World Collapse Expert: We’re Entering The Most Dangerous Global Power Vacuum Ever
In a Nutshell
Professor Ian Bremmer's 2026 Top Risks report identifies the US as the primary driver of global geopolitical uncertainty due to its rejection of free trade, policing, and open borders—exacerbated by Trump's policy failures in Iran (failed blockade, regime hits, no clear win) and predictions of his lame-duck status post-midterms, sparking a US political revolution. China dominates critical minerals, EVs, and long-term strategies, outpacing short-sighted US/Europe, while AI emerges as a catastrophic risk: unreleased models expose systemic vulnerabilities in global infrastructure, tech firms wield superpower influence, and mass unemployment looms without retraining/UBI pilots. Middle East chaos (Iran vs. Israel blocks, Lebanon war) persists amid G0 leadership vacuum, but positive shifts like Syria's Assad fall and Gulf reforms offer hope; ultimate threats stem from human politics failing to govern AI race, urging US-China arms control and universal AI access.
These notes were generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies.
Professor Ian Bremmer produces an annual risk report highlighting the top 10 biggest risks. He predicts a US political revolution is on its way. The US has become the biggest driver of geopolitical uncertainty in the world. Trump will fail. AI developments behind the scenes are critical: they created a model so powerful they couldn't release it because it would be an immediate systemic risk to the global economy and security; artificial intelligence is eating its users.
Team reports random unsubscribes. Viewers should check if they've hit the subscribe button. Approaching significant subscriber landmark. In return, commit to fighting harder to bring desired guests and conversations weekly and monthly.
Top Risks Report released at the beginning of every year to help understand the global risk environment. Firm has analyzed geopolitics for 30 years to aid better decisions. The 2026 report is prophetic as listed risks are playing out. Three biggest risks:
US drives risk via tariffs, Venezuela, Greenland, Iran. Small changes in smaller systems don't matter globally, but US changes affect everyone. Americans reject rules they set: no free trade system, no global policeman role, no open borders. Not challenged by China, but by Americans refusing leadership.
Overwhelmingly likely, overdetermined, massive impact on global economy, politics, security.
China builds most effective electric vehicles, batteries, critical minerals, rare earths at scale globally for decades, including reprocessing. Critical minerals (lithium, antimony) essential for devices, car batteries, missile systems, advanced weaponry, advanced economy.
China invests long-term; others focused on just-in-time globalization and quarterly returns. Sets China for stronger long-term trajectory. Less critical than US revolution for 2026 but severe. Countries hedge toward China as US becomes less predictable.
Trump will fail due to policy incompetence, unwillingness to take expertise. Unpopular on issues, will lose big in November midterms, become lame duck. Republicans will prioritize own futures over 80-year-old Trump. Underlying challenges for average Americans persist, demanding political revolution. Next leader: self-focused or country-focused? Trump identified symptoms, benefited as political entrepreneur in two free elections.
Zohran Mamdani, democratic socialist, mayor of New York City (capital of global capitalism). Demand for something different from left or right. Leads to G0: absence of global leadership (no G7/G20 agreement). Powerful make rules; weak accept.
Yale poll April 2026: Kamala Harris 20%, Gavin Newsom 19%, Pete Buttigieg 14%, AOC 13%. Means nothing. Jim Carville: Democrats should go to Turks and Caicos until after election, say nothing, stay out of Trump's way. Post-midterms: two-year 2028 election with billions spent.
Link to Venezuela, Greenland, Iran. Trump promised to stop wars; one of eight wars he claimed stopped was with Iran. Ended Afghanistan war via Taliban deal (good for Taliban, got Americans out after 20 years, trillion dollars on Afghan and poor Americans/Europeans).
Three reasons:
- Venezuela success: Plans to take out Maduro (problem for region: 8 million refugees, drugs). World's largest oil reserves (branding win, but years to impact; ExxonMobil CEO: not investable). Successful operation: no US casualties, Maduro jailed in Brooklyn. Delcy Rodríguez (VP) acting president, cooperative on oil/mining/economy. Released political prisoners, popular in South America (Colombia, Peru, Brazil, Chile) for security. Trump feels great, thinks he can do bigger in Iran.
- Past Iran experience: First term, Iran struck US bases/proxies, Saudi refinery; Trump assassinated Qasem Soleimani (Quds Force head); Iran threatened but did nothing. Last June, Iran advanced missiles/nuclear (60% enrichment); Israel struck (US intel); popular, successful; Iran warned before Qatar base missiles.
