For me, the most intriguing takeaway from the war is that geopolitical
economic leverage exists, albeit in unexpected ways. It was not widely
understood how important Ukraine would be as an agrarian exporting
nation on the global market.
While geopolitics is useful for post-mortem analysis, it is less useful
for future analysis: geopolitical analysis is insightful, but current
maps/concepts are always severely outdated. In my opinion, an applicable
solution is to draw inspiration from modern AI or neural networks, start
with all of the raw maps and empirical big data, and then derive new
theories from the big pile of data. Whenever an analysis is presented,
one can see how technological shifts would change the battlefield/outcome.
One cannot fully cure geopolitics' disease, pre-conceptional bias, but
one can distill new narratives.
In a Schmittian discourse, the term "political" has a distinct, spatial
meaning, which makes his approach self-confirming.
How should a geopolitical analysis of "Cyberspace" be told? What should
a nation state like Germany do to strengthen its national clout in the
Clouds, the Internets?
-- A
Am 07.03.23 um 18:45 schrieb Pit Schultz:
Maps and territory don't determine political outcomes and have a very
limited primary function in encoding the general future.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nett...@kein.org
# @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: