<div class="text-justify">

Well, that is that - both Finland and Sweden have announced their intention to apply for [NATO](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO) membership. As both are part of the EU, I don't really know what this brings to the table, other than making the EU look militarily ineffectual and ununified, because;

>"If a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States shall have towards it an obligation of aid and assistance by all the means in their power"


![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23zGoR7oPSnWCe3RGm6kzfiabtKqLs5RqQkuRewxTWue2KzZf72XcjW85Yzm9aPu9MMR2.png)


And this includes the mobilization of local NATO assets from EU members, even if NATO doesn't want to get involved, which effectively provides a double-layer defense framework for an EU member, even if not part of NATO. 

![image.png](https://files.peakd.com/file/peakd-hive/tarazkp/23uRFaJSdJSxSeLJ2LWM9BhrnWfYv33ygLbk7sN4WoQnDvM8724WCouWPLejcKivShGT7.png)

It has been interesting however, because the Finnish population has pretty much been against joining NATO for many years, with as late as late last year, only 30% of the country in favor. But, with Russia's move into Ukraine, that has jumped dramatically upward to 75% approval for joining in the last couple months. It goes to show how quickly fear can swing opinion and, how quickly decisions can be made, especially for example, since Sweden has remained unaligned for 200 years until this.

Of course, the hope for most people is that war never happens, but unfortunately, "hope" doesn't stop power struggles at the top of the controlling food chains. For all of those in hope, it is accepted that when it comes to what actually happens in regard to war, we have very little say in matters. Money talks.

However, what is going to be interesting in the future is what happens when that "money" is decentralized and to make these kinds of decisions and commit to war, the support of individuals is required in order to fund it. If you had to pay for supporting directly from your bank account, would you?

Fear drives so much of our decision making at the highest levels and often, once the decisions are made, rolling them back is near impossible. Look back at the extension of powers post-9/11 and realize that they have only extended further since. It is like the age old car salesman approach of "keep getting yesses" no matter whether the car is suitable for purpose or not. Every time they want a decision supported, they will use fear as the motivator to swing public opinion, because we are made to feel that *we can't protect ourselves.* 

And in many ways we can't, but what we need to consider is that which we need protection from in the first place. For the most part, we don't need it from each other, we need it from governments that are very much like our own, using the same techniques as our own to make their populations fearful of us. 

At the end of the day, the vast majority of people in this world are very similar in most respects, even if the governments that control them vary. Most people want a safe life with some opportunity to be successful, food on the table, education for their children and enough extra to have something special from time to time as a treat. We really aren't so very different at the core, but let the governments and the media define us and those they position as our enemies, and we are made to look like we could never get along. 

>Is this the case?

There are always conflicts amongst humans, but it is very unlikely that all of these conflicts would go (literally) nuclear if we would argue amongst ourselves at a low level. Firstly, who the hell is going to fund nuclear weapon development in a decentralized economy? The only way something like that can be funded is through centralized tax and, it is done in secret and out of the visibility of the population that funds it - because you know, national security. Funny eh?

Look at all of these different groups and consider that they make the decision to help or not to help on whether the subject in question joined or not - not on whether it is the right thing to do. And what it means is that none of this is about any kind of ethical position, it is about business, purely about money. Your money and my money, and how they are going to spend it. 

There are a lot of nuances and complications in all of this, but don't for a minute be fooled that it is about the protection of a population, because unless they sign, there will be no help forthcoming. This makes it a protection racket - pay your dues, or something might happen to your shop. It is thuggery dressed in suits. 

>Greed and fear know no bounds. 

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]


</div>