Vision Global Britain 2025

1.0 Our Campaign Objectives

Vision Global Britain 2025

Our Vision Global Britain 2025 campaign harnesses the predictive power of the second stage of the Five Stages of Empire, to anticipate and socially engineer Britain’s post-Brexit path. It aims to harness the national energy that needs to be amplified and focused, expressing the aspirations of the British population for greater affluence and increased global influence. Our work has shown that all self-organising systems in a state of expansion find their way to recognise and implement the components of our Vision Global Britain 2025 strategy.

However, this campaign is about creating the most-productive path in the shortest possible time, by applying the lessons of history to shape our strategy to return to a global maritime paradigm. 

Global Britain’s rise represents an event that could have a hugely beneficial impact on global geopolitics, when viewed in the context of the cycle of the decline of the Western Christian Super Empire (WCSE).

To gain confidence in the power of our Five Stages of Empire model to shape Britain’s strategy, it is worth reviewing our success in predicting every step of the Brexit process from 2012 onwards. 

2.0 The Importance Of Brexit Globally


Global Forecaster has always maintained that Brexit would have far-reaching consequences not only for the UK and then the EU, but for the whole of the Western Christian Super Empire and the construct of democracy. This is because it took place at a time when all the other nations of the WCSE were in decline, especially America, while facing a rising and aggressive Chinese hegemonic challenge. Britain may be relatively small in comparison to China, but could yet tip the scales in balance of global democracies facing Xi’s dictatorship on the road to WWIII in 2025. If this seems fanciful then it is worth remembering Britain’s success at creating a vaccine and then implementing a rollout faster than any other nation. This is a clear indication of high levels of national energy latent within Britain. National energy is critical to surviving a large-degree entropy event like a pandemic or war. However, for Britain to maximise its beneficial impact in the struggle against the Chinese and possibly Russian dictatorships, it will first have to maximise its economic rate of expansion with a simultaneous military expansion. This makes our Vision Britain 2025 campaign even more pertinent and urgent.

3.0 Understanding Brexit Using The Five Stages Of Empire Model


Brexit was not an error or momentary mistake driven by popularism or made by thoughtless, maverick Brexiteers. Rather, it was the product of a predictable and necessary human cycle to unlock the next phase of Britain’s growth.

In 2012, at the London Olympics, Britain won second place in the medals table, which triggered one of Global Forecaster’s key Breaking The Code of History signals for rising national energy. This almost infallible signal of a nation rising through the ranks suggested that Britain, unlike its cousin nations of the WCSE (the EU and America), had started a new empire cycle from the mid-1970s, kicked into life by Margaret Thatcher. The implications were profound and many. Foremost of which was that a rising Britain would inevitably leave a declining and collapsing EU. However, before it could do so there would have to be a political upheaval of a huge magnitude. 

The old and new cycles of Britain

When we applied the Five Stages of Empire model that underpins the predictions of Breaking the Code of History, it became obvious that Britain was in the late stage of regionalisation, i.e. phase one of five. Further supportive evidence to the Olympic medal success came from indicators such as an expanding population and the rise of the Brexit party under Nigel Farage. The Brexit party was, in essence, initially a protest movement, but the feedback loop of the response of Government only strengthened the power of its arguments. It was obvious that Farage was the key catalyst for the nation’s need to express and manifest a mechanism to expand – one that demanded a dramatic change of course by leaving the EU. This movement became stronger with time, drawing traditional Conservative supporters to their cause. The situation became so critical that, to entice his lost Brexit supporters back into the Conservative fold, Cameron was forced to promise a definitive, once-in-a-lifetime EU referendum vote if he won the election.

From that moment, we were able to predict Cameron’s election victory, using our election models, which then implied that there would indeed be an EU referendum. We were then able to use our model of a civil war of regionalisation to further predict the outcome of the referendum and the path to Brexit – often against all popular expert opinion. 

The essence of a regional civil war is that the expanding population at the bottom of society’s pyramid demands positive change from the narrow leadership at the top of the pyramid, who are left-brained, out of touch with the electorate’s needs and views, deeply entitled and arrogant to the plight of those less fortunate. When those demands are not met, the polarisation of the civil war increases. This ultimately seeks the removal of the left-brained enfranchised leadership, with their controlling leadership dynamic, and replacing them with a right-brained leadership structure with an expansive and strategic mindset that allows the system to grow rapidly beyond its borders. Historically, regional civil wars have always been bloody and ruthless in a Darwinistic selection of right-brained leadership that is tried and tested in battle. At the point of victory, the new leadership will inevitably be right-brained and will lead a militarised society that is ready to take on its neighbours with force. In essence, the Brexit civil war was a re-run of the English civil war, thankfully without the bloodshed, but rather was conducted within the boundaries of democracy. This is one of the rare times in history that this has happened, suggesting a significant and hopeful step for all human societies.

Using our unique social model, we achieved a sequence of accurate predictions by applying our behavioural overlay to the passage of events. We provided real-time insight predictions and a greater understanding as to the social forces at work in society. This included the battle within the Conservative Party and the rise of Boris Johnson as the personification of right-brained leadership.

4.0 Brexit Success And Unfinished Evolutions

The Brexit civil war was a historic moment for both Britain and mankind because the energy of regional civil war is one of the most powerful social dynamics within the lifecycle of a human system. In all other cases in history, civil wars have been truly bloody affairs between a population that is split down the middle and then fights for control of the nation's future. During the battle, the left-brained enfranchised leaders struggle to contain the right-brained forces of revolution. The Darwinistic, entropic nature of battle always favours the right-brained system, as right-brain leadership copes with entropy and battle far better than that of iterative left-brained leaders. By the end of the traditional bloodletting of a civil war, the inevitably successful rebellion will have become almost 100% right-brained and the left-brained opposition will have suffered death or banishment from public life. This brutal social engineering through combat maximises the right-brained creative and expansive leadership of the nation, in turn maximising the chances of rapid expansion in the first steps of the second stage of expansion to empire.

Thankfully, Brexit remained peaceful and the forces of democracy and law contained its energy of the process of social transformation. It was a truly remarkable achievement on the scale of human evolution; one that brings hope that in the decades ahead we might find the solution to historically intractable problems between nations without wars. In addition, this peaceful social transformation reaffirmed the power of British democracy when America and the EU’s democratic processes are failing. 

However, the removal of the bloody war component of this social evolution does have one major downside. From a human social dynamic, the reason war is an integral part of human societies is that, through its Darwinian processes, the weak leaders and systems are replaced by stronger ones with greater anti-entropy, advancing human society as a whole. In the case of Brexit, Johnson and his merry band replaced the left-brained leadership of the Conservative Party that was epitomised by May. Boris was accompanied by a right-brained leadership cadre of politicians who all became ministers because they each expounded the new vision for Global Britain. One that is a perfect reflection of nations entering the second stage of expansion to empire.

