The basic problem is the second one: the ruling value system is one of hard power, hard negotiation, "winner takes all" and other macho values. Sitting down and talking, assessing common interests and finding ways of making everyone gain from an agreement are sad, girly and pinko. Our society, and our politics is out of balance: more so in some places than others.
Hard power is for stopping other people using hard power, not a tool with which to achieve any lasting ends.
I'm genuinely uncertain as to which one drives the other, if at all. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
Interesting phrase. I wonder how the ET citizens would respond to the question, "Please describe THE GOOD LIFE as you see it, not that you are necessarily currently living it. Or, please describe THE HEALTHY HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY or PERSONALITY." Answers to either could prove enlightening.
The reason I post this is because the people who ascribe to "our ruling value system" are those that run things and, I suspect, in their opinion, anyone NOT buying into their definition of WINNING are simply disgruntled losers. In their mind, anyone not like them are the fucked up ones. So who's right? Now where's the fun in that! - Megatron
Hard power is for stopping other people using hard power
Not even that - hard power is an end in itself, with little or no interest in strategic outcomes.
Hence the missile waving and the random blowing up of shit for the sake of it.
Energy is non-military power, so it's entirely consistent to try to have a monopoly on both, and to be more interested in forms of energy generation which are explosive, dangerous and can be monopolised and leveraged, than caring sharing girly-man DFH sustainables.
Our leaders are teenagers. Especially the older ones.
