Geopolitics

In The Hunger Games, twenty-four children are forced to kill each other while the elites applaud. It was sold as dystopian fiction. The trouble is, it is looking more like current affairs with every passing news cycle. The real world, too, is structured like a zero-sum game—where one person’s gain must be another’s loss. There are no mutual wins here, only trade-offs, casualties, and very profitable illusions. This article contends that global power operates not unlike the Capitol’s arena: a ritualised battleground in which marginalised regions—Gaza, the Congo, Yemen, Ukraine—are sacrificed to maintain the illusion of order and the comfort of hegemony. The names change. The rules do not. ...

The global system is less a well-oiled machine and more a Jenga tower of vested interests, teetering on the edge of collapse—but held together by the shared fear of losing one’s own block. It stays upright not by design brilliance, but by inertia, intimidation, and a stubborn refusal to imagine alternatives. As in … Inertia of the comfortable Those with power—states, corporations, elites, and multilateral institutions—are quite content, thank you. Change threatens their positions. So they: ...

At first glance, The Hunger Games seems like a dystopian romp designed for young adults who enjoy a bit of archery and a healthy disdain for authority. But dig deeper, and Suzanne Collins’ world is less allegory than blueprint. Panem is not merely fiction. It is a thinly veiled map of our geopolitical, economic, and psychological landscape. If you squint (or even if you do not), you can see the outlines of our own era: a decadent centre, exploited peripheries, staged conflict as entertainment, and rebellions whose success depends not on justice, but on optics. ...

It is fashionable to believe that technological progress is inevitable, and that artificial intelligence will, barring catastrophe, continue its relentless march forward. But there is a future—quietly lurking just beyond the smug grins of Silicon Valley keynote speeches—where AI does not progress much further at all. Not because of some singularity, nor because we all upload our brains into the cloud, but because we collectively decide: “That is quite enough, thank you.” ...

The European Democracy Shield (EUDS)—a name that practically screams “importance”, if not effectiveness. One imagines a shining bulwark of European resolve, standing firm against the onslaught of foreign interference, disinformation, and creeping authoritarianism. In practice, though, we might be dealing with something rather less heroic: an ambitious framework coated in Brussels gloss, promising much, delivering… well, that remains to be seen. The EUDS: idealism or institutional theatre? On paper, the European Democracy Shield is a bold step. It claims to offer a comprehensive defence of democratic norms, combining regulation of digital spaces, protection for media, and support for civil society into one elegant package. But the EU is no stranger to bold declarations. The question is whether this will be another statement of intent with no meaningful enforcement—or something that actually holds the line. ...

This cheerful little analysis explores how Europe’s recent budget-slashing spree is playing out—cutting aid, climate finance, health, and all those other inconvenient things that don’t explode or vote. The immediate fallout (spoiler: it’s not great), the long-term consequences (even less great), and how all these “fiscally responsible” choices might cost several times more down the road. Think of it as a guide to burning down your house to save on heating. Only the house is a continent, and the smoke alarms are also being cut. ...

Why did Israel really attack Iran? Analysis with wit and additional perspectives by PR included. Israel’s recent strikes on Iran mark a dramatic escalation in a decades-long shadow war that’s finally emerged from the shadows – rather like a pensioner suddenly taking up parkour. The reasons behind this attack weave together existential threats, geopolitical manoeuvring, domestic politics, and enough ideological hostility to make a North London dinner party look tame. Below, we dissect the key drivers – from nuclear paranoia to Netanyahu’s increasingly creative approaches to job retention – and throw in a deeper look at Iran’s creaking regime, a misfiring axis of resistance, and the global political theatre fuelling it all. ...

Welcome to Fungolia—a fictional European nation best known for producing bureaucrats with severe stationery addictions, national holidays dedicated to committee meetings, and the invention of the “Mutually Suspicious Cooperation Accord” (which mostly involved not poisoning each other’s water supply). In Fungolia, difference isn’t just tolerated—it’s enshrined in law, embossed in gold, and swiftly ignored in practice. This article is about unity. Not the fluffy kind that fits neatly on a banner at a protest you forget to attend, but the kind you earn by wading through the muck of genuine difference. In a Europe increasingly divided by wealth, history, ideology, and the collective trauma of having to agree on cheese standards, the idea of unity can feel more like a punchline than a plan. ...

About the Broomstick Welcome to The Broomstick Brief—a blog for those who suspect that the world isn’t quite as rational, peaceful, or democratic as advertised. This is a space for untangling complexity, lifting the curtain on technocratic waffle, and occasionally poking polite fun at the collapsing scaffolding of late-stage capitalism. Here you’ll find long-form analysis, speculative scenarios, and the odd broom closet of critical thought—sweeping through the mess of geopolitics, information warfare, climate collapse, digital security, and the bureaucratic inertia that enables it all. ...