However, the right-brained change of the guard at the top did not cascade down to the other components of government. Although Cummings was a deeply flawed individual in many ways, his identification as to the need to change the structure of government was spot on. But because he was emotionally unintelligent, lacked empathy and was extreme in his expression of his goals, the conventional left-brained establishment was able to isolate him and orchestrate his ejection, leaving them to continue with their inefficient ways. In so doing, they rebuffed the attack and facilitated their continuation. The consequence of this is that we have a right-brained political leadership structure dependent on a left-brained government apparatus that has long since passed its sell-by date and urgently needs radical reform. 

The second missing component associated with a peaceful civil war was that Britain has not effectively militarised itself with right-brained wartime leaders, modern equipment and integration between the body politic and the military. The construct of Global Britain is by its nature expansive and with the decline of America there will be many vacuums which Britain will be impelled to fill. However, that very expansion places it on course for a head-on collision with China, which is in a similar if not more advanced expansive state. That dynamic, coupled with the collapse of Pax America, makes massively increased defence spending, with the radical reform of the leaders of Britain’s armed forces, an urgent imperative. 

A Second Wave of Government Evolution Is Ahead

Civil wars often unfold in a sequence of three waves as the process is chaotic and at times and exhausting. Thus the system requires pauses to consolidate, as it transitions from one construct to a new and adapted model. It was thus so with the English Civil war that unfolded in three distinct stages. The first stage (1642–1646) and second stage (1648–1649) wars pitted the supporters of King Charles I against the supporters of the Long Parliament while the third stage (1649–1651) saw fighting between supporters of King Charles II and supporters of the Rump Parliament.

Today we think of Brexit as being a done deal. However, the underlying social drive and mechanism behind this civil war of regionalisation have yet to complete the process of transformation. The endpoint is defined as when the whole of government is dominated by highly competent right-brained leadership and commensurate thought process. This means that with Johnson's repeated incompetencies and similar failings across government, another phase of change will inevitably unfold, one that will manifest a new and very strong reformist leader to arise from the conservative ranks. Sweeping aside Johnson, and enacting a major evolution of government. Much as Margaret Thatcher once masterminded.

5.0 Bold Reforms Are Urgently Required

The semi-completed nature of the social Brexit transformation to a right-brained government means that its leaders and ministers are at odds with each other at a very fundamental level. The die-hard Remainers in government departments will have adopted a covert strategy that will almost inevitably be sabotaging Brexit. This will compound the problem that the left-brained thought process will fail to see the bold strategies required to maximise Brexit.


The key actions that are required:

  1. The need for the radical expansion and reform of the UK's armed forces, driven through an emergency defence spending programme described in the Now-or-Never Global Forecaster UK Strategic Defence Review 2020 and Vision Global Britain 2025: Defence, The Missing Focus
  2. The need for reform of every aspect of the apparatus of government, by placing bold and decisive right-brained reformers from outside government who are empowered to enact massive efficient and swift decisive changes. Two critical targets for reform are the MoD and the NHS. 

6.0 Brexit Leadership

Boris Johnson

6.1 Johnson’s Leadership

We highlighted back in 2015 that Boris Johnson was the only politician who expounded and resonated with the electorate's values that were commensurate with Britain entering the second phase of expansion to empire. This post-Brexit phase has become known as Global Britain. We said that Johnson's leadership would depend on his ability to deliver his vision, or face replacement. Either way, we predicted that Johnson would, in all probability, be viewed by history as equally as great as Margaret Thatcher. Indeed, his success in concluding Brexit, through what was effectively a civil war, and then creating a vision of the path upon which Britain can travel was masterful.

However, we simultaneously were very critical of Johnson’s shortcomings and failures – not to bring him down, but rather to provide realistic feedback from which mistakes can be learned, and from which better policies can be enacted that befit the needs of an expanding nation. We voiced our concerns in a series of Murrinations Insights, listed below in reverse date order.

  1. Global Britain’s Defective Economic Strategy
  2. Confronting China: The Seduction Of Western Leaders By The CCP – Part 3: Boris Johnson And His Family
  3. Britain Needs To Learn And Grow From Its Failures
  4. Indifference To Incompetence; Time For Boris To Evolve
  5. Boris's Blind Alley
  6. Time For Boris To Evolve
  7. Indifference to Incompetence Linked to the Cycle of Empires
  8. Boris's Crisis of Incompetence
  9. The Battle At The Heart Of Boris's Government
  10. The Battle At The Heart Of The Boris Government Part 2

Johnson sought to model himself upon Churchill, and the irony was that he too, would preside in a time of great danger to Britain. However, Johnson failed to understand that leaders must serve the people they lead and not themselves. A culture that when exhibited at the top of government cascades down through the power structure. In the end, his lack of strategic vision by failing to recognise China as the main global threat, presiding over a lockdown policy as opposed to the voluntary action enacted by Sweden, and his inability to deliver any Brexit commitments, made him unsuitable to captain the Good Ship Global Britain in open waters. What then finally did for him was his narcissistic sense of self and his tenuous relationship with the truth, qualities that when exposed ultimately demanded his removal. But Johnson failures just provided the opportunity that the linear Remainers sought to exploit.

6.2 Truss and The No10 Game of Thrones

Johnson's betrayal of Brexit was that, once in power, he failed to continue the lateralisation process that would have been consistent with the Brexit implementation. He fired Cummings as his agent of change, and then sought to create a presidential culture of control, emulating Trump's presidency to some degree. Thus it was Johnson's ego and incompetence that sabotaged the delivery of Brexit policies that would have accelerated growth. Underlying that failure was the reality that many of the Conservative Party’s MPs were, in reality, linear thinkers seeking to maintain the same policies as the EU, even though the British people had voted to leave. Thus when Johnson took his foot off the Brexit/lateralisation pedal, his MPs failed to hold him to account.

Then came 44 days of Liz Truss, once Johnson was forced out of office by the linear side of the party, led by Rishi Sunak. Consequently a new leadership election was held. In that process, it became clear that Sunak was the MPs' favourite. However, the Conservative membership were not so impressed, as they on the whole support more traditional wealth-creation policies. Indeed, they voted very clearly, with 58% for Truss on a growth agenda. This demonstrated a clear lateral-linear difference between the Conservative MPs and the Conservative Party membership. Truss understood that she would be judged on her policy delivery, and had only two years to make an impact during a time of crisis. At the heart of her policies was the lateralisation of the Civil Service and the implementation of widespread wealth-creation policies to kick-start the UK economy, relative to the EU and the US, in the face of hyperinflation. Her policies were, in Global Forecaster's opinion, the only viable option in the circumstances. However, the all-at-once attempt at implementation showed poor judgement, and fatally exposed her to a massive counter-attack.


