In the afternoon of Monday, January 16, 2023, dozens of UvA students and teachers occupied a university building. Their reason? Once again, the university’s long-standing ties with the company Shell. Upon the protesters’ refusal to leave, the UvA immediately filed a report of trespassing with the police, who had to intervene by entering the building and arresting 30 of the protesters. Protesting against the university’s collaboration with Shell has been going on for months, but until recently, all of the protesters’ words have fallen on deaf ears. The UvA’s ties with a company that has been involved in destroying indigenous communities, lobbying against climate policies and oil spills in Nigeria result problematic for some of the University’s communities. However, on February 8, 2023, the University of Amsterdam officially announced a moratorium (a temporary suspension) on its collaboration with Shell. After months of protesting, the militants had won. Was the occupation of a building owned by the university the act that finally opened the eyes of the university’s representatives? And why did the protest have to get so violent? After the police’s intervention and arrests, a discussion spiked throughout the university’s activist community. Is this a matter of police brutality? And where do we draw the line between unlawful actions and pressing climate issues? To answer these questions, the University hosted a conference on February 15, 2023, titled Abolition Ecology: Police, Violence, and Ecology. The conference has been promoted on social media by @uvarebellion, a leftist community within the University of Amsterdam whose purpose is “demanding that the UvA cut its colonial ties with Shell.” In the end, it seems they have reached their goal. One legitimate question that inevitably arises when looking at the Instagram profile of @uvarebellion is why the university’s ties with Shell are defined as “colonial.” Is it just used as a buzzword to spark even more outrage? This piece does not aim to discuss whether or not police violence is ever justified: it is not, and I do not deny police violence either. I am simply questioning whether police violence and environmental activism are connected, or at least if they are connected to a significant degree. Could it be doing a disservice to both issues to connect them in such a way so as to spark even more outrage? The UvA hosting a conference about climate change and police violence in my opinion condones the two issues’ connection. At the end of the day, I believe that in most cases, the police only intervenes to restore order and does not have anything against climate activism in and of itself, and that may very well be what happened at the UvA protest against Shell. I am not denying how big of a deal death by the hands of the police is. What I am questioning is the framing of the issue: specifically, I am criticizing how activists expect to be able to occupy a building without there being any consequences from the point of view of involving police forces. Opinion of the writer Climate action and requests that the university ends a controversial collaboration are valid motives for protesting. Indeed, it is in everyone’s right to do so. But I question whether occupying a university building and talking about police brutality, in this case, might be taking it too far. The occupation of private facilities is a grey area when it comes to protesting. In this case, the University has decided to involve the police to restore order. Tying climate action with police brutality is a long stretch and not an entirely fair one. Not only at the UvA, of course, but everywhere in the world, lately, we are seeing climate activists going against the law. In many cases, they go as far as limiting other people’s freedom to take a strong stance and “make their voice heard” (such as activists physically stopping traffic on roads). A famous adage goes, “my freedom ends where yours begins,” and no climate emergency, as pressing as it is, justifies breaking the law. Using the expression “police brutality” in the setting of climate action deeply undermines both the issue of police brutality and the environmental emergency. Where do we draw the line, then? Why are activists occupying a university building (thus going against the law) any different than people throwing paint at invaluable artwork in museums? The climate crisis is real. There is no denying it. But it is highly problematic to assume that climate and environmental issues give someone the right to break the law. One should change tactics if one needs to shout so loud to get their voice heard. Of course, in the end the UvA has decided to end their collaboration with Shell, but is it actually going to make a difference in terms of environmental damage? It seems to me that the students and professors protesting against this collaboration were simply forcing their ideas upon the university. Everyone’s opinion is valid and worth listening to; the environmental emergency is real. But unlawfully occupying a building (albeit in disuse) is probably the wrong way to make a point since it is a violent action: those that agree with it are already convinced, and those that don’t are probably going to be even more set in their opinions against climate activism. Arguably, this particular violent type of climate activism is harming the environmental cause rather than benefiting it. There are other ways of opening up the dialogue. Using kindness to discuss even the most pressing issues may be the way to finally reach a breakthrough.

Innovation Should Not Become A Zero-Sum Game Taiwan, Trade, and TikTok. When it seems like relations between the United States and China can not stoop any lower, they somehow do. It points to a looming power struggle at a time when the stale tale of the Cold War only adds fuel to the fire. The entire relationship is defined by national security and the fear of irrelevance; both countries have a stance that favours their interests above everything else. It then becomes a matter of survival, where concessions are a result of sporadic mishaps rather than choice. As they retreat into the cocoons of isolation, a new branch of discord emerges. It’s called the tech race. A fresh sketch of a politically fractured, protectionist approach to globalisation. It paints a grim picture of a polarised future of technology driven by the economic race to the bottom. One that is hostile towards each other in every sense of the word but ultimately lacks the ideological cause. One industry, in particular, semiconductors, is the key to the 21st-century tech reign. The winner vies an unprecedented edge in renewable energy, telecom, and quantum computing. Right now, it’s unclear who’s ahead and maybe – for us as end consumers – that is for the better. But what exactly spurred this fierce competition, and how – if it’s worth enough – to get out of it? Tech manufacturing was not a point of fierce rivalry between the US and China until 2020. It was mainly a point of free market competition between public/private corporations to gain a competitive advantage. When COVID hit, it disrupted every possible manufacturing supply chain. Whilst some industries sailed through the storm relatively unscathed, others have been dealt a heavy blow. Advanced tech manufacturing belongs to the latter group; the unfortunate victim of circumstance. In its case, the circumstance was not only a supply chain breakdown and a demand surge; it was also propped up by the geopolitically imposed trade war between the US and China. It was a perfect storm for the industry. Tech could not just escape from the tight grip of the trade war. The entire industry was at a standstill until recently, patiently waiting for a change in fortunes. This “change” came to be an approval of new industrial policies set by the US and China – both pivot away from imports towards producing their own. They are also one of the very few countries that have the means to undertake such a massive pivot. At the core of this tech rivalry is the fight for emerging technologies. They are a wild west; hundreds of companies can go through busts and bursts before their products are offered to consumers. Maybe, that is the reason why this carries such significance to the government. They just want to get a tighter grip before such tech becomes public. To break it down, Goldman Sachs’ newly created Office of Applied Innovation separates it into four categories, which: Have national security implications Represent chokepoints in the economy Are “accelerant technologies” Grant a competitive advantage The reason both China and the US are investing heavily in semiconductor fabrication is that this piece of technology ticks all boxes. This spiralled a competition for reshoring the industry. A competition where the re-aggregation of supply chains comes at the expense of increased prices for inputs. Either become dependent or develop it on your own. And let me tell you, the technologies affected by the semiconductor industry is vast. Imagine a world where tiny crystals of silicon and other elements can shape the future of our planet. Where they can capture the sun’s rays and turn them into clean electricity that flows through our homes and cities. Where they can enable lightning-fast communication across vast distances and unleash the power of artificial intelligence. Where they can unlock the secrets of quantum physics and create new possibilities for computation. This is not a fantasy, but a reality that is being forged by the semiconductor industry. They are the unsung heroes of innovation, the architects of tomorrow’s technologies. They are transforming our lives and our world with their ingenuity and vision. But what does it mean for us? Where does this leave us as third-party actors in the form of governments, businesses, and simple customers as end consumers? Governments just don’t like the idea of choosing sides, they want to mix and match the best technologies from both. They want a smooth blend of innovation and cooperation, not a bitter brew of competition and conflict. They want tech that works together, not tech that tears apart. And so do we, the businesses and consumers who depend on tech for our daily lives. Do you really care what kind of chips are inside your iPhone? Or do you care more about what it can do for you? Emerging tech should not be a pawn on the geopolitical chessboard. It should be a common good that benefits everyone, guided by a balance of market forces and regulations. Otherwise, it will lead to a zero-sum game where only one side can win and the other must lose. A game that has been played too often in our history.

