265SmithWatt 75Neumann JHuangDHassabisFLiEMusk 20 Agentic AIforU
KingCharlesLLM DeepLearning009 NormanMacrae.net EconomistDiary.com Abedmooc.com
europe
WEF 2026 Jan - Carney why would anyone in AI's 2nd quarter century bet their peoples brainpower on nation led by chief hatemaker
IS europe less than sum of its middle powers - or will it miss ai boat to agent every human brain rather than monetisation of humanity by a few hegomonies
CAN EUROPES LEADING DATA SOVEREIGNTIES _ FRANCE GERMANY UK...Overcome Eurocrats Destruction of Youth AI?
Norman was only journalist at Messina 1955; unfortunately the EU soon became a system exponentially promoting older's not youth's generation and not transparent decolonial AI - this is not how to make use of intelligence fast changing tech nor Europe's unique cultural WEF2- regarding work force future brainpower we tablr some rough estimates by grok of where the half of human world under 30 are
which euro countries are offering any youth solutions; I dont really see any from Belgium - see this dc briefing https://www.youtube.com/live/1wDiUJu7-7c?si=H3ebpTCHuVx4y0lh&t=...
i asked groc for ranking of euro countries leading any change tec
Top European Nations Leading in AI and Tech Innovation (2025-2026)Rankings draw from key metrics: AI startups and unicorns, funding, research output, government strategies, adoption rates, and contributions to "uniting" solutions (e.g., open-source models, collaborative platforms, or societal AI).
- France
Home to Mistral AI (a leading European foundational model challenger to global giants) and massive government investment in AI "champions." France hosts numerous unicorns, AI factories, and excels in generative AI and ethical frameworks. It actively unites intelligence via public-private partnerships for next-gen education and healthcare. - United Kingdom
Dominates European tech funding and unicorns (e.g., Isomorphic Labs from DeepMind, Stability AI). London serves as Europe's top AI hub with high startup density and rapid scaling in applied AI (drug discovery, creative tools). The UK leads in commercializing AI for broad societal impact, despite post-Brexit dynamics. - Germany
Strong in deep tech and industrial AI (e.g., Aleph Alpha, Parloa, Helsing in defense AI). Berlin and Munich drive innovation with robust R&D funding and high unicorn creation. Germany focuses on trustworthy AI integration in manufacturing and sustainability—key for uniting fragmented European systems. - Sweden
Excels in AI adoption (highest growth in enterprise use) and fast-scaling unicorns (e.g., Lovable in AI coding). Stockholm emphasizes sustainable, human-centric AI, with rapid revenue growth in startups. Sweden positions itself as a leader in ethical AI for future generations. - Netherlands
Rising hub for AI infrastructure and blockchain/AI hybrids, with strong talent pools and innovation in practical applications (e.g., supply chain, sustainability). Amsterdam attracts global investment and fosters collaborative ecosystems. - Finland
High AI talent concentration and adoption rates, with focus on public-sector AI and education. Helsinki drives Nordic collaboration for shared AI vision. - Estonia
Leads Europe in unicorns per capita and digital government (e.g., e-governance as a "uniting" tech solution). Estonia punches above its weight in AI startups and open digital infrastructure.
Other notables:
- Denmark → Tops AI enterprise adoption.
- Switzerland → Overall innovation leader (non-EU but influential in Europe).
- Belgium → Strong in cybersecurity, semiconductors, quantum, and emerging AI hubs (e.g., Brussels as regulatory center, bids for AI factories, Google investments). It adopts AI well in enterprises but lacks standout unicorns or foundational models compared to leaders—more infrastructure/supportive than pioneering unique apps.
Many European countries emphasize collaborative, human-centric AI over pure scale, aligning with your vision of uniting intelligence beyond "broken systems."
welcome other reports chris.maxrae@yahoo.co.uk
Views: 26
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by chris macrae on
-
Prime Minister Mark Carney gave a forceful speech Tuesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on the “new world order” and how middle powers like Canada can benefit by working together.
The speech was delivered against a backdrop of rising geopolitical tensions between great powers like Russia, China and the United States, and as U.S. President Donald Trump threatens allies with tariffs and pushes to acquire Greenland from Denmark, a member of the NATO military alliance.
Below is the full transcript of the English parts of Carney’s remarks.
Thank you very much, Larry. I’m going to start in French, and then I’ll switch back to English.
