Hey Rob, thanks! Yes, the great political aspect of realism is that people will forgive you for a lot...if they think you are actually trying to put their interests first, and not that of some far away otherworldly global elite. This is what binds Milei, Trump and the populists; they are rightly seen as nationalists. It is a politically attractive thing to be for a hard-pressed citizenry.
Watch this space! In the next podcast we will talk about meeting up as a community in London at the Langham for drinks! Hope you can make it and fondly, John
Yes, Kieran, its a far more transactional world; its about getting things done. If one helps America secure its interests you are onside, an ally and can benefit (thereafter). If not, well then America will no longer shield you from certain power realties. But realism (after all these years of a vey soft Wilsonianism)forces upon every non-American country a very different way of thinking first of all. Thats worthy of a substack on its own Kieran, down the road.
Yes, its an easy win, but as you note Kieran, an important one, because it sets the tone with the rest of the Hemisphere for a consequences-laden return to realism, without any negative damage being done. You are on the money in saying its now a realist board, the question is who are the players and what can they do. A good old fashioned war game, which my firm specialises in!
Yes, John. I can’t help but think of the stark contrast in outcomes between the Colombian flight and the UK’s attempt with Rwanda.
Although overly generalised, it seems the U.S. poses three fundamental questions to the world:
1) Do you want to play the game? If yes, you acknowledge that it operates on the principles of realism. If no, you’re on your own, though not necessarily an enemy.
2) If you choose to play, which side are you on? Are you an ally or an adversary?
3) Can you help us win? If you align with the U.S., you may benefit from its success—but only after it has secured its own interests (like pilot fish around a shark).
Appreciate I may have a tin foil hat on here, but it seems entirely plausible to me that we’ve just witnessed a calculated attack on the Western financial system: The sudden emergence and impact of Deepseek AI.
By exploiting speculative avarice market behaviour through the spread of misinformation about unrealistically low development costs—without any credible evidence—this maneuver has erased hundreds of billions in market value from U.S. tech companies. Billions were poured into developing OpenAI, yet Deepseek claims replicated success with just $5.6 million?
I appreciate that the Chinese are world leaders in replication at reduced cost, but there’s something undeniably fishy here.
In reality, Deepseek’s costs were almost certainly significantly higher—likely comparable to Western counterparts, but the doubt sowing has worked. The markets grabbed the bait before it even hit the water. Could this be Trumps first real test?
Matt, as ever thanks for this. I think the Trump team--per your correct assessment as to how a new manager steps in to clean up a mess--was very lucky in that the first test (Columbia) was so easy, even quasi-comical. It allowed the White House to stick to its guns, make its realist point, and remind everyone the bird is indeed merely riding the rhino. It encourages all the weather vanes out there to gather with us. Fondly, John
It’s a classic conundrum for any leader/manager stepping into a role and tightening things up - the first test to see if the leader means it. And there will be a test. So for the Trump Administration, the immediate point was reminding the bird that it’s on the rhino’s back and needs to act accordingly, but the broader point is to tell the backbenchers at the UN that they may be next…bottom line, don’t mess with the rhino.
Hi John, thank you for another great podcast. I cannot think of a better example than this to highlight the differences between Trump & Biden/Harris. One talks without doing anything and the other just gets it done. In the UK we are already seeing sections of the media, GB News mostly, saying that we need our own Trump. A leader who will put British interests first. Instead we have a government that cannot find any money for its own citizens but can commit to 100 years of aid to the Ukraine!
Meeting up would be great, I do head down to London a few times a year for business and pleasure and tend to stay a short walk from the Langham on Piccadilly. Hopefully in the not too distant future a beer and G&T awaits!
Laughing whilst on the running machine at the comments on "the loght" and washing machine. Why are there always parts left over when you put it back together? Beats me!
And love Trump's diplomacy writ large - don't mess with the Rhino!
Excellent insights, John. I feel privileged that, because of my GMT zone, I’m one of the first to listen during my commute! An easy test for Trump to pass, but a stark warning to other leaders: agree to something only after fully considering the consequences. Without trivialising global politics, the board game of realism is now in play. The next step will be determining who’s willing to take a seat at the table—and on whose side.
Hey Rob, thanks! Yes, the great political aspect of realism is that people will forgive you for a lot...if they think you are actually trying to put their interests first, and not that of some far away otherworldly global elite. This is what binds Milei, Trump and the populists; they are rightly seen as nationalists. It is a politically attractive thing to be for a hard-pressed citizenry.
Watch this space! In the next podcast we will talk about meeting up as a community in London at the Langham for drinks! Hope you can make it and fondly, John
I'll let her know. As to Erik and Hayek, you are in the best of hands!
Yes, Kieran, its a far more transactional world; its about getting things done. If one helps America secure its interests you are onside, an ally and can benefit (thereafter). If not, well then America will no longer shield you from certain power realties. But realism (after all these years of a vey soft Wilsonianism)forces upon every non-American country a very different way of thinking first of all. Thats worthy of a substack on its own Kieran, down the road.
Yes, its an easy win, but as you note Kieran, an important one, because it sets the tone with the rest of the Hemisphere for a consequences-laden return to realism, without any negative damage being done. You are on the money in saying its now a realist board, the question is who are the players and what can they do. A good old fashioned war game, which my firm specialises in!
Yes, John. I can’t help but think of the stark contrast in outcomes between the Colombian flight and the UK’s attempt with Rwanda.
Although overly generalised, it seems the U.S. poses three fundamental questions to the world:
1) Do you want to play the game? If yes, you acknowledge that it operates on the principles of realism. If no, you’re on your own, though not necessarily an enemy.
2) If you choose to play, which side are you on? Are you an ally or an adversary?
3) Can you help us win? If you align with the U.S., you may benefit from its success—but only after it has secured its own interests (like pilot fish around a shark).
Appreciate I may have a tin foil hat on here, but it seems entirely plausible to me that we’ve just witnessed a calculated attack on the Western financial system: The sudden emergence and impact of Deepseek AI.
By exploiting speculative avarice market behaviour through the spread of misinformation about unrealistically low development costs—without any credible evidence—this maneuver has erased hundreds of billions in market value from U.S. tech companies. Billions were poured into developing OpenAI, yet Deepseek claims replicated success with just $5.6 million?
I appreciate that the Chinese are world leaders in replication at reduced cost, but there’s something undeniably fishy here.
In reality, Deepseek’s costs were almost certainly significantly higher—likely comparable to Western counterparts, but the doubt sowing has worked. The markets grabbed the bait before it even hit the water. Could this be Trumps first real test?
Matt, as ever thanks for this. I think the Trump team--per your correct assessment as to how a new manager steps in to clean up a mess--was very lucky in that the first test (Columbia) was so easy, even quasi-comical. It allowed the White House to stick to its guns, make its realist point, and remind everyone the bird is indeed merely riding the rhino. It encourages all the weather vanes out there to gather with us. Fondly, John
It’s a classic conundrum for any leader/manager stepping into a role and tightening things up - the first test to see if the leader means it. And there will be a test. So for the Trump Administration, the immediate point was reminding the bird that it’s on the rhino’s back and needs to act accordingly, but the broader point is to tell the backbenchers at the UN that they may be next…bottom line, don’t mess with the rhino.
Hi John, thank you for another great podcast. I cannot think of a better example than this to highlight the differences between Trump & Biden/Harris. One talks without doing anything and the other just gets it done. In the UK we are already seeing sections of the media, GB News mostly, saying that we need our own Trump. A leader who will put British interests first. Instead we have a government that cannot find any money for its own citizens but can commit to 100 years of aid to the Ukraine!
Meeting up would be great, I do head down to London a few times a year for business and pleasure and tend to stay a short walk from the Langham on Piccadilly. Hopefully in the not too distant future a beer and G&T awaits!
Brilliant Pod!
Laughing whilst on the running machine at the comments on "the loght" and washing machine. Why are there always parts left over when you put it back together? Beats me!
And love Trump's diplomacy writ large - don't mess with the Rhino!
Look forward to meeting up in London
If Sara sends flowers, I will spring for chocolates! I am Erik’s student and am so grateful for his time!!
Excellent insights, John. I feel privileged that, because of my GMT zone, I’m one of the first to listen during my commute! An easy test for Trump to pass, but a stark warning to other leaders: agree to something only after fully considering the consequences. Without trivialising global politics, the board game of realism is now in play. The next step will be determining who’s willing to take a seat at the table—and on whose side.