Georgia is one of the post-soviet countries that sets European integration as its core political objective. However, the recent development of political events in the Georgian parliament steers the 80% majority of the population away from their pro-European goals. Does not the way the ruling party, Georgian Dream, represents people’s dreams feel very questionable? On March 7, the parliament adopted one of the two bills that could dangerously affect civil society. The bill is referred to as a “foreign agent law” and goes against human rights laws as it seriously threatens freedom of speech and expression. The proposal requires individuals, media, and organisations to register as “foreign agents” if 20% of their funding comes from abroad. The law also requires concerned groups to disclose their information and allows Justice Ministry to inspect them, and in case of some violations, it can also lead to imprisonment of up to five years. The bill’s goal was presented as improving financial transparency, and it passed the first hearing with a 76-13 majority. In fact, NGOs are already subject to various laws. However, the broader society knew the dangers of such restrictive bills. If adopted, such laws allow authorities to investigate the personal information of “agents of foreign influence.” Moreover, the law not only restricts groups but also discredits them as the label “agent” has a negative connotation and implies carrying out the interest of foreign powers or being influenced by them. The most concerning part about this bill is its resemblance to the Russian Foreign Agent Law adopted in 2012. The law is widely used to suppress freedom of speech, media, and anti-Putin groups. The law was initially presented as similar to the US Foreign Agent Restriction Act in Russia. However, unlike FARA, the Russian law aims to restrict not only the lobbyists, but its scope expands to the public and media. Ironically, the Georgian bill initiators also used the FARA similarity argument to justify the bill. Such concerning laws have been adopted not only in East Europe but also in the EU member countries such as Hungary. In 2017 the Hungarian parliament adopted a similar law that did not use the wording “agent” but asked NGOs to register as “organizations in receipt of support from abroad.” The law was in breach of some EU rules regarding capital mobility and human rights laws, and after the order of the European Court of Justice, it got revoked. The wider Georgian society identified the underlying motifs of the Russian-like law as a threat to democracy. Thousands of Georgians took to the streets and protested for two days, demanding the bill's withdrawal. The protesters were peaceful, demonstrating with anti-Russia posters, waving the EU, Ukraine, and Georgian flags, and asking for their legitimate rights and justice. However, the Georgian Dream chairman referred to the youth-dominated crowd as “radical opposition” and accused them of political destabilisation and anarchism. There are indeed some videos of protestors throwing stones at the building or breaking the protective fence around it. However, the police violence was unfair and disproportional as they used tear gas and water cannons, aiming them directly at civilians. The total number of arrests during the protests reached 142. The clashes with police and two days of protesting ended with a victory for the Georgian people. On March 9, the government organised a special meeting and withdrew the bill from the parliament. While announcing this decision, the government referred to the need to reduce the opposition from society. Such language from the government is alarming and showcases the bill withdrawal as a mere pause from an anti-democratic action to avoid intense public confrontation. The government should be kept under scrutiny, and it should be monitored so that the law is not brought back in another form. The “foreign agent bill” draft raised some concerns on the international political scene. The US Embassy in Georgia called March 7 “a dark day for Georgia’s democracy” and called “Parliament’s advancing of these Kremlin-inspired laws [is] incompatible with the people of Georgia’s clear desire for European integration and its democratic development.” The spokespersons from the EU Foreign Affairs and Security Policy shared similar replies. Several threats and negative comments were heard from Kremlin. Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov denounced the protests in Tbilisi and referred to it as a coup attempt. He also compared the event to the “Kyiv’s Maidan” uprising. The analogy is brutally ironic since the Maidan Revolution was against the pro-Russian government. The tense political situation in Georgia casts doubts on the Georgian pro-European course. Political events, foreign agent bills, police violence, and denouncement of peaceful protests scream a dying democracy. However, it once again highlights the difference between society and the government. This dichotomy has been especially remarkable since the start of the war in Ukraine. The Georgian crowd has demonstrated multiple times, sharing fellowship with Ukraine against Russia. However, the Georgian ruling party has been reluctant to pose sanctions on Russian products and welcomes Russians who flee their occupant country. Meanwhile, Georgian Dream openly criticizes Zelensky’s appeal to release Georgia’s ex-president Mikheil Saakashvili due to serious health complications. Saakashvili holds Ukrainian citizenship. Georgia-EU relations are decades-long, including proposals regarding the Union membership since 2014. Almost ten years ago, three ex-soviet states - Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova - signed the Association Agreement with the European Union. Since the implementation of this bilateral agreement, the countries mentioned have been putting mutual efforts with the EU to create a foundational framework for EU integration. The paths of the three ex-soviet countries were quite similar. However, in February of 2022, the EU granted candidate status to Ukraine and Moldova, unlike Georgia, as they might have followed the guidance from the bloc better. The Council expressed its eagerness to consider Georgia’s candidacy if the country would meet 12 recommended conditions. The EU report acknowledged Georgia’s European prospects and its progress, especially in business and economics. However, the country’s polarised political scene was considered as weak institutional stability and a threat to democracy and the rule of law. The demanded reforms regard renewable energy, human rights violations, and a relevant aspect of the Georgian political scene, namely “de-oligarchisation.” Notably, the ruling party, Georgian Dream, was established by the Georgian billionaire Bidzina Ivanishvili who gained his fortune in Russia. The Georgia pollical scene looks chaotic. Almost every month, Georgians protest against the government, fearing the return to the Kremlin’s orbit. Not only the domestic struggles but also Russia’s interest in keeping Georgia away from NATO and the EU are putting the country in a dangerous position. Ultimately, the fate of Georgia lies in the hands of voters, with people whose political orientating is firmly with the West. While the EU observes how the political situation unfolds, the Georgian people are getting ready for the upcoming parliamentary elections in 2024.

There is general acceptance of two modern-day behemoths: looming global recession and the boundless economic potential of artificial intelligence (AI). However, in some ways, they exist in contradiction and with deeper implicit economic narratives propagating them. It is pertinent to consider the evidence and reasons for and against these two projections of the prosperity of our shared future as we stand at the crossroad. Recent, and – to cut ourselves some slack – somewhat unforeseeable economic developments, such as the aftermath of Covid-19, have left the world in a 127 Hours-style situation, also known as teetering on the edge of global economic recession. Whilst Covid-19 is now largely a memory around the world, its legacy is the incitation of a near-universal inflation-fighting vs growth-spurring battle. The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) World Economic Outlook April 2023 stipulates that inflation, specifically the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which reports the price changes of an average consumers’ basket of goods and services, is very unlikely to drop back to target levels before 2025. The CPI has certainly been stubbornly rising in OECD countries, reaching levels not seen in over three decades. In the US, this level of inflation is on the magnitude of historical wars or global oil shocks. The IMF states that core inflation, which excludes food and energy – the typically more volatile goods – will only decline slowly. The more stubborn inflation is against our efforts to mitigate it, the larger the so-called economic ‘sacrifice ratio.’ This is the amount of national income that must be foregone to reduce inflation by one percent. This is a reason for the confronting warning of Indermit Gill, Chief Economist at the World Bank, that “A lost decade could be in the making for the global economy.” The World Bank projects an average growth of global potential output of only 2.2% per year until 2030, a 30-year low… The drop-off is predicted to be sharper for developing countries in particular. To make the narrative more dismal, Mr. Gill outlines the expanding challenges of our times, chief among them “stubborn poverty, diverging incomes, and climate change,” which become harder to address as growth slows. The realness and severity of this prospect can simply not be understated. They point to the end of the so-called ‘golden-era’ of development, with the economic engine of China and other countries no longer driving global economic expansion. A November 2022 European Parliament policy paper, Tackling global inflation at a time of radical uncertainty, discusses how against the background of surprisingly differentiated economic circumstances across countries, central banks walk a tight rope between the risk of under- or over-tightening. If they are too loose, inflationary expectations may ‘de-anchor’from the central bank’s control, reducing credibility and potentially ultimately leading to an inflation spiral. By contrast, if they are too tight, the risk of global recession may indeed be realised. Regardless, the most predominant impact of inflation is on those who directly feel the loss in real income, the poor. The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre wrote this in stone in December 2022, finding that current inflation is widening existing economic and social inequalities in the EU. We can now understand the dismaying picture painted by the World Bank. The AI industry on the other hand, undergoing a formidable infancy, appears immune to this looming recession in the coming decade. In fact, AI’s potential contribution to the global economy is estimated by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) at USD$15.7 trillion by 2030. Almost 70% of this impact is predicted to occur in China and the US, with China’s GDP poised to be boosted by a whopping 26% in 2030 and America’s by 14.5% as a result of AI. Further to this, renowned Stanford economist Erik Brynjolfsson believes we are past the turning point of an AI-driven productivity J-curve, and a rapidly accelerating one at that, as a very result of the state of the post-covid-19 economy, at least in the US. So while global growth is apparently slowing dramatically, these unprecedented advances will plough ahead. Mind you, we must manage this technological revolution very carefully, as considered with industrial robotisation, because AI has the power to change the economic game systemically. The huge economic potential of AI means we cannot take its dominant narrative at face value. There have not been big criticisms levelled at AI developments insofar as they have the potential to upheave society. The most prominent step back was the Future of Life Institute’s open letter to Pause Giant AI Experiments with high-profile signatories, amongst them Elon Musk and Yuval Noah Harari. Jim Hightower, a middle-class defender not afraid to question the establishment, claims that “the AI agenda is not coming from the gods, nature or machines. It's a choice being made by an elite group of corporate and political powers trying to impose their selfish interests on everyone else.” To bolster this, Erik Brynjolfsson says that mimicking human intelligence with AI, as opposed to developing it to augment our capacities and tasks, is the “single biggest explanation” for the rising concentration of wealth. As humans get replaced by machines, wages are driven down, and income and wealth inequality are only exacerbated. In fact, Kai-Fu Lee, author of A.I. Superpowers: China, Silicon Valley, and the New World Order estimated in his 2018 book that by 2033 AI and automation will be able to do 40-50% of our jobs. Despite the economic boosts, such as those projected by PwC, Mr. Brynjolfsson remains critical of the implicit narrative of necessary job destruction heralded by tech giants like Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, who gatekeep AI development. Indeed, in March 2021, Mr. Altman wrote “This technological revolution is unstoppable.” This view, if perpetuated top-down, precludes even the possibility to discuss the vast potential to steer AI development towards augmenting creativity and productivity of workers, not replacing them. Then, is there a way to unify these disparate visions of the prosperity of the coming decade and beyond? More importantly, is there a way to avoid the crunches and ride the booms? What does it take? Well, World Bank officials suggested that international monetary and fiscal policies should be more aligned. This is exactly echoed by the European Parliament’s Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies. What exactly this entails is a matter for central banks and governments. If we trust the institutions – and trust them we must – they can delicately steer our path through this turmoil. Trust, in this case, has economic implications and is a necessity; the biggest wrong would be for the people to – without even knowing it – run the economy into their imagined hell of self-fulfilling inflationary expectations, and thereby undermine the power and legitimacy of central banks to actually affect prices. At the same time, I propose we elicit some more critical reflection in policymakers, agenda-setters, and tech and AI tycoons. The public should want to have a stake in the discussion, make sure to examine the narrative, and express distrust if deemed necessary.

