๐จ JUST IN: Commerce Sec. Howard Lutnick reveals he listened to the ENTIRE Supreme Court case and believes SCOTUS will uphold President Trump's tariffs
"We're gonna win the case...I listened to the whole case. I think we win 5-4 or 6-3. The president is absolutely right. He's… pic.twitter.com/d761yeTZYf
Being a founder is lonely. Being a solo-founder is viscerally lonely.
Because no one is as all-in on your mission as you. At 5pm, on weekends, on holidays, the replies stop. Your Slack messages sit there, unread. You want to keep the momentum alive, but you’re building alone,…
I’ll go out on a limb to claim @NotebookLM is the best AI product of the year! It’s unbelievably good! I no longer read PDFs or slides or other docs; I upload them to NotebookLM and convert them into audio/video overviews, infographics, mind maps, or flashcards. It’s just crazy!
The Dawn of Multipolarity: Navigating the End of the Post–World War II Order
The world is undergoing a profound structural shift. The geopolitical architecture that shaped global affairs for nearly eight decades—anchored in the United Nations system, the Bretton Woods institutions, and the World Trade Organization (WTO)—is no longer functioning as designed. What was once the backbone of a stable, rules-based order has become a relic of a fading era.
The WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism is effectively paralyzed. The UN Security Council is gridlocked. Bretton Woods institutions face increasing criticism from emerging economies. As a result, the post–World War II order has not simply eroded—it has ended. The world now stands in a transitional moment, balancing between the short-lived unipolar dominance of the United States and the rise of a new multipolar system whose coordinates are still being drawn in real time.
From Bipolarity to Unipolarity to Something Entirely New
Understanding today’s transformation requires revisiting the structure of global power since 1945.
The Bipolar Cold War Era (1945–1991)
The end of World War II ushered in a clear bipolar world: the United States versus the Soviet Union. This rivalry shaped institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and GATT (the WTO’s predecessor), all designed to promote Western-led economic stability and prevent the return of global depression or war.
The Unipolar Moment (1991–2008)
The collapse of the Soviet Union left the U.S. as the undisputed superpower. Scholars called this the “unipolar moment”—a period defined by American military dominance, financial reach, and technological leadership.
But unipolarity was more fragile than it appeared.
Cracks in the American Century
By the early 2000s, multiple forces challenged U.S. primacy:
China’s unprecedented economic surge
Russia’s political revival under Vladimir Putin
India’s rapid ascent as a technology and services powerhouse
The global backlash to the Iraq War
The 2008 financial crisis, which severely damaged faith in Western economic models
The rise of protectionism, nationalism, and supply-chain realignment
These factors eroded the foundations of the “rules-based” order. By the mid-2020s, the pillars of liberal multilateralism—free trade, consensus governance, collective security—were visibly disintegrating.
The Mirage of a G2 World
During this transition, some analysts imagined a “G2” global structure in which the U.S. and China would jointly manage world affairs. Both countries intermittently acted as though such a duopoly might emerge:
The U.S. attempted a strategic containment-and-engagement approach.
China negotiated one-on-one deals through the Belt and Road Initiative.
Yet the G2 model fundamentally misread global aspirations.
Why Bipolarity Will Not Return
A U.S.–China duopoly would sideline most of the world, forcing smaller countries into client-state dynamics reminiscent of Cold War proxy politics. In a world of rising national autonomy, digital sovereignty, and economic diversification, few nations are willing to be squeezed between two giants.
More importantly: other powers simply refuse to accept a bipolar frame. Multipolarity better reflects the ambitions, identities, and strategic cultures of emerging states.
Russia and India: The Co-Architects of Multipolarity
Two countries in particular—Russia and India—are shaping the global transition away from bipolarity.
Russia’s Role
Despite Western sanctions and conflicts, Russia maintains influence through:
Energy corridors connecting Europe, the Middle East, and Asia
Deepening ties with China in Eurasia
Expanding partnerships with Africa, the Gulf, and Latin America
A diplomatic philosophy rooted in sovereign equality and power balancing
Russia’s strategy is clear: prevent any one nation or bloc from achieving global domination.
India’s Role
India's foreign policy is guided by multi-alignment rather than non-alignment. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India:
Maintains strategic partnerships with the U.S.