Trump expected: kill 86-year-old unpopular Supreme Leader, IRGC (real power) would negotiate like Venezuela. But first term had patriotic advisers (Pompeo, Mattis) who pushed back/leaked/undermined bad decisions. Now, loyal advisers (good: Marco Rubio, Scott Bessent; incompetent: Pete Hegseth) shade toward Trump's brilliance, ignore military warnings (e.g., Joint Chiefs head Dan Caine: horrible idea, Iran can shut Strait of Hormuz).
Israelis took out Supreme Leader and military leadership Americans were talking to. Trump: "a lot of the guys we were talking to are dead now." Iran decentralized to local commanders (mosaic defense). Shots at Gulf states, critical infrastructure; stopping Strait transit.
Impossible to know internals fully, but centralized decisions implement quickly (e.g., gas field hit → retaliation). Toll-taking in Strait ordered centrally. Islamabad talks (Pakistan): Iran sent FM, parliament speaker, experts on Strait, missiles, proxies, nuclear (21 hours, substantive; nuclear most divisive).
No deal. Trump announced Strait blockade hours ago (overstated; 21 hours means substantive). Trump frustrated, lost leverage. Spoke to JD Vance 10+ times. Pre-market reporting: further talks planned. Trump speech: war over in 2-3 weeks max; Straits not his problem. Iranians see: Americans can't take pain, no military solution.
Changes mind, doesn't follow through (e.g., Greenland 180, dropped European tariffs). Own people pressuring him to get out. Unpopular on this issue, day by day hurting.
He's unpopular day by day. It's hurting his economy. His midterm elections are coming up. He's going to be severely hurt and lose power. Iranian leaders might be incentivized to wait it out. They don't think they have to wait months. It's a democracy, so he's going to be unelected in a couple years.
They saw China do this last year, Liberation Day as Trump called it, where he puts tariffs on countries, high tariffs on China. They hit back. He does it again. They hit back. He's like, "I'm going to do export controls." They say, "We're going to shut down your critical minerals." Suddenly CEOs go to Mar-a-Lago saying deal with the Iranians or we're shutting down factory lines in red states. Trump backs down. Countries with leverage over Trump can hit him. He has the strongest military but a glass jaw. He can't take a hit like unelected non-democracies. Chinese and Iranians over the Strait.
Trump announces the blockade but hasn't broken the ceasefire. Blockade is an act of war, but he hasn't said hit the Iranians again right now. Deescalated compared to a week ago, which looked more dangerous. Telling Iranians he's willing to cut off their oil export funds. Same Trump who suspended sanctions on Iran to keep prices down.
Iran can't let it be seen that dropping bombs on us made us pander. If they set that precedent, every American leader knows: drop bombs on their leadership, bomb everything, then they negotiate and give up nuclear weapons. If they buckle, America repeats this playbook forever.
After the 12-day war last June, Iranians understood their deterrent failed. Incapable of preventing Americans and Israelis from hitting them and proxies whenever wanted.
Haven't talked about Lebanon. Another war there now. Israelis hitting Lebanese hard. Over a million displaced in last several weeks.
Hezbollah, terrorist organization recognized by Israel and US (not everybody), continues strikes against Israel. Nowhere near Israeli military strength. Lebanese government promised to disarm them but hasn't. Hezbollah does missile strikes, small numbers, into north Israel where civilians live. After October 7th Hamas attacks, over 100,000 Israelis evacuated homes and schools for a year because Hezbollah made their lives hell.
Israel taking 5 to 7 kilometers of Lebanese land, occupy as buffer zone to protect civilians from Hezbollah weapons.
Iran understands: Hezbollah was most powerful non-state military in world on October 7th. Now leadership targeted and destroyed by Israelis, military incapable, critical infrastructure disrupted. Israel hits Beirut, capital of Lebanon, no one can respond.
Enormously repressive Iranian regime takes brutal action against own people, as in January. Doesn't respect Israel's right to exist. Sends weapons, money, military advice to revolutionary actors, undermining security in Yemen, Iraq, Syria. Core of Middle East has revolutionary regime exporting instability.