Within the rigidity of corporate structures, there is no function more ill-defined than that of communications. Conjuring images of public relations experts, human resources units, and customer management practitioners, no singular element truly unifies their operations, beyond a general uncertainty in the created value. Accordingly, said mix of people and activities have historically been cast to the sidelines - an eclectic support function at best. Nevertheless, it is not the current state of affairs or past practices that cause concern, but the lack of direction for the future of corporate communications. As processes increase in complexity, the need for effective control in organisations has become evident. Whether it be in the form of evidence-based decision-making or advanced systems such as Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP), taking ownership of the information flow is essential. Yet, communications fail to occupy said newfound role. Functional changes do exist, such as introducing software for coordination between suppliers, employees, and customers, but those are neither initiated nor inherently governed by communication departments. It is a mere example of delayed technological adoption, as opposed to actual information ownership necessary at the organisational level. Thus, change must occur, abolishing the current communications framework in favour of a novel one, that aligns practice and research. The foundation for said framework requires an understanding of corporations as meticulously crafted entities, serving the purpose of minimising transaction costs. By generating efficiencies within individual processes, operations are permitted to run more smoothly, ultimately enhancing the complete organisational network they form. Thus, the newfound role of communications is to be one of deliberate intent, as opposed to ad hoc reactions. Eliminating decision-making based on the mere subjective assessment of communication practitioners brings the function in line with departments such as procurement, finance, and logistics management. A shift from intuition to inference, from attitude to analysis. It is a change that appears counterintuitive, incompatible with the chaotic and impromptu nature of communications of the past, yet a necessary one given the complexity of organisational structures. Thus, the transition from simply responding to the perceptions and attitudes of stakeholders to actively managing them is innately tied to the social sciences. Measuring latent constructs such as trust, belonging, and identification is a principal step in said process. Building on foundations in sociological and psychological research, communication practitioners are to use scales in order to quantify the impact of their work. By establishing a baseline on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), the effectiveness of employed interventions can be continuously monitored - whether it be internal policy changes or external campaigns. Equipped with the aforementioned knowledge and abilities, those working within communication departments would generate strategies that more accurately reflect the state of their respective oorganisations Internally, such an example would be the use of content analysis when screening written employee reports. Communication practitioners could use an initial database from past records to manually code expressed sentiments, by attaching meaning labels to individual units of text. Thereafter, supervised machine learning would allow for a model to be trained, such that reports are processed automatically, providing management with a complete information overview of implicit perceptions, attitudes, and behavioural intentions. The value of said function lies within the ability to identify emerging issues and subsequently resolve them at earlier stages of development. Namely, the ability to diagnose decreases in employee job satisfaction or perceived organizational support would serve as an immediate warning system, prompting respective departments to take action, based on information that could otherwise not be extrapolated at such a scale. Externally, a change in the communications framework would increase the depth of understanding and control when interacting with secondary stakeholders, those not engaged in a contractual relationship with an organisation. An example would be going beyond classification of individuals based on their influence and importance for a corporation to the adoption of comprehensive guidelines for managing the information flow. Communication practitioners could use a mixed methods approach, initially conducting qualitative research to establish organisation-specific theory, followed by quantitative data analysis in determining the accuracy of the identified groups and their relevant characteristics. By using unstructured interviews, those working within communication departments would recognise key touchpoints, based on which stakeholders form their perceptions and attitudes. Thereafter, survey instruments could be employed to assess the reliability of the created measures by gathering data from a larger sample, allowing for statistical tests to be used. By adopting said mixed methods approach, factors that moderate communications relationships could be identified, such as the extent of organisational messaging and customer recall, or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) engagement and viewer trust. In such a way, stakeholder groups are to be individually targeted, increasing the effectiveness of communication interventions by quantifying their impact and adjusting strategies accordingly. Thus, in the words of Stanford professor Matt Abrahams - communications are imperfect, but structure gives freedom., To occupy a principal function in the corporate value chain they must transition from providing reactionary solutions, to deliberate measurement, planning, and control. By having organisations utilise techniques from the social sciences the gap between research and practice can be reduced, achieving efficiencies both internally and externally. Whether it be through continuous employee monitoring and preventive action, or tailored customer messaging, communications can better the information flow – equipping management with the necessary tools for the future.

How governments can ensure stability in an AI-driven labour market of the future. In 1775, the invention of the steam engine sparked the Industrial Revolution, forever altering the course of history. Two centuries later, the rise of the internet brought about the Digital Revolution. In the past months, another major milestone in technological advancement has been reached with the birth of ChatGPT on the 30th of November, 2022. In just about six months, it is already being used to write homework, write and correct computer code, and draft legal documents. This glimpse into the future is fascinating. Yet, what precisely will the future hold? To gain a clearer understanding, it is crucial to understand that ChatGPT is only a steppingstone on a much longer path. Over the next decade, the capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI) will inevitably improve: what is now a mediocre high school essay will eventually be a cum laude PhD thesis; a few lines of Java code might be top-selling computer games; and why would it not be able to draft an entire constitution? AI technology has the potential to revolutionise the landscape of economics – to start a new era, an "AI Revolution". For now, this is all merely a vision. As such, we do not know how reality will unfold. Instead, take this with a grain of salt. Trying to predict the future has historically been a rather shady business, therefore, toward the end of this article, I will examine to what extent this prediction is realistic. My focus, however, will simply be to explore the possibility of what could happen and what to do if it happens. Enough about technicalities, though; let's get into the fun stuff. What Influence AI Could Have on the Labour Market Artificial intelligence is being used in medical diagnostics, financial data analysis, or in the organisation of global logistics – as such, it is not just a recent development; it has already influenced the labour market to some extent. In contrast to these more covert changes, those that could follow its most recent developments promise to be much more ground-breaking than any before. At the time of writing, OpenAI's GPT-4 is arguably the AI most "human-like" in terms of its cognitive capabilities. It can emulate numerous intellectual activities typically performed by humans: Be it essay writing, coding, poetry, or roleplay. Upon examining these abilities, one common thread becomes strikingly clear: they all revolve around the mastery of language. GPT-4 is so good at this because it is a "large language model", an AI model trained through the input of large amounts of text data. While evidently other types of AI exist, language models seem to be most useful in aiding (or replacing) human jobs; their primary source of input and output is language, just like for humans. So what shifts can we anticipate from AI in this context? As a general guideline, I propose that any job done mostly on a laptop, i.e., jobs of which the input consists mainly of text, will either undergo significant transformation (such as those in managerial positions) or face complete replacement (like that of copywriters). Jobs requiring heightened organisational skills, where the text serves mainly as an instrument for transmitting information rather than for the direct creation of final products, might – due to this added layer of complexity – enjoy some more resilience yet are likely to eventually be replaced too. Other, more social jobs such as caretakers, psychologists, or babysitters are likely to persist much longer. These tasks rely on complex personal interactions, which are more challenging to automate. While the demand for more workers in these sectors undoubtedly exists, it remains highly questionable whether this sector could be scaled to accommodate everyone. A significant reduction in working time and working hours seems necessary. Regardless, the individual's contribution to economic growth is sure to diminish. It can be useful to understand this development through the lens of "capital versus labour". In traditional economic theory, capital refers to resources used to produce more goods and services. Labour, on the other hand, refers to the human effort utilised in this production process. The effectiveness of capital is generally more expandable. Although labour processes can be improved, most major improvements in production efficiency result from improvements in the means of production – capital. Historically, capital has, therefore, more and more replaced labour. In the past, this labour replacement was generally offset by labour expansions to different, often newly emerged sectors. For example, as automation replaced jobs in manufacturing, it also opened new opportunities in fields like robotics and programming. Projected developments in capital shrink the space left for labour to expand into; with AI becoming more and more human, human utility will becomes less and less apparent. What Are the Societal Consequences of This? Assuming we accept the previous analysis and anticipate the possibility of most human jobs becoming expedient, it is crucial to explore the potential impact of this development on society. In a world where most human work is seen as redundant, will most human workers become redundant as well? In other words, how far is political empowerment possible without economic leverage? In contemporary society, if the political system fails to serve the people's interests, the populace has the ability to withhold its support. People can resort to strikes or cease paying taxes. Modern dictatorships, despite their oppressive mechanisms, still rely on their working class. They might enforce stringent rules and regulations, but fundamentally, they must ensure the workforce remains productive. This necessitates providing basic necessities and maintaining a certain quality of life. In essence, modern governmental power is inextricably linked to the power of the workers. However, significant technological advancements, such as the proliferation of AI, could potentially undermine this economic leverage that workers currently wield over governments. It is important to clarify that this scenario is not about AI conspiring against workers, nor is it coercing governments into disregarding their needs. Rather, the concern is that as governments become more reliant on AI and less on human labour, they may unintentionally become indifferent to the needs of the workers. This phenomenon is not a new one: there are countless examples of the economically weak being forgotten in the political process, be it during investments in infrastructure, education, or health care. The core difference between what we have now and what might happen in the future is the scale. Currently, the economically unempowered make up "only" a particular chunk of the population. These disparities will only be exaggerated in the society of the future. It could consist almost entirely of a class of "economically useless". As we move further into this AI-centric future, navigating these shifting dynamics with care and foresight is imperative. Political inaction could inadvertently tip the scales, causing societal imbalance and unrest. Potential indifference of governments towards human workers, not out of malice but as a by-product of their futility, could cover them in a veil of political invisibility. Thus, how do we approach this situation? How do we maintain a healthy balance between political empowerment and economic influence in a world where AI reigns? Worst Cases and Best Cases of AI Implementation The central question that arises when contemplating the implications of AI implementation is the classic socio-economic conundrum: who owns the means of production? The answer to this question could steer us towards varying scenarios, ranging from dystopian to utopian. We will explore three scenarios on this spectrum. In the worst-case scenario, private corporations or individuals would own extremely powerful AIs that will, as previously discussed, disrupt the labour market. In such a situation, most of the profit generated by these AI systems would be concentrated in the hands of a small group of people. In the absence of effective AI regulation, this would leave the rest of the population without jobs or income. Such extreme economic inequality would be no doubt reflected in a nation's political processes. If we simply let AI happen without government intervention, dystopia seems imminent. One possible mitigating approach would be to combine privately-owned AI with the concept of universal basic income (UBI). This idea first gained fame in Silicon Valley and through promotion by many tech billionaires. In this scenario, AI would remain privately owned but would be heavily taxed, with the proceeds used to fund the UBI. However, this approach still leaves the means of production in private hands and those living in society as mere recipients of UBI cheques. As portrayed in the previous section, a population without economic leverage is at risk of political disempowerment. After all, what can they do but accept the choices made by whoever owns the capital producing their cheques? In an ideal scenario, we could envision a publicly owned, perhaps even open-source, AI. All profits and power generated by AI would be owned by the community rather than private entities. Each citizen gains an equal right to the rewards. Such a scenario has been termed "AI Communism" – the shared ownership of the means of production; of powerful AI. It promises stability and equality in an age of uncertainty and polarisation. This, however, would necessitate major shifts in our economic and political paradigms and socio-economic structures. Looking into the future Now, are these predictions realistic? Is “AI Communism” the solution? That is hard to tell. Personally, I remain unsure whether any such scenario could occur in the near future. Nonetheless, even if the likelihood of this new economic revolution is small, its potentially disastrous impact justifies the attention this topic presently gains. The following years will no doubt be interesting ones. The world could well change to an unimaginable extent – we should try to make this change be for the better. Whether we succeed at this, only time may tell.

