The Matrix Revolutions - Wikiquote
The Matrix: "We meet again, Mr. Anderson!" The Matrix: "We meet again, Mr. Anderson!" The Matrix: "We meet again, Mr. Anderson!" Vhs Tapes,. Visit. The Matrix IV: how Europe changes from Mr Anderson into Neo Better still, read his books. And that we shall have it again and again. .. our ability to persuade others to join us in a campaign to meet common challenges. Today we say farewell to our talented friend, developer and comic book aficionado, Tyler Anderson. Tyler has decided to head back to school.
You are a plague, and we are the cure. View Quote Have you ever stood and stared at it? Marveled at its beauty, its genius? Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious. Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world, where none suffered? Where everyone would be happy? It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world.
But I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through misery and suffering. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this, the peak of your civilization.
I say your civilization because as soon as we started thinking for you, it really became our civilization, which is, of course, what this is all about: Look out that window. You had your time. The future is our world, Morpheus. The future is our time. View Quote Can you hear me, Morpheus? I'm going to be honest with you: Slowly, over the years, bit by bit, but relentlessly all the same. We cannot afford to discard this looming threat as the pet project of a green lobby eager to overstate its case in apocalyptic terms.
Serious scientists and serious governments all over the world, chief among them the 27 member states of the European Union, have charted the cumulative effects of rapidly rising CO-2 emissions into our atmosphere. Here are three major crunches that are global and which demand solutions on a global level. No government alone can hope to insulate its country and people against the harmful effects of either of these three. National measures by themselves are doomed to fail. To paraphrase the immortal Colonel Nathan Jessup: But reality has this nasty habit of popping up anyway and then grabbing you by the throat.
The unmistakable truth is that the globalisation of trade and finance, of technology and information, has bound together the fates of countries, economies and people in ways never seen before in history.
It has brought unprecedented freedom and prosperity to hundreds of millions. But what if these connections start to come apart? What happens if one day we wake up and we discover we have been living in Thomas A. It could be more disruptive and more devastating than anything we have seen before. Unless we learn to be Neo very quickly. How did we get here? So what precisely is a crisis anyway?
Warranty & Support
I think it is a question worth asking, because we are stumbling from one to the other these days. Are they somehow related? I believe they are. I think the energy crunch, the financial crisis and the threat of climate change are intertwined and reinforce each other. Let me run a few numbers by you.
Numbers that you have been reading about on the front pages. Numbers that will put things into perspective: That is one-third of the total received by the US federal government inincluding social security, income tax, corporate tax, and all other receipts. It is billion dollars more than has been spent on the Iraq war since It is billion dollars more than what was spent on social security benefits. It is the sum that equals the annual cost of energy imports for the United States.
But these numbers pale in comparison to what the International Energy Agency has calculated the world will need to invest between now and into renewing our energy infrastructure: Nothing works like a crisis to concentrate the mind. The see the Matrix for what it is, a make believe world. For the past quarter century, the gospel has been that the markets are always right. That they will solve any problem, regardless of its nature. And do it faster, better, cheaper. Who could argue with that?
The Soviet Union collapsed under the weight of its own internal contradictions and decades of political repression and economic mismanagement. That other big country, China, so enticed by the clever diplomacy of Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, decided to open up to the world and join the market economy — sort of.
India, Brazil, Russia, and others followed. As more and more countries began to participate in this new global order of free trade and free capital, literally hundreds of millions of people have been lifted out of abject poverty. We live in a world that is immensely inter-connected. What we do here has an effect elsewhere in the world. There truly is a butterfly effect.
We see it every day, most clearly, in the area of trade. If you take a screwdriver to the back of your laptop, you will find that its various components have been manufactured in such places as Vietnam, China and Austria. The raw materials to build these components have been sourced in Australia or the Congo. It was probably a Danish shipping company that transported those raw materials from their source to the other side of the world, to a port that was constructed by Dutch engineers.
Which would make him an alumnus, just like senator Obama and president George W. By all accounts, this globalised world, and all the good it has brought us, provided a magnificent spectacle.