Israel, America's top ally (America first, but Trump gives billions yearly even cutting aid to others including Ukraine). Israel attacks enemies, creates outcomes it wants, causing instability. Continuing to take territory in West Bank, no one stops. Hits Lebanon hard, no response. Attacked Iran directly with US, confident no backlash undermining political survival. Not existential risk. Even if Iran develops nukes (everyone wants to prevent), Israel has 100+ nukes.
Two fundamental drivers: US-aligned Israel, revolutionary theocracy Iran.
Positive developments: Syria's Assad, brutal dictator, overthrown by own people and military who wouldn't support him. Russians couldn't support significantly. Opportunity for representative government engaging region.
Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar transformative domestic policies attract investment, build experiences for travel, create better remunerated work than foreign labor home countries, allowing money home. Saudi Arabia taking 35 million people, half economy used to closed to women, now educating and opportunities in every employment area. Extraordinary governance change story.
In Iran war context and US doing less global leadership, US-aligned countries ensure futures. Two blocks forming:
-
UAE with Israel (Abraham Accords, Trump's first term success: UAE others recognize Israel, tourism, business, tech transfers). UAE, Israel, US, India aligning on national security, technology, becoming international block.
-
Saudi Arabia-Pakistan long defense partners, now public alliance. Pakistan nuclear, Saudi not, but Pakistan provides if wanted. Regional defense quad with Turkey, Egypt. Big countries, populations, aligning diplomatically/defense, calling for regional security architecture not easily aligned with UAE/US/Israel/India.
95 million in Iran, military/economy/industry substantially degraded, running economy into ground pre-war. Not winners, survivors. Influence over Strait, but dangerous long term.
US won't give up demand Iran cease nuclear enrichment. Iran insists right to enrich uranium, nuclear power plants pre-conflict. Trump blockaded Strait, ceasefire in place (14 days, now 9-10 left). Standoff.
Trump thinks about legacy, can't be reelected, talks Nobel Peace Prize, Mount Rushmore. Can't just leave or Iran continues enrichment, history like Bush failure. Must be seen to win. Iran can't let him win.
Trump could end it, say "I won." Already said doesn't care about nukes: entombed under rubble, satellite coverage, hit back if they try. Regime change, new people to talk with. Strait not his problem. Moved towards deescalation, set stage to back out: we won, regime change, Strait not problem, have own oil.
But then "end civilization" tweet, bomb bridges/nuclear plants. Not plausible, no chance that evening.
Trump impulsive, no impulse control, no mechanisms around him. On phone constantly, watches media, recency bias. Watches markets obsessively, announcements timed with opens, insider trading concerns, personal enrichment.
Most likely: ceasefire extended. 21-hour substantive talks, more talks. Iranians more likely give on nuclear/enrichment if maintain privileged Strait transit position for money/security/deterrence. Never had nukes, wouldn't get without blown up (two weeks if access/material/reprocess, not stopped).
Influence over Strait, used it, making money. Trump no military plan to hit back.
Then Iranians cut deals for more oil out. After strong ceasefire, Europeans/Indians/others escort ships for secure Strait. Less bad scenario (all avoidable).
Iran concedes somewhat on nuclear, gets more Strait control: decide passage, charge toll (reparations for war reconstruction).
Other scenario: Trump lacks military plan yet. New aircraft strike group to Gulf, thousands more ground troops, total 15,000 deployed by Trump since war start, there in 2 weeks. Then use them.
Trump says take the oil (not blockade stopping export, but control). Kharg Island: half size Manhattan, not fortified, close Iranian shore, 90% Iranian oil export. CENTCOM: take with 12-15,000 men comfortably. Right off Iranian coast.
Americans control, Iranians can't get oil out, more economic leverage. To market, only via Americans. Iranians still disrupt Strait. Other plans: take coastal regions, raids on ballistic missile sites, drones. More troops/casualties, but enforce navigable Strait with escorts (can't now).
Likelihood Trump orders <50%. Worst scenario not likely, understands unpopularity. Must sell ugly pig with lipstick. Can't blame others: his war of choice, decider. Economic downturn his fault: oil up, gas >$4/gallon, diesel >$5, inflation, food up, underwater on affordability.
Russia-Ukraine war vanished from US news (big in Europe, Poland, Baltics). China laughing at US self-harm. Europe colluding, not helping US. UK first time saying US do it yourself, meeting Macron to go alone.