'God, Homeland, and Family' ('Deus, Pátria e Família') was the slogan that formed the foundation of Portugal’s dictatorship. However, it can well be used to illustrate the influence that religion still has in the country, where 80% of the population identifies as Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church has long shaped the Portuguese societal dynamics, from its formation and establishment of borders to its colonial empire. However, the relationship with this institution has not always been particularly beneficial for Portugal. History books and political analysts do not hold themselves back when pointing out the role of the Church in the Portuguese underdevelopment and economic struggles, especially when compared to its protestant Nothern-European counterparts. Recently, these allegations and references to historical patterns have resurfaced in light of the preparations for World Youth Day. This event aims to unite young international catholic believers and provide them with a week full of activities. Lisbon is set to host the event this year, so public authorities have already revealed that they expect to spend €80 million from public funds divided among the government, Lisbon, and Loures municipalities. These financial predictions have, however, caused a public outcry, even from the Catholic population. The main point highlighted is the carelessness of allocating such an immense quantity of public money, by a secular state, for a religious event while Portugal, as a whole, and specifically Lisbon, is currently facing one of the most severe housing crises experienced by its citizens. Portuguese people are expected to be able to afford rents that are more expensive than in cities like Madrid and Milan, while the minimum legal wage is €760, and 56% of the population needs to make ends meet while earning less than €1000 by the end of each month, which crowns Portugal as the country with the lowest average salary of Western Europe. Hence, due to the recent controversies and backlash towards the Church, it becomes interesting to look back into Portuguese history to understand the impact that the Institution, not the religion per se, had on Portuguese society. Therefore, this article will guide you through two of the most relevant moments where this connection has not been particularly beneficial to the most Western European country. Portuguese Inquisition During the 14th century, Portuguese sailors positioned Portugal as the epicentre of new knowledge, making significant contributions to the development of modern science. The kingdom embraced a modern and open spirit with the growing popularity of Humanist ideas. Intellectuals of the time were largely independent of European cultural influences and generated numerous new ideas and scientific discoveries. However, while Northern Europe, i.e., Protestant Europe, experienced a strengthening Renaissance spirit that fostered scientific advancements, the Portuguese mentality lost its vigour during the imposition of the Inquisition in the country. The Institution, desired by Manuel I, the king who expelled non-converting Jews from Portugal, was officially established during his son's reign. Its official goal was to combat Judaism, prevent the spread of Protestantism (which had minimal support in Portugal), and alleviate discrimination against the Jewish community by converting its members to Catholicism (you cannot hate what is not there). However, religion served as a mere cover for economic and social motives: The Jewish community played a crucial role in commerce and held significant power, engaging in various banking operations that posed an intense competition against the bourgeoisie class. Additionally, the Jewish community boasted higher levels of education, making them assume important liberal and political positions. Therefore, they were seen as a threat to the nobility, clerical and bourgeoisie classes at that time, which all fought for money and influence in the political and economic systems of the country. Theoretically, the monarch controlled the 'Holy Office', but its inquisitors wielded authority surpassing civil, military, and religious powers. Consequently, as representatives of the Pope, they were the ones unofficially dictating the rules in the country. The inquisitorial apparatus intellectually stifled the nation, attacking any ideas that questioned the Church's practices or doctrines. It also impeded social progress by targeting the Jewish community, whose members either fled to countries like the Netherlands or faced persecution and execution. Unfortunately, they took with them all their knowledge, entrepreneurship and innovative spirit, so instead of contributing to Portugal's economic development, they aided the Northern economies where they found freedom and acceptance. Thus, at a time when Portugal possessed all the necessary conditions to establish itself as a leader in modernity, it regressed from a Kingdom of Intelligence to a Kingdom of Stupidity, hindered under the pretext of religion. Dictatorship "Estado Novo" (The New State) was the name given to the Portuguese dictatorial period, which was instituted in 1933 and lasted until 1974. The dictator António Oliveira Salazar accomplished to gather the support of the clerical hierarchy, Catholic believers, small to large landowners, the bourgeoisie, monarchists, fascist sympathisers, and many others, which was impressive at a time when Portuguese society was more fragmented than ever. This remarkable doing was largely due to his "financial miracle," in which he managed to mitigate the impact of the Great Depression and secure economic growth for the country for the first time in years. This miracle was accomplished through an intense period of austerity, which permitted Salazar to generate a positive saldo in the public funds and write off the state’s debt aggravated by the country’s premature participation in World War I. These attainments helped the country avoid the kind of debt crisis that plagued other nations during this time while aiding Salazar to gather increasing respect and power amongst the government, not taking long until he rose to the rank of President of the Council of Ministers. However, despite having an enormous amount of gold in Portuguese banks, the dictatorship did not bring peace and happiness to Portuguese people, who saw their living conditions becoming progressively worse and their rights being stripped away from them one by one. Salazar’s ideology was extremely conservative and traditionalist, distinguishing ‘Estado Novo’ from other European totalitarian regimes of that time, which Salazar considered pagan. This aversion to modernity idealised rural living as the preferred way of life, while the industrial world was seen as perverse, immoral, and undisciplined. Furthermore, the Catholic Church was once again protected by making its teachings mandatory in schools and through a formal treaty that granted the Institution several privileges in the country. To preserve family morality, women were expected to be submissive and deprived of independence, with their sole role being to take care of the Catholic, rural, and austere family. Furthermore, artists were harshly repressed, and education was virtually limited to primary school, as even though higher education was available, the harsh living conditions obliged parents to send their kids to work during their childhood years, making them leave school prematurely. In addition to all this, the economic model of the dictatorship strongly relied on small individual initiatives and dirigisme, with all cartels being controlled by the state, which further contributed to the country's underdevelopment. The entrepreneurs’ conservativism and resistance to innovation hindered Portuguese economic growth, leaving the country increasingly behind the rest of Europe. Salazar's fear of diluting Portuguese religious values also increased isolation and distance from Western societies. Under the slogan "Orgulhosamente sós" ("Proudly Alone"), the dictator avoided external intervention in the country, further contributing to social, cultural, economic, and scientific underdevelopment until the Carnation Revolution brought an end to the regime. As the revolutionaries took control of the country on the 25th of April of 1974, 30% of the Portuguese population was illiterate, and child mortality rates were high. Additionally, the colonial war, which lasted 13 years (1961-1974) and was fought between Portugal's military and the emerging nationalist movements in the Portuguese African colonies, severely aggravated the Portuguese living conditions, with rationing affecting bigger cities, and those in rural areas unofficially forced to rely on subsistence agriculture. A significant portion of the population lived in isolated villages without proper sewage, water supply, road access, or electricity. Most houses outside the main cities or in the suburbs of Lisbon and Oporto were clandestine and made of rocks and wood. People had to use communal tanks or rivers to wash clothes, and horses and carriages remained popular transportation. This description does not depict Medieval Portugal but rather the Portugal of the 20th century, governed by a Catholic-inspired dictatorship that prioritised preserving religious morality over opening the country to development, thereby subjecting its people to adverse conditions. Conclusion The Inquisition and the Dictatorship personify two historical periods when Portugal possessed the necessary funds and energy to establish itself as a European hub, but the Church’s hand on its politics hindered modernisation within the Portuguese borders. Accordingly, while World Youth Day does not entail the same physical and ideological repression witnessed in the past, the allocation of public funds to a religious event when the country is going through such hard social and economic time easily reminds the Portuguese of their governments’ misguided decisions in the name of religion. Once again, it appears that the government and municipalities are prioritising religion over the interests of taxpayers. No miracle seems close enough to resolve the mounting issues of rising inflation, the housing crisis, and deteriorating quality of life. As a result, more and more educated young people are opting to emigrate to other northern countries where their skills are valued, and they receive fair compensation, leaving everything behind to pursue a better life. They take with them their knowledge, their initiative and innovative ideas, as the Jewish people did during the Inquisition. This exodus highlights the urgency for real solutions addressing Portugal's challenges rather than promoting events to entertain the people. History teachers state that their discipline is important to reflect on past mistakes and avoid similar actions. However, the relentless cycle of self-destruction in the name of religion became increasingly apparent, leaving the Portuguese people exhausted and disheartened. Maybe the civilians should update their political approach: they can either start believing in modern miracles or, better yet, only elect leaders who ace their history tests. Printed Sources: Rosas, M., Pinto do Couto, C., Costa, A., & Santos, A. C. (2022). Entre Tempos. Porto Editora. Fortes, A., Gomes, F., & Fortes, J. (2019). Linhas da História. Areal.

