GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

SUBSCRIBE or PURCHASE

Utilities for hard times

This short article is intended for long-term investors who allow themselves to be distracted by Trump’s speeches and wars and are tempted by the mainstream trend of investing in AI, IT and weapons.

The so-called ‘utilities’ sector is a defensive sector of the economy that provides everyday goods and services. People can tighten their belts when it comes to spending on electronics, holidays or cars, but they cannot do without electricity, water or gas. This makes demand for these companies’ services relatively stable regardless of the economic cycle. During a recession, they usually fall less than the broader market, although in times of euphoria they tend to grow more slowly than technology or industrial companies. For a long-term investor, this is not a disadvantage but an advantage. Such a sector can, in fact, act as a portfolio stabiliser.

The second key element is the regulatory model. A significant proportion of revenue for companies in the utilities sector comes from tariffs approved by regulatory authorities. Whilst this limits the potential for very dynamic growth, it offers predictability in return. Many of these companies operate as local monopolies and therefore do not have to compete for customers in the same way as companies operating in highly competitive markets.

On the other hand, there are regulatory risks, as decisions made by public officials can affect a company’s profitability.

The third argument in favour of such companies is dividends. Utility companies are among the sectors that traditionally offer shareholders an attractive share of their profits. A stable cash flow enables such companies to distribute profits regularly, and for an investor focused on passive income, this is of the utmost importance.

However, one must not overlook the weaknesses of this sector. The construction and maintenance of energy, gas or water supply infrastructure require enormous capital expenditure. As a result, utility companies generally have high levels of debt. High debt levels are not unusual in the modern world, but they make the sector sensitive to changes in interest rates. As interest rates rise, so do the costs of servicing debt. Consequently, investors tend to view shares in companies in this sector somewhat like bonds. When bond yields rise, some capital flows away from these companies, which can put pressure on their share prices. However, this should not be interpreted as a deterioration in the quality of their business, but merely a shift in investor preferences.

Why might utilities be set for an extra boost to growth right now? In recent years, the utilities sector has gained a new and very strong case for investment: the development of artificial intelligence. AI does not operate in a vacuum. Behind every model, every data centre and every AI-based service lies a vast computing infrastructure that requires huge amounts of electricity. This means that the next industrial revolution driven by AI could increase energy demand in the coming years and, above all, have a positive impact on electricity supply companies. That is why the sector, which has been viewed as dull and uninteresting over the last few years, could now be one of the biggest beneficiaries of a changing world. In 2026, many market segments are performing poorly, particularly following the very strong growth of previous years. Some of the more defensive sectors are currently performing relatively well despite the war narrative, which shows that capital is once again seeking stability and predictable cash flow.

Looking for specific investment tips? Here you go. Here are a few companies that pay dividends regularly and increase them (US market): NextEra Energy, Atmos Energy, Essential Utilities, Eversource Energy, and Consolidated Edison.

Thucydides’ Trap

In recent decades, the US strategy towards China has been based on economic opening towards the Middle Kingdom, which was particularly evident in the outsourcing of American manufacturing there. This was made possible by the reforms of Deng Xiaoping, who facilitated and advocated this opening. The subsequent leaders of the People’s Republic of China (Jiang Zemin, Hu Jintao) zealously fulfilled Deng’s legacy, although the current leader, Xi Jinping, has violated one of his predecessor’s most important teachings: the famous 24 character-mantra. Deng’s testament read as follows: Observe coolly and calmly, secure your positions. Gain trust, conceal your capabilities, bide your time without stepping out of line, do not raise your head if you wish to retain your leadership.

Xi broke ranks: he flooded the West with cheap goods of ever-improving quality, sold US Treasury bonds, hoarded gold, built artificial islands for his bases in foreign waters in the South China Sea, expanded his fleet, developed hypersonic missiles, landed on the moon, helped the Serbs, Iranians, Russians, won over half of Africa, and built the world’s longest bridges, dams and cities. A colossal emperor!

Meanwhile, the US empire survived only thanks to innovation and increased productivity. That is not enough. The Americans know this and, in response to China’s abandonment of Deng’s policies, have sent Emperor Trump to the front line. The guns are now thundering against Beijing’s allies; tariffs and sanctions are being imposed. But… if this continues, it could well end in a kinetic, direct conflict between the US and China.

