By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The summit in Alaska between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin concluded without any significant agreements, leaving Ukrainians relieved after fearing potential concessions. However, the warm reception given to Putin, including a red carpet and friendly gestures, sparked outrage in Ukraine. Critics felt this level of ceremony for an aggressor responsible for the war was inappropriate and legitimizing. The summit’s optics, particularly Putin’s jovial demeanor and Trump’s deference, contrasted sharply with the grim reality of the ongoing conflict and the suffering it has caused.
Read the original article here
The world is behaving irrationally, a sentiment that seems to resonate deeply with the current geopolitical climate. It’s hard to ignore the stark contrast in how figures like Putin and Zelenskyy are received, and the reactions to these events paint a disturbing picture of the current state of global affairs.
The welcome afforded to a war criminal, as some might perceive Putin, stands in stark contrast to the treatment of Zelenskyy, the leader of a nation bravely defending itself against aggression. The comments highlight the outrage and disgust felt by many when observing this dynamic. The implication is clear: something is fundamentally broken when those perpetrating violence and undermining international law are seemingly rewarded, while those defending their homeland are treated with a lack of respect.
This perceived irrationality seems to have a focal point: the United States. Criticism is directed towards the current administration, with accusations of mental instability and the spread of disinformation. The focus is specifically drawn towards the political figure. It’s not just about one individual, but the broader context of a system that allows such figures to gain power, with MAGA as a prime example.
The article then suggests that the source of the issue stems from outside of the US, and rather the US is just one of many. The rise of far-right ideologies globally, from Latin America to Japan, points to a systemic collapse, a failing of the neoliberal paradigm. It’s a complicated situation where America’s current political standing is the symptom, and not the cause.
The idea of the world being irrational may also be influenced by financial gain and political incentives. It seems that the narrative surrounding the US, whether accurate or not, is affected by the funding that Russian entities and billionaires provide. This can often result in misinformation, or even more disturbingly, the manipulation of world leaders.
The article also points to how international bodies are involved, and highlights the existing tensions surrounding the ICC’s attempts to hold Putin accountable. It underscores the feeling that despite international condemnation, the system is not truly equipped to deal with the scale of the issues. This is a call for greater action.
The core problem is a lack of global unity, and a sense of powerlessness. While there is a shared understanding of the irrational behavior, the responses vary. Some are angry, others are frustrated, and many feel a sense of learned helplessness. The desire for tangible change is palpable, but the path forward is unclear.
Many people are asking themselves what they can do about it, but their frustration is directed at the existing political and social landscape. The article argues that the solution isn’t simply about replacing one set of leaders with another, but rather about addressing the root causes of the problem.
The collapse of the neoliberal paradigm and the rise of far-right politics are seen as a global trend, and countries that have better regulations against what is going on are more protected. The article seems to suggest that most people on earth want nothing to do with the current war. This suggests that there is a significant disconnect between the actions of world leaders and the desires of the global population.
The discussion moves on to the idea of neutrality versus support for Ukraine, and it’s pointed out that neutrality is a widespread position throughout the world. The West’s changing stance is a key element, with the US’s political landscape being cited as a significant factor, and even in times of global turmoil, there are people on both sides who feel as though the current administration is not doing enough.
The article acknowledges the complexities of the situation, the frustration with the existing political system and the desire for action, but it also cautions against simplistic explanations. The article reminds us that there may be greater issues at play that are beyond the reach of any single government.