But looks can be deceptive. What we failed to understand - or chose to ignore - is that this global system of massive outsourced production and boundless trade has been riding a monster wave of cheap oil and cheap credit. Thanks to both, it made business sense to relocate production to places with an abundance of cheap labour and to tie everything together in hugely complex global supply chains.
This system has been good for many developing and emerging economies. It made it possible for those outside the Western hemisphere to catch up and begin to partake in what has been the biggest growth in global prosperity in the history of humankind.
But now the two principal factors on which this system hinges have changed. The business case for this globalised system rested on the assumption of an infinite supply of cheap energy. But energy is no longer so cheap. Not in monetary terms and certainly not in terms of its derived costs to our global environment.
Or listen to the chief executive of DHL in Europe, who states that the global supply chains are in turmoil. Where manufacturers previously thought nothing of shipping finished goods from China to the United States and Europe, they are now looking for shorter supply chains.
The present priority is proximity to markets. In a recent business review with high-tech companies, DHL found that customers were looking at assembly in Europe rather than supply out of Asia. This chief executive reckons that the world is moving from globalisation to regionalisation. The price of oil may have halved in the last three months, but it is still three times the average price of twenty dollars that was considered the norm for this model of global supply chains.
We are running out of fossil fuels. Not because we are not alert to the need to use this precious commodity as efficiently as we can; but because we have been joined by new and big economies, like China, which also need lots of it.
The last twenty years the world has been awash in liquidity. Money was cheap and abundant, and so allowed for this enormous global economic expansion. The high end of the financial industry created its own Matrix, which allowed it to expand even further. Bankers who we thought were prudent caretakers of our capital took on the appearance of ever so many Agents Smith, true believers in the Matrix, feeding on it, keeping it alive. Capital is either being hoarded or in full flight to safety.
One of the structural consequences of this financial crisis will be the emergence of regional financial hubs in the Gulf and the Far East, which will service their regional markets the way Wall Street and The City have done sofar.
The bankers in New York and London are under no illusion that they will lose market share to these new regional centers of finance. As the world economy enters recession in some places and a prolonged economic slowdown in others, interest rates are likely to stay relatively low, but credit itself will not be extended so carelessly as it has been in the last fifteen years. Prudent banking is bound to make a strong comeback. Proximity to markets, in other words.
Time for an audit of politics I am convinced that in the midst of our troubles and uncertainty a better world is within our grasp. Neo, Trinity and Morpheus can prevail. We live in an age where so much of our daily lives is shaped by global events and global politics. It would be a great start if we could see it.
Remember there is no spoon. There is no world government and there will never be one. My mandate was given by you. By the people of this country on the basis of its particular political system. The same applies to the next President of the United States and the men and women in Congress he must work with. France and Britain are no different. And, each in their own way, neither are China, Russia, India, or Brazil.
The power invested in government and politics is a national affair. We are facing global problems that demand global solutions. That is not the way of the world. They know this as well as we do. But what these governments worry about even more are the billions of people who want the same economic lifestyle that we are enjoying.
The trick is to find ways to square the circle through new and better ways of international cooperation. High-minded lectures from the West will not achieve that. Therefore, above all, we must talk about what I believe is perhaps our most important task: To a large extent this depends on our ability to regain our moral authority.
Long have we have viewed it as self-evident. Up to the point where we have become terribly complacent about it. But as other regions and countries gain in wealth and power, they no longer accept Western leadership as the normal state of affairs.
We no longer simply tell others what to do. Certainly not in times when faith in the principles of our political and economic culture has been shaken to the core. Restoring moral authority, however, begins here — at home. We need to take a long, hard look in the mirror and ask ourselves: Our task, in these uncertain times, is to rediscover our faith in the promise of progress, in our will to make sure that the next generation will inherit a better world than ours.
This complex of crises serves as a massive correction to an ideology we allowed to get completely out of hand. When we ended the Cold War and declared victory for the West, we made one big mistake: We forgot that it was our pragmatism and sense of moderation that had given us our moral authority and which had made us strong and adaptable.
