Frontpage Summary Full text (free) Audiobook (free) Buy the book Videos Podcasts FAQ
Here is the FB post where you can see any comments – and add your own.
–-
In recent days, we have seen how global systems are fragmenting, how power is shifting toward regions, and why the world is becoming more unstable before it becomes simpler.
Today, we take a closer look at our own position:
Europe. The Nordic region. Norway.
What does this global reorganization mean for us? And how can we adapt wisely in a time when old safety nets are weakening? This is not primarily a political question. It is a structural one.
Europe in an In-Between Position
Europe finds itself in a demanding situation.
On the one hand:
On the other hand:
Europe is not a unified actor. It is a network of countries with different interests, historical experiences, and economic structures.
As long as the global order was stable, this worked. When it becomes unstable, weaknesses become visible. Decisions take time. Responsibility is diluted. Measures become compromises.
From Centralization to Regional Realism
For decades, Europe’s main strategy has been more integration, more centralization, more coordination.
This brought advantages:
But it also created vulnerability:
In an unstable world, this becomes problematic. That is why we now see a slow movement in the opposite direction: more regional thinking, more local production, more focus on preparedness, more strategic autonomy.
Not because anyone “wants to go back,” but because systems force adaptation.
The Nordic Region as a Possible Center of Gravity
In this situation, the Nordic countries occupy a special position.
This is not accidental. It is the result of long cultural and institutional traditions. In a fragmented world, such qualities are valuable—not for domination, but for stabilization.
The Nordic region has the potential to function as a regional resonance field. But this does not happen automatically; it requires conscious choices.
Norway’s Special Position
Norway stands partly outside and partly inside.
This creates both opportunities and risks.
Opportunity: We can adapt faster than large systems.
Risk: We depend on structures we do not control.
Therefore, the question is not: How do we preserve everything as before? But: How do we build robustness from below?
From Dependence to Capacity
In a transitional period, one thing becomes increasingly important: real capacity:
This is not about isolation. It is about balance.
The Connection to Cells and Resonance
When large systems lose stability, responsibility shifts downward: to regions → local communities → networks → cells.
Small, resonant, responsible units make society flexible. Without them, the top becomes heavy. With them, the whole becomes agile.
What This Means for Individuals
In transitional phases, it becomes increasingly important to:
Security is shifting.
From systems → to networks.
From structures → to relationships.
From schemes → to communities.
Toward a European and Nordic Transition from Below
The transition will not happen through one grand plan. It will happen through thousands of small adjustments:
Slowly. Unevenly. Pragmatically.
We live in a time when maps are being redrawn. Old guarantees are weakening. New structures are unfinished.
This can create fear, but also maturity: we become more grounded, more responsible, more relational, more realistic. We do not flee from challenges; we reorient ourselves.
So You May Ask:
What does all this have to do with “spirituality and science”? The core is this:
Everything we have discussed in these posts—geopolitics, regions, collapse, cells, resonance—is, in its nature, mental movement.
Systems do not change by themselves. They change because ideas change.
What people believe is possible.
What we experience as safe.
What we consider necessary.
What we identify with.
These ideas are in turn governed by attractor dynamics—both in individual consciousness and collectively in families, close circles, places we live, and society as a whole.
When old mental structures lose power, society reorganizes itself.
When new ideas gain weight, new structures emerge.
A Battle of Minds:
This means that the “battle” is not primarily fought in parliaments, financial markets, or military alliances. It is fought in consciousness.
What we collectively imagine as possible, real, and desirable shapes the world we then experience. This is what spirituality is fundamentally about. Not rituals. Not dogmas. But the realization that we are consciousness experiencing its own ideas.
At present, we are experiencing the idea of being humans in a society on a planet in transition. That idea is entirely credible. It must be lived. It must be fully experienced.
But it arises in something greater.
Behind the individual.
Behind society.
Behind history.
A universal consciousness in which all ideas arise. To realize—and also experience—this by leaving the familiar, safe, and learned behind: that is what spirituality is about. Many of us reach a point where we no longer believe what we are told. There is something more. Yes, there is more—much more.
This does not mean that life is “unreal.” It means that life is an experience; an immensely complex experience—including everything we perceive as “material.”
The details of this must be explored in another conversation.
What kind of experience the future becomes depends on which mental structures we nourish—privately and collectively.
Question:
Do you experience that security in your life is increasingly linked to people, skills, and local contexts—and less to large systems than before?
–-
All posts are continuously collected here:
There you can also see what is coming next.