(IN FRENCH)
It seems that every day we’re reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry — that the rules-based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.
And this aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable, as the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself. And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along, get along to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.
Well, it won’t. So what are our options?
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel, later president, wrote an essay called “The Power of the Powerless,” and in it he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
And his answer began with a greengrocer.
Every morning, the shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world unite.” He doesn’t believe in it. No one does. But he places the sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists — not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Havel called this living within a lie. The system’s power comes not from its truth, but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true. And its fragility comes from the same source. When even one person stops performing, when the greengrocer removes his sign, the illusion begins to crack.
Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false, that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically, and we knew that international law applied with varied rigour, depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony in particular helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.
This bargain no longer works.
Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS, YOU HAVE READ AND AGREE TO GLOBAL NEWS' TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY.The multilateral institutions on which the middle powers have relied — the WTO, the UN, the COP, the very architecture of collective problem-solving — are under threat. As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions that they must develop greater strategic autonomy in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable.
A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.
But let’s be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile and less sustainable.
And there’s another truth: if great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate.
Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty. They’ll buy insurance, increase options in order to rebuild sovereignty — sovereignty that was once grounded in rules but will increasingly be anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.
This room knows this is classic risk management. Risk management comes at a price, but that cost of strategic autonomy, of sovereignty, can also be shared. Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortresses. Shared standards reduce fragmentations. Complementarities are positive sum.
The question for middle powers like Canada is not whether to adapt to the new reality — we must.
The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls, or whether we can do something more ambitious.
Now, Canada was amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture. Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumptions that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security, that assumption is no longer valid. And our new approach rests on what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, has termed value-based realism.
Or, to put it another way, we aim to be both principled and pragmatic. Principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter and respect for human rights.
And pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner will share all of our values.
So we’re engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes. We actively take on the world as it is, not wait around for a world we wish to be.
We are calibrating our relationships so their depth reflects our values, and we’re prioritizing broad engagement to maximize our influence, given the fluidity of the world at the moment, the risks that this poses and the stakes for what comes next.
And we are no longer just relying on the strength of our values, but also the value of our strength.
We are building that strength at home. Since my government took office, we have cut taxes on incomes, on capital gains and business investment. We have removed all federal barriers to interprovincial trade. We are fast-tracking $1 trillion of investments in energy, AI, critical minerals, new trade corridors and beyond. We’re doubling our defence spending by the end of this decade, and we’re doing so in ways that build our domestic industries. And we are rapidly diversifying abroad.
We’ve agreed to a comprehensive strategic partnership with the EU, including joining SAFE, the European defence procurement arrangements. We have signed 12 other trade and security deals on four continents in six months.
In the past few days, we’ve concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar. We’re negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines and Mercosur.
We’re doing something else: to help solve global problems, we’re pursuing variable geometry. In other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests. So on Ukraine, we’re a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per capita contributors to its defence and security.
On Arctic sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland’s future.
Our commitment to NATO’s Article 5 is unwavering, so we’re working with our NATO allies, including the Nordic-Baltic Eight, to further secure the alliance’s northern and western flanks, including through Canada’s unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, in submarines, in aircraft, and boots on the ground — boots on the ice.
Canada strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland and calls for focused talks to achieve our shared objectives of security and prosperity in the Arctic.
On plurilateral trade, we’re championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union, which would create a new trading bloc of 1.5 billion people.
On critical minerals, we’re forming buyer’s clubs anchored in the G7 so the world can diversify away from concentrated supply. And on AI, we’re co-operating with like-minded democracies to ensure that we won’t ultimately be forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalers.
This is not naïve multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions. It’s building coalitions that work issue by issue with partners who share enough common ground to act together. In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations. What it’s doing is creating a dense web of connections across trade, investment, culture on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities.
Our view is the middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.
But I’d also say that great powers can afford, for now, to go it alone. They have the market size, the military capacity and the leverage to dictate terms. Middle powers do not. But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what’s offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It’s the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: compete with each other for favour, or combine to create a third path with impact. We shouldn’t allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy, integrity and rules will remain strong if we choose to wield it together.
Which brings me back to Havel. What does it mean for middle powers to live the truth?
First, it means naming reality. Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.
It means acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.
It means building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored. It means creating institutions and agreements that function as described, and it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion.