China most pertinent, most powerful. Russia easiest: little manufactured goods, poor tech, rely on Chinese. Have oil, gas, fertilizer—prices spiked, making more money. Economy squeezed by sanctions, now better. US reduced sanctions like on Iran for markets.
US weapons to Europe/Ukraine now needed Middle East, Ukrainians harder defend vs Russian missiles/drones. Putin less interested in ceasefire (wasn't before). Trump promised end war, frustrated, failed after Gaza ceasefire win in Knesset. Russians persist, Trump likely deal over Europeans' heads.
Europe: economic problems, no productivity/growth. Over 30 years, two geopolitical shifts: US orientation change (Trump unique to allies), rise of China/global south (India after).
American allies like Europe, Canada, Japan, and South Korea are contracting demographically, with flatter growth and reduced productivity compared to the United States. These countries have not invested in their own defense or technology, creating an asymmetry. As the US withdraws from global engagements—not interested in fighting wars or free trade—these allies bring less to the table.
Mario Draghi's 800-page competitiveness report (Draghi Plan), from the former ECB head known as Super Mario, outlines steps for Europeans and Brits: build entrepreneurship, invest in new technologies for long-term returns, reduce red tape. However, Europe is not a single country—it's 27 EU nations plus the UK post-Brexit—lacking scale. Frequent elections make it harder to execute long-term strategies like those of UAE, Saudis, Singaporeans, or China.
Post-1989 Berlin Wall fall and 1991 Soviet collapse, Europe assumed a peaceful world with everyone adopting their system, so they underinvested in defense and technology, prioritizing quality of life. They were wrong: China grew wealthier but remained a consolidated dictatorship under Xi Jinping with no term limits and state-controlled economy, not aligning with US/Europe or becoming a free market democracy.
Much comes down to energy costs and productivity. Countries like China and the US pursued oil, nuclear, and ignored net zero constraints, while Europe focused on sustainable sources. US and China aggressively pursued entrepreneurship and innovation; Europe's environment has been less friendly to new technologies.
China invests in everything: dirty coal for industry, but also massively in green tech at scale—solar, wind, leading EV car companies, most efficient batteries, raw materials. They invest in nuclear too. Europe (except France with heavy nuclear) turned away from nuclear, leaning into green while making other technologies challenging—nuclear should be seen as green. This inhibited European growth.
US is on-again-off-again: one administration leans green, next doesn't. US is world's leading oil and fracking natural gas producer. Texas (red state) produces more sustainable energy than any other US state. Energy technologies are becoming cheaper at scale; all are needed. Europeans erred by not recognizing this.
US is world's leading superpower, but present trajectory if continued would challenge its dominance. US dollar is global reserve currency—nothing close—allowing reckless money printing, massive deficits, lower interest rates. China lacks convertible currency, rule of law; opening it would cause capital flight and instability.
China's military is a fraction of US capabilities—not close in nuclear, conventional weapons, naval or ground war experience (decades since last wars). They watch US actions in Venezuela, Iran without matching capacity.
Concern with China: leading or at parity with US in world-changing technologies, investing at scale. They can set rules, standards, sell essential products—and shut you off if adversarial. Example: Europe's dependence on Russian gas/oil devastated economy when Russia invaded Ukraine; US was fine. US relies on TSMC in Taiwan for semiconductors—what if China cuts off?
Don't let one adversarial country control what your economy desperately needs. China thinks long-term (10-20 years), making no-regret moves, low risk—unlike US short-term electoral cycles. Biggest danger to US is America itself: not investing in best products, competitiveness, attractiveness for study, living, working.
TED Talk (June 14, 2023, tens of millions YouTube views): "The Next Global Superpower Is Not Who You Think." Comments: "You called it a year ago—100% right," "Hello from a year in the future—I have bad news about 2025. You were right."
World moving beyond geopolitics: most important global leaders are technology companies writing their own rules, not countries. Russian invasion of Ukraine started Feb 23 (not 24) when Microsoft detected cyber strikes, alerted US/Ukraine governments. Elon Musk's Starlink enabled Ukrainian communication and fighting—Zelensky might be gone without it. US government hesitated on military support; companies made the difference.
New AI tools like Anthropic's model: so capable it poses fundamental security risk. In testing, it found vulnerabilities in applications, software, banks, critical infrastructure (power grids, water systems)—every exploitable bug. Too powerful to release; immediate systemic risk to global economy/security.