Many political scientists see parallels here with the so-called Thucydides Trap. The ancient Greek historian Thucydides wrote a famous work, The History of the Peloponnesian War, which describes the conflict between the two greatest city-states. The aforementioned “trap” suggests that ancient Sparta, seeing its position in Hellas under threat, sought an escalation with Athens, which claimed the role of hegemon. At that time, the Greek world was bipolar, which threatened to escalate. This occurred in 431 BC. According to Thucydides, this war was inevitable precisely because one of the city-states wanted to retain the status of hegemon and the other wanted to attain that status. However, the war ended with both the Spartans and the Athenians losing their influence.

The historian Graham T. Allison has expanded on the concept of Thucydides’ Trap and, in his study, described 16 examples of it, 12 of which ended in war, e.g.:

[1] Late 17th to mid-18th century – Kingdom of France vs. Kingdom of Great Britain – war

[2] Mid-19th century – France vs. German Empire – war

[3] Mid-20th century – United States vs. Empire of Japan – war

Allison’s concept has been criticised by many political scientists, such as Hal Brands and Michael Beckley. They argued that in many of the cases identified by Allison as the Thucydides Trap, it was not the impending overtaking of an old hegemonic power that triggered the war, but rather the rising power struck first when its rapid rise turned into stagnation.

At present, however, we are seeing that the Chinese economy may be stagnating in the face of the new oil crisis and tariffs.

Eternal Aesop

What is has always been, what is will always be. That’s what humanity noticed at the dawn of history. These observations have been collected and handed down from generation to generation, first, by word of mouth, then they were enshrined in holy scriptures of different peoples, of various faiths or simply in epic literature.

In ancient Greece it was Aesop, a storyteller or – most probably – a story collector, who encapsulated human knowledge in brief fables. Those fables refer not only to human character but also to the life of societies. They are a treasure trove of timeless wisdom.

Take the story about the lion and the farmer’s daughter. The lion fell in love with a farmer girl and wanted to marry her. His requests were turned down by the girl’s father again and again because the father was scared for his daughter if she were to be the lion’s wife. Simultaneously, he feared the lion. The farmer needed to turn down the lion’s requests in a diplomatic way. As the farmer was running out of excuses explaining why he withdrew his permission, he resorted to a trick. He demanded that the lion tear off all his claws because they were an obvious threat to his daughter’s safety if she were to become the lion’s wife. The king of animals complied. When he turned up to eventually receive permission from the girl’s father to marry her, the farmer – now fully confident that there was nothing he could fear once the lion had been defanged – said a final and resounding no. The lion could do nothing about it: he himself had deprived himself of his armament.

Now look for mirror reflections of this story in the history of the world, especially in current politics. The USSR desperately wanted to ingratiate itself with the West. The Soviet Union’s requests were met with demands, which Moscow was all too willing to comply with. Once the Soviet Union had disarmed itself – not merely militarily, but politically and economically – it became easy prey for the world’s powers that be.

China has understood the lesson and refused to follow the Soviet Union’s example. Beijing blazed its own trail out of communism to state capitalism, and it proved successful. Similarly, Iran was attentive at class and consequently has done its homework. The American and Israeli demands that Tehran disarm the country were declined, which eventually led to the war that we are witnessing at present.

Or the fable about the swallow, the flax, and the other birds. The swallow saw people sowing flax. The swallow was knowledgeable about what flax was used for. The swallow gathered the other birds and told them that people had sown flax in order to make cords for traps and nets with which to catch birds. The swallow strongly advised the birds to fly to the newly sown fields and peck out all the seed before it sprouts, before flax grows, before people make the nets and traps. Birds being birds, some did not believe the swallow, others were too lazy to be bothered, still others thought there was plenty of time so why be in a hurry. The birds did nothing. The people grew flax, processed it and made nets and traps, and began to catch birds.

Israel, among others, is like that swallow. Tel Aviv has for decades perceived Iran at first as a field sown with flax seed, then as a field with growing flax, an eventually as a manufacturer of nets and traps with which to entrap Israel: hence Tel Aviv’s insistence on attacking Iran in due time, hence the pressure exerted by Tel Aviv on the United States to strike Iran.