That’s building a strong domestic economy. It should be every government’s immediate priority.
And diversification internationally is not just economic prudence; it’s a material foundation for honest foreign policy, because countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
So, Canada. Canada has what the world wants. We are an energy superpower. We hold vast reserves of critical minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are amongst the world’s largest and most sophisticated investors. In other words, we have capital talent. We also have a government with immense fiscal capacity to act decisively. And we have the values to which many others aspire.
Canada is a pluralistic society that works. Our public square is loud, diverse and free. Canadians remain committed to sustainability. We are a stable and reliable partner in a world that is anything but, a partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.
And we have something else: we have a recognition of what’s happening and determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.
We are taking a sign out of the window.
We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from the fracture we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just. This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from genuine co-operation.
The powerful have their power. But we have something too: the capacity to stop pretending, to name realities, to build our strength at home and to act together.
That is Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently, and it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.
Thank you very much.
-
-
U.S. affordability to face brunt of tariffs on Canada, Carney says
WATCH: Carney responds to Trump's 100% tariff threat, says China deal consistent with CUSMA
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Americans will face the brunt of affordability challenges posed by U.S. President Donald Trump’s latest salvo in the trade war between the two countries.
Carney’s comments came a day after Trump threatened 100 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods over its decision to expand economic ties with China.
Asked about the threat, Carney pointed to affordability impacts.
“The impact of American tariffs will be on American affordability, not Canadian affordability,” Carney told reporters in French.
He appeared to be alluding to the fact that duties slapped on Canadian imports by the U.S. would be more felt by American consumers. When American companies bring in tariffed Canadian goods, they’re the ones having to pay the cost and, in most cases, pass that onto the public.
The prime minister outlined measures Ottawa would take to protect affordability in Canada, such as child and dental care, and the national food program for children.
Carney also said there would be “other significant measures” on affordability announced in the coming days.
Trump’s threat came days after Carney negotiated a new “strategic partnership” with China aimed at expanding bilateral trade and investment.
Get daily National news
Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day.BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS, YOU HAVE READ AND AGREE TO GLOBAL NEWS' TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY.“If Governor Carney thinks he is going to make Canada a ‘Drop Off Port’ for China to send goods and products into the United States, he is sorely mistaken,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “China will eat Canada alive, completely devour it, including the destruction of their businesses, social fabric, and general way of life.”
2:04Trump threatens tariffs on Canada over China trade tiesYet despite the partnership, Canada-U.S. Trade and One Canadian Economy Minister Dominic LeBlanc recently said there was no pursuit of a free trade deal with China, calling the recent talks a resolution of specific tariff-related issues.
In his comments Sunday, Carney said Canada respected its current commitments such as the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA).
“We have commitments under CUSMA not to pursue free trade agreements with non-market economies without prior notification,” he stressed. “We have no intention of doing that with China or any other non-market economy. What we’ve done with China is to rectify some issues that developed in the last couple of years.”
The deal signed with Beijing reversed course on 100 per cent tariffs Canada had slapped on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) in 2024, which aligned with similar U.S. duties. Canada and China also agreed to reduce tariffs on canola and other products.
Trump’s comments Saturday are an about-face from his earlier reaction to the deal reached between Canada and China, who at the time called the agreement a good thing. “That’s what he should be doing. It’s a good thing for him to sign a trade deal. If you can get a deal with China, you should do that,” Trump told reporters.
His cabinet though, had expressed concern.
Canadian MPs are set to return to Parliament on Monday, with budget implementation expected to be at the front of the line.
It’s also where Carney will face off with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre. On Saturday, the Opposition Leader called for action by Carney on multiple affordability measures, including making food affordable, and fast-tracking bills that enact trade deals.
chris macrae said:Prime Minister Mark Carney gave a forceful speech Tuesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on the “new world order” and how middle powers like Canada can benefit by working together.
The speech was delivered against a backdrop of rising geopolitical tensions between great powers like Russia, China and the United States, and as U.S. President Donald Trump threatens allies with tariffs and pushes to acquire Greenland from Denmark, a member of the NATO military alliance.
Below is the full transcript of the English parts of Carney’s remarks.
Thank you very much, Larry. I’m going to start in French, and then I’ll switch back to English.
(IN FRENCH)
It seems that every day we’re reminded that we live in an era of great power rivalry — that the rules-based order is fading, that the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.