© APA/Werner Kerschbaumayr Four years have passed since the Ibiza affair shook Austrian politics to its core as one of the country’s most consequential political scandals of the 21st century. Leaked video footage showing HC Strache, then Vice Chancellor of Austria and chairman of the far-right populist Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ), offering government contracts to a woman posing as the niece of a Russian oligarch unveiled the reality of deep-rooted corruption in Austrian politics. As a result, the FPÖ lost a majority of its public support, spiraling into a period of political turmoil for several years. Yet, today, the FPÖ is on track to perhaps win its first-ever general elections in 2024, with current polling predicting a landslide victory for the far-right populists. The Austrian government’s responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and the current soaring costs of essential goods have clearly fueled distrust in the Austrian political establishment and inspired the Freedom Party’s increasing support. It is evident that a yearning for change and a desire for a strong hand in the face of an uncertain future have paved the way for a popular willingness among the Austrian people to embrace an ‘Orbánization’ of Austria. It is no secret that the Freedom Party considers Orbán’s Hungary as a role model for Austria. “Let's follow Orbán's example; let's build the fortress Austria!” - Herbert Kickl, the FPÖ’s chairman, said in a speech about illegal migration just earlier this year. Just a few weeks earlier, at the 2023 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Budapest, Kickl also praised Hungary’s role in fighting the EU elites’ ‘militaristic’ sanctions against Russia, calling Orbán a “decisive leader at the helm of the state.” For the FPÖ, Orbán's Hungary, however, is not only a role model for how to conduct conservative politics but also for the role of the judiciary and the media in Austria. The 2019 Ibiza affair is the perfect proof of the latter. When former FPÖ chairman Strache was caught eagerly explaining to a woman he thought to be the niece of a Russian oligarch how she should acquire the Krone Zeitung - one of the most prominent newspapers in Austria - to support the FPÖ, the video did not go down well with the Austrian public. The scandal led to the collapse of the government, and key figures of the Freedom Party, such as Strache, were forced to leave the party or give up their political privileges. Needless to say, the FPÖ’s support crashed for years. In the 2019 snap general elections, the FPÖ merely managed to secure 16.7% of the total valid votes (compared to 26% in 2017). From 2019 to 2021, the FPÖ lost, on average, between one-third and one-half of its voter base in all five state parliamentary elections. The decline was particularly stark in Austria’s capital, Vienna, where the party's electoral support plummeted from 30.8% in 2015 to a mere 7.1% in 2020. However, in 2022, the FPÖ's fortunes began to shift. For the first time in years, the party started gaining popularity again, beginning with the state parliamentary election in Tyrol. The FPÖ went on to increase its vote share by one-third on average in the following major elections, marking the party’s best-ever performances in Lower Austria (24.19%) and Salzburg (25.75%). Current polling suggests that the FPÖ could even win the general elections with 29% of votes for the first time in history if elections were held now. So, what constitutes the FPÖ’s current success? Since the FPÖ’s official founding in 1955, the party has run on a campaign of Austrian nationalism, strict immigration policies, far-right extremist sentiments, and populist rhetoric. The FPÖ has been involved in countless scandals and accused by many of being fascist, racist, anti-Semitic, and misogynistic. Furthermore, the party has been shown on many occasions to have close ties to neo-Nazi circles and other far-right movements. Nevertheless, the FPÖ is one of the most established political forces in Austria, with a particularly strong appeal among young, less-educated men. According to the SORA Institute, 40% of FPÖ supporters are ideologically committed ‘core voters’, while the majority of the party’s followers vote FPÖ out of protest. It is precisely these protest voters who have made the current success of the FPÖ possible. In recent years, the party has managed to attract various new groups of voters and capitalize on two particular societal concerns: distrust in the Austrian establishment parties and people’s fear for their future due to the current inflation. While the Ibiza affair undeniably had a negative effect on the FPÖ’s reputation, it has also fueled a broader sense of distrust in Austrian politics that, over the years, the FPÖ has been able to capitalize on. This skepticism has been further exacerbated by other political parties - especially the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP) - who have also been involved in various scandals in recent years. At the same time, the Austrian population's dissatisfaction with the government's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic cannot be overstated. Over 25% of Austrians were very dissatisfied with the government's measures to combat the pandemic, with many perceiving them as exaggerated, paternalistic, and quasi-dictatorial. This frustration played directly into the hands of FPÖ politicians, who are skillfully exploiting it. The populist party is reaping the benefits of FPÖ leader Herbert Kickl's narrative of ‘us down here against them up there.’ The FPÖ consistently presents itself as the party of the people - and it does so with success. Such a self-presentation hits the contemporary political zeitgeist: only 34% of Austrians believe that the current political system is functioning well. At the same time, economic insecurity and the rising costs of essential goods lead many to yearn for a simple answer to their worries and a strong hand to solve their problems. More people than ever wish for a ‘strong leader.’ Around 20% of Austrians want an unapologetic leader who does not care about the outcome of elections and instead directly addresses citizens' concerns. Only 46% of the population clearly rejects this notion. Paradoxically, even those who currently lean towards authoritarianism still consider democracy to be the best form of government. The fact that authoritarian thinking is no longer seen as obviously contrary to democratic values only highlights how much the FPÖ with its far-right, conservative agenda has become socially accepted. The growing popularity of the FPÖ due to a distrust in the political establishment and people’s general fear for their future highlights how illiberal politics is becoming increasingly mainstream in Austria. This means that the FPÖ is resonating with the Austrian public despite, and not necessarily because, of its far-right extremist history and policies. Ultimately, voting for the FPÖ is seen as a viable alternative to electing other political parties, even if that entails the further ‘Orbánization’ of Austria. It is yet to be seen what that means for Austria’s future.

There are many reasons why people struggle to quit smoking, but it almost always concerns a wrong understanding of how they perceive value. Traditional psychologists who ravel on methods to quit smoking generally neglect to engage in exposing the reasons why people find value in smoking in the first place. Meanwhile, economists generally disdain the study of how value can be created by personal attributions. For smokers and non-smokers alike, I prescribe a short manifesto on how value is really conceived. As even non-smokers may discover they’ve been indulging in their own versions of ‘smoking’. A Model to Approach Value During World War II, in a prisoner war camp, Radford observed how between prisoners most trading was established by the means of barter; but cigarettes, in particular, rose from the status of a regular commodity to that of a currency. Camp authorities periodically granted a package of goods for all prisoners —smokers and non-smokers alike— which included a selected cigarette ration. Because cigarettes are homogeneous, reasonably durable, and of convenient size, they organically perform all the functions of a metallic currency as a collectable and portable unit of account. They became a transferable medium for exchange as non-smoker prisoners traded them according to their tastes and priorities. Most fundamental to cigarettes’ transformation into currency was that they were collectively recognised as a means of storing and preserving value over time, as they were demanded by enough people for the effects of smoking tobacco. The pleasure nicotine produces, only ten seconds after entering the body, triggers a sensation that war prisoners treasured as a dormant delight. This effect was agreed on as a tangible representation of value, as the act of filling their stale breath with igniting smoke became a desired momentary sanctuary from the hardships of war. “Additionally, when the situation of the war allowed for some stability, camp authorities decided to create a shop, large enough to have access to a larger quantity of cigarettes. Prisoners who were temporarily out of cigarettes were able to borrow from the shop. As credit emerged, cigarettes attained all the characteristics of a currency and the market was unified under the value of tobacco smoke.” Cigarettes, as Perceived by Camp Smokers In cigarette currencies, an apparent dichotomy of how smokers and non-smokers perceive the value of cigarettes exists. For smokers, a cigarette comes across as a form of commodity money, having value in itself which is directly perceived by its users. Tobacco has a use in itself; an intrinsic value that doesn’t exist as an object, but does in its properties. For this reason, in Radford’s prisoner war camp case, “certain brands were more popular than others as smokes, but for currency purposes, a cigarette was a cigarette.” The clash between the value of cigarettes as a coin of trade and the value of cigarettes as a commodity shows that these were subject to the working of Gresham’s Law: “Bad money drives out good”. This principle implies two types of money. Good money refers to a currency of higher quality in terms of its intrinsic value. Bad money, on the other hand, refers to a lower-quality currency. When both good and bad money are simultaneously in circulation and are legally exchangeable at the same fixed rate, people tend to hoard good money and use bad money for transactions. People get rid of the inferior currency as quickly as possible and as a result, bad money circulates more widely, while the good money is withdrawn and will gradually disappear from circulation. When applied to cigarettes, it’s not hard to notice that people’s subjective preferences on brand and flavour have a fundamental role in the valuation of the cigarette’s intrinsic worth when putting good and bad money in the scope. Smokers also display a time preference in perceiving cigarettes as commodity money, as they exhibit a preference for immediate consumption. For instance, a nicotine-deprived smoker may highly value a cigarette available any time in the next six hours but assign little value to a cigarette available in six months. Smokers prioritise the pleasure gained from smoking in the present over the potential future value of cigarettes as a medium of exchange. For someone craving nicotine, cigarettes are nothing more than a commodity. Cigarettes, as Perceived by Camp Non-Smokers Within this context, non-smokers don't perceive cigarettes merely as commodities for immediate consumption. Instead, they attribute value to cigarettes as a form of representative currency. For non-smokers, a cigarette’s worth doesn’t lie in its inherent worth, but rather in how it represents something valuable to someone else: the intrinsic value it holds for a smoker. Value is fairly held in the belief that as a cigarette passes from hand to hand in every transaction, eventually, at the end of the chain, value manifests itself in consumption as someone accepts the cigarette as a commodity. Non-smokers, who usually are inclined only to see cigarettes as a means of exchange, can exhibit some subjective insight on the intrinsic value of the cigarettes they prefer to accept in a transaction: they would rather have cigarette brands that are more popular among smokers or cigarettes that are in good condition against those that are folded or wrinkled, believing these would be easier to trade. This means non-smokers can also value cigarettes through the eyes of smokers, and the perception under which cigarettes are valued, constitutes a position rather than an inherent trait. There’s more to this; a smoker can only pleasurably smoke up to a specific limit of cigarettes. After reaching peak satisfaction, a smoker starts to get liquid, and from this point onwards, cigarettes are seen as nothing more than a means of trade. This means that value consists of the agreement of potential with its object based on a person’s subjective need. Here, valuation is driven by the accountability of resources and needs. Smokers can take a similar position to that of non-smokers in a transaction. Remarkably, a cigarette involved in a chain of ten transactions is in nine transactions perceived as a representative currency by both parties. While it is finally perceived as a commodity in only one instance by a single party: the smoker that eventually consumes it. This way, intrinsic value is deferred, pushed forward into the future every time someone exchanges a cigarette away. Given that for most transactions smokers operate in the same way as non-smokers, it can be abstracted that cigarette currencies primarily operate as perceived representative tokens in the minds of both smokers and non-smokers. Under this premise, a deeper examination reveals that while the value of cigarettes as a token of exchange is conscious, the intrinsic value, which remains unsatisfied until consumption, becomes unconscious to the individual. In other words, although cigarette currencies are initially tied to a specific commodity, their intrinsic value becomes detached from the physical act of smoking as they undergo a chain of exchanges as currency. Both smokers and non-smokers consciously recognise cigarettes as a valuable medium of exchange, while unconsciously disregarding their intrinsic consumable value. As a result, people unknowingly reconcile two conflicting ideas: 1) neglecting the act of consumption that gives cigarettes their intrinsic worth, with that of 2) still acknowledging them as a valuable token for trade. We have to accept that these two contradictions are somehow unconsciously reconciled. Otherwise, it would imply that in trade, people are willingly relinquishing their possession of something in exchange for a cigarette