A Commentary:

non

Cyborg Life: The In-Between of Humans and Machines

Cyborgs are ongoing becomings of a doubly “in-between” temporality of humans and machines. Materially made from components of both sorts of beings, cyborgs gain increasing function through an interweaving in which each alters the other, from the level of “neural plasticity” to software updates to emotional breakthroughs of which both are a part. One sort of temporal in-between is of the progressive unfolding of a deepening becoming as “not-one-not-two” and the other is a “doubling back” of time into itself in which moments that were once disparate are conjoined or enjambed. Tracing the experience of Michael Chorost during a four year period of coming to terms with his cochlear implant, related in Rebuilt: How Becoming Part Computer Made Me More Human, the essay pinpoints shifts in awareness, perceptual belief, and being-with others that unfold within the in-between of person and machine

Methodology for Systemic Geopolitical Analysis according to the Lakatosian model

The absence of an epistemologically founded geopolitical analysis method that has been internationally observed was the motivation for writing the following contribution. The paper is divided into two parts: i) Definitions and Example analysis and ii) Determination of the Lakatosian Structure of the Systemic Geopolitical Analysis

Geopolitics and contemporary international reality: knowledge, interpretation and prediction

Knowledge of the geopolitical reality has been, is and shall be a challenge for political and spiritual leadership. The dominant actors in the globe are equipped with notable centers of research and study concerning the geopolitical reality. In this manner and taking into account the geopolitical models that derive from research they are able to plan their relative hegemonic or dominant international strategies. The current reality, though, is characterized by a tendency of revision concerning those traditional hermeneutic models of the Cold War period, a period during which known and ‘safe’ answers were provided for all social, political, economic and philosophical matters. These traditional ‘holistic’ models, which were applied on specifi c state actors and groups of state actors, were two: i) the socialist model and its dialectic opposite, ii) the liberal model. These two philosophical and ideological axes were complemented by the geopolitical model created by Nicholas J. Spykman (1893-1943), according to which there occurs a worldwide antagonism between Land Powers (Warsaw Pact, Soviet Union and satellite states) and Sea Powers (US, Great Britain, Japan, NATO and satellite states). This division led to the geopolitical, ideological, defensive, economic and therefore geostrategic alignment of the participating states into two clashing worlds, i.e. the Eastern and the Western world. This dominant division was adopted by the relevant elites of the various state actors that were part of the international structures of the International Power Poles. This phenomenon was prevalent throughout the 20th century and was manifested also in the relevant political cultures, dominant ideologies, as well as in the geostrategic approaches of the aforementioned International Power Poles and their respective satellites

The rationale of NATO founding and N.J. Spykman’s geopolitical example

The foundation of NATO on April 4th, 1949 marked in the most exquisite manner the disintegration of the alliance of the US, Great Britain and USSR which lasted during WWII. At the same time it coincided with the introduction of a new post-war system of power equilibrium, with the Cold War as its main characteristic. This total geopolitical confrontation of the two superpowers and their respective satellites extended around the globe, begun in the ruins of post-war Europe, where the long-standing geopolitical ambitions of both sides manifested themselves, reinforced through the reproduction of established myths and stereotypes, as well as national interests. This power equilibrium was based on the framework of values and principles put forth by the UN Charter in 1945 as the bedrock of the postwar international system. The guiding principles of the UN Charter prescribe the delegitimization of the use of violence in international relations as an accepted way of solving international disputes (Articles 2.3 and 2.4), respect of the domestic jurisdiction of any state (Article 2.7), and the right of self-defense, even in its version of collective self defense, as defined in Article 51 (and thereafter in the corresponding Article 5 of the NATO Charter and the corresponding provisions of the Warsaw Pact). The new post-war world order was built amidst an atmosphere of insecurity, fear, distrust and even hate, emanating from both sides. As a consequence Germany was divided between two states, while the whole of Europe was divided between two blocs. The so-called West and the USSR came to a confrontation through the blockade of Berlin by the Soviets (1948-1949). It was during that period that ΝΑΤΟ was created

The Mediterranean-Balkans-Middle East Complexandthe Western Strategy in the Greek-Turkish Conflict (elements of Power and Law)

In the current paper we give a persistent effort to emphasize on the clear present threat posed by Turkey’s Neo-Ottoman Islamic and revisionist role for the Geopolitical Complex of (Middle-East / Balkans / Caucasus).Furthermore, we try and make it abundantly clear that any abandonment of the Greece-Cyprus dipole of Hellenism, which is staunchly protecting Western interests over and across three continents and with such interests firmly grounded on the principles of the civil, pluralistic, European Democracy and Civilization, will deliver the most significant blow to these very Western Interests. A blow, which in fact is using as its “stabbing knife” Islamist Turkey, which has submitted and succumbed to the Organization of the “Muslim Brotherhood”, as well as to the fascist Turkish group of the “Grey Wolves”, two groups which they are both off-springs of International Fascism, work in perfect harmony together

Geopolitical analysis of the Russo-American energy antagonism in the sub-system of the Balkans, in the greater system of the Mediterranean

Greece has the ambiguous privilege of forming the intersection of two unstable Sub-systems of the Mediterranean Geopolitical Complex, i.e.: i. the Sub-system of the Balkans and ii. the Sub-system of Turkey and the Near East. We shall demonstrate that these two Sub-systems feature an intense joint function of instability in the present juncture and we shall also emphasize the main Geopolitical Factor that causes the aforementioned instability, i.e. energy security. Furthermore, we shall lay emphasis on the new Cold War-style antagonism between the two fundamental Poles of International Power, i.e. Moscow and Washington, an antagonism affecting in a destabilizing manner the Geopolitical Complex of the Mediterranean and in the Western Balkans regions as a main focal point. The term new Cold War-style is used so as to highlight the fact that there exists a considerable ideological distance between these two Poles (the same applies albeit in a different manner for the relations between Washington and Beijing), as was the case during the Cold War. The ideological difference in this case consists of the contrast between the neoliberal Western approach and the identitarian conservative approach of the East spearheaded by Moscow. Our analysis is based on the classic Anglo-Saxon geopolitical school and especially on N.J. Spykman’s «containment model», as the latter has been modified by Z. Brzesinsky. Our methodological approach is based on Systemic Geopolitical Analysis