And this aphorism of Thucydides is presented as inevitable, as the natural logic of international relations reasserting itself. And faced with this logic, there is a strong tendency for countries to go along, get along to accommodate, to avoid trouble, to hope that compliance will buy safety.
Well, it won’t. So what are our options?
In 1978, the Czech dissident Václav Havel, later president, wrote an essay called “The Power of the Powerless,” and in it he asked a simple question: how did the communist system sustain itself?
And his answer began with a greengrocer.
Every morning, the shopkeeper places a sign in his window: “Workers of the world unite.” He doesn’t believe in it. No one does. But he places the sign anyway to avoid trouble, to signal compliance, to get along. And because every shopkeeper on every street does the same, the system persists — not through violence alone, but through the participation of ordinary people in rituals they privately know to be false.
Havel called this living within a lie. The system’s power comes not from its truth, but from everyone’s willingness to perform as if it were true. And its fragility comes from the same source. When even one person stops performing, when the greengrocer removes his sign, the illusion begins to crack.
Friends, it is time for companies and countries to take their signs down.
For decades, countries like Canada prospered under what we called the rules-based international order. We joined its institutions, we praised its principles, we benefited from its predictability. And because of that, we could pursue values-based foreign policies under its protection.
We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false, that the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient, that trade rules were enforced asymmetrically, and we knew that international law applied with varied rigour, depending on the identity of the accused or the victim.
This fiction was useful, and American hegemony in particular helped provide public goods, open sea lanes, a stable financial system, collective security and support for frameworks for resolving disputes.
So we placed the sign in the window. We participated in the rituals, and we largely avoided calling out the gaps between rhetoric and reality.
This bargain no longer works.
Let me be direct. We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.
Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited.
You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration when integration becomes the source of your subordination.
Get breaking National news
For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen.BY PROVIDING YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS, YOU HAVE READ AND AGREE TO GLOBAL NEWS' TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY.The multilateral institutions on which the middle powers have relied — the WTO, the UN, the COP, the very architecture of collective problem-solving — are under threat. As a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions that they must develop greater strategic autonomy in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable.
A country that cannot feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.
But let’s be clear-eyed about where this leads. A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile and less sustainable.
And there’s another truth: if great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate.
Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty. They’ll buy insurance, increase options in order to rebuild sovereignty — sovereignty that was once grounded in rules but will increasingly be anchored in the ability to withstand pressure.
This room knows this is classic risk management. Risk management comes at a price, but that cost of strategic autonomy, of sovereignty, can also be shared. Collective investments in resilience are cheaper than everyone building their own fortresses. Shared standards reduce fragmentations. Complementarities are positive sum.
The question for middle powers like Canada is not whether to adapt to the new reality — we must.
The question is whether we adapt by simply building higher walls, or whether we can do something more ambitious.
Now, Canada was amongst the first to hear the wake-up call, leading us to fundamentally shift our strategic posture. Canadians know that our old, comfortable assumptions that our geography and alliance memberships automatically conferred prosperity and security, that assumption is no longer valid. And our new approach rests on what Alexander Stubb, the president of Finland, has termed value-based realism.
Or, to put it another way, we aim to be both principled and pragmatic. Principled in our commitment to fundamental values, sovereignty, territorial integrity, the prohibition of the use of force except when consistent with the UN Charter and respect for human rights.
And pragmatic in recognizing that progress is often incremental, that interests diverge, that not every partner will share all of our values.
So we’re engaging broadly, strategically, with open eyes. We actively take on the world as it is, not wait around for a world we wish to be.
We are calibrating our relationships so their depth reflects our values, and we’re prioritizing broad engagement to maximize our influence, given the fluidity of the world at the moment, the risks that this poses and the stakes for what comes next.
And we are no longer just relying on the strength of our values, but also the value of our strength.
We are building that strength at home. Since my government took office, we have cut taxes on incomes, on capital gains and business investment. We have removed all federal barriers to interprovincial trade. We are fast-tracking $1 trillion of investments in energy, AI, critical minerals, new trade corridors and beyond. We’re doubling our defence spending by the end of this decade, and we’re doing so in ways that build our domestic industries. And we are rapidly diversifying abroad.
We’ve agreed to a comprehensive strategic partnership with the EU, including joining SAFE, the European defence procurement arrangements. We have signed 12 other trade and security deals on four continents in six months.