Maybe you remember Ronald Reagan. One of the truly great presidents of the United States. Who restored confidence to a troubled and divided nation in the wake of the Vietnam War.
Who broke the deadlock of the Cold War. But he is also remembered for that one slogan that won him the presidential elections in What he called the nine scariest words in the English language: When the going gets tough, governments get going.
But somehow, somewhere along the way, we seem to have forgotten about that. At best a service provider, at worst a blood sucker. At the core of both democracy and capitalism is the idea of competition. We compete for votes and power, just as we compete for market share. But we the citizens deluded ourselves by thinking that the principles of the market apply in equal measure to the principles of politics. We politicians succumbed to the rhetoric of the free market and came to see ourselves as managers rather than political leaders.
We lost sight of the fact that what is good for each of us individually, may not always be so good for us collectively. Our politics made the mistake of equating the citizen with the consumer, and we engineered our political institutions to behave as just another competitor in the free market for service delivery. But — and let me state this as clearly as possible — this is not the fault of capitalism or the free market. You cannot fault business for wanting to make bigger profits.
- Agent Smith quotes
- The Matrix IV: how Europe changes from Mr Anderson into Neo
Nor can you blame the consumer for looking for the best bargains. Both are behaving rationally and in ways that are expected of them. Yet, as we see now, the net result is that we have struck a path that we simply cannot keep to. We need to restore government to its true function. Which is to protect and secure, to bring order and to mobilize society to face common threats.
And, above all, to take responsibility for the issues of the longer term, which cannot be left to the short-term considerations of the market. In a way, it is the opposite of a system. It is hive of human energy, with no specific goal or particular ambitions other than self-improvement.
Whether we talk about the meltdown in the financial markets, the huge threat of climate change, or the creeping uncertainty in our societies about the forces of globalization, the common theme goes back to our ability to order and shape our immediate environment. To regain that ability, we need to escape this Matrix that we believe we live in. We need to shake off this misconception that we are somehow subject to forces beyond our control. That our actions do not matter all that much.
Or will make much of a difference. And that each of us, therefore, enjoys some kind of implicit license, an unspoken right, to while away our time on this planet in search of self-centered gratification, in whatever form we may happen to like it today.
Or, at the other end of the spectrum, to wallow in bitter recriminations and self-pity, because so many others appear to be enjoying what we do not have. This is what I sense in our society. A kind of benign fatalism bordering on dangerous nihilism. That we are somehow destined to decline. Evaluating and rigorous self-criticism are part of our DNA.
At the core is our fundamental belief that government is beholden to its citizens and must always account for itself. That is why we have invented a political system based on liberty, the rule of law and the separation of powers. This system was not designed to make life easy for those in power.
On the contrary, it was designed to make their political life very difficult. Government is never off the hook, it is always under scrutiny. Now this political system may strike many as messy and sometimes chaotic, but its genius is that it stores tremendous powers of rejuvenation.
For the intercourse between citizen and government generates a constant drive to adapt and to improve. As I said earlier, I believe we find ourselves today once again in the midst of another great audit. These crises should open our eyes to the fact that we do not live in the virtual reality of a matrix. We have choices — and we have some big ones to make in the coming years.
We’ll Meet Again, Mr. Anderson! • The Breakroom
A new era for Europe The world will become a bit rounder again, then, after Thomas Friedman had earlier pronounced it to be flat. Globalization will assume a new face in the coming years.
And I think that if we handle it well, if we resist the siren of protectionism, if we do not confuse healthy patriotism with unsound nationalism, then this new face will smile on us in Europe. If proximity to markets is the driver of the new economic order, then Europe suddenly looks a very good place to be.
What strikes me today, probably more than I ever realized, is that the investments we have made over the last decades in our European cooperation, and the institutions we created to facilitate and guarantee that cooperation, are paying off in what we all agree are testing times.
Let me tick off the most important ones and explain why I think the European project in the 21st century will prove a success at least equal to the success of the preceding fifty years.
We need to retrace our steps out of this cul-de-sac that the past decade of the politics of trivia have led us into. I will state my case first in classic economic terms.