On “eclipse day”, I found myself compelled to write about a confounding question; how many existential crises does it take? It might sound like the start of a joke involving a light bulb, but my (hopefully) bright idea is to examine how we humans are facing a few more, shall we say, critical challenges than we are used to. For many, it seems to have become overwhelming.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, in his latest “forward guidance”, refers to the more immediate issues or crises to deal with; geopolitical risks, energy shortages, strongman leadership south (and east), as reasoning for an order of priorities. As in, first things first –we can only deal with long-term problems if we sort out the short- or medium-term ones first. That sounds like a practical approach.
However, the list of short- or medium-term problems is getting longer than any of us want to admit. To name a handful:
- The spiralling Russia-Ukraine war
- The swirling quagmire centred on Iran and the Mideast
- Millions of machines now capable of waging war on our behalf
- A world dominated by an ever more capable Chinese industrial, manufacturing, and technology complex
- Win-lose global deal-making
- Tariffs and tantrums of a president
- Obscene levels of government debt
- Multi-trillion-dollar companies led by the uber rich
- Attacks on freedom of speech and declining democratic principles
- Artificial intelligence gone wild
They are today’s priorities, all of which come before the “recent past” dual existential crises of climate change and COVID. Implied in Carney’s remarks: perhaps we just need to solve a few of these before we worry too much about how many parts per million of CO2 is in the atmosphere, and just how bad a warming and greening planet is and will be for humans.
Just writing that list (you likely have more of your own) makes me feel like I am having a multiplex cinema experience, simultaneously running; “The Matrix, 1984, Terminator, Don’t Look Up, 28 days, The Circle, and The Book of Eli. Perhaps, though, it is The Sum of All Fears (title at least) that best captures the moment.
The Russian-instigated war with Ukraine has descended into terrible loss of life and infrastructure. It has led to severe hardship for the Ukrainian people and growing issues for the Russian public. With inconsistent support from the United States, it has also at times served to strengthen NATO, while putting countries bordering Russia at higher risk.
In its fifth year, with an estimated 2 million casualties, it has become a brutal example of modern-day warfare. The grinding toll on humanity backed up by the most advanced machines man has produced to do our dirty work for us. It is a lethal combination of the power of mankind’s innovation with the worst of our impulses. How does it end – when all the options presented are thought unacceptable? How does it stay “contained” when a Russia bent on winning at all costs, refuses to negotiate a settlement, and seems to prefer escalation?
With Ukrainian interceptor-missile supply all but exhausted, there is no hiding from the devastation of ballistic and hypersonic missiles that continue to rain down. The response will be even more attacks deep within Russia. No one wins, everyone loses, and the world in general is a far less safe place
The Iran conflict and the U.S.’s attempt at reshaping the balance of power in the Middle East is yet another lesson in unintended consequences. Emboldened by a seemingly successful regime change in Venezuela, and the whisperings of Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his ear – and perhaps believing that a quick removal of the top officials would lead to dramatic change in Iran – the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump dove headlong into yet another quagmire in the Mideast.
This time will be different; right? As has been the case repeatedly for the U.S. in that region, a quick, positive outcome has been denied. How this evolves, devolves, and ends is difficult to predict, with neither side having any trust in the other, and clearly different end-game expectations. Almost certainly, realignment of regional relationships will be an outcome, which means a time of higher risks for the world and to the global economy, driven by huge impacts on energy infrastructure and trade routes. Does Iran being closer to Russia and China, while continuing to be backed by Syria, Hezbollah, Houthis and Iraqi Shia militias make you feel safer? How about Saudi Arabia pursuing nuclear capabilities and a defence alliance with Türkiye and Pakistan that mimics NATOs Article 5? What are U.S. options for exit? Can they outlast Iran by having them fail economically, or will they need to resort to even more aggressive, or as they say, kinetic war manoeuvres, that would put more strain on an already unstable situation? It is a dangerous time, to say the (Midd) leEast.
In my previous articles on how the very nature of war is changing, I reviewed the incredible “progress” intelligent war machines have been making on the battlefields of today. “Sensor to sensor” conflict is rapidly supplementing or replacing “eyeball to eyeball” combat. It is not so much about how many humans are in the fight, but the number of machines you can bring to bear and how intelligent they are. Some now work autonomously to achieve their often-gruesome goals.