Also Russia viewed Ukraine as a field of flax where the Western countries had sown the seed, with a view to bracing themselves for entrapping Russia with the nets and traps produced from the flax which was to be harvested in the field. The Russian swallow positioned sufficiently high up in the Russian hierarchy to have an influence managed to convince the Russian ruling class (all the other birds) to see in Ukraine such a flax field with all the attendant threats. This time the other birds saw the impending danger and acted accordingly. They flew to the field (Ukraine) to peck out the flax seed and prevent future threat from materializing.

Two fables that reflect typical and hence forseeable political attitudes and the resultant actions. We have only adduced recent examples, but you can multiply them ad infinitum if you delve in the past of the nations and countries.

The Dragon’s New Plan

We are talking about Beijing’s new five-year plan. The term ‘AI’ appears 50 times in the document. Artificial intelligence is to be implemented across all sectors of the economy: the aim is to achieve 90% saturation in areas such as industry, social security, public administration and the military. Although China has a population of over 1 billion, it faces demographic challenges. These are to be addressed through the use of humanoid robots to support industry. Robot production is expected to double within five years and be deployed in companies affected by labour shortages.

Other key technologies are also mentioned:

– Quantum networks for Earth-space communication (ultra-secure information transmission system);

– Nuclear fusion;

– Communication between the brain and the computer;

– 6G.

In order to develop the above-mentioned sectors effectively, Beijing intends to increase R&D spending by an average of 7% per year. China anticipates GDP growth of around 5% per year, and the document also outlines plans to develop self-sufficiency, not only in technology but also, for example, by increasing grain production capacity.

When you read such a plan, you can see just how much China’s political philosophy differs from that of the West. Donald Trump says “Let’s make America great again” without setting out a long-term strategy. And European politicians and strategists are unable to present a unified plan that could make Europe great again. When one compares the West’s current political turmoil and war games with China’s methodical, long-term approach, it becomes clear who is best suited for the struggle for global hegemony.

Sources: Merics, GTAI

Cat turned mouse

Three weeks into the war and it has emerged that the predatory cat – the United States (and Israel) – has turned into the mouse, while the mouse – Iran – has become the cat. What a turn of events! The United States has stepped into a quagmire and now has difficulties extricating itself from it. Is this the beginning of the end of the global superpower?

It was in 1979 that the Soviet Union deployed its troops to Afghanistan. The Western world condemned the action. The Soviets stayed in Afghanistan for a decade and then withdrew. They withdrew on the eve of the collapse of the first state of the workers and the peasants.

The same seems to be happening to the United States. Its troops have not put their boots on the ground as yet, but its air force and its missiles are operating against Iran, while Iran is striking back, and striking back successfully. Targets are hit not only in Israel but also in all the Persian Gulf countries that have American military bases. The leaders of those countries must have nurtured hopes of security once they had invited American soldiers on their soil, now they must regret it. It is also a signal to other countries having American bases: a warning to Poland, Romania, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Italy. Safe are they not.

In an attempt to save face, the American president has recently talked about negotiations with the Iranian leadership. The problem is that Iran denies ever taking part in any negotiations. President Donald Trump has issued a forty-eight-hour ultimatum, threatening that if the Strait of Hormuz was not made accessible to vessels from around the world, American troops would destroy Iranian power plants. The forty-eight hours did not elapse and the American president extended the period by a further five days. He is losing face. Worse, the American president is divorced from reality. And still worse, the American president has unleashed a war on purely ideological or religious grounds of ‘destroying the enemies of Israel, God’s chosen people.’ Wasn’t it the same in the case of the Soviet Union, whose military intervention in Afghanistan was dictated by the ideological urge to come to the aid of Afghan communists? Afghanistan did not threaten the Soviet Union at that time, nor is Iran a threat to the United States nowadays.

Tehran has become self-confident and daring. It is not waiting for the Americans and the Israelis to propose a ceasefire. Rather, Tehran has laid down conditions, and these are conditions of a victor:

[1] the US must withdraw from the region its military units,

[2] the US must unilaterally put an end to the hostilities,

[3] the US must pay Iran compensation for all the material damage and loss of human life.

One might say, it is Tehran that has issued an ultimatum rather than the United States.

It is not merely that Iran seems to be gaining the upper hand: almost the whole world is on Iran’s side. Why? Because the whole world saw that the United States and Israel attacked Iran unprovoked, during the negotiations; because the whole world perceives the hostilities as a war of aggression on the part of the United States and Israel; because the whole world has had enough of American bullying, of American policing.