In the past few days, we’ve concluded new strategic partnerships with China and Qatar. We’re negotiating free trade pacts with India, ASEAN, Thailand, Philippines and Mercosur.
We’re doing something else: to help solve global problems, we’re pursuing variable geometry. In other words, different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests. So on Ukraine, we’re a core member of the Coalition of the Willing and one of the largest per capita contributors to its defence and security.
On Arctic sovereignty, we stand firmly with Greenland and Denmark and fully support their unique right to determine Greenland’s future.
Our commitment to NATO’s Article 5 is unwavering, so we’re working with our NATO allies, including the Nordic-Baltic Eight, to further secure the alliance’s northern and western flanks, including through Canada’s unprecedented investments in over-the-horizon radar, in submarines, in aircraft, and boots on the ground — boots on the ice.
Canada strongly opposes tariffs over Greenland and calls for focused talks to achieve our shared objectives of security and prosperity in the Arctic.
On plurilateral trade, we’re championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union, which would create a new trading bloc of 1.5 billion people.
On critical minerals, we’re forming buyer’s clubs anchored in the G7 so the world can diversify away from concentrated supply. And on AI, we’re co-operating with like-minded democracies to ensure that we won’t ultimately be forced to choose between hegemons and hyperscalers.
This is not naïve multilateralism, nor is it relying on their institutions. It’s building coalitions that work issue by issue with partners who share enough common ground to act together. In some cases, this will be the vast majority of nations. What it’s doing is creating a dense web of connections across trade, investment, culture on which we can draw for future challenges and opportunities.
Our view is the middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu.
But I’d also say that great powers can afford, for now, to go it alone. They have the market size, the military capacity and the leverage to dictate terms. Middle powers do not. But when we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what’s offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating.
This is not sovereignty. It’s the performance of sovereignty while accepting subordination.
In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: compete with each other for favour, or combine to create a third path with impact. We shouldn’t allow the rise of hard power to blind us to the fact that the power of legitimacy, integrity and rules will remain strong if we choose to wield it together.
Which brings me back to Havel. What does it mean for middle powers to live the truth?
First, it means naming reality. Stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as coercion.
It means acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window.
It means building what we claim to believe in, rather than waiting for the old order to be restored. It means creating institutions and agreements that function as described, and it means reducing the leverage that enables coercion.
That’s building a strong domestic economy. It should be every government’s immediate priority.
And diversification internationally is not just economic prudence; it’s a material foundation for honest foreign policy, because countries earn the right to principled stands by reducing their vulnerability to retaliation.
So, Canada. Canada has what the world wants. We are an energy superpower. We hold vast reserves of critical minerals. We have the most educated population in the world. Our pension funds are amongst the world’s largest and most sophisticated investors. In other words, we have capital talent. We also have a government with immense fiscal capacity to act decisively. And we have the values to which many others aspire.
Canada is a pluralistic society that works. Our public square is loud, diverse and free. Canadians remain committed to sustainability. We are a stable and reliable partner in a world that is anything but, a partner that builds and values relationships for the long term.
And we have something else: we have a recognition of what’s happening and determination to act accordingly. We understand that this rupture calls for more than adaptation. It calls for honesty about the world as it is.
We are taking a sign out of the window.
We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from the fracture we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just. This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and the most to gain from genuine co-operation.
The powerful have their power. But we have something too: the capacity to stop pretending, to name realities, to build our strength at home and to act together.
That is Canada’s path. We choose it openly and confidently, and it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.
Thank you very much.
About
ENTREPRENEURIAL REVOLUTION NETWORK BENCHMARKS 2025now : Remembering Norman Macrae
AsiaAI.docx where & how 2/3 human brains are celebrating AI livelihoods
====
lelated US AI reports:
chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk :help celebrate library of INTELLIGENCE multipliers: -system map
- Action Apps
- Millions of AI Agents 1 2 3
- Software sovereign infrastructure
- Chips1 & Supercomputers
- Energy: Genesis
- Fusion SCSP-FI -F2
- Quantum
- Critical Minerals: Pax
- Space
- Edu-media rev li>Nature
- workforce 1
cvchrismacrae.docx - Data Science
- Geonomics 1
views on whether AGI exists
- how close are google aws or huawei to nvidia
2025REPORT-ER: Entrepreneurial Revolution est 1976; Neumann Intelligence Unit at The Economist since 1951. Norman Macrae's & friends 75 year mediation of engineers of computing & autonomous machines has reached overtime: Big Brother vs Little Sister !?
