Richard Andrew’s Post

One of my highlights of 2024 so far has been being "stuck" in the fortified basement of a #Kyiv hotel for a late-night panel discussion on autocracy versus liberal democracy, in the midst of one of #Russia's regular drone raids on the historic #Ukrainian capital, during the Yalta European Strategy (YES) summit hosted by #VictorPinchuk. It was a privilege to witness a debate involving historians Anne Applebaum and Timothy Snyder, CNN host Fareed Zakaria and political scientist Francis Fukuyama, author of the famous 'End of History' essay. This got me thinking about how the investment world was also focused on two different blocs: an 'adversarial' cohort of countries including China, Russia and Iran, which most players are shunning; and a more liberal grouping led by the US and Europe, including Japan and various southeast Asian economies. Most of the global south seems to trade and invest with both blocs. But the election of #DonaldTrump appears to have swept away some of these previous certainties. Here is my Professional Wealth Management (PWM) piece, inspired by Ukraine's brave resistance against #Putin's brutal invasion and attempts to redraw the international order, with excellent analysis from Carmignac, Didier Duret from Omega Asset Management, Belinda Aspinall at Northern Trust, Timothy Ash from RBC BlueBay Asset Management - one of few economists to predict #Russia's invasion and its global fallout https://lnkd.in/e2NunKgi

Thirty-five years ago, the world experienced an epochal change with the collapse of the Iron Curtain and communism in Europe. Francis Fukuyama famously called this moment the “end of history” ( 👉 https://lnkd.in/eajjTXmC), predicting that all societies would eventually converge toward liberal democracy and market economies. Today, it is almost a cliché to observe how wrong that prediction was. As Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz here ( 👇 ) argues, we should call the current era the “𝐞𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬.” A few arguments for this negativity: 🔴 Climate Crisis Threat: Progress made on climate change mitigation could be reversed, exacerbating global environmental challenges. 🌍🔥 🔴Inequality and Social Division: Trump's policies have historically deepened inequality and could further erode social cohesion, leaving vulnerable communities more at risk. 📉🤝 🔴Damage to International Cooperation: Returning to “America First” policies could weaken alliances, disrupt global cooperation, and harm multilateral institutions. 🌐 Of course, technological advancements will march on. 🤖📈 Of course, wealth will continue to accumulate. 💰 But let’s not mistake these developments for genuine progress or a golden age for nations. 🌍✨ It serves the wealth of a privileged few rather than the wealth of nations. 💰🌍 This so-called "progress" only benefits the oligarchs. 🏦👑 It’s their golden age—not ours. https://lnkd.in/eq9TvGbY

Why the Lessons of Party-Building in the Soviet Union Are More Relevant Than Ever. This semester, I've been immersed in three fascinating courses at Harvard that surprisingly intersect in unexpected ways. One course, “The American Presidency”, delves into the polarization gripping the U.S. political system. A pivotal moment that reshaped this system was the McGovern-Fraser reforms of 1968, which democratized the primary process but diminished party influence. Today, populist rhetoric and media savviness dominate the political landscape, with figures like Donald Trump and Ted Cruz rising on personality rather than party-driven strategy. In contrast, my “Political Economy of Transition in China” course reveals the centrality of the Communist Party to China's governance and unity. Xi Jinping recognized the importance of party discipline, steering the country away from the free-market experiments of Deng Xiaoping. The Party's resilience is grounded in its strict adherence to Marxist-Leninist principles, which, oddly enough, may hold valuable lessons for modern U.S. politics. The diminishing influence of political parties in the U.S. has contributed to growing polarization—a problem that may be partially addressed by strengthening party organization. Meanwhile, in my “Behavioral Science” course, we explore how subtle social pressures can shape individual behavior, a technique that political regimes have long exploited. It reminds me of Soviet-era tactics used to compel civic participation through social observation and pressure. What’s interesting is how behavioral science today repurposes these same ideas to influence voting behaviors through modern "nudge" techniques. Ultimately, the same principles that kept the Soviet Party strong are being re-examined across the world, whether in China’s political system or in U.S. academic debates about party strength. It’s a reminder that the past often holds the key to solving contemporary challenges. Perhaps it’s time to dust off the old volumes on Marxism-Leninism, as their insights into party organization and political unity may offer surprising solutions for today’s polarized world. What do you think?

