David Cameron Jeopardizing British History

June 2, 2016

Countries that lack technological infrastructure will move along the geopolitical stream of leading dominant and technologically-advanced nations. Less developed nations in the technological field will be subjugated in the role of gaining some economic benefit rather than none. In the geopolitical spectrum, technology has a significant role in the shift and movement of dominant nations. If technology means we have established more efficient means for humanity to move forward, then technology will be used to subjugate sovereign countries.

The physical alignment of technology is to determine sovereign nations that render themselves useless in the global technological society. Technology is not there to unite the global order of the world or to bridge any gap to man’s moral progress in sustaining freedom. Technology may have the romanticism in man’s limited scope in rationalizing between chaos and order; the aberration exists in accelerating disorder.

Nations with limited technological infrastructure will be inflicted with a colonial mentality resting on an imperial technology that dominates them. This is known as the digital divide: a theory referring to the gap between demographics and regions that have access to modern information and communications technology, and those that don’t or have restricted access. The nations who possess modern technology will undoubtedly use this advantage to exploit the resources of emerging nations.

Sovereign nations that can’t advance technology will offer their patronage to countries that can. A nation that lacks technological orientation can only emulate the practices and some corresponding institution that achieves some benefits to succeed economically. The goal of a dominating technological society is to dominate others and align themselves with weaker nations in exchange for benefits.

Mikhail Kovalchuk, a Russian physicist, recently stated, “I am certain that the policy of military colonization that the leading world powers were conducting over the past centuries against weaker and less developed countries has now given way to technological colonization. Does it make any sense to indulge in saber-rattling and to conquer others’ territories at a time when the same can be achieved without a single shot fired? Before, most backward states were the targets of colonization. Now the emphasis is on the developed countries.”

The statement itself needs further examination. As a physicist, Mikhail understands that historically, military might means technological progress in society. Even with war and peace, technology will still advance. Technology is responsible in the militarizing of the global order; it is now prepared to push its colonial mentality to the forefront. Technology is not exempt from the geopolitical shift and balance-of-power between a dominating nation and a rising power.

A rising technological nation will reach their own natural selection of militarizing themselves; potentially weakening a dominant rival or power. If intellect is a commodity that is in the greatest demand, then it applies with the trend of global militarization. Physicist Jorge E. Hirsch concluded, “America is embarked in the premeditated path that will lead inexorably to the use of nuclear weapons.” The only way that this statement could become true is when freedom overrides man’s rationality and overwhelms and dominates the words, “Thou shalt not kill”.

This is when the word freedom becomes predictable and productive in its influence in its own manifestations to use the military machine to decimate an economic rival. A soldier will give up his life for freedom. However in this millennium, will a soldier give up his life for technological colonization or a rising technological power similar to their own?

Japan’s technical innovation took firm roots in imported technologies to suit the country. They industrialized and catapulted into the pantheon of technology. Japan’s co-dependency stands with US military might to safeguard their technological dominance in Asia. That is why Japan’s national creed can not stand a rising China coupled with technological advances.

Japan has 18 universities in the top 500 academic rankings of world universities versus China’s 32. It is because of this exponential growth in technology that the US and Japan are pressing for military action against China based on freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. The Philippines do not have a single university in the top 500 academic rankings of world universities. However, the US continues to pontificate that the Philippines’ land claims are within the jurisdiction of international law as though the Philippine government has the capability to develop those claims.

Canada and the Philippines have developed a colonial mentality in the geopolitical world. It is a progressive lack of leadership that has done irreparable damage for them to achieve strength and identity in transforming their economies. What is acceptable for the US is for Canada and the Philippines to become consumers of technology rather than producers and/or competitors.

The worst one of all is Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron who simply sits in Parliament and writes frivolous LinkedIn articles rather than taking a strong geopolitical position in the world. If Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher were alive today, they would both scold Cameron as an ineffective leader for the strength of the British empire.

Britain’s GDP only expanded by 0.4% in the first quarter of 2016. Cameron gave away Britain’s historical prestige in the First and Second World War and its geopolitical influence to the United States who entered the war much later. British technological innovation provides easy access to foreign technology due to imperial connections with the US. Britain has no instinctive feeling that they should produce technology. In fact, Britain has no psychological motivation to invest in research and development indigenously because they feel that the colonial syndrome is acceptable in strengthening their economy.

David Cameron’s myopic world is to sit in parliament and take the soft approach to technology, and as a result foster weaker technological tradition of the pre-colonial days. Cameron is not willing to travel and make deals in modernizing and updating technology; no wonder British research and development firms account for a negligible percentage of their annual turnover. British universities and research establishments are more concerned with imported technology rather than research and development. The Brits do not innovate technology, they simply boast of other nations’ prowess and assimilate themselves with imported technology.

This is one country that has achieved a static approach to technology by eliminating jobs in sophisticated industries. Cameron stated, “It doesn’t matter whether you work in a car plant, factory, shop, or office. The likelihood is that you would take home less money at the end of every month than if we stayed in Europe. Of course, slower growth will also feed through public financing too. It would hit tax revenues, generating less money to pay wages for the public sector.”

Later, Cameron went on to thank the IMF and Obama for something which no one knows. He also went on to mention that the Albanian Prime Minister wants to be more like the Brits. Please, give me a break, this is not leadership. Cameron is a man who can not come to terms with modernizing British technological infrastructure because he’s too preoccupied with old factories and shops to generate revenue to pay for the public sector.

I agree with Oxford University that they have boasted and produced 55 world leaders from different countries. The logical question is whether or not this formal education is similar to David Cameron’s intellect and education. If it is, the 55 leaders that Oxford produced have established the sequence of being colonized. Russian physicist Kovalchuk indicated, “What is it I’m driving at? Economic sanctions and other instruments that are often in use in big politics are on one bank of the river, and science, on the opposite one. Russia has been an integral part of the world science landscape and it will remain so.”

What he means is that China, Russia, France, and Italy do not want to be colonized. Darwin demands rivals and competitors; it is the nature of the beast. 


Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

© 2023 by "This Just In". Proudly created with Wix.com