Anthropic's caution is real (not just marketing), despite communication strategy. Jerome Powell (Fed chief), Scott Bessent (Treasury Secretary) called urgent bank CEO meeting to deploy internally. JP Morgan's Jamie Dimon (best at cyber) sees it as five-alarm fire. Anthropic fought US Defense Dept (refused AI for targeting/surveillance, called "woke"), but can't be excluded—too vital for US national security. Timing convenient post-fight, but risk real: deploy now to patch bugs before adversaries get tools.
Scale of risks: severe (happening this year, April already), underappreciated vs. Iran/Venezuela/China headlines. If systems hackable, markets crash, banks fail, data stolen—Russians/Iranians would exploit. AI tools soon available to anyone with laptop/phone.
Technology shifts power: Russia bigger than Ukraine, yet Ukraine retook territory last 3 months via drones—now world's most capable drone producer at scale. When Iranians attacked US Gulf allies post-US strike, US asked Zelensky for drone tech help.
Video example: Indian workers wear head cameras to record hands performing tasks, training AI to replace them. Like sawing off your own branch (meme of man on tree branch cutting it).
AI/robotics firms need real-world data, so factory workers record themselves. Terrifying yet empowering: most humans don't self-actualize via such work. Depends on using wealth generated.
Political/social system needed where machines do most work, many lack jobs. Technologist predicts 2025 unemployment surge from AI; people annoyed, Democrats win associating Republicans as pro-AI. AI less popular than ICE in US. People unhappy—benefits not flowing down, corps get richer.
Global South excited about AI for human capital/opportunities; China enthusiastic for better lives. Americans/Europeans fear white-collar/knowledge worker job loss.
No massive US unemployment next year: CEOs avoid layoffs without downturn excuse; friction, resistance (e.g., longshoremen blocked AI to protect jobs). Slows process.
Politically: US Senator (pro-tech, pro-business centrist) says constituents furious about AI data centers—no jobs, higher energy/water prices, ugly zoning, growing wildly.
Trump won twice on men without advanced degrees feeling left behind: factory robotics/automation, free trade to China/India, immigration. Similar in Europe (Nigel Farage). Women with advanced degrees, urban/suburban, now worry about their/kids' jobs—populism wave coming 2028, AI/data centers key piece. No clear political figure yet.
AI CEOs least popular: Sam Altman faced Molotov cocktail, shooting at house (nobody should support violence). United Healthcare CEO gunned down nearby a year ago. General anger at elites; tech owners are wealthiest.
Solution exists: AI already improves productivity, reduces waste—e.g., makes recycling viable by reforming trash into productive format; micro-adjusts airplane navigation real-time, cuts fuel 10%. Or improve
AI optimizes agricultural use in Ethiopia for over 100 million people, determining what to plant, where, and when, leading to cheaper food. Every day, mind-blowing uses of these technologies appear in companies worldwide. However, self-destruction would come from people and politics, not technology. The system deploys these technologies inhumanely, with benefits captured by a small number of individuals and companies that write their own rules and disregard people. This anger leads people to respond outside legal frameworks through mass or violent action, indicating broken politics.
Universal basic income jump from full-time jobs is unlikely in a year. Pilot programs could reduce work weeks to 4 or 3 days in disrupted areas, paying the same but dedicating extra time to AI training for effectiveness in current jobs or transitions. Only those deploying these tools will have jobs in three to five years. Start spending on this now. Some aware individuals remain in winner-take-all mode without helping, leading to societal breakdown.
Governments sometimes hinder technology, as in UK and EU. A CTO of a major tech company explained inability to release hardware features in Europe due to regulations, like demands for removable batteries, which increase waste (batteries expire on shelves), make devices non-waterproof (leading to more breakage), and harm the environment more. This overregulation makes Europeans uncompetitive. Tech companies no longer need Europe's market with Brazil and other big markets emerging as buyers.
US system: Private sector holds most power, captures regulations, drives growth and wealth, but average Americans do not benefit, leading to anger and lashing out.
Chinese system: State captures private sector, dictates actions, often owns enterprises, drives long-term growth, but people have no say, creating dissent like "lying flat."
European system: Focuses on social contract for citizens' benefits, but heavy regulation and anti-entrepreneurial nature prevent growth needed to fund it.