Iranians have surprised the world with the missiles that they have at their disposal. Some of them develop speeds of more than 10 Mach. Some of them have a reach of 4000 km (Iranians attempted to hit the American base on Diego Garcia Island on the Indian Ocean). Iran has decentralized its command centre; Iran has learnt to strike back asymmetrically. Iran is militarily supported by Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and the Houthis in Yemen. Iran is also backed up by Russia and China, both of which supply it with satellite data.

What if? What if the United States will be compelled to admit its defeat? Will it be another Vietnam or worse for America? The image of a superpower will have vanished in thin air. The Gulf states might as well demand that Washington withdraw its troops from their territory. Why should they have them on their soil? To further expose themselves to attacks? Iran – in league with China – might begin the sale of its oil and gas in return for the Chinese currency. That might lead to the end of the petrodollar. And if the dollar stops being in demand worldwide, the United States will spiral into a position of a country that will have difficulties solving its financial problems. Without the dollar as the international currency all American economic might will shrink. Till now, for decades nations would have bought dollars – i.e. sold goods and services – to stock them and to have currency for purchasing oil. Once this scheme comes to an end, America will cease to be flooded by foreign goods and services: America will be compelled to manufacture things on its own. Due to the outsourcing, there are not so many factories, engineers and skilled workers in the world’s most admired democracy. Rebuilding will take time…

The war against Iran was to be a walkover. The United States has already handled, in one way or another, Libya, Syria, Iraq, and Venezuela. Americans thought that Iran was to be yet another intervention of the same small calibre. How wrong they were!

When you drink alcohol, you feel good after the first couple of drams. Then slowly but surely the substance begins to impede your speech and motor activity. Eventually one of the drams becomes one too many. They say proverbially: one over the eighth. Was the attack on Iran – after Venezuela, Libya, Syria – one over the eighth?

Sulphuric acid and helium – or why the war in Iran is bad for Kazakhstan and Taiwan

The Hormuz blockade has turned sulphur into a black swan event in the mining industry. This is because a large proportion of the global sulphur trade passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Sulphur is the raw material from which sulphuric acid is produced, which is indispensable in mining, amongst other things. Consequently, a disruption to the availability of sulphuric acid on the world market could mean that the conflict in the Middle East affects a number of less obvious sectors, such as the uranium sector.

Sulphuric acid is mainly produced during the processing of oil and gas. Consequently, the situation in the Middle East affects the sulphuric acid market in two ways: firstly, less sulphur is entering the global market, leading to a reduced supply of sulphuric acid; secondly, the infrastructure for hydrocarbon processing – and thus the infrastructure in which sulphur is produced – is being destroyed. This means that even if the Strait of Hormuz is reopened, the supply of sulphur will remain limited for some time.

One of the world’s largest uranium producers – the Kazakh company Kazatomprom – will be particularly affected by this problem. The recent floods in the country meant that sulphuric acid supplies for uranium mining operations did not arrive on time, which restricted production and ultimately led to a decline in the expected supply of uranium on the market. It is all the more significant that Kazatomprom extracts uranium using the ISR (In-situ Recovery) method. This is a technology in which a chemical solution is injected into the uranium minerals to dissolve them, and sulphuric acid forms the basis of this solution. Furthermore, it turns out that more than 90% of the sulphur imported into Africa comes from the Middle East… and therefore flows through the Strait of Hormuz. New uranium exploration projects are currently underway on the African continent (for example, in Namibia), where sulphuric acid is urgently needed for operations. Traders are already struggling to secure any supplies. Consequently, sulphuric acid prices in Africa are rising significantly… and if the shortages last longer than three weeks (and there are many signs that, in our view, they will last much longer), then mining projects will have to be temporarily shut down because they are running out of acid.

The problem with sulphuric acid is therefore becoming a more global issue and will affect more companies, which, paradoxically, would significantly improve the long-term outlook for the price of uranium.

As for helium: Qatar is the world’s second-largest producer of helium and is set to account for around 33% of global production in 2025 – 63 million m³.