Truss was committed to her policies and knew they had to be delivered in less than 24 months. Indeed, the starting gun was prematurely fired when she sacked Tom Scholar, permanent secretary to the Treasury and ardent advocate of higher taxes, as a clear signal of her determination to execute a major change across the Civil Service. Her departure from Sunak's economic policy, which paralleled those of the EU nations, triggered an extreme response of linear survival by MPs, senior secretaries and the broader establishment, who continued to advocate policies of low growth and money printing, which were effectively policies of managed decline.

The counter-consequence to Truss's threatened lateralisation was a linear coup against her and the changes she wanted to implement, in favour of the status quo – even if that status quo is, in effect, enacting the same policies as we would have had in the EU. Which was in direct opposition to the mandate that the party was elected upon, i.e. to execute Brexit adaptations. The inclusion of the UK's TV and press in the coup, to first create an artificial crisis in the markets, was a frightening example of the 'Blob' or deep-state response to prevent change. Make no mistake, this was a coup to put Sunak into the PM's seat. From the moment Truss stupidly sacked Kwarteng, she was a dead woman walking. She would have been better advised to tough it out with him by her side, but in this judgement her weakness was her demise, and her alter ego as Thatcher 2 was exposed as false.

The 1922 committee and its leader Sir Graham Brady were much a part of this coup process. Indeed, it is clear that the end-game of the coup was to design an election process that would put forward Penny Mordaunt against Sunak, guaranteeing that their candidate (Sunak) would be elected.

The Conservative civil war was once more in full swing. In an essentially a lateral-linear battle. The self-sabotage that we witnessed within the party was a disgrace, and suggests that the party as a whole is morally bankrupt, having failed to enact the vision of a resurgent Global Britain. The essential problem is that the party had not lateralised itself to become adaptable in a time of war and hyperinflation, which historically always sweep aside linear leadership. But to make the situation worse we saw a linear coup within the Conservative Party, that to achieve their goals even circumvented its membership. A disaster for the Conservatives, Brexit and the nation.

6.3 Sunak the Linear, aka The Boy Scout, Spells Disaster


Brexit in the Context of the Process of Revolution explained the revolutionary process that frames British politics today and its potential for continued instability. Our concern is that Sunak, based not on his PR image as the nation's saviour, but on the evidence of his past performance, will not be the Prime Minister to deliver Britain from the entropic challenges ahead. He is therefore not the leader Britain or the West so desperately needs at such a precarious time in our history.

6.3.1 Crowned in a Coup As we explained in The No 10 Game of Thrones, Sunak came to power in a backroom Conservative political coup of linear-thinking sensibles, many of whom were cloaked ex-Remainers. A coup that overturned the 2019 election mandate of the people to execute Brexit and adapt by taking advantage of the policy freedoms it enabled. The coup simultaneously overrode the views of the majority of the Conservative Party membership, who had refused to endorse Sunak. As such, Sunak is either: naive and was used by the linear/sensible side of the Conservative Party (aka Gove & co) for their own ends, in which case, he is not the man the nation needs; or he was instrumental in the coup, driven by his hunger for power, in which case his nice-guy persona is just social camouflage for a much more sinister reality that lies beneath. His about-turn on taxes during his hustings with Truss strongly suggests that power, and not integrity, is his currency. Time will tell on this, but there are warning signs aplenty.

6.3.2 Sunak’s Brexit Credentials are, we Suspect, Questionable, even though he is perceived as a staunch Brexiteer. Staunch because since 2015 he has almost always voted for pro-Brexit policies in Parliament against more EU integration, and has almost always voted against Britain’s membership of the bloc, as well as voting against the right to remain for EU nationals. He has also said he voted to leave in the 2016 EU Referendum. Questionable because votes and words are easy, but it is by his actions that he will be judged. So far, there seems little evidence based on his policy implementations as Chancellor, or those in evidence in the early stages of his tenure as PM. Our concern is that Brexit was a convenient conveyor belt to power for Sunak rather than a political conviction. We await to see his true convictions in the manifestation of his policies, especially with respect to raising taxes.

6.3.3 Sunak’s Shaky Financial Credentials His supporters have presented Sunak as the only man with the financial experience to save the nation. But the reality is that he is a king amongst paupers, as his financial experience is relatively limited, limited to spells working initially for Goldman Sachs and later at The Children's Investment Fund as a single stock analyst. His track record speaks for itself and is hardly one of prudence.

Once he became Chancellor he gave away £400bn in unfunded Covid support packages (Truss was lambasted for a £40bn gap). To compound the problem he then failed to ensure that HM government funding took advantage of historically low long-term interest rates through 30-year gilts, or better still a perpetual bond, like the old war loans, missing out on a heaven-sent opportunity to pre-fund a massive expansion in defence. Investment in the navy, which historically enhances trade flows, would have helped increase deterrence. The result instead is that, as interest rates increased, some £20-30bn has been added to the nation's annual interest-rate burden. To cover for his poor management of the nation's finances, he then raised taxes to a point where the tax burden was higher than it had been for decades. A policy that he knows seems dedicated to continuing in his strangulation of the British people. Locked into the dogma that mistakenly argues that higher taxes equate to greater revenues.

To cap these clear failures he blocked any defence spending increase above a meagre £16bn over four years, even after Russia invaded Ukraine and the threat to the nation skyrocketed.

6.3.4 Sunak’s Total Failure to Defend the Realm Despite the numerous shortfalls already apparent in Sunak’s policies, there is one clear policy weakness that stands head and shoulders above all others; the defence of the realm. A deficit that makes him 100% the wrong person to be PM in today's geopolitical environment. However, with the imminent threat of an overt NATO-Russia war and Britain being Putin’s number-one target, coupled with the increasingly bellicose messaging of Xi now he is in total control of China, what Britain desperately needs is a wartime lateral-thinking Prime Minister. Sunak’s linear mindset, total lack of interest or experience in defence, and most importantly his reluctance to consider its vital importance, is without doubt now the nation's greatest weakness and liability. Making him a wholly unsuitable choice for PM. Despite being at war with Russia via Ukraine, Sunak continues to strangle our emasculated armed forces. As the path to WW3 accelerates it will become clear that Sunak is the wrong PM and has acted irresponsibly. It will be his downfall, just as it was for Chamberlin.

