What does a sober retrospective view from the future demand?

Within the framework of the European Environmental Councils (EEAC), we introduced the method of retrospective analysis to assess current developments. This has since become common scientific practice.
  In light of this method, we resemble a global train of lemmings racing towards the abyss. We are on the brink of disaster in ecological, social and political terms.
  The apparent diversity of negative developments is very great. For the sake of brevity, I will highlight only a few of the most significant threats.
  On ecology:
  Marine pollution calls for a reversal. Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) reports that a plastic island of the size of Europe is already floating in the Pacific Ocean. The plastic waste lying at the bottom of the oceans is 100 times heavier than that floating on the surface. This is estimated at 12 million tonnes.
  The recent UN conference in Geneva on global plastic waste reduction, which ended without any result, demonstrated the narrow-mindedness of the producing countries.
  They are acting with an attitude of “devil-may-care”.
  Global soil consumption is equally alarming when one considers that soils have the highest biological diversity after the oceans. Soils can store around 2,000 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide.
  The loss of over 10 million hectares of arable land per year also destabilises food supply. If this land consumption continues, we will fall below 2,000 m² of fertile soil per person and thus face a real food crisis that is no longer distribution-related.
  On social issues:
  The gap between rich and poor is widening both internationally and nationally. According to OXFAM, the five richest people in the world have doubled their wealth since 2020. This development is normally downplayed because extreme poverty has fallen from one third of the world’s population to less than 10 per cent over the last 40 years.
  Nevertheless, this development must not be allowed to continue, not only in terms of human rights.
  Above all, the rising debt of nations is extremely dangerous. If it continues as before, interest payments and repayment obligations will dominate budgets.
  Nothing would be left for the social sector. Education, health, unemployment and pension provision would fall by the wayside.
  Economists Dirk Sollte and Wolfgang Eichhorn highlighted this in 2009 as part of the Forum for Responsibility in their book “Das Kartenhaus Weltfinanzsystem – Analyse – Rückblick – Ausblick” (The House of Cards: The Global Financial System – Analysis – Review – Outlook). They projected that by 2030, the entire value added would be needed to service interest and returns if we continue to let the financial system run as it has done so far. In addition, big capital is pushing more and more for larger, environmentally destructive projects.
  Unfortunately, the political landscape also points to stormy times ahead:
  Enemy stereotypes are being created so that the military-industrial complex can continue to be financed instead of prosperity-enhancing expenditure.
  Thomas P. M. Barnett outlined this in his book: “The Pentagon’s New Map after the fall of the Iron Curtain” in 2004.
  The flooding of Europe with migrants was also conceived as a means of domination.
  Military spending has been rising worldwide for 10 years. According to SIPRI Sweden, it rose by 9.2% from 2023 to 2024 to 2.7 trillion US dollars, or 2,700 billion US dollars. Approximately 0.7 per cent (14 billion US dollars) would be enough to alleviate the worst cases of world hunger – a scandal of inhumanity!
  Additionally, the escalation of current conflicts brings with it the danger of a nuclear war.
  This is particularly important for Europe to consider: the US has terminated the treaties with Russia on mutual inspection of nuclear weapons and at the same time announced that it will equip its military bases in Europe – especially in Germany – with nuclear-tipped medium-range missiles. The target year is 2026.
  I am now putting myself into the shoes of the Russian military leadership: before Russia will be completely surrounded and practically defenceless, a surprise liberation strike might become an obvious option. The Russians do not want a nuclear war. Therefore, they will try to take out US nuclear weapons using “conventional” means.
  This coincides with the predictions of the Bavarian seer Alois Irlmaier (1894–1959), who said to a young nurse: “Young girl, you will see the Third World War, and I will tell you how it will unfold:

First there will be prosperity like never before.
Then there will be an unprecedented decline in faith.
This will be followed by moral decay as never before.
Then a large number of foreigners will come into the country.
There will be high inflation. Money will lose more and more of its value.
Soon after, a revolution will follow.
Then the Russians will invade the West overnight.

Irlmaier then saw specifically: While peace is still being discussed, three tank divisions advance westward overnight. One in the north, one across Berlin and one north of the Danube. They will reach the Rhine (thus taking out the US missile bases). But then the US will attack from the south (base in North Africa) using drones creating a death strip (neutron bomb) “from the city on the bay (Szczecin?) to the golden city (Prague)”.
  This will lead to a desperate and devastating final battle, in which the Russians also will use nuclear weapons, and Germany north of the Danube will be destroyed.
  The three tank divisions correspond to the three western military districts that the Russians have established in response to the NATO manoeuvre Defender Europe.
  These are equipped with the most modern tanks (Armata tanks). The Russians are not using these in Ukraine to ensure that the technology remains unknown.
  We should not dismiss this scenario, because unfortunately it is plausible.
  However, I observe a collective denial and escape into trivialities. Peace initiatives and neutral concepts are therefore more urgent than in the past – and necessary. 
  Stephane Hessel deliberately included the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which calls for reason and humanity, in his farewell booklet: “Time for Outrage” (2011).
  Therefore, Switzerland and Austria, as permanently neutral states, are called upon to mediate and not to allow themselves to be drawn into confrontations – which, unfortunately, is gradually happening.
  As an old man, I would like to conclude with a memento from Antoine de Saint-Exupery, because I believe that peace begins in the hearts of men. Let this be written in the book of the exploiters and warmongers.

“When people become godless,
then their governments are clueless,
lies abound,
debt rises immeasurably,
meetings are pointless,
enlightenment is brainless,
the politicians characterless,
Christians prayerless,
churches powerless,
nations peaceless,
morals decadent,
fashion shameless,
crime rampant,
conferences never-ending, – prospects bleak.”

I would like to add a quote from an atheist ex-communist, Gregor Gysi. He said:
  I do not believe in God, but I fear a godless society. •

(Übersetzung Current Concerns)

* Heinrich Wohlmeyer, born in St. Pölten in 1936; retired Director General; Honorary Professor, Dipl. Ing agr. Dr. iur; Dipl. in Law, studied agriculture and law in Vienna, worked as a Fulbright scholar in the USA on “Agricultural Economics and Business Administration” and obtained his doctorate in London on “International Raw Materials Control Agreements”. Wohlmeyer worked in industry, regional development and trade policy for 20 years and was a research manager for a good ten years. He taught at the Vienna University of Technology and the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences in Vienna. At an early stage, he addressed issues of sustainability, circular economy, and economic, ecological, and social undesirable developments. Various awards and numerous publications.