When the Ras Laffan plant, the world’s largest LNG export facility, was shut down due to the war with Iran, helium supplies were halted, as helium is produced as a by-product of natural gas processing. As a result, the market is currently losing around 5.2 million m³ of helium per month, with virtually no global reserves of this raw material – helium evaporates during storage and should reach consumers in around 45 days. The disruption has already doubled helium prices since the start of the war with Iran. The ships transporting this gas have stopped sailing through the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea. This is a serious problem, as a large proportion of the world’s helium supply is transported via this very route. Consequently, companies such as Samsung and SK Hynix, which account for 60% of global SSD production, have reported problems. Helium is, in fact, absolutely essential for the manufacture of semiconductors. It is used to cool and stabilise lithographic equipment, and there is no substitute for it. If the supply of helium is cut off for an extended period, chip factories will begin to scale back production within a matter of days. This will immediately trigger a domino effect: memory production for Nvidia will fall, Apple will be unable to assemble iPhones, Tesla will cut back on car production, and AI data centres will not receive enough GPUs. The entire semiconductor industry – worth more than $600 billion – could start to grind to a halt. Unlike the 2021 chip crisis, which was caused by the pandemic and factory downtime, the current problem is geopolitical in nature. The raw material is not reaching the factories because sea routes are blocked or too risky. And helium is just one of many critical gases whose absence could cripple global technology production.

Iran did not need to target a semiconductor factory with missiles. It was enough to jeopardise road safety to undermine the foundations of the modern digital economy and the energy supply.

Extraterrestrials – Donald Trump’s only hope

Yes, history has witnessed cases that are strikingly similar to the ongoing US-Iranian war. Of the many examples the most telling and revealing is the relatively recent military conflict between Italy and Greece that took place from 28 October 1940 to 23 April 1941 and has come down in history as either the Greco-Italian War or Italo-Greek War. Benito Mussolini, Italy’s ruler, wished to vie for the leadership in the axis (whose core was made up of Italy, Germany, and Japan) with Adolf Hitler. Benito Mussolini – a highly narcissistic individual – wished to assert himself, wished to show off that he, too, can pull off a blitzkrieg victory. By the end of October 1940, the German armies had walked over Poland, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and France. Benito Mussolini could only brag about conquering the economically backward Ethiopia. To be precise, he could not brag about conquering this country because Ethiopians resisted him bitterly, the Italian troops advanced but slowly, and Italy’s ruler needed to eventually resort the chemical weapons. So, to bolster his ego, Benito Mussolini decided to invade Greece. The task seemed all the easier, because Mussolini had a bridgehead across the Adriatic in Albania, a bridgehead neighbouring Greece, which he had conquered within five days in April of 1939. Hang on, you might say! So, Mussolini had his own blitzkrieg!

Not exactly. Albania was small and weak and backward. Its conquest was easy. Albania to Italy was not even like Denmark or Norway to Germany. Greece, however, appeared to be the right morsel. Neither too large, nor too small: just the right size for an impressive conquest. Greece’s area amounted to 110 thousand sq km as compared to Italy’s 300 thousand sq km, whereas Greece’s population stood at 7 million as opposed to 44 million of Italy’s.

The pretext for war? It was not hard to create one. Well, Italy, as Germany’s ally, had already been at war with the United Kingdom, so Rome needed only to accuse Athens of being on friendly terms with London and consequently of posing a threat to Italy’s security. Never mind that Greece was much smaller than Italy; never mind that Greece and Italy were separated by the Adriatic Sea; never mind that Greece’s military and economic potential was no match to that of Italy’s. Greece posed a threat to Italy. Period. Therefore, Greece needed to be conquered.

So, on October 28, 1940, Italian armies launched an offensive from Albania into northern Greece. Benito Mussolini was in for a big, big surprise. It did not take much time for the Greek troops to take the initiative and push the Italian divisions back across the border and into Albania! Small Greece retaliated and retaliated successfully! Europe was stunned, the British papers printed huge titles and elaborate articles about brave Greeks and their tenacious resistance. The war, which was planned for weeks at the most, protracted for half a year, and had Germany not intervened aiding its Italian ally, the war would have protracted for a couple of months more. The Italian soldiers and officers did not want to fight, as they righteously recognized that war as a war of aggression.