6.3.5 The Hubris of Linearity The evidence is clear that rather than being a safe pair of hands Sunak will inevitably follow the US and EU's policies of managed decline, rather than desperately needed Brexit adaptations. He used his first major speech of 2023 to make five promises to voters, the economic elements of which demonstrate that he is way out of his depth with the mechanisms of the world that are unfolding. That he will halve the rate of inflation, grow the economy, and make sure the national debt shrinks. With the annual rate of CPI inflation at 10.7% in the year to November 2022 (shown in the above OBR forecast graph) this means the PM has 12 months to get CPI down to close to 5%. He has no tools to implement such a decline in inflation, but instead like many others with linear thought processes is just hoping that inflation will fall and he will get the political credit. Indeed, all his economic promises are based on this single premise of falling inflation, cessation of rate hikes and a short recession before the world returns to the normality of the past two decades. A view that we believe is totally erroneous and hubristic. Indeed the fact that Sunak has made such a prediction, linking his future to the Bank of England's projections, which have been totally wrong, shows how linear thinkers cluster together even more tightly as the world departs from their expectations. This delusionary behaviour is exactly why they are poor adaptors and fail in times of entropic events.

We predict that Sunak will be replaced by a lateral thinker, whether from a coalition government, or from within the Conservative Party (Johnson could be back) or from a new UK political party.


6.4 Brexit in the Context of the Process of a Social Revolution

History shows there is a distinct pattern to the path of revolutions, that are much like the swings of a pendulum. The process of revolution commences at the extreme of one swing where there is a massive social imbalance between the top and bottom of the pyramid of a society's structure. A point at which a seemingly minor event can spark a social explosion and revolution. From that point onwards, the pendulum is set in motion towards the other extreme of its swing, at which point the revolution reaches its extreme incarnation/expression, which is equally unsustainable as it represents too dramatic a change for the system to absorb. So it starts back in the other direction and commences multiple oscillations around the midpoint, with each swing having less aptitude than the last, until the energy is expended and the nation is set on a new course. Whilst each revolution is driven by its own cause or vision, we would argue that the essence of the civil war/revolutionary dynamic is the battle between linear, established collective values, and those of adaptive change, driven by the lateral component of the social system.

6.4.1 The French Revolution saw the replacement of a king and aristocracy with a revolutionary council, which was in turn deposed and replaced by Emperor Napoleon, who once more exercised singular power. But in the process, the revolutionaries created the first French Republic (1792–1814), which changed the very nature of France. With the fall of Napoleon in 1814 (excepting the 100 days in 1815 when Napoleon returned to power) came the Bourbon Restoration, which was a constitutional monarchy that lasted until 1830 when the the July Revolution swept it aside for Louis Philippe, who ascended the throne not as "King of France" but as "King of the French". He lasted until 1848, until the next revolution resulted in the French Second Republic (1848–1852), which quickly ended with the accession of Napoleon III, whose reign was ended in 1870 by defeat and humiliation in the Franco-Prussian war, which had the consequence of ending the monarchy in France once and for all. This brought to an end some 80 years of pendulum swings between monarchy and republic.Although there had been a fundamental shift, in that the republican creed gave far greater social mobility to the common Frenchman, than had the previous aristocracy, that had precluded the majority by their birth status. With the  French surrender to the Prussians came the French Third Republic, which ended in 1940 with the subjugation by Germany in WW2 and then restarted with the French Fourth Republic (1946–1958). Until the need for a new, revised, and more liberal constitution begat the French Fifth Republic (1958–present).

6.4.2 In the Russian Revolution of 1917, the USSR was created and a tsar was replaced by first Vladimir Lenin (1917–1924) then by Joseph Stalin (1924–1953). Both led in the mould of an cruel emperor with total power, just like the one they replaced. However, there had been a fundamental shift, in that the communist creed gave far greater social mobility to the common Russian than had the previous aristocracy, that had precluded the majority by their birth status.

6.4.3 In the English Civil War of 1642 to 1851, a Catholic king was deposed, and replaced with a Protestant dictator in the form of Cromwell, who in later years was increasingly brutal. The next swing of the pendulum came with the restoration of the Protestant monarchy King Charles II (1660–1685) followed by the brief reign of his younger brother King James II (1685–1688). Thankfully for the English, the number of swings of the pendulum were relatively limited. In the post-civil war era, there were two great legacies; that of the sustained and established power of the Parliament, and that England had commenced its path along the second stage of its empire, as it fought its neighbours Holland and then Spain and France.

6.4.5 Brexit commenced the pendulum swing with the Cameron government. After years of machinations and strife, Brexit finally took place under Johnson. Truss, in her aborted premiership, represented the extreme swing of the pendulum to the lateral or adaptable mindset, before the recent linear (sensible) coup which inevitably started the swing back to the centre under Sunak. Cameron was a weak (sensible) coalition leader and we fear that Sunak will be very similar in his leadership style. However, whatever Sunak's policies turn out to be, Britain has left the EU, which will in the years ahead most probably implode and fracture north and south.

Thus the real question is whether Sunak will make the most of the new hard-won Brexit freedoms, and most critically will he be strong enough to ensure the defence of the realm in the face of Putin's increasingly direct aggression to the UK, and Xi's expected aggression. There is, of course, another key question raised by the pendulum swing model for revolution, and that is how many more swings will be seen in the UK before a degree of stability is attained. We suspect that Sunak will be the swing that charts a course away from the Brexit vision, but that he too will reach a point where he is replaced by a swing back towards Brexit adaptation.

So in summary, the evidence is that political instability will continue inside the Conservative Party, affecting the nation for some years ahead. Inevitably resulting in the rise of a faction or new party to the right, occupying the old ground of traditional conservatives, but hopefully with a developed social conscience!

7.0 A Grand Strategy To Execute Vision Global Britain 2025


Boris Johnson has done a brilliant job of sharing his vision for Global Britain through the Brexit process, transforming the nation’s mindset from a continental adjunct to the EU, to the return to a global maritime paradigm. This vision is perfectly resonant with the second stage of empire upon which Britain has embarked, and which is entirely appropriate for Britain's phase of its empire cycle. This resonance with the unconscious needs of the nation and a human system explains the core element of Johnson's political popularity.

However, to make his vision a reality, Johnson needs a very clear grand geostrategy which then has to be rigorously executed over the next decade. A strategy that, to date, has been notably absent. There are three examples from which Britain should learn.

  1. Greece, when facing its greatest threat from Persia, Themistocles anticipated and marshalled the disparate city-states into a consolidated Greece force, while specifically masterminding the navel component of the defence and then leading it in the battle to a dramatic and successful conclusion. In the process, he not only repelled the Persians but melded the Greeks into one nation who then, under Phillip of Macedon and his son, the truly great Alexander, conquered the known world.
  2. America had the works of Alfred Thayer Mahan which guided presidents in their expansionary strategy to become the global naval power, by dissecting the very nature of Pax Britannia’s strategy and then seeking to challenge it head-on.
  3. Germany's Second Reich had the great Count Bismarck to politically marshal the disparate Prussian states into one nation post the Franco-Prussian War. In so doing, he forged Germany in fire and formulated its expansionary strategy.