Overtime help ed weekly quizzes on Gemini of Musk & Top 10 AI brains until us election nov 2028
unaiwho.docx version 6/6/22 hunt for 100 helping guterres most with UN2.0
RSVP chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk
Prep for UNSUMMITFUTURE.com
JOIN SEARCH FOR UNDER 30s MOST MASSIVE COLLABS FOR HUMAN SUSTAINABILITY
1 Jensen Huang 2 Demis Hassabis 3 Dei-Fei Li 4 King Charles
5 Bezos Earth (10 bn) 6 Bloomberg JohnsHopkins cbestAI.docx 7 Banga
8 Maurice Chang 9 Mr & Mrs Jerry Yang 10 Mr & Mrs Joseph Tsai 11 Musk
12 Fazle Abed 13 Ms & Mr Steve Jobs 14 Melinda Gates 15 BJ King 16 Benioff
17 Naomi Osaka 18 Jap Emperor Family 19 Akio Morita 20 Mayor Koike
The Economist 1982 why not Silicon AI Valley Everywhere 21 Founder Sequoia 22 Mr/Mrs Anne Doerr 23 Condi Rice
23 MS & Mr Filo 24 Horvitz 25 Michael Littman NSF 26 Romano Prodi 27 Andrew Ng 29 Lila Ibrahim 28 Daphne Koller
30 Mayo Son 31 Li Ka Shing 32 Lee Kuan Yew 33 Lisa Su 34 ARM 36 Priscilla Chan
38 Agnelli Family 35 Ms Tan & Mr Joe White
37 Yann Lecun 39 Dutch Royal family 40 Romano Prodi
41 Kramer 42 Tirole 43 Rachel Glennerster 44 Tata 45 Manmohan Singh 46 Nilekani 47 James Grant 48 JimKim, 49 Guterres
50 attenborough 51 Gandhi 52 Freud 53 St Theresa 54 Montessori 55 Sunita Gandhu,56 paulo freire 57 Marshall Mcluhan58 Andrew Sreer 59 Lauren Sanchez, 60 David Zapolski
61 Harris 62 Chips Act Raimundo 63 oiv Newsom. 64 Arati Prab hakarm,65 Jennifer Doudna CrispR, 66 Oren Etsioni,67 Robert Reisch,68 Jim Srreyer 69 Sheika Moza
- 3/21/22 HAPPY 50th Birthday TO WORLD'S MOST SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY- ASIAN WOMEN SUPERVILLAGE
Since gaining my MA statistics Cambridge DAMTP 1973 (Corpus Christi College) my special sibject has been community building networks- these are the 6 most exciting collaboration opportunities my life has been privileged to map - the first two evolved as grassroots person to person networks before 1996 in tropical Asian places where village women had no access to electricity grids nor phones- then came mobile and solar entrepreneurial revolutions!!
COLLAB platforms of livesmatter communities to mediate public and private -poorest village mothers empowering end of poverty 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6
4 livelihood edu for all
3 last mile health services 3.1 3,2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6
last mile nutrition 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2,6
banking for all workers 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
NEWS FROM LIBRARY NORMAN MACRAE -latest publication 2021 translation into japanese biography of von neumann:
Below: neat German catalogue (about half of dad's signed works) but expensive -interesting to see how Germans selected the parts they like over time: eg omitted 1962 Consider Japan The Economist
feel free to ask if free versions are available
0 The coming entrepreneurial revolution : a survey - In: The economist 261 (1976), pp. 41-65 cited 105
. we scots are less than 4/1000 of the worlds and 3/4 are Diaspora - immigrants in others countries. Since 2008 I have been celebrating Bangladesh Women Empowerment solutions wth NY graduates. Now I want to host love each others events in new york starting this week with hong kong-contact me if we can celebrate anoither countries winm-wins with new yorkers
mapping OTHER ECONOMIES:
50 SMALLEST ISLAND NATIONS
TWO Macroeconomies FROM SIXTH OF PEOPLE WHO ARE WHITE & war-prone
ADemocratic
Russian
=============
From 60%+ people =Asian Supercity (60TH YEAR OF ECONOMIST REPORTING - SEE CONSIDER JAPAN1962)
Far South - eg African, Latin Am, Australasia
Earth's other economies : Arctic, Antarctic, Dessert, Rainforest
===========
In addition to how the 5 primary sdgs1-5 are gravitated we see 6 transformation factors as most critical to sustainability of 2020-2025-2030
Xfactors to 2030 Xclimate XAI Xinfra Xyouth Wwomen Xpoor chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk (scot currently in washington DC)- in 1984 i co-authored 2025 report with dad norman.