Eighty-six years fast forward and we are seeing the incarnation of Benito Mussolini in the person of American President Donald Trump, who is as narcissistic as the Italian ruler, strikes similar poses and presents to the world similar facial expressions. Donald Trump had walked over Venezuela, just like Benito Mussolini had walked over Albania, and decided to move in for the kill against Iran. Just like Benito Mussolini, Donald Trump had hoped for a quick, impressive campaign, for a blitzkrieg, and just like Benito Mussolini he was in for a big, big surprise. Iran, just like Greece eighty-six years earlier, has struck back and has struck back successfully. Iran’s population of approximately 90 million is smaller than the 350 million of the American population, while Iran’s area of 1.650 sq km is a few times smaller than that of the United States, which amounts to 9.800 sq km and still, and despite that, Iran is fighting back.

Now, Mussolini had the big brother in the person of Adolf Hitler and a big ally in the form of the Third Reich. Germany eventually came to Italy’s assistance. True, it was predominantly Germany that could enjoy the spoils of war: Italians were only granted small parts of Greece as their occupation zone, but at least Italy was rescued. Who is going to salvage America from the trouble it has got itself into? There is no big brother, there is no ally powerful enough to do it. The United States’ allies are smaller and weaker, and even they have refused to provide military aid. Russia and China might influence Tehran to stop the hostilities, but why should they do it? Both Moscow and Beijing remember that Washington has been hostile to them for years. Moscow remembers America’s involvement in the Ukrainian war, while Beijing is aware of the fact that Washington views China as America’s archenemy. Both Moscow and Beijing would certainly rather derive benefits from the current political circumstances. Besides, Iran is an economic partner of both Russia and China. Iran has been providing Russia with drones in the latter’s conflict with Ukraine. Now Russia feels obliged to show gratitude to Tehran and to give Washington the taste of its own medicine: now it is Russia that provides Iran with satellite intelligence and munitions of war, just as the United States has been doing it for years in reference to Ukraine.

That Greece in 1940 posed a threat to Italy was at least more convincing than that Iran poses a threat to the United States, as President Donald Trump has said. The straight-line distance between Italy and Greece is some 80 km, across the Adriatic, whereas the straight-line distance between the United States and Iran is… 10.000 km, across continents and oceans. The distance separating America from Iran is 125 times larger than that separating Italy from Greece. In 1940, theoretically Greek aircraft could reach Italian soil and bomb it; neither Iranian aircraft nor Iranian missiles can reach the United States’ territory.

There is one significant difference between narcissistic Donald Trump and narcissistic Benito Mussolini, and a similar significant difference between the ruling class of the United States and that of Italy eighty-six years ago. Mussolini and his clique at least acted on their own: there was no third country, political entity or foreign lobby to pressurize them into attacking Greece. It is much different in the case of the United States: American presidents and the American ruling class do the biddings of the Israeli lobby, which through such organizations as AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) or through the so-called Christian Zionists (American Christians mentally hijacked to follow Israel’s political agenda) are capable of drawing the United States into wars waged in the interests of Tel Aviv rather than Washington.

Let us face the same question again: Mussolini, once he had got himself in deep trouble, was saved by his big German brother. President Donald Trump has no big brother because the United States is the biggest brother on Planet Earth. The smaller brothers are either unwilling to extend a helping hand (Western Europe) or are America’s – how shall we put it? – opponents (Russia, China), or prefer to sit on the sidelines (India). Who for goodness’ sake will bail out poor Donald Trump? Extraterrestrials?

MAGA or maga?

Symbols are designed to concisely put across grand, political, religious or social meaning and to rally people around the cause that the symbols represent. Yet, symbols – which is the nature of symbols – sooner or later diverge from reality, and so when what they were supposed to imply changes, so does the meaning of the symbol. Think about the hammer and sickle, the worldwide recognizable symbol of communism. Few people know that initially the symbol pointed to the revolutionary union between the German industrial working class (hammer) and the Russian agricultural peasantry (sickle). The Bolsheviks had hoped at that time that the Russian revolution would be supported by its German counterpart, and together the two nations – Germans and Russians – would spark a worldwide revolution. As we know, the German revolution was nipped in the bud, and so Russia remained alone on the political stage as a socialist country. What was to be done? The hammer-and-sickle symbol needed to be reinterpreted and so it was: the hammer began to imply the Russian working class, while the sickle – the Russian peasantry.