In each example, specific individuals formulated and then articulated a grand strategy that they either enacted themselves or passed on to leaders who then followed through with the plan. The British Empire certainly had a grand strategy to control the world via its oceans; one that can inform Global Britain’s new geostrategy today.

The creation of an effective grand geostrategy should be based on:

  • The state of the nation for which it is formulated.
  • The state of other competitor nations, while allowing for their respective strategies.
  • The constrictions are provided by geography and demographics.
  • The competition for resources with other nations.
  • The military strengths and weaknesses of the nation and its competitors.
  • The potential threats to both the nation and its expansionary strategy.

If we need any inspiration, we should remember that only recently, in 1996, the Chinese formulated an incredibly effective geostrategy, one that in less than 25 years has seen them rise to challenge America on an almost equal footing. This Chinese strategy should be an inspiration to Johnson as to the benefits of such a process, with the advantage that, when successful, it enshrines its originator (AKA BJ) for prosperity!

However, today in Britain, grand strategies are as rare as unicorns. In the era of the decline of the Western Christian Super Empire, when Britain is swimming against the tide, coupled with lacklustre modern British politicians and iterative government departments and agencies, the current government advisers have demonstrated a very limited grasp of strategy and anticipation of events. Skills that, when combined, allow for setbacks that can be turned into opportunities that fit within a much larger geostrategic plan.

So, who could provide a similar role for Johnson and Global Britain? The obvious conclusion is that Global Britain's new geostrategic plan will have to come from outside the system of government and then be fed into the national strategy via the PM, i.e., Johnson himself from the top down. That is where Global Forecaster's Vision Global Britain 2025 campaign comes into play.

8.0 The Geopolitical Environment

Britain’s outcomes in the years ahead depend on both its own internal transformation and its foreign policy’s ability to maximise the geopolitical environment in the age-old competition of empires. Over the past five years, Britain has changed direction and struck out on its own by choosing the Brexit path. Simultaneously, the world around Britain has changed as the key geopolitical trends have accelerated. Foremost of these is the decline of American power and the rise of China. This makes the world that Global Britain has emerged into a very dangerous one indeed, one which is fraught with the risk of unfolding peer-to-peer conflicts. This geopolitical environment presents both opportunities and challenges:

  1. The opportunities are based on Global Britain now being the only expanding nation of the old WCSE. As such, it could play a vital part in filling the American vacuum of decline and similarly will act as a centre for a new political alliance once the EU disintegrates in the years ahead. The special relationship will inevitably change because America is declining and Britain is rising. This is the converse of the dynamic from 1945 when the term ‘special relation’ was coined.
  2. The challenges derive from China’s accelerated hegemonic challenge, which, based on Global Forecaster’s current predictions, will in all probability erupt into hostility by 2025. Consequently, Britain needs to build up its defence forces to join with its democratic allies to deter such a conflict. The imminent invasion of Taiwan means that the world will complete the bifurcation process that started with Trump and will inevitably end with a new Asia-Pacific iron curtain. What is not apparent is that, as the only expansive Western nation, Britain’s global agenda places it in a headlong inevitable clash with expanding China. If we are to survive, Britain needs to maximise its growth with a perfectly executed strategy. 

Britain will need to reorganise its resource and supply chains to reflect the bifurcation of the world and China as our strategic competitor. Looking back to the Cold War, the idea that the West had any economic dependence on the USSR would have been laughable. Going forward, China should be treated the same way, with a national ‘confront and contain’ strategy.

Now is also the time to create a clear national geostrategy for Britain over the next 5, 10 and 15 years. The rapidly shifting geopolitical tectonic plates associated with American decline, which have been exacerbated by the pandemic, have created a power vacuum. This is a vacuum that Britain, if strategically focused, will be able to expand into so that it can manifest its post-Brexit vision and simultaneously bolster a waning Western world against the very present danger of Chinese hegemonic ambition.

9.0  The Key Tenets Of A Geostrategy


Our Vision Global Britain 2025 campaign seeks to correct the loss of the key elements of social evolution as a result of a peaceful civil war while seeking to offer a perspective based on the principles of Breaking the Code of History, which is the internal strategy focused on the character of new Global Britain and the external strategy relating to the home and foreign policy.

9.1 The Internal Strategy


This is the social engineering needed to consciously compensate for the peaceful nature of the Brexit civil war and to maximise economic growth.

  1. Ensure that the best leaders rise to run the nation. Run a campaign of great leadership. Define what we expect as a nation from our leaders and who the icons are that we seek to emulate. 
  2. Encourage emulation whereby Boris Johnson and all politicians lead by example. 
  3. Create a national school of leadership. Recognising and understanding the Five Stages of Empire allows us to understand when, and in what form, heroes manifest in a social system. But it goes deeper than that, as it allows us to define the behaviour of the most-productive heroes of past empires and distil their essence into an iconic leadership model. This model can then be taught to both current and future leaders of society, to maximise anti-entropy and growth at any point on the curve.
  4. Create and reinforce a clear definition of the national values of Global Britain that society will expose in this second cycle of empire going forward. Articulate values for a new, truly multi-cultural Britain based on a meritocracy. Then define what it is to be British as part of an aspirational Global Britain.
  5. Increase national risk appetite and creativity. Encourage risk-taking processes at all levels of society with rewards and recognition including tax breaks, new national campaigns and increased availability of capital, but not from the Chinese.
  6. Social cohesioncollective values and self-responsibility. Create a multi-cultural meritocracy, with values of balanced wealth generation and distribution, new national campaigns, encourage early learning and self-responsibility across all levels of society. A special focus on fitness and wellbeing.
  7. National health and pride. Change the NHS to the best practice insurance system, encourage gut health programmes, new national campaigns to combat obesity and encourage health and wellbeing on a national level.
  8. The national sense of duty. New national campaigns which encourage service over self. National service, if focused on growing the potential of recruits, could be a powerful tool to re-energise Britain's society. 
  9. Optimism and confidence – national belief. Keep winning at sports on a global level, demonstrating high levels of national energy by providing funding from lottery sources. 

This raises the question as to the possibility of such a concept being taught by a national institution, socially modifying the behaviour of Britons to be more anti-entropic. Thus potentially breaking the human unconscious collective behaviours that have so far governed our past and present, transforming them into more conscious and consistently productive choices. Britain is ready for such a national institution, as we sit on the cusp of a phase of significant expansion as the new Global Britain.