|
Asia Rising Surveys
Entrepreneurial Revolution -would endgame of one 40-year generations of applying Industrial Revolution 3,4 lead to sustainability of extinction 1972's Next 40 Years ;1976's Coming Entrepreneurial Revolution; 12 week leaders debate 1982's We're All Intrapreneurial Now
|
The Economist had been founded in 1843" marking one of 6 exponential timeframes "Future Histores"
IN ASSOCIATION WITH ADAMSMITH.app :
we offer worldwide mapping view points from
and these viewpoints:
40 years ago -early 1980s when we first framed 2025 report;
from 1960s when 100 times more tech per decade was due to compound industrial revolutions 3,4
1945 birth of UN
1843 when the economist was founded
1760s - adam smithian 2 views : last of pre-engineering era; first 16 years of engineering ra including america's declaration of independence- in essence this meant that to 1914 continental scaling of engineeriing would be separate new world <.old world
IF we 8 billion earthlings of the 2020s are to celebrate collaboration escapes from extinction, the knowhow of the billion asian poorest women networks will be invaluable -
in mathematically connected ways so will the stories of diaspora scots and the greatest mathematicians ever home schooled -central european jewish teens who emigrated eg Neumann , Einstein ... to USA 2nd quarter of the 20th century; it is on such diversity that entrepreneurial revolution diaries have been shaped
EconomistPOOR.com : Dad was born in the USSR in 1923 - his dad served in British Embassies. Dad's curiosity enjoyed the opposite of a standard examined education. From 11+ Norman observed results of domination of humans by mad white men - Stalin from being in British Embassy in Moscow to 1936; Hitler in Embassy of last Adriatic port used by Jews to escape Hitler. Then dad spent his last days as a teen in allied bomber command navigating airplanes stationed at modernday Myanmar. Surviving thanks to the Americas dad was in Keynes last class where he was taught that only a handful of system designers control what futures are possible. EconomistScotland.com AbedMooc.com
To help mediate such, question every world eventwith optimistic rationalism, my father's 2000 articles at The Economist interpret all sorts of future spins. After his 15th year he was permitted one signed survey a year. In the mid 1950s he had met John Von Neumann whom he become biographer to , and was the only journalist at Messina's's birth of EU. == If you only have time for one download this one page tour of COLLABorations composed by Fazle Abed and networked by billion poorest village women offers clues to sustainability from the ground up like no white ruler has ever felt or morally audited. by London Scot James Wilson. Could Queen Victoria change empire fro slavemaking to commonwealth? Some say Victoria liked the challenge James set her, others that she gave him a poison pill assignment. Thus James arrived in Calcutta 1860 with the Queens permission to charter a bank by and for Indian people. Within 9 months he died of diarrhea. 75 years later Calcutta was where the Young Fazle Abed grew up - his family accounted for some of the biggest traders. Only to be partitioned back at age 11 to his family's home region in the far north east of what had been British Raj India but was now to be ruled by Pakistan for 25 years. Age 18 Abed made the trek to Glasgow University to study naval engineering.