An intriguing debate is taking place in the intellectual sphere: Is America mirroring the decline of the late Soviet Union? Niall Ferguson's thought-provoking comparison, citing declining life expectancies, rising debt, and gerontocracy, certainly sparks discussion. However, Jonah Goldberg's counterarguments, highlighting America's relative wealth and robust freedoms, offer a compelling rebuttal. This nuanced conversation transcends simple binaries, revealing a spectrum of perspectives on the complexities of societal evolution. Whether you lean towards Ferguson's cautionary tale or Goldberg's optimistic outlook, this dialogue invites us to think critically about the factors shaping nations' future. As global citizens, we must remain informed and participate in these conversations. By analyzing diverse viewpoints, we can contribute to a richer understanding of our world and its trajectories. #America #GlobalAffairs #Geopolitics #TheFreePress #IntellectualDebate https://lnkd.in/daM6hgfB

#politics #economics #unitedstates #NobelPrize It does take a while to cut through the veneer of Obama's savvy teleprompter orations and the noise of Trump to understand the underlying reality of American governance. The frustrated people spoke violently by ochlocracy, mob rule - on Capitol Hill on January 06, 2021, not in violation of Jefferson's 1776 Declaration of Independence if you care to read it carefully, exactly 80 years to the day from the speech by FDR, another Harvard man, on January 06, 1941 on Four Freedoms - which was averted when Thomas Jefferson won against John Adams, the first such deeply acrimonious election in American history until the two founding brothers kissed and made up in letters that crossed paths between Massachusetts and Virginia when they died on the same day, July 04, 1826, 50 years of American independence, deeply concerned about the future of the republic, unprecedented work of genius in human history, they had all founded together. United States of America and its promise were lost soon after that to the emerging industrial interests with the election of Andrew Jackson and his authoritarianism. The concerns first articulated by Benjamin Franklin in 1787 and George Washington in his farewell of September 19, 1796, a ritual reading for the United States Senate https://lnkd.in/efvBJZ8H are now the Damocles' sword hanging over America's and the world's future if the political culture does not change in Washington to be thoughtful, collegial, and respectful of each other voting your conscience and not your party lines. Donald John Trump's election for a second time exposed this inward looking ugliness of American politics, lacking both insight and judgment, which cannot be resolved until Washington returns to the first principles of democratic politics and values which founded the nation nearly 250 years ago. #OurCommonFuture The Nobel Prize © 2025 One World http://tamirisa.com TAMIRISA

Renowned historian Anthony Beevor shares a thought-provoking essay on the current global landscape, shedding light on the prevalent geopolitical uncertainties. While his viewpoints may not align with everyone's, Beevor's analysis encourages us to contemplate the pressing challenges, especially in Western societies. Explore his compelling insights here: https://lnkd.in/ddef6up3

Now available, Julia Sonnevend's Charm explores the utilization—and weaponization—of charm in contemporary global #politics. Politics is a site of performance, and contemporary politicians often perform the role of a regular person—perhaps someone we would like to have a beer with. They win elections not because of the elevated rhetorical performances we often associate with charisma (“ask not what your country can do for you”), but because of something more ordinary and relatable. The everyday magic spell that politicians cast using mass and social media is what sociologist Julia Sonnevend calls “charm.” In this engaging and enlightening book, Sonnevend explores charm (and the related “charm offensive”) as a keyword of contemporary global politics. Successful political leaders deploy this form of personal magnetism—which relies on proximity to political tribes and manifests across a variety of media platforms—to appear authentic and accessible in their quest for power. Sonnevend examines the mediated self-representations of a set of liberal, illiberal, and authoritarian political leaders, past and present: New Zealand’s Jacinda Ardern, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, Iran’s Mohammad Javad Zarif, North Korea’s Kim Jong-un, and Germany’s Angela Merkel. She considers how charm (or the lack of it) is wielded as a political tool, and the ways charm is weaponized to shape the international image of a country, potentially influencing decisions about military aid, trade, and even tourism. Sonnevend argues that charm will shape the future of democracy worldwide, as political values will be increasingly embodied by mediated personalities. These figures will rise and fall, often fading into irrelevance; but if we do not understand charm’s political power, we cannot grasp today’s fragile political moment. This timely book is now available! Learn more: https://hubs.ly/Q02LC3rk0