9.2.  The External Strategy 

Boris Johnson

Britain needs to rediscover the strategic principles of the British Empire by seeking to return to a global maritime economy, while remembering the period when Protestant England stood alone in Europe in the mid-17th century. All measures should be taken to ensure that the sea lanes remain open with the imperative of free trade, simultaneously mitigating the following threats:

  • China
  • Russia
  • The financial collapse of the Doomsday Bubble
  • The damage from rising inflation, leading to stagflation if the economy cannot outgrow inflation
  • Construction of free trade and maritime access
  • Expansive Islam

Global Britain’s strategy should have four key pillars (for more details please see below this summary)

Royal Navy
  1. Build a powerful military that is embedded within the fabric of society. Oversee a renaissance in the British military using modern revolutions in military affairs to maximise their effect. Increase military investment to 5% and export weapons technology to allies who share common values – the threat from the rise of China and Russia will drive this process, but time is running out for us to effectively respond. Detailed in our Now or Never Report below.
  2. Build a high-growth economy resistant to high levels of inflation founded on several competitive USP solutions:  
    1. Establish a low flat tax regime to escape the stagflation tsunami. This to be structured over five years, to attract foreign capital with strong tax incentives for new investment into UK PLC, reducing the need for the use of more national debt, by increasing investment and tax revenues.
    2. Encourage right-brained entrepreneurship and innovation to maximise the use of debt to create long-term growth.
    3. Build a global maritime trading economy with a large mercantile fleet and grow UK shipbuilding capacity.
    4. Minimise government bureaucracy, as it kills creativeness.
    5. Energy security via emergency implementation to a green nuclear/hydrogen-based economy, reducing inflation.
    6. Increase national resilience by securing national resource/supply chains/food security.
    7. Avoid being consumed by healthcare. Lift the burden of the cost of healthcare by replacing the NHS with an insurance-based system with government subsidies.
    8. Develop a national infrastructure with government investment in critical and innovative infrastructure, which stimulates the economy and increases competition.
    9. Become a scientific superpower by encouraging:
      1. larger numbers of scientists in higher education
      2. innovation via right-brained entrepreneurs and operators
      3. copious access to capital for start-ups and early growth businesses
      4. the protection of  intellectual capital
      5. new next-generation technologies, i.e., 3D printing and new manufacturing processes 
  3. Expand global influence by:
    1. developing a strong, consistent foreign policy integrating strategic vision and intelligence services, plus predictive social models like Breaking the Code of History, to anticipate opportunities and obstacles
    2. creating a policy of ‘confront and contain’ to deter China
    3. building up a diversified portfolio of global trade, strengthening links with democratic allies in the Indo-Pacific and resource-rich Africa
    4. only trading with other democracies and do not trade with China
    5. increasing the size of the Royal Navy, which is critical to securing our resource chains
    6. rejuvenating the Commonwealth

4. Global Britain’s Energy Security and Climate Challenges:

  1. Recognise that climate change is a clear and present danger to the nation, and requires negative carbon targets but even then is lower in priority than the threat of China by 2025.
  2. Use climate change to exert Global Britain’s global leadership qualities and vision, and export our new green technology.
  3. Combine a green agenda with an energy security programme. 
  4. Build a civilian nuclear industry based on small prefab Thorium reactors and lead in fusion power development.
  5. Prioritise new thinking to create swift changes.
  6. Introduce financial incentives in the form of the Californian carbon credit scheme that gives credit for carbon sinks.
  7. Lead the world in carbon sequestration technology.

Britain has been relatively quick to recognise that climate change is real and is a clear and present danger to the nation. However, it has been very slow to recognise that, to achieve their bold goals, it requires negative carbon targets to be adopted that include the recognition of the value of carbon sequestration technologies, which to date are expounded in the Californian carbon credit scheme.

Energy Insecurity

In its rush to implement lower-emission power production, Britain has irresponsibly and recklessly abandoned any semblance of energy security. The replacement of coal power by gas power, upon which the nation depends on imports, has also simultaneously reduced its strategic gas reserves to irresponsibly low levels, reducing the nation’s ability to cope with a supply shock to almost zero. Indeed, the recent sharp rises in gas prices have demonstrated how vulnerable that has made Britain to gas price inflation, which is now controlled by Russia across Europe. A position that is compounded when high pressure covers the UK and reduced wind power generation amounts to a trickle. Thus, we urgently need to increase national gas reserves by a factor of 20 in the year ahead in an emergency programme.

UK Power
gas storage
Russian Gas

Meanwhile, Britain has not invested in nuclear energy production, and what new plants it was engaged in building it has been slow to prevent CCP companies from being involved with the risk of compromising operations by remote backdown methods in a crisis. What is clear is that Britain needs a new emergency programme to vastly enlarge our nuclear power production capability to provide the base levels for national power generation. This would prevent any future inflationary pressures in supply constraints that would feed into national inflation rates. This could be supplemented by tidal energy, which is reliable and potentially abundant around the British Isles with its powerful tidal streams.

Emergency Measures

One thing for certain is that over the past decade the Conservatives have presided over the most disastrous energy policy since Britain's industrialisation, one reminiscent of that of Eskom in South Africa. Much like defence, this policy needs to be rectified, urgently, in the months or weeks ahead, or else we will see an inflationary drag on the economy that will create huge social inequality. Energy infrastructure takes time to implement even with an accelerated programme. Thus, interim emergency measures will need to be required. One example is that Britain has retired 20 nuclear submarines since 1980. None have been disposed of and nine still contain radioactive fuel in their reactors of up to ~500 MWt, according to an audit by Britain's National Audit Office. This raises the question as to whether they could be put back into operation and plugged into the national grid to boost base power production. Edit media Image

The Climate Crisis Is An Energy Crisis

The harsh reality is that the climate crisis is an energy crisis that the nations of the world must solve by finding a new emissions-free and plentiful energy source. Thus, if the developed world were to design and mass-produce a new, cheap form of energy that could then be sold to the world and especially the EM nations, then the problem would solve itself. Indeed, we could then use the excess energy to start taking out all the CO2 and methane that we put in, truly reversing the planetary climate shift. Whilst fusion power is the holy grail that could revolutionise power production, it is still technically beyond our capability today. However, the more money that flows into this research, the closer its technology will become. That leaves the only current solution as the development of small nuclear, low-maintenance thorium reactors that can be mass-produced into small, closed units on a scale never seen before, which could then just be plugged into the National Grid. Thorium reactors are safer than uranium reactors and as they do not produce weapons-grade fissile material they can be sold to any nation.