Expands defense and energy cooperation with Russia
Competes and collaborates with China in equal measure
Champions Global South representation in global institutions
India’s worldview—rooted in civilizational identity, strategic autonomy, and economic ambition—seeks a global system where no single country can dictate norms.
A Symbiotic Partnership
India and Russia, despite asymmetries, share three core principles:
A rejection of hegemonic order
Support for a sovereign, pluralistic international system
Advocacy for Global South empowerment
Their cooperation—in energy, defense, connectivity, and multilateral diplomacy—helps anchor multipolarity.
Infrastructure as Geopolitics: The New Silk Roads of Multipolarity
One of the most compelling indicators of multipolarity is the global infrastructure race:
China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
Covering more than 150 countries, BRI projects redefine trade and energy flows.
India–Russia–Iran International North–South Transport Corridor (INSTC)
A multimodal route connecting Mumbai to Moscow via the Caspian Sea, capable of reducing shipping times by 40%.
EU’s Global Gateway
Europe’s strategic counterweight to BRI.
Gulf States’ Energy and Digital Corridors
Saudi Arabia and the UAE now invest heavily in green energy, AI, and global logistics.
These overlapping networks reflect a world no longer organized around a single hegemonic center but distributed across many.
BRICS: The Institutional Fulcrum of Multipolarity
If the UN, WTO, and Bretton Woods institutions represent the past, BRICS represents the future.
Once a loose acronym for fast-growing economies, BRICS today includes:
Brazil
Russia
India
China
South Africa
Egypt
Ethiopia
Iran
Saudi Arabia
UAE
Together, they represent:
40% of global population
Nearly 30% of global GDP (PPP)
Major shares of global energy production, minerals, and agriculture
What Makes BRICS a Multipolar Engine
Advocacy for de-dollarization via alternative payment systems
Push for UN Security Council reform
Shared frustration with Western-dominated financial institutions
Increasing cooperation in energy, AI, health, climate finance, and defense
A collective commitment—however imperfect—to sovereign equality
While internal tensions remain—especially regarding China’s outsized economic weight—BRICS is the only major platform actively designing alternatives to the Western-led system.
Challenges of a Multipolar World
Multipolarity is not automatically peaceful or stable.
Key risks include:
Heightened regional rivalries (South China Sea, Middle East, Caucasus)
Fragmentation of global trade into competing blocs
Competing technology standards (AI, 5G/6G, digital currencies)
Increasing use of economic sanctions and weaponized interdependence
Yet these risks are counterbalanced by new opportunities.
Opportunities: A More Balanced Global System
A truly multipolar order enables:
1. Greater Agency for Smaller States
Countries like Vietnam, Tรผrkiye, Kenya, and Mexico can now diversify partnerships, negotiate better deals, and avoid dependence on a single power.
2. Innovation Through Competition
Multipolar technological ecosystems—from AI to green energy—are already accelerating innovation.
3. Culturally Pluralistic Governance Models
The future does not belong to a single ideology but a mosaic of governance systems.
4. More Resilient Global Supply Chains
The pandemic and Ukraine conflict triggered a diversification wave that will strengthen global resilience.
Conclusion: The Unipolar Era Is Over—A New System Is Being Born
The post–World War II order, with its assumptions of Western leadership and U.S. dominance, has reached its historical endpoint. What comes next is not chaos, nor a new Cold War, nor a U.S.–China duopoly. Instead, the world is moving—sometimes haltingly, sometimes rapidly—toward a distributed, diverse, and dynamic multipolar order.
Russia and India, empowered through platforms like BRICS and new connectivity corridors, are ensuring that this order is not another form of imperial hierarchy but a more inclusive global framework.
The world is not merely shifting power—it is rewriting the rules by which power operates.
The unipolar chapter has closed. The multipolar narrative has only just begun.
Going after undocumented immigrants is a fool’s game Squads of federal agents descend on the city one night in September, cordoning off an eight-block area in which they are confident they will find illegal aliens. Some 200 men — none white — are rounded up, with hundreds more to follow in subsequent days. .......... Some are dragged from their beds. All are taken to the federal building. Interpreters are summoned, and those able to prove they entered the country legally are eventually let go. But 68 without papers are arrested, arraigned and taken to jail. ........... This all happened in New York exactly 100 years ago. The 1925 dragnet was a classic case of racial profiling before the term had even been invented. And the feds weren’t after Hispanics or Blacks. Their destination was Chinatown and their targets Chinese. .............. Americans have a sad history of demonizing latecomers, especially when they are poor, their languages are unintelligible, their customs are foreign and their skins are darker. Going after those who enter illegally can play well with voters, and it is a favorite tactic of populist candidates and elected officials. But they know — or at least they ought to know — better. Because however popular banishing these people may be, doing so mostly works to our detriment. ...............