- 7 Middle East & Stans
- 8 Med Sea
- 9 Africa
- 10 Latin Am /Carib
- 11 Arctic Circle
- 12 UN
1943 marked centenary autobio of The Economist and my teenage dad Norman prepping to be navigator allied bomber command Burma Campaign -thanks to US dad survived, finished in last class of Keynes. before starting 5 decades at The Economist; after 15 years he was allowed to sign one survey a year starting in 1962 with the scoop that Japan (Korea S, Taiwan soon hk singapore) had found development mp0de;s for all Asian to rise. Rural Keynes could end village poverty & starvation; supercity win-win trades could celebrate Neumanns gift of 100 times more tech per decade (see macrae bio of von neumann)
Since 1960 the legacy of von neumann means ever decade multiplies 100 times more micro-technology- an unprecedented time for better or worse of all earthdwellers; 2025 timelined and mapped innovation exponentials - education, health, go green etc - (opportunities threats) to celebrating sustainability generation by 2025; dad parted from earth 2010; since then 2 journals by adam smith scholars out of Glasgow where engines began in 1760- Social Business; New Economics have invited academic worlds and young graduates to question where the human race is going - after 30 business trips to wealthier parts of Asia, through 2010s I have mainly sherpa's young journalist to Bangladesh - we are filing 50 years of cases on women empowerment at these web sites AbedMOOC.com FazleAbed.com EconomistPoor.com EconomistUN.com WorldRecordjobs.com Economistwomen.com Economistyouth.com EconomistDiary.com UNsummitfuture.com - in my view how a billion asian women linked together to end extreme poverty across continental asia is the greatest and happiest miracle anyone can take notes on - please note the rest of this column does not reflect my current maps of how or where the younger half of the world need to linkin to be the first sdg generation......its more like an old scrap book
how do humans design futures?-in the 2020s decade of the sdgs – this question has never had more urgency. to be or not to be/ – ref to lessons of deming or keynes, or glasgow university alumni smith and 200 years of hi-trust economics mapmaking later fazle abed - we now know how-a man made system is defined by one goal uniting generations- a system multiplies connected peoples work and demands either accelerating progress to its goal or collapsing - sir fazle abed died dec 2020 - so who are his most active scholars climate adaptability where cop26 november will be a great chance to renuite with 260 years of adam smith and james watts purposes t end poverty-specifically we interpret sdg 1 as meaning next girl or boy born has fair chance at free happy an productive life as we seek to make any community a child is born into a thriving space to grow up between discover of new worlds in 1500 and 1945 systems got worse and worse on the goal eg processes like slavery emerged- and ultimately the world was designed around a handful of big empires and often only the most powerful men in those empires. 4 amazing human-tech systems were invented to start massive use by 1960 borlaug agriculture and related solutions every poorest village (2/3people still had no access to electricity) could action learn person to person- deming engineering whose goal was zero defects by helping workers humanize machines- this could even allowed thousands of small suppliers to be best at one part in machines assembled from all those parts) – although americans invented these solution asia most needed them and joyfully became world class at them- up to 2 billion people were helped to end poverty through sharing this knowhow- unlike consuming up things actionable knowhow multiplies value in use when it links through every community that needs it the other two technologies space and media and satellite telecoms, and digital analytic power looked promising- by 1965 alumni of moore promised to multiply 100 fold efficiency of these core tech each decade to 2030- that would be a trillion tmes moore than was needed to land on the moon in 1960s. you might think this tech could improve race to end poverty- and initially it did but by 1990 it was designed around the long term goal of making 10 men richer than 40% poorest- these men also got involved in complex vested interests so that the vast majority of politicians in brussels and dc backed the big get bigger - often they used fake media to hide what they were doing to climate and other stuff that a world trebling in population size d\ - we the 3 generations children parents grandparents have until 2030 to design new system orbits gravitated around goal 1 and navigating the un's other 17 goals do you want to help/ 8 cities we spend most time helping students exchange sustainability solutions 2018-2019 BR0 Beijing Hangzhou:
Girls world maps begin at B01 good news reporting with fazleabed.com valuetrue.com and womenuni.com
.==========
online library of norman macrae--
==========
Ma 2 Ali Financial
- 1972's Next 40 Years ;
- 1976's Coming Entrepreneurial Revolution; 12 week leaders debate
- 1982's We're All Intrapreneurial Now
- What will human race produce in 20th C Q4? - Jan 1975
- (1984 book on net generation 3 billion job creation) ...
- 1991 Survey looking forward to The End of Politicians
- 1975 Asian Pacific Century 1975-2075
- 1977 survey China
- first of 4 hemisphere remembrance parties- The Economist Boardroom
health catalogue; energy catalogue
Keynes: 2025now - jobs Creating Gen
.
how poorest women in world build
A01 BRAC health system,
A02 BRAC education system,
A03 BRAC banking system
K01 Twin Health System - Haiti& Boston
Past events EconomistDiary.com
include 15th annual spring collaboration cafe new york - 2022 was withsister city hong kong designers of metaverse for beeings.app
© 2026 Created by chris macrae.
Powered by