Global Britain Could Lead The World

The nation that leads this new energy technology would take a massive leap forwards in their energy security, by detaching themselves from the geopolitics of hydrocarbon producers. They would also be able to provide themselves with cheap and reliable power, giving their economy a major advantage whilst gaining huge geopolitical influence as it sells and installs this technology amongst its allies and, last of all, its competitors and enemies. Based on our Five Stages of Empire model, it will most likely be a nation in the expanding second stage that wins this race. That is, either China (who is currently at the forefront of this technology) or the UK. So, what more incentives could a government have to win this race, for its nation and humanity? Thus if the Johnson government is serious about becoming a tech superpower, small, mass-produced thorium reactors are the key area, along with fusion that should receive huge amounts of government investment. Two leading UK companies of special note are Rolls Royce Modular Reactors and Core Power who design reactors for ships.

Solving The Investment Bottleneck

Whilst the government urgently needs to formulate and implement a new national energy strategy, once it has done so it needs to create an environment for government investment to catalyse the development of new, ground-breaking technologies not just in the energy sector but also across all new technology sectors, to create a new wave of British-based innovation that will power our future economy. The current problems with the funding of new ‘energy transition’ technology are as follows:

1) Funders (VCs, Angels, other funds etc) are stuck in the old mindset of ‘it is too early to invest’,and ‘you need to have solid sales first’ etc, because they always want a valuation – on something with no precedent, i.e., a traditional financial model for a novel domain. There is a serious disconnect as investors do not understand and are unable to evaluate new technologies, thus they will not take the risk on new technology until it has been proven to everyone else, which is too late.

2) What is desperately needed is funding to bring what are very good technology developments (which are often very difficult and expensive to develop) out to the market. The key stages are to take them out of the R&D phase and then to MVP (minimum viable product) and into a demo stage into a format that investors want – and the world needs.

3) There are many billions of funding earmarked for the green energy transition, but it is often heard that those funds ‘cannot find good projects/(small) companies to invest in’. Why not? Exactly because they are stuck in the ‘it is too early to invest’ mindset.

Closing this funding gap requires government money that would have gone into grants to be placed in the hands of entrepreneurial lateral thinking and risk-oriented managers whose prime responsibility is to seed a new generation of technology, with a portfolio with very modest return expectations, based around success in one out of ten investments.

Expanded Commentary

  1. 9.2.1 Build a powerful military that is embedded within the fabric of society. See full details of the 5% defence spending programme required as described in Now or Never Global Forecaster UK Strategic Defence Review 2020 and Vision Global Britain 2025: Defence, The Missing Focus

9.2.2    Fast-track economic growth and create a unique economic USP. To better understand the policies that Global Britain needs to thrive in the years ahead, we need to appreciate what a system like Global Britain requires, based on our Five Stages of Empire model and specifically the UK’s current second phase of expansion to empire. The first thing to recognise is that the UK has a massive amount of coiled national energy that will be released despite poor leadership decisions and policies from the top. This means that just because the system grows, it does not vindicate the economic policies of the time. But rather the question has to be: do the policies that run the economy release the maximum potential economic energy of the nation?

We have argued that Boris Johnson has unwittingly created a new form of politics, that of simultaneous wealth creation and distribution, leaving Labour out in the cold as an irrelevance. The concept behind this is to spend on the poor areas of Britain and to upgrade them, as once the reunion of Germany did for East Germany. This is both laudable and politically expedient. However, it seems Johnson and Rishi Sunak have gone overboard on the spending and forgotten the key aspect of simultaneous wealth creation, without which they will fail to manifest the full potential of the construct of Global Britain. Luckily, there are clear examples provided by applying the lesson of the Five Stages of Empire to Britain’s second-stage of expansion today.

Successful empires, as they rise, create a unique set of economic conditions to fund that expansion. The British Empire’s wealth was founded on being the greatest maritime trading nation the world has ever seen. To be successful, Global Britain today needs to emulate that paradigm as far as possible, allowing for a different geopolitical landscape. So the enticement of British-flagged ships back to the UK through tax benefits was a stroke of genius and shows that lateral thinking does exist in the Treasury, in at least thimbleful measures. However, the key to the future, as Johnson has stated, will be to construct a scientific superpower that can create and manufacture all its visions. While Britain has creativity in abundance, it needs access to massive and accessible investment to unlock its potential.

9.2.3 (a) Establish a low flat tax regime to escape the stagflation tsunami. To maximise private investment and reduce the need for more debt and government investment, the UK requires a fertile investment regime; one that would be easy to create by simplifying the tax code and moving, over five years, towards a single flat tax regime of 20%. Not only would this encourage the growth of new companies, but it would poach mature, revenue-producing companies to UK shores and expand the economy at an accelerated rate. Even if there were revenue gaps in the transition process that increased debt, the long-term advantages would power Britain forwards for the next five decades. In stark contrast, Johnson and Sunak are now levying the highest rate of net tax on the economy of any government for decades, with justifications that are straight out of Labour’s playbook. It’s a guaranteed path to encouraging lower growth than if a low-tax regime was to be implemented. One consequence of increasing inflation will be that as prices and incomes rise, so more people are drawn into paying taxes from which they were previously exempt by moving into higher tax brackets than before. As inflation rises, while tax thresholds mostly remain unchanged, so the overall fiscal burden becomes more onerous without the Chancellor having to lift a finger, slowing down growth. The positive tax gains to the nation of fiscal drag would provide the ideal environment to shift to a flat tax regime.


The need to create a low-tax, high-growth economy is not just based on the need to maximise Brexit and the expansion of Global Britain, but also because the UK and the rest of the world face a massive wave of inflation in the next four years that will be of a higher magnitude than the 1975 peak. The result of which will be stagflation and negative real growth that will induce the most traumatic social outcomes. While America and the EU are locked in the paradigm of decline, and for them the outcome of economic collapse is inevitable, Britain’s Brexit gave it the ability to choose another path of high growth. That option is being squandered by Johnson and Sunak through a lack of imagination and boldness. This means that instead of the ‘Roaring Twenties’ promised by Johnson at his election, this decade in the UK could become known as the ‘lost decade of stagflation’, in which real incomes continue to go into reverse at an accelerating rate, which is a guaranteed route to Johnson becoming very unpopular indeed.

