don't know if they couldn't do it technically, but they wouldn't be allowed to produce weapons-grade uranium anyway.
1
imagem de perfil
👍🏻
imagem de perfil
I'm reading Kostolany at the moment. There was someone else who promised 1000 years of peace... and the world was prepared to believe it in the short term
imagem de perfil
@Isus01010 Can you compare the two?
imagem de perfil
@Soprano I read the book for other reasons. And Trump's role models in thought are more likely to be found in the 19th century.
imagem de perfil
And precisely because we have this kind of technology in Europe, we now have to persevere, stand up to it and rely on our own software. The man doesn't understand diplomacy, Gary Newsom was absolutely right to say that.
Ver todas as 3 restantes respostas
Participar na conversa