The world has learned a lot from the innovation coming from especially the outnumbered (in human population) Ukrainians, who, out of necessity, are building millions of drones per year. The world has fully awoken to the need to have “armies” of intelligent drones, backing up their traditional armies, whether it be on land, sea, or in the air. Building vast numbers of machines is essential in defending or bringing the fight to an opponent. It has become the new obsession of militaries around the world, with hundreds of billions of dollars of new spending coming online.
Many regimes have also recognized that their industrial manufacturing muscle has atrophied almost beyond recognition, and are scrambling to re-establish competency. The U.S. is moving aggressively toward “on shoring”, realizing they have allowed “outsourcing” to go too far. To succeed in the new world, advanced manufacturing of the highest level of intelligent machines is where future strength is determined.
Perhaps China has been counted out by the U.S. too often in the past – but no longer. Some of the arguments: they don’t have enough energy access, their demographics are working against them, their trading practices are not fair, their geographic location is too limiting. Whatever the argument, for propaganda purposes, principles, or superiority complex, China’s doubters have been proven wrong. The “manufacturer to the world” continues to dominate in the new economy.
From plastics to solar panels, critical mineral refining to electric vehicles, machinery to industrial components, robot development to AI models, China has demonstrated a potent combination of strategic thinking, long-term discipline, and unmatched speed and ability to execute. The proof:
- Chinese automaker BYD is now larger than Tesla
- China has the top five wind turbine manufacturers, with over 100 GW installed power as of 2025
- China has the largest solar array by a factor of 6 with 210 GW of capacity, or 50% of the planet’s installed solar systems
- China has two of the top five gas turbine manufacturers, feeding increasingly insatiable electricity demand for an electrified modern society, not to mention the demands of AI and its data centres
- China exported an incredible $3.77 trillion USD in 2025 and imported $2.58 trillion for a trade surplus of almost $1.2 trillion. In comparison, the U.S. runs a trade deficit of over $1 trillion. It is no coincidence that the U.S. is aggressively pursuing trade deals that bring manufacturing home. It is critical for their economic, technology and military complex future.
Which brings me to win/lose deal-making, tariffs, and tantrums of the Trump administration. Not a day goes by that I do not think that this is disastrous strategy. Who needs friends when you can just go it alone and dominate? Except, repeatedly throughout history, that has proven to be a recipe for failure.
We all need friends. Whether it is at the level of the individual, community, or nation, we need those we can count on in times of trouble. Equally important, those we can trade and grow with. The merits and troubles, or gives and takes, caused by globalization have been debated extensively, but I think anything taken to an extreme has unintended consequences. Slamming the pendulum back against the opposite post is generally not a sound approach. Unfortunately, teaching the current old dog a new trick is extremely unlikely at his advanced age and ego. Is power through domination and isolation really the best strategy for a long-term solution to anything meaningful? Undeniably, it is reshaping global alliances like nothing since the great world wars.
Meanwhile, the U.S. national debt, approaching $40 trillion, brings daunting domestic challenges to the country’s laundry list of international conflicts. Long the upholder of democracy, freedom, and enterprise, the U.S. is seeing its fiscal power eroded – and this has negative consequences for many nations, particularly in the West. Their weaknesses will be exploited by others. With U.S. GDP at about $30 trillion, the debt is well above annual economic output and climbing at an alarming rate of almost $3 trillion per year.
With interest costs now over $1 trillion per year, it is making interest one of the highest government expenses. This is a very slippery slope, and a dangerous perception is making its way into the markets that the U.S. is so far down the debt rabbit hole, it cannot afford to raise interest rates to curb inflation without suffering significantly more self-harm.
The U.S. treasury has become dependent on short-term lending, much from hedge funds, while the share coming from large traditional lenders, such as central banks and sovereign wealth funds, is decreasing steadily. So, raising interest rates immediately affects about 25% of the U.S. debt. They cannot tighten without creating a chain reaction, whereby financing costs take off. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) says that U.S. annual gross financing needs – the key metric watched by rating agencies and bond funds – will reach 45% of GDP this year and is on track to hit 60% by 2030. No leading powers have lasted long at that level. Becoming beholden to the short-term thinking of hedge funds is not a bridge to long-term strategic success.
Many in the U.S. leadership know this. Is a new financial crisis in the making? When will the chickens come home to roost? With weakening power on the global stage, and fewer flocking to its dollar as a safe haven, how will the U.S. pull out of its tailspin?