9.2.3 (b) Encourage right-brained entrepreneurship and innovation. One of Britain's greatest strengths is its high number of entrepreneurs, of which the majority derives from the right-brained group. Churchill called upon this group to create asymmetric solutions to the German threat. In this, they were immensely successful. The reason for this was maverick right-brained individuals who were and are, today, the most adaptive and creative element of our society (and indeed any other). Their vision and enterprise are, quite simply, the future of our nation. Yet, the current financial support packages have cut this sector of society adrift. These are people with a vision who have put their life savings into a business that has not yet made any money. They have sacrificed income for their vision and their employees. They are now beached. The government needs to make loans accessible to entrepreneurs directly from a fund, stopping the banks from intervening in the process and clogging it up. These entrepreneurs need effective support urgently. Consequently, entrepreneurs should be viewed as a net collective investment by the government, into the future of our economy. To that end, the government should urgently create an Entrepreneurs Support Fund (like the US DARPA) led by right-brained mavericks who can see the potential of gifted people with great ideas. In effect, this would be a national think tank.

In addition to supporting entrepreneurs, government and companies should seek to employ their skills to help them make the shift from the old world into the new. This will need some key organisational changes to ensure integration, but in essence this process emulates Britain’s WWI and WWII response to harnessing innovation.

9.2.3 (c) Maximise the use of debt. In the second stage of empire, national debt levels always rise significantly through borrowings that are predominantly from the nation. Both Britain in its last cycle and America showed very similar debt expansion curves in their second stage. So, the increasing national deficit in the case of the UK is consistent with this part of the cycle. However, the key issue is what that money is spent on. Nations in decline use debt to just maintain their status quo, which only delays their collapse. However, nations in expansion use their borrowings to create long-term strategic advantages that then create wealth, which then ultimately pays off that first mound of debt. As such, every penny spent should transfer into a long-term plan of strategic advantage, otherwise that increased debt creates drag. Thus, it is critical that spending is visionary and prudent in the way that it is used to maximise outcomes. Sadly, this is not yet a hallmark of Johnson’s government as he blasts pounds out of his spending blunderbuss.

graph power and money

The above diagram shows the cycle of debt in the British Empire. Global Britain is now in the second phase of the cycle where debts should be expected to increase and a new economic model is established that facilitates a significant expansion of national revenues.

9.2.3 (d) Increase national resilience by securing national resource/supply chains/food security. After WWII, Churchill stated the only thing that truly troubled him in regard to losing the war was the Battle of the Atlantic. He understood the closing of the sea lanes could starve Britain of the resources it required to continue the war. If our prediction as to the K cycle is correct, the competition for resources will accelerate significantly in the years ahead. The realisation that a no-deal Brexit outcome could have strangled Britain prompted a plan called Operation Yellow Hammer. This broke down the locations from which we sourced our national resources and where we were vulnerable. That report should stand us in good stead as we make emergency plans for supply chain breakdowns in the challenging world ahead. Britain should be using its overseas aid budgets to support specific regions where we resource ourselves. In addition, it would make sense for Britain to send experts and human resources if necessary along our supply chains to help maintain continuity. This would also strengthen local relationships moving forward. To this end, it would make sense to create a new Ministry of Supply, to focus on keeping our resource chains open and directing support to UK businesses and partner nations overseas. This may also include the encouragement of the building of  Britain’s mercantile fleet.

In addition to securing our food import chains, the lesson from 1940 is to increase domestic national food production with a government-promoted ‘Grow Your Own’ programme both on an industrial and small-scale basis. This would decrease pressure on imports. It would make sense for the government to encourage such a national programme and ensure there are enough seeds available. Encouraging direct sales from farmers would also decrease the burden on supermarkets. Most of all, the lack of foreign labour for farms needs to be addressed urgently, before harvest time, with a farming corps raised from those who are unemployed or on furlough. Having lived in times of plenty, it is easy to discount times of famine. But, without food, a nation will fall. There were warning signs that food supply chains are very vulnerable in the pandemic, from our wheat being sourced in Russia to our rice coming from Asia. Importantly, the issue is logistics, not production. 

9.2.3 (e) Avoid being consumed by healthcare. The demographic trap of an ageing population, that increases its need for care while lowering its revenues, means that health and social care consume an increased share of the UK national budget at the expense of other vital areas such as defence. However, instead of throwing more money at the problem to compensate for poor performance and cost-effectiveness, this sector of government policy needs fundamental reform. 


These include a top-down either fundamental reform of the NHS in its organisation or announcing its demise and changing the current healthcare funding system, from tax-funded (thus lowering taxes in the process) to the more common mechanism in Europe, of insurance with co-payments by the government for the poor. Then promoting efficiency by giving patients the choice as to which GP/consultants and hospitals they attend while encouraging self-responsibility, by adding premiums to habits likes smoking. Lastly, to initiate a drive to prevent disease, by encouraging self-responsibility for health, with new national programmes for wellbeing based on exercise, weight control and gut health. These combined measures would increase national productivity through enhanced national vitality, and would release healthcare funding, that could then be harnessed to expand the economy, and thus further lower the relative burden of health on GDP. No such programme has been mooted by the government.

9.2.3 (f) Development of a national infrastructure. Traditionally, spending has been based on infrastructure that facilitates a more-productive economy. Today, a prime example would be an investment into a new national energy complex away from fossil fuels. But most significantly it has traditionally been spent on armed forces to expand economic influence overseas and thus increase the revenue base of the expanding nation. In that regard, the UK's defence spending today is completely inadequate and negligent before we take into account the clear and present danger of Russia and China as they arm themselves to the teeth. This is a critical and dangerous point of failure of Johnson’s government.

9.2.3 (g) Rejuvenating the Commonwealth. With the potential accelerated decline of America and the EU under this tidal wave of entropy, Britain would do well to strengthen its links and support of its Commonwealth partners. With the commonality of law and democracy, while recognising that a high percentage are in the emerging world, this would be the time to provide aid and support to build ties that feedback into the resource chain security and deny China influence. A recent example of how we should be taking advantage of the current American power vacuum was when China threatened not to buy Australian beef (amounting to 25% of Australian exports). This occurred simply because Australia was demanding an investigation into the source of the Wuhan virus. Britain should have stepped in and offered to buy some of this beef going forward, building closer ties with Australia in the process. Fortune favours the bold and expanding systems like Britain benefit the most from bold action.

Now Or Never

Today, Britain is living through a time of crisis, triggered by the pandemic and the consequent economic contraction. To compound the uncertainties ahead, Britain is also in the final stage of its Brexit process. However, every signal from the five-stage roadmap model indicates that phase is in reality a time of great opportunity for Britain to reset and rebuild as we return to our global maritime heritage and increase our integration into a global trading system in a new multi-polar world. It is a time when Britain will be able to fill the numerous vacuums created as America contracts, which will sure up the democratic world against the rising threats of dictatorships. Although spending may apparently be constrained when viewed with the traditional thinking of cost and no benefit, increased defence spending in reality will provide both greater security and a major boost to the British economy through multiple benefits.

Download a copy of the defence review or pre-order a hard copy, a document that has helped shape political policy.