that 1) holds no intrinsic value, as they themselves will not consume it; and 2) holds no intrinsic value they can consciously attribute in every transaction, as it represents value to someone else. When compared to banknote money this idea becomes clearer: Banknotes used to hold value as a medium of exchange because they ultimately represented something valuable to someone: gold. Each banknote was backed by a reliable guarantee, as the government and private entities store a reserve of gold. Once coins and banknotes became widely circulated, people engaged in various activities like feasting, purchasing new clothes, and getting groceries. It created a bustling environment where individuals were occupied with fulfilling their needs and desires. Every banknote was backed by its equivalent value in gold. But in the regular flow of economic activity, people’s perceptions tend to focus on immediate concerns rather than on grasping the actual representative value of each banknote. As banknotes circulate and change hands, their connection to the underlying gold becomes less apparent. While people consciously recognise the value of banknotes as a token of exchange, the representative value, which remains unsatisfied until consumption, becomes unconscious to the individual. This way, people unconsciously reconcile 1) their neglect of the representation that gives banknotes their value —gold—, with that of 2) continuing to acknowledge it as a valuable token for trade. Again, in both cigarette and banknote currencies, we must accept that these assumptions are somehow unconsciously reconciled. If otherwise, trade wouldn’t be possible. Cigarette Currencies, as Perceived by You and Me Decades ago, a Charlie Chaplin impersonations contest was held in California. There were 40 competitors, and Chaplin himself participated in it. But he didn't end up winning; in fact, he came in 27th place. Chaplin impersonated his well-known self, yet he resembled people’s abstraction of Chaplin less than the random men who scored ahead of him in the contest. Cigarettes and all other forms of currency are subject to a similar phenomenon: people’s abstraction of value in money differs from its actual value. From this concept, we can adopt an approach that reconciles the two conflicting assumptions that people hold regarding money: From how smokers perceive cigarettes, we’ve learned that value in currencies consists of the agreement of potential with its object. The smoker that consumes the cigarette, perceives it as a commodity currency in virtue of the fact that he enjoys the value of the use of the cigarette, that is, its intrinsic value. The inherent value of a cigarette stems from the pleasure and need for nicotine consumption. This is its potential. But non-smokers —or likewise, smokers that don’t end up consuming it— detach the cigarette from its intrinsic value. They don’t naturally perceive the intrinsic potential of the cigarette, and this void in value makes them worthless. The void left, however, is instantly bridged as non-smokers get their hands on a cigarette. They unconsciously ask themselves: “What can I turn this cigarette into? What commodity can I potentially transform this pack of cigarettes into?” Cigarettes are perceived as valuable regarding their potential claim on a personally desired commodity. Cigarettes stop being representative of their final intrinsic value on consumption: they transcend the act of smoking and become associated with a symbolic representation whose value ultimately relies on personal attributions. This is the mystification of money. Through each individual it passes through, the cigarette goes beyond its physical form and becomes a manifestation of desires and needs, as it embodies the exchange and possession of other possible desired commodities. For some, cigarettes symbolise a month's rent, while for others, they represent a new phone or a romantic dinner. Money assumes different representations yet retains its identity as the same physical token. Value manifests through the agreement between a symbolic representation of perceived potential and the cigarette, predicated upon a subject’s desires. As long as other individuals attribute their own symbolic meanings to cigarettes, banknotes, or any other form of currency, they retain their efficacy as tokens of exchange. Value, as Perceived in Currencies The process of abstraction regarding intrinsic value extends beyond the chain of individual exchanges. It expands over time alongside the growth of wealth and technology. As societies and economies have advanced, they have sought improved methods to facilitate trade and transactions. Tobacco and other forms of commodity money were replaced by metallic currency: coins made of gold, silver, and copper. These represented a direct exchange for the value given by actual consumable commodities. This was the first transformation made where people began to blur the boundaries between their consumable desires and the means to attain them. Later on, paper money emerged, which, while not intrinsically embodying the value of metals like coins, was a more abstract representation of them. Banknotes were prescribed as claimants for the metallic value coins were representing. This transformation was the last instance of tangible currencies which, at least, represented tangible value. With the passage of time, it was thought that banknotes issued didn’t need to represent a complete conversion into gold and metals. People found banknotes very convenient and they rarely thought of presenting them to the issuing authority. Therefore, the full backing of money was not required. Only an average proportion of forty per cent was considered enough to cover the banknotes in their conversion into gold: cutting the initial intrinsic value of banknotes by more than half. This was fiat money, backed by government decree. Following the tendency, through time the conversion was cut into a minimum amount of gold. This was the transformation in which tangible currencies began to represent intangible value, yet still worked as tangible translations of people’s needs and pleasures. In our modern economies, money has taken on an intangible form by becoming digital. Technological advancements, physical plastic cards, applications like Apple Pay, and potential future innovations like facial recognition, have and will continue to gradually distance people from the tangible value or backing associated with the money they possess. Digital money is now the current state of affairs, where intangible digital representations of otherwise intangible currencies represent, ultimately, intangible value. Yet, value is still perceived in these immaterial tokens as mediums of trade through the mental artefacts that have been exposed previously. A Lesson for Smokers The process by which people detach cigarette currencies —and all currencies— off their intrinsic worth offers a bridge to understanding the real value people perceive in the otherwise worthless act of cigarette smoking, and as such, also provides insight into understanding the factors behind the tendency to get locked into a cigarette dependency. All smokers lay the foundations of their smoking practice by getting acquainted with the buzz: the head rush experienced from nicotine smoking, appreciated as a subtle feeling of lightheadedness. This experience is recognised as the expression of a pleasure that, framed lightly, is embracing, vitalizing, and even enlightening at times. However, over time, smokers gradually stop experiencing the buzz. The initial intrinsic value brought by cigarette consumption becomes absent, yet smoking continues to be nurtured by smokers as an act of value. It is from this point onwards that smokers find themselves in that characteristic disposition of the subject that has detached the object from its intrinsic value, and, just like with cigarette currencies, perceive value in an unconscious symbolic representation, rather than in the consumption of nicotine for its own sake. By the time smokers no longer feel the buzz, they have smoked enough cigarettes for many of them to have been present on occasions of great happiness and celebration, many of them have also offered instant relief during despairing situations; as a consequence, they become affiliated with the smoker’s mental recollections of feeling good. The act of smoking has become associated with the times it was an escape from uncomfortable situations, or a source of comfort when returning home after work. It goes as far as affiliating itself with people whom the smoker shares these moments with, and becomes a part of the way the smoker relates to them. Phenomenologically, smokers blur the boundaries between these moments of bliss and the act of smoking itself. Due to the significant presence of cigarettes in these positive experiences, the emotions associated with those moments become connected to the act of smoking. The perceived value of cigarettes now relies on affective motives, where the symbolic representation of past recollections serves as a substitute for the buzz. This happens as an internal need compels smokers to unconsciously adopt this association. Of course, smokers don’t deliberately smoke for the purpose of remembering good moments nor do they, by instinct, run the movie of those cherished moments in the background of their mind every time they grab a smoke. What has happened is that as the physical sensation of the buzz detaches from smoking, the unconscious, to fill the void left behind, merges the idea of the buzz with the emotions felt in those cherished moments. Smokers unconsciously project their emotional states onto cigarettes, seeking a psychological translation of value in the act of smoking in the absence of a prominent authentic buzz. The buzz, even if faintly noted sometimes when paired with drinking or with a morning cigarette, has stopped being the object of perceived value for the long-time smoker. The value they perceive in cigarettes is now grounded in emotional motives, as smoking has come to be the commemorative reproduction of a perceived psychological state. The nature of cigarette cravings and withdrawals brings evidence to this concept. To a heavy smoker, withdrawal is almost never, although it almost always appears to be, a matter of physical, but rather psychological longing. The truth is that psychological withdrawals always precede physical withdrawals. When cravings arise, the smoker seeks to satisfy the psychological desire even before experiencing physical symptoms of withdrawal. People who are not attempting to quit smoking rarely experience headaches and fatigue, which usually peak on the fourth or fifth day of withdrawal. Multiple studies have been made on the use of placebo cigarettes to relieve subjective nicotine cravings. Cigarettes with no nicotine have been proven to relieve subjective nicotine cravings in participants, to a lesser extent than actual nicotine cigarettes of course, but still significant in how they prove the relevance of the perceived psychological state in dependency. In cigarette dependency, nicotine dependency is only peripheral: it operates separately from cigarette cravings despite being connected to them. How to Quit Smoking Just as is the case with cigarette currencies in modern economies, cigarettes have become representations of intangible value. The difference between cigarettes and cigarette currencies lies in the fact that cigarette currencies translate into desired economic material capital, while cigarettes serve as a self-complacent medium of exchange to acquire desired psychological capital. As the cigarette currency has become the central artefact of economic wealth, so has the cigarette become the central artefact of psychological wealth. But, just as cigarette currency can take any form to serve this purpose, so can the cigarette also be transmuted by changing the object with which a smoker wants to associate the desired psychological state. Phase one: Smokers can find a substitute to keep their mouths and hands busy in scenarios where they would normally smoke a cigarette. At the moment of psychological craving, instead of smoking a cigarette, they can drink a milkshake by sucking on a drinking straw, chew cinnamon sticks and toothpicks, blow bubbles, play music and whistle, eat candies and mints; if at a party, they can take another shot straight from the bottle or make out with someone, anyone. Fellatio and breast-sucking can also be complementary substitutes in the wake of Freud’s theories. Whatever poison is picked, smokers have to make sure they choose an alternative that 1) is fixated as somewhat of an oral substitute and 2) brings in its consumption something of an intrinsic ‘buzz’, and soon enough all the recollection of the emotional states brought by cigarettes will be translated into this other object. Phase two: As smokers engage with this substitute, they will come to realise that they will eventually also detach the intrinsic value from it: once the milkshakes and candies become a learned behaviour it will no longer serve the purpose of a translation into a psychological state but rather a psychological reaction. Smokers will have to diversify the objects through which they obtain their desired state by learning new behaviours and coping skills. Phase three: In the final stage, each of the diversified objects will have lost its intrinsic value. It is at this moment where smokers found themselves in the capacity of moving value categorically; in contrast to how they only could do so previously by symbolic representation. Smokers can now access their desired psychological state by directly engaging in any other activity. These same concepts are endorsed by professional medical advice. The evolution of a smoker is parallel to the evolution of monetary doctrines, as value evolves from intrinsic to perceived in the representation of a desired material or psychological state. The process by which the smoker wants to approach quitting smoking has to be understood as an allegory of the evolution of money in reverse; quitting smoking must be regarded as a return to barter. In phase one, perceived value is de-digitised from its intangible representability and its ‘fiat’ status is removed when it is brought down into actions performed consciously to quench craving. In phase two, representation ends and value is commodified through the process of diversification. Finally, in phase three, it is devolved into a direct system of exchange, where any deliberate action translates promptly into a desired state of mind. Makes for a beautiful catharsis that at this point the value previously concentrated in cigarette smoking can be distributed, at will, to any other action. If these principles and methods are adopted authentically, the ex-smoker will find he/she has transcended into something of a wizard of states, transmutation and value.