How does geopolitics affect you? A recent RIF TRUST article shines a light on the global phenomenon. Here's an extract: “Whilst your parents play an undeniable role in your existence, you can’t control your entry into the world. Yet one of the most important decisions you can take is to vote on the governmental orientation of your native country. In 2024, the Year of Elections, the geopolitical domino effect is greater than ever. Sure, this ever-more influential geopoliticization could lead to your chosen candidate winning. Or it could do the opposite. You should, though, already be exploring contingency plans to separate yourself from an election outcome your vote was powerless to prevent. The very year that delivered John Rennie Short’s Geopolitics also brought Ray Dalio’s Principles for Dealing with the Changing World Order: Why Nations Succeed and Fail. 3 years further on, Dalio advises that his tome is even more relevant than in 2021. In a TIME article, he foresees a new US Civil War, predicting that America’s “approaching the point in the internal order-disorder cycle when you will have to choose between picking a side and fighting for it, keeping your head down, or fleeing.” Dalio’s philosophizing about the world in general and you can apply his thinking to a recent stormy period in France. It’s not hard to detect what is geopolitics’ part in a soft middle having to deal with both an extreme left and a far right. This struggle against the ravages of populism is being repeated across the globe. Take the centre-left Labour Party’s UK victory in 2024, as an example. This is the consequence of increasing polarization in the country, more than anything else.” #geopolitics #investmentmigration #newcivilwar

"God helps those who help themselves". Mearsheimer said on the Oct. 11th debate. In his mind, we should become more powerful to prevent other's invasion. Yes, this is the first newsletter I wrote through ChinAffair+. I listen to and transcript the Yan Xuetong and Mearsheimer’s third debate in Tsinghua. Both of them predict that China-US competition will intensify in the short term, especially in cutting-edge technology. Yan mentioned that bipolar configuration in Global Order. As for US election, Yan predicted that if Harris wins China and US will have more political conflicts, she is more reluctant than Trump to accept the fact China is going to catch up. Here is the link you can find my article and please follow @ClarenceGu at substack :) #internationalrelation #USCHINA #realism #Globalorder

Jérôme Maucourant et Bruno Tinel "Nations and Capitalism: a socio-historical perspective1 It has become essential to explore the critical thinking behind globalisation, according to which the current economic processes are so unprecedented that the diverse forms of the political economy would be, generally speaking, of little help in understanding the current situation. This argument is hardly convincing; neglecting political processes is surely one of the causes. We will endeavour to understand the reasons behind these representations of the economy which overlook the question of hegemony. Quite apart from any denunciatory position, the hegemony of the United States is an undeniable fact, as was British hegemony. For those looking in from the outside, America (the United-States) and Great Britain still represent the path to universality and well-being. The lack of legitimacy of Capital and the fall of the rate of return towards the end of the 1960s certainly called this cultural characteristic into question. And yet, during the 1990s neoliberal practices propelled American policies across the globe like never before. However, at the start of the twenty-first century, the misguided strategy of the ruling class in the United States and its allies opened up, once again, the field of possibilities, as seen before in the 1930s and 1960s. The 2008 crisis of American Capital followed by the stagnation in Europe confirms this hypothesis. Donald Tusk, current President of the European Council, recognised this fact2 in his comments regarding the battle of July 2015 looking to overthrow the Greek government who refused the deflationary policy imposed on the continent by the creditor nations (primarily Germany thanks to its neo- mercantilist policy) .... " https://lnkd.in/dDPjbYwR