The promises of communism were slow to materialize. Party bosses would have regularly announced that communism was close by, but somehow this communist bright future obstinately refused to arrive. Soviet people began joking about it. One of the jokes ran like this. A factory party committee holds a rally with a group of factory workers. The first secretary of the local party organization says solemnly, We will achieve communism in five years. Hearing that, somebody from the audience asks him, Will we achieve it as well?

The hammer-and-sickle symbol was immortalized by sculptor Vera Mukhina in a 1937 statue known as the Soviet Worker and the Collective Farm Woman, which later became the readily recognizable logo of the Mosfilm film studio. From the world revolution to the revolution in one state alone, to the symbol of a film studio…

That’s, however, not the end of the story of the hammer-and-sickle symbol. Since the ideals of communism – as said above – refused to materialize, since economic and social reality loomed worse and worse, the Soviet people composed a quatrain, which ran something like this:

Grab the sickle, grab the hammer, / Слева – молот, справа – серп,

grab the Soviet emblem’s glamour: / Это наш советский герб:

whether you will mow or hit, / Хочешь жни, а хочешь куй,

the reward for work is shit. / все равно получишь хуй.

Such was the epic failure of the communist dream as felt by and expressed by the common people.

Though President Donald Trump did not come up with a visual symbol – a counterpart of the hammer-and-sickle sign or something akin to the Soviet Worker and the Collective Farm Woman statue – he came up with the MAGA political slogan, which translates into Make America Great Again. No, it is not a promise of communism, but it is, nonetheless, a promise, a promise of something great, grand, fascinating, attractive. This MAGA slogan included in itself a call to stop the forever wars. America was to rebuild itself and rebuild its international standing, while wars were to be a thing of the past.

President Donald Trump has barely finished his first year of the second term and he has already managed to abduct Venezuela’s president and attack Iran – twice. But the military operation designated Epic Fury has apparently misfired. It has misfired so badly that commentators have coined a new designation for it: Epic Failure. Iran is fighting back, Iran is biting back, while Americans willy-nilly are seeking the ways to back out of the conflict. MAGA has reinterpreted itself as maga, a Latin word for witch. The American president seems to act as a magus – a magician – who promises the moon while MAGA or maga appears to be (or, rather, to have been) the Pied Piper/Rat Catcher of Hamelin, whose task it was to seduce as many Trump’s followers as possible. While the maga and magus succeeded to a larger extent at first, they are now on the losing end. The end of the war against Iran is nowhere in sight, American top leaders – the president himself, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defence/War Pete Hegseth – are losing sleep over it, while Donald Trump’s political basis is shrinking with his voters being increasingly disappointed about him.

President Donald Trump’s narcissism is too strong to give in to criticism or sheer common sense. He thinks himself king of the kings, a ruler of the globe if not of the Solar System. He strikes poses like Benito Mussolini, and is in constant demand for narcissistic supply. Here, too, one can have associations with the Soviet Union, or with Joseph Stalin, to be precise. Donald Trump – just as Joseph Stalin – has never enough of praise and admiration. Donald Trump – just as Joseph Stalin – is ready to blatantly warp reality if that serves his purpose of elevating himself in the eyes of the people. Just as Joseph Stalin could not stop from falsifying history, so can’t Donald Trump. The closing scene in the 1950 feature movie The Fall of Berlin (Падение Берлина) shows – contrary to historical fact – Stalin’s visit to Berlin by plane and his elevation by the thousands of people of various nationalities as the saviour of the planet. President Donald Trump has precisely the same cast of mind: he desperately needs praise and he desperately needs to be looked up to not only by his followers but by the whole world. Hence his contrary-to-fact statements about winning wars and bringing peace to different corners of the world, hence his pontificating about policymaking, international justice and what not. He is a magus or wizard (or astrologer) who keeps deceiving people (along the Orwellian lines that war is peace, while peace is war) because he desperately needs narcissistic supply. Donald Trump – Benito Mussolini – Joseph Stalin… You know the man by the company he keeps, don’t you?

GEFIRA BULLETIN

GET ACCESS TO CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

€225/250$ FOR 10 ISSUES

GEFIRA provides in-depth and comprehensive analysis of and valuable insight into current events that investors, financial planners and politicians need to know to anticipate the world of tomorrow; it is intended for professional and non-professional readers.