Economists are notoriously bad at predicting recessions even as they are taking place. Or maybe they are too good. After all, “the stock market has predicted nine out of the last five recessions” as Paul Samuelson famously said back in 1982. This figure is now closer to 14 out of the last 8. Still, even if we cannot predict recessions, it is worthwhile to think about models that most accurately describe the business cycle to effectively guide economic policy. The two central conceptual views on business cycles are as follows: First, the view that business cycles are primarily driven by exogenous shocks, and that absent these shocks, the oscillating pattern of the business cycle would largely disappear. The other view acknowledges these shocks but emphasises the significance of internal mechanisms of the economy that produce booms and busts regardless of exogenous shocks. Economic historian Charles Kindleberger’s Manias, Panics, and Crashes argues that financial crises throughout history have shared many commonalities, most notably a ‘euphoria’ among investors during booms associated with pro-cyclical increases in the supply of credit and the subsequent indebtedness of investors. The willingness of investors to take on debt is enabled by the idea that asset prices will continue to rise forever. This mob mentality means that as soon as the increase in asset prices no longer exceeds the interest rates connected to the funds used to finance their asset purchases, a panic sets in and contagion and feedback effects can quickly spread waves of insolvency across the economy. Kindleberger concludes that although exogenous shocks such as the onset of war or bad harvests do take place, ultimately “the pattern [of financial crises] is biological in its regularity”. In this regard, the business cycle is more like the ebb and flow of the tide. While a natural disaster may upset the natural rhythm of the crashing waves, they will inevitably return to their original flow. This also means that, although we are aware of the patterns of reckless trading, trying to stop such a crisis is as effective as casting a rock into the ocean to interrupt the currents. For this reason, Kindleberger stresses the importance of a lender of last resort to inject liquidity into a panic-stricken environment. This of course also lends itself to problems of moral hazard: private investors become more reckless in their extension of loans if they believe they will be supported during moments of financial distress. Another view is that business cycles are driven by chance. The summation of random numbers such as the last digits of the Russian lottery (as Eugen Slutsky did back in 1937) reveals a pattern that closely resembles the oscillations of the business cycle. In other words, we can think of the business cycle as random shocks averaged over time. In practice, this means that it becomes increasingly difficult to predict downturns in the economy. But say we can in fact predict recessions before they materialize. Just as Kindleberger concluded, this is not to say we can do anything to stop them, we may only be able to use economic policy to minimize the ensuing damage. Much like a car with loose brakes, we may not be able to stop the economic machine from driving off a cliff but perhaps we can steer it in the right direction to soften the landing. The US Federal Reserve has recently pursued a series of rate hikes which are forecasted to reach as high as 5.6% before 2023 draws to a close. Fighting inflation with rate hikes inevitably slows the economy. According to Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, one of the ‘Big Three’ bond credit rating agencies in the US, “when inflation picks up and the Fed responds by pushing up interest rates, the economy ultimately caves under the weight of higher interest rates.” It is not surprising that this has convinced economists that a recession is on the horizon. Still, it has yet to precipitate. Despite low unemployment and steady job growth, inflation is actually dissipating. The economy has remained oddly resilient to the forces of monetary policy. For example, take 30-year fixed mortgage interest rates, which, despite having risen almost 4% in the past year and a half, seem to have weak impression on home ownership, likely due to the surge in housing demand when remote work became commonplace. The consensus has been that a recession is imminent in the close future, but perhaps the growing pessimism is misplaced. In any case, the economy seems to be stubborn to the conventional forces of economic theory, or perhaps the worst is yet to come. Whether it be exogenous shocks or biological regularities, the tide must fall before it can rise again.

Dalle AI Nine billionths of a second. A unit of measurement so accurate that, by comparison, a wristwatch becomes a blunt instrument for telling time. An archaic tool for which the price has little to do with the specification of its movement but instead the values of the current day; a continued appreciation for the craftsmanship that has brought time to each and every person, enclosed in the steel casing of a watch. Seemingly disregarding the imperfections of the automatic and quartz movements, through ignorance of the cutting edge – where optical clocks measure time in the frequencies of ultraviolet light, as opposed to the swings of a pendulum. 06:00 - Time as a shadow Nevertheless, in understanding the value one is to attribute to timekeeping it is necessary to rewind the clock to 3500 BCE when obelisks and stone rods cast their shadows, denoting the passage of time. It was by tracking celestial bodies that one could divide the day into smaller units, placing each movement at a point beyond dawn and dusk. Over the course of the next 2000 years, the Egyptians brought further refinements through the creation of the sundial, for once establishing the components of a modern clock. First, the presence of a constant and repetitive action, recognized to be the movement of the sun, such that increments of time can be denoted; and second, a means to record and display said increments. Thus, for the Egyptians, the sundial enabled the scheduling of trade and coordination of communal activity, but simultaneously set the beginning of a pursuit for refinement – a search for consistency and regulation in timekeeping. NIST 07:00 - Darkest hours Naturally, the question of how one is to track the passage of time when the sun is not visible ensues, requiring a reinvention of the clock independent of celestial objects. The answer to which the Egyptians found in the water clock: a series of connected vessels with slowly flowing liquid, measured along marked intervals. A similar principle underlines the use of sand, burnt essence and candles, whose continuous change in level could be tracked over time, although with lesser accuracy. Yet, the next great refinement in timekeeping found its basis in this very technology, in 750 CE, thousands of kilometers and hundreds of years away, by the hands of a Chinese monk and scholar. Thus, ushering in the age of mechanization through a wheel spun by flowing water, marking the intervals of time – each quarter and hour announced by drumbeats. Hence, the definition of horology, seen not only as the study of time, but the art of creating the instruments that measure it. The intricate assembly of gears, rods, and levers that over the next millennia brought a clock tower down to the size of a pocket watch. NIST 08:00 - Ownership of a day Similar to the involvement of the Chinese monk in the refinement of timekeeping, it was the Roman Catholic Church and the need for strict observance of prayer time that marked yet another tick in the accuracy of measurement. It was by combination of the knowledge, craftsmanship, and affluence of the monastic order that bell towers were introduced across Europe in the 1300s. A development relying on the use of gravity and weights, whose continuous movement was made periodic through an escapement, producing a ticking sound with each shifting of the gear. Where the completion of 60 ticks was announced through the striking of the clocca – Latin for bell – by which the surrounding population was made aware of the passage of time. Served as a means to itemize one’s day and track one’s duties, thus shifting ownership to each person within a community. 09:00 - Search for a second Over the course of the next 300 years, the mechanical clock underwent many iterations, shifting both in dimensions and craftsmanship, a change driven by horologists’ need to appease the merchant class. The once public nature of the clock tower found itself transformed into an individual affair, reserved for the residences of the wealthy, adorned with verge escapement wall clocks. Timepieces offering greater precision throughout the entirety of the day, as opposed to the hourly strikes of a bell. Yet, those engaged in trade sought to measure even smaller intervals, commissioning timepieces with dial complications for both minutes and seconds, only to realize the imprecision of those very clocks. As, although the use of springs instead of weights had allowed for portability, it had come at the expense of tens of minutes lost or gained over the course of a day – revealing the unreliability of such timekeeping methods. NIST 10:00 - Balance in motion What came to follow was one final refinement to clock movements based on gravitational force, having once emerged through the flow of water, then mechanized by the inclusion of weights, and ultimately culminating in the swing of a pendulum. The beauty of an oscillating motion, continued and rhythmic in nature, endlessly shifting the gears of a clock over time. What Dutch astronomers discovered in the winter of 1656 was not only an answer to the grievances of the merchant class, enabling them to conduct commerce across seas, but a scientific marvel a hundred times more accurate than any horological instrument to date. With a loss or gain of less than a minute for each week of time, tracking any imprecisions became difficult for the ordinary person. A clock in line with the abilities of its owner, soon to accompany them at each and every second. Thus, by addition of a spring, the motion of a balance wheel could be regulated, allowing it to rotate repeatedly in each direction, all while sheltered in a small metal encasement – a pocket watch. 11:00 - Tempus populi Portable, accurate, technologically advanced yet continually inaccessible, a tool reserved for the affluent. Watches remained a significant purchase for many, difficult to justify unless truly needed. Hence, it is only logical that the proliferation of said horological instruments coincided with the emergence of a new frontier – that of travel and military conquest. The expansion of railroads necessitated complete synchronization, such that collisions could be avoided, while simultaneously ensuring that trains run along a specific line of track at a predetermined time. Demand for watches further increased with the outbreak of the Civil War, due to a need for coordination by Union army forces, consequently leading to the start of mass production. Where Swiss craftsmen took months to create a single timepiece, factories in the United States would manufacture dozens in a day, removing all barriers of ownership by creating a tool for the masses. A final stroke of the watch hand denoting the pinnacle of individual timekeeping – the ability of each person to track the seconds, minutes, and hours of a day. NIST 12:00 – A period after time Regardless of the thought one gives to modern time measurement instruments, innovation over the last century has seemingly surpassed that of past millennia. As mechanical clocks and automatic watches are to be considered obsolete relics, upon comparison with the accuracy of the quartz movement. The use of a crystal excited through a constant electric current, in turn producing vibrations at a regular rate, to the point of losing a second of accuracy for every 30 years of time. A technology that has ultimately found its way to the timepieces of the modern age, yet remains overlooked by many. Ingenious in its means of measurement, it provides accuracy beyond what the ordinary person deems necessary, serving instead a higher purpose – that of scientific discovery. Thus, the evolution of atomic and optical clocks, meticulously designed instruments distinguished not for their portability or craftsmanship, but their contributions to technological innovation, shaping global positioning services and modern communications. Whether it be by measuring the frequencies of cesium atoms or those of ultraviolet light, said devices redefine what a timepiece truly is – with a precession of nine billionths of a second, they have succeeded in the race for regulation of time. NIST Conclusion It is through such a historic recounting that one may come to appreciate the value of timekeeping. A search for continuity in movement, for which the increments are recorded to track the passage of time, driven by a need for refinement across both day and night. Ushering in an era of mechanization and establishing the importance of instrument creation within horology, while simultaneously directing the life of communities and allowing for personal ownership of one’s time. Yet, with advancement in craft comes a realization of imprecision, a clock running either ahead or behind, but always misaligned with the needs of the affluent. A problem finding its solution in the magnum opus of movements based on gravitational force, an oscillating pendulum bringing clock towers and verge escapements to the miniature case of a pocket watch – the most personal timekeeping instrument. Yet one that would have remained inaccessible to many, if not for historical circumstances culminating in the wristwatch known today. A horological device long superseded by the invention of atomic and optical clocks, that is to be valued not for its accuracy, but for its homage to the notion of timekeeping itself. A recognition of the ingenuity and millennia of innovation carried by an individual – one’s own attempt to record an incremental movement in time.