Extremes in these systems cause problems. Americans want a new deal; Trump won by positioning as outsider to end wars, invest domestically (America first), addressing desires for care, opportunities, and avoiding despair—the American dream. Grandparents fled Armenian genocide to Ellis Island for opportunity. Most Americans no longer believe it applies. Give people opportunities to create dreams in their countries, or they revolt.
History does not always lead to revolt (e.g., 25 million in North Korea under cult rule for decades). In democracies, frequent pushback occurs against kleptocrats who put themselves above the system.
Jeff Bezos raising $100 billion for Project Prometheus AI company; Elon with xAI, Anthropic, Google (Dermis, Sundar Pichai), OpenAI (Sam Altman). Intelligence is the most powerful commodity; Altman says pay for it like water or electricity. Average Americans fear losing control to companies.
-
US-China AI arms control: Post-1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, US-Soviet talks created hotline, deconfliction, limits (e.g., no Star Wars defense). Desperately needed now with higher tech stakes.
-
AI Stability Board: Like financial stability mechanisms where central banks (People's Bank of China, ECB, Bank of England, Fed) collaborate in crises. Technocrats identify global threats (e.g., Anthropic's recent model finds exploitable software bugs worldwide) and address them.
-
Fund AI access for all: Half of Africa lacks electricity; AI gap will create divide between hybrid AI-empowered humans and others treated as a different species. Unacceptable; ensure universal access.
Domestic economies need the same funding. From space, no borders visible—just 8 billion people. Inadequate governance for technology; short-term divisions lead to self-destruction. US created UN post-WWII recognizing this. Need more global forums uniting, not dividing. Currently heading opposite direction, though technology could enable better governance.
Human tools enable good outcomes. Last 50 years' big stories: longer lives, better education/healthcare, more wealth, less starvation/poverty—general trend toward capacity despite bad episodes amplified by fast information spread and algorithms.
Not worried about AGI, but humans becoming computer-like via smartphones programming behavior. Real conversations (like this one) are humane; algorithms create lanes making us inhuman. Hate prediction markets turning politics into casino. Need regulations, governance, companies helping better selves.
Podcaster independence (no boss, team aligns) enables interviewing across spectrum: Ivanka Trump, Michelle Obama, Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, etc. Algorithms cause anger from half audience, but real-life connections show shared destinations despite path disagreements. No one's villain in own story. Independence is obligation to speak above 50% hate, as others risk firing.
Be authentic, honest about values/priorities via conversations, never sell out or self-censor—unlike mainstream media. Real-world interactions friendly; digital anger often vocal minorities, bots, or algorithmic. Do more live, long-form to resist algorithms.
Love talking to those disagreed with; quote: if complete opinion set matches one group, not truly yours. Steal ideas from all. Algorithms reinforce echo chambers/sides. Fixed opinions amid change lead to error; algorithms resist view changes.
Built global platform without irresponsible lies/hatred. Power shifts from established politics to outsiders/tech. As kid in second grade, wanted to be president for public service impact. No longer true—not due to broken system, but new opportunities outside politics to make global difference.
People may not always agree, but they recognize the genuine care and commitment to improvement. No plans to serve in public office, but aim to increase positive impact over a long, healthy life.
The most powerful people on planet earth are no longer the elected. They are those that influence the electorate.
Influencers of voters hold significant responsibility and perform a public service through education. Host praises the guest's extensive bookshelf of incredible books.
Guest has written numerous books, including the most recent The Power of the Most. Another book coming out next year: The Power of Crisis: How Three Threats and Our Response Will Change the World, which discusses AI as one of the threats. Host will link all books below and recommends checking the variety. Follow guest on YouTube for frequent content on evolving issues and on X (over a million followers).
Podcast tradition: previous guest leaves a question for the next. Question: "When you are on your deathbed, how will you describe your life?"
Unanticipated.
Optimism stems from the mystery of existence—no idea what we did to deserve being here. Every day is a gift; remembering that improves life.
Host thanks guest, having followed for many years on YouTube and X. Guest's takes are accessible and demystifying, especially during global turmoil. Provides public service by helping understand craziness, informing better electoral decisions, worldviews, and interpersonal treatment—enabling better lives.
You're helping people like me understand all of this craziness and therefore hopefully live better lives and make better decisions as to who we elect and how we think about the world and how we treat one another.
Guest is motivated and promises to keep doing their best.
Keep The Diary Of A CEO in your library
Save the videos and channels worth coming back to, and find them again in one place.