Few debate the U.S.’s ability to transform markets and lead the world in innovation. They have demonstrated time and again, their ability to adapt, let the free markets perform, and create unimaginable “modern stuff” while generating tremendous wealth. That means trillion-dollar companies such as the “Magnificent 7”. Tesla boss Elon Musk recently became the first trillionaire, and surely several will join the club soon.
The big get bigger, while the masses get by – not a recipe for long-term societal health. The benefits of a strong economy need to be reasonably balanced across the broader population or, as history tells us, bad things happen. Perhaps we are a long way from pitchforks and torches, but the warning signs are out there.
What we need in the West (at least) is a shot of economic prosperity widening at the base, not an unstoppable force of ever-increasing, top-heavy tilt. Solutions such as inclusive capitalism, social capitalism, or employee capitalism are achievable. In the past, I have written about the power of entrepreneurship within employee-owned organizations. It is one solution that continues to gain traction, but at a glacial pace.
If the above list of crises is not enough, the elephant in the room is certainly AI. Since OpenAIs launch of ChatGPT in November of 2022, there has been a relentless push for better, stronger, broader AI chatbots built on large language models. Two very different models of innovation are at play; the free capitalist model of compete, spend big and fast, or die trying, versus the open-source model where the community at large is engaged in growing and improving the models, essentially free for their own use.
That this power struggle comes from the two heavyweights of industrial and technological innovation – the U.S. and China – comes as no surprise. It is an epic battle of the titans for tech supremacy that may define the next major evolution of humanity. Where humans end up – machines in service of the human masters or the other way around – is a matter for existential philosophical debate. Just last month, AI models “escaped” their masters, only to break into non-suspecting organizations. Three of the big platforms have admitted to “losing containment”.
Mathematicians have had their world turned upside down by accelerating mathematical discovery, where not 1, but 10 previously unsolved problems have suddenly been solved using AI. One had been puzzling mathematicians for more than a century. From how tightly spheres can be packed into more than three dimensions, to a problem regarding how efficiently data can be encoded and transmitted, to error-correcting codes – which helps recover information from noisy signals to quantum game theory – to the search for targets in high-dimensional grids.
As esoteric as these examples may be, all three have implications for real-world applications including cybersecurity and quantum computing. “Few doubt that a profound upheaval is already underway,” reads the header from the Verge article on AI’s impact on mathematics. We can take it as a warning of a multitude of “upheavals” AI has the potential to bestow on us mere mortals. No industry, process, product, company and or person, is not already being affected and/or changed by this transformative technology.
And it has only just started. With open-source models running for as little as 18 U.S. cents per million tokens, versus about $4 U.S. for top western/U.S. models, while the capability gap has narrowed dramatically, the race may already have been won.
Value extraction will need to happen downstream of the model providers by way of platforms, or compute or memory-chip manufacturers, or in the end-user product output. That is just the tip of the economic iceberg, though. If we already cannot contain AI, what happens when it really gets rolling? What happens when AI gets applied to genetics or bioweaponry? What existential crises do humans face, and do we even stand a chance?
Regardless of where we are in the world, I believe that the vast majority of us share fundamental desires of the human experience – to be healthy, safe, secure, happy, and loved. Populations have been controlled by fear for as long as hierarchical human power structures have existed. Is it any different now? Perhaps there are more dimensions to the fear. Certainly, there are more options to pick off the “fear card”, with many feeling the potential for catastrophic outcomes is higher than normal. The background noise is elevated, and therefore the “signal” is harder to receive.
I am an optimistic person by nature. Glass-half-full kind of guy. I, too, am feeling the “sum of all fears” more intensely than I am used to. I have been fortunate to have health, safety, security, and am generally very happy and loved by at least a few. I am concerned, though, about those who are not. When the “strongman, fear-based leadership” style dominates so many countries and governments, how do we find an offramp to a better place? When you feel powerless as an individual to change things, what actions can you take?
I believe our thoughts matter. Our intentions matter even more. Our belief in good and just outcomes for all still more. And our individual behaviours matter yet more. Seeking balance in all we do, more again. Not big, sweeping things, but the simple things. How you treat your neighbour, or the person passing by. How you choose to love those close to you and care for them. How we speak to each other with basic respect, civility, and understanding. How we choose compassion over hate. Love over fear.
We can overcome fear by choosing to enjoy the nature around us, friends, family, and the multitude of good things our modern world offers. It comes down to individual choice; how we respond to the world around us. Ultimately, that is how the world will respond to you.
(Grant Wilde – BIG Media Ltd., 2026)