In short, what was bad policy in 1925 remains bad policy in 2025.
.............. What happened a century ago, and what is happening today, is the expulsion of many law-abiding and hard-working people who contribute significantly to the national economy and who have never spent a day on the public dole. ........... Setting aside the abject cruelty of separating children from parents or extraditing people who have never known any home but the U.S., the fact remains that these deportations hurt America. ............ The wholesale expulsion of undocumented Chinese laborers a century ago did little to stop crime. Nor did it free up many jobs for citizens, because Chinese in that era generally did work nobody else wanted. It did not halt illegal immigration. But it did deny America these people’s productivity and the potential contributions of generations of their descendants. .............. A Pew Research Center study identified Asian Americans, of whom Chinese Americans account for 25 percent, as the highest-earning, best-educated group in the U.S. We sent those expelled back to China to set up businesses, forge new industries, make scientific discoveries, create jobs and pay taxes, which they and their descendants could have done here instead. ........... Today’s undocumented workers, mostly of Latino origin, hold about 8 million jobs in the U.S., according to Pew. They account for 5 percent of the workforce and are concentrated in such critical sectors as agriculture, construction, manufacturing and transportation. Nearly all pay taxes in one form or another, and with few exceptions they do not receive aid through Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security. Nor are they eligible for food stamps, housing subsidies or unemployment insurance. .............. arresting, detaining, processing and removing large numbers of undocumented immigrants is not inexpensive; it is estimated to cost about $70,000 per deportee. ............. Mass deportation of undocumented Latinos would create serious labor shortages. One-fourth of U.S. farm workers and 15 percent of construction workers would disappear. Production would slow and the ripple effect would put tens of thousands of American citizens out of work. Federal, state and local tax revenue would shrink, as would GDP, which would decline by as much as 6.2 percent, depending on how many are expelled. ............. However they got to America, most are making their lives, and all of our lives, better. Go ahead and deport the murderers and the rapists — that will make us all safer. But let the hard-working, law-abiding immigrants stay, for their sake and for our own.
How big tech is creating its own friendly media bubble to ‘win the narrative battle online’ If you are looking to hear from some of tech’s most powerful people, you will increasingly find them on a constellation of shows and podcasts like Sourcery that provide a safe space for an industry that is wary, if not openly hostile, towards critical media outlets. Some of the new media outlets are created by the companies themselves. Others just occupy a specific niche that has found a friendly ear among the tech billionaire class like a remora on a fast-moving shark. The heads of tech’s largest companies, including Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Sam Altman, Satya Nadella and more, have all sat for long, cozy interviews in recent months, while firms like Palantir and Andreessen Horowitz have branched out this year into creating their own media ventures. ............ “At Arena, we don’t cover ‘the news.’ We cover The New,” a letter from the editors stated in its inaugural issue. “Our mission at Arena is to cheer on the people who are, slowly but surely – and sometimes very quickly! – bringing the future into the present.” .......... The letter echoes a sentiment shared by its founder, who has criticized publications like Wired and TechCrunch for being too critical in their coverage of the industry. ............ As with many developments in tech, Elon Musk was an early adopter of this style of pro-tech media appearances. Since the billionaire bought Twitter in 2022, the company has throttled links to critical news outlets and set up autoreplies that return poop emojis when reporters reach out for comment. He has seldom given interviews to established media outlets, but appears for long sit-downs with sympathetic hosts like Lex Fridman and Joe Rogan, in which his opinions go largely unchallenged. ......... Film and album release press tours have long been tightly controlled affairs, where actors and musicians go through a gauntlet of easily vetted, low-stakes interviews on shows like Hot Ones. Politicians have embraced a similar model – as was evident during Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign tour of podcasters like Theo Von, or California’s governor, Gavin Newsom, launching his own politics podcast earlier this year – which offers them both access to new audiences and a safer space for self-promotion.