How Donald Trump effortlessly confirmed his front-runner status Source: Dall-E Donald Trump, the clear favorite for the Republican nomination in the upcoming presidential election, has taken to campaigning with unconventional strategies. Amongst such, skipping the primary debates has left the Grand Old Party (GOP) scrambling for attention. Regardless, the outcome of the Republican primaries seems already decided. As the 2024 United States presidential election edges closer, the GOP and the Democratic Party have initiated the nomination process for their candidates. While confirming President Joe Biden’s nomination constitutes the Democratic Party’s main task, the GOP instead must start the selection from the very beginning. In order to obtain their party’s candidacy, politicians face a long and arduous road, consisting of several steps that test a widespread variety of abilities. Candidates must prove their fitness for the presidency countless times throughout the campaign: reaching donation quotas, holding captivating rallies, engaging news appearances, creating convincing platforms, and winning debates. In particular, debates represent a key moment in every politician’s campaign, either boosting the candidate’s popularity or plummeting their poll numbers. Specifically, primary debates constitute an exciting component of a candidate’s public image, positioned at a juncture between the starting blocks of the race and the Iowa caucuses. Two out of the three Republican primary debates have already occurred. Strangely, former President Donald Trump did not attend either forum. Regardless, the business tycoon won both debates. Now, Donald Trump stands unchallenged as the Republican front-runner, and the nomination only constitutes a formality. Appearing as either calculated tactics or dumb luck, a combination of choices and coincidences produced such an outcome. Trump’s tactics aptly matched the current context of the GOP. The former President left just the right amount of spotlight for his opponents to reveal their incompetence whilst also manipulating the media’s narrative through his absence. The result: candidates embarrassed themselves and debate viewership decreased, while Tucker Carlson, the ex-Fox News ally, calmly interviewed Trump. The candidates Amongst the causes of Trump’s invulnerability is the array of unlikable and uncharismatic competitors. Thus far, candidates have yet to make a favorable impression on Republican constituencies. With the clear favorite absent and a scrambled hierarchy, Fox News broadcasted contenders’ embarrassing gaffes and obnoxious attacks. Namely, despite an abundance of efforts, candidates failed to penetrate Trump’s armor and ultimately lost the crowd’s and viewers’ favor. Additionally, debate participants damaged each other and themselves throughout the contest. Untouched by the end of the night, the former President rhetorically dominated his opponents while not even present on the debate stage. During the first two debates, former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie led the attack, continually attempting to denigrate the former President’s image. “We’re going to call you Donald Duck”, stated Christie. However, such powerless insults only served to damage his own reputation rather than effectively dismantling Trump’s name. Throughout the first debate, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis also came out swinging, immediately using his first answer to criticize Trump. "Donald Trump is missing in action. He should be here on this stage tonight. He owes it to you to defend his record," DeSantis said. Nonetheless, the Florida Governor, after losing the attrition war with Donald Trump, has now flatlined at a low percentage in the polls. An unimpressive performance in the debates just confirmed his newly found low-tier status. On the other hand, candidate Vivek Ramaswamy embraced Trump’s absence and, trying to become the GOP’s next star, mimicked the former President’s debate style with clunky and atypical insults. Moreover, the 38-year-old businessman pledged absolute loyalty to Trump, promising to deliver a presidential pardon if elected. Echoing the former President, Ramaswamy antagonized his opponents within five minutes of the first debate: “Now that everybody got their pre-prepared slogans out of the way, we can actually have a real discussion”. Despite successfully rallying the Trump base, Vivek Ramaswamy struggled with foreign policy and came out inexperienced, ultimately proving too divisive and not charismatic enough to attract the masses. Former Vice President Mike Pence, Trump’s closest soldier for four years, is now gunning for the highest rank in the White House. Seemingly torn between riding the Trumpian wave and condemning his previous superior, Pence’s campaign has been intriguing to follow. Particularly, Mike Pence faces the difficult task of navigating the discourse surrounding the January 6th Capitol incident. In fact, Vivek Ramaswamy attempted to entrap Pence by drawing out his allegiance to Trump. “Join me in making a commitment that one day you would pardon Donald Trump,” Ramaswamy provoked Pence. The Indiana Republican demonstrated his prowess and experience with a careful response: “(a pardon) usually follows a finding of guilt and contrition by the individual that’s been convicted.” But, finding himself caught between Trump and anti-Trump politics, Mike Pence left GOP voters confused. Coupled with the second-lowest speaking time among all candidates, Pence’s platform remains grounded in the polls. Other candidates that have failed to distinguish themselves include: North Dakota businessman Doug Burgum, South Carolina senator Tim Scott, former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson, and South Carolina diplomat Nikki Haley. After delivering a tepid and dull performance, these contenders left the stage and returned to their hitherto unremarkable platforms. Many candidates’ presidential campaigns seemed over before they began. Controlling the media In recent years, Donald Trump has been a headliner for the GOP. Knowing how to control the media and its narrative represents one of the former President’s strongest abilities. Once an entertainer, Republican audiences flock to Trump’s persuasive messaging. By not participating in the debates and thus limiting their reach, Donald Trump has stripped his rivals of an opportunity to challenge him and expand their platform. Without the strongest candidate present, the Republican primary debates cannot captivate as many viewers. For instance, from a statistical point of view, viewership for the Republican primary debates has decreased in comparison to the 2016 debates, going from 24 million viewers to roughly 10 million. Now, with an already struggling campaign, candidates also lack an appropriate launch pad. At a time when maximal outreach is paramount to the success of a political campaign, Donald Trump has even managed to reduce his rivals’ scope of action. Of course, Donald Trump could not stay idle while others berated him. On August 24th, to upstage his competitors on the actual stage, Trump and his team arranged an interview with former Fox News host Tucker Carlson. Since being fired from Fox News, Carlson has hosted his new show Tucker on X. During the interview, Trump demonstrated awareness in regards to the strength of his position: “I’m saying, do I sit there for an hour or two hours, whatever it’s going to be, and get harassed by people who shouldn’t even be running for president?” From Trump’s point of view, skipping the debate represents the only rational choice; the alternative consists of participating in an irrelevant debate with irrelevant candidates. By the end of the first debate, the Tucker-Trump segment on X had amassed more than 80 million views. With an ingenious tactic, Trump garnered greater media attention and discoursed for 45 minutes without any disturbances, much unlike his rivals on the stage. Donald Trump dismantled his opponents’ platform and created his own, displaying decades of media training. The future interception Pundits and analysts selected their winner for the night, mostly choosing either Vivek Ramaswamy or Mike Pence. While a candidate may have emerged victorious amongst his peers, Donald Trump has already won the race. The Republican primary debates serve the purpose of increasing participants’ presence within the GOP rather than finding an actual rival to Trump. Eventually, though, from the Republican primary debates, the strongest candidate will surface and move up in the polls. Rumoring and clamoring will occur around such a contender. Part of the GOP will support the newly found candidate. The Trump loyalists will voice their hostility. Such a candidate will participate in interviews on Fox News, perform rallies in key primary states such as Iowa or Florida, receive Super PAC donations, and appeal to voters in their home state. And then Donald Trump will dominate an overwhelming majority of the primary caucuses and elections, ultimately becoming, as initially foretold, the GOP frontrunner.