An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interviewer: Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Numbering: Issue 23.A, Idea: Outliers & Outsiders (Part Nineteen)

Place of Publication: Langley, British Columbia, Canada

Title: In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Web Domain: http://www.in-sightjournal.com

Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020

Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020

Name of Publisher: In-Sight Publishing

Frequency: Three Times Per Year

Words: 3,131

ISSN 2369-6885

Abstract

Tor Arne Jørgensen is a member of 50+ high IQ societies, including World Genius Directory, NOUS High IQ Society, 6N High IQ Society just to name a few. He has several IQ scores above 160+ sd15 among high range tests like Gift/Gene Verbal, Gift/Gene Numerical of Iakovos Koukas and Lexiq of Soulios. His further interests are related to intelligence, creativity, education developing regarding gifted students, and his love for history in general, mainly around the time period of the 19th century to the 20th century. Tor Arne works as a teacher at high school level with subjects as; History, Religion, and Social Studies. He discusses: the main principles of global order; principles of understanding international affairs; a rise of conspiracy theories without consideration, or little thought for, scientific skepticism, parsimony; unipolar world with a univocal narrative from the United States of America after World War Two set the tone for the global order; an information-intensive global economy; individual Member States of the United Nations; traditional warfare and information-based warfare; the orientation of the traditional understanding of politics and international affairs; the current points of tensions internationally; and pivotal decisions facing nations in the 2020s.

Keywords: history, knowledge, principles, Tor Arne Jørgensen.

An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three)[1]^,[2]*

*Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citation style listing after the interview.*

1. Scott Douglas Jacobsen: For this third session, I want to focus on the application of historical knowledge and principles of history to the current political moments before us. What are the main principles of global order important to bear in mind for all of human recorded history, insofar as “global” should be a reduced and non-literal term in this context? 

Tor Arne Jørgensen: I will divide my answers into two sections, hereby first addressing the following note in reference to majoritarian democracy at the cost of the free market through liberal-idealism. The principle of the free market as to the time period from the 19th century onwards when the power relationship in many ways was to be held on the hands of the mighty few (the bourgeoisie) at the cost of governing majority (the proletariat).

Populist opinions from the grassroots, postulated in the hope of change as regards to economic independence for everyone. This was introduced under the value designation of equal rights brought forward through the principle of international law, and is still today looked upon as one of the major historical shifts with reference to the principle of the free market and global trade.

Secondly, popular sovereignty, with it the reference to the birth or should I say the rebirth of democracy. Hereby to the personified notion of malcontent by reference to the crippling paradox within its own right.

2. Jacobsen: In recent history, what principles of understanding international affairs have been the most important, most instructive?

Jørgensen: Hereby reference the five principles of politics, and especially the section about the principle of history. By all the turbulence we now see today within a global perspective regards the Trump administration, and the besudlende effect this causes, has now hopefully reached the optimal wanted result, this by its own crumbling demise of international stability.

We must not wave the steady course of international justice, as to deploy the stately war band, by the mere intent to destabilize the international governance.

As history has revealed before in reference to foreign policy, the path to global stability, global development, and world order in general, is done by way of strengthening ties between states, and not by building high barriers to keep all foreigners out. The global leaders around the world, should only concern themselves as to how we can lead a more open world policy of tomorrow, that will unite us all even more than before, and not divide us by tactics of divide and conquer.

3. Jacobsen: When we see a rise of conspiracy theories without consideration, or little thought for, scientific skepticism, parsimony, and the like, how has this been reflected through history?

Jørgensen: Point of reference regards scientific skepticism through history as a narrative afterthought. The human wants and needs as bases for self-realization to uncover the truth in whatever manner they may or may not be hidden, is inherent in us all as a cradling need by the content of skepticism in regards to any field of interest. All skeptics alike have been throughout history some of the most powerful contributors to unveiling the real «truth» by means of empirical research. Conspiracy theories with reference to its historical content, has blinded the general public in so many ways as to religion, science, philosophy, justice, and more.

Thus the human race is easily fooled by these various instigators behind these conspiracy theories, to their applauding result. Furthermore in regards to the political governance, and its state leaders, done again in a similar manner, by deluding us the general public from revealing this truth, as to self-protection by means of actively proclamating government propaganda. Case in point, the military cover-up in the Nevada desert regards to Area 51 back in the 50s, and the cover-up of the JFK assassination in the 60s.

The conspiracy list goes all through history, and onward into the present time. The conspiracy movement is growing exponentially, and will continue to do so into the near to far future.

The skeptics will also continue to make efforts to debunk these theories as best they can. One can only hope that the facts will see the light of day, ever more as time goes by. The thought of these conspiracy theories going ever more viral in the manner that we see today, is indeed alarming, as to the notion of what are we then left to believe in, if we no longer can hold any theory as the fact by its own content. Today we must be more skeptical about everything, can we really trust our own government, do they guide us in the right direction, or do they hold us in contempt by means of delusion for best purposes served. I surely hope I am wrong in my belief of delusional altruism by mind control.

4. Jacobsen: How did the unipolar world with a univocal narrative from the United States of America after World War Two set the tone for the global order seen now? You touched on some of this before.

Jørgensen: I would like to address the self-proclaimed titling by the United States in many ways as the modern world’s «World Police». That all the world’s turmoil stands and falls on the United States involvement for world peace, whereby the UN’s involvement is no longer direction bearing as global order is concerned. That in the wake of the cold war, has left us with one remaining dominant superpower, with a predominantly trust position by its own merits.

I find myself wondering, are we all best served, in the notion of democratic governance, as to be led by a nation’s leader based on his own self-image, to be the global god for peace and prosperity for all mankind. Must point out that it makes my skin crawled by the very thought, regarding global governance and world politics in general.

5. Jacobsen: In an information-intensive global economy, and becoming more technological and scientific, not less, how is this influencing the orientation of the global order?

Jørgensen: As the endless power struggle between the two designated units by freedom of democracy vs capitalist idiocy within the notion of benevolent dictatorship, again brought through the process of technological renewability. Then the pendulum fluctuation is again fixated to swing even more in the wrong direction, away from it’s cradling bosom of democracy and over to the «dark side» with reference to capitalist dictatorship. The worldwide companies of today like, for instance, Google, and Facebook, that take a direct part in steering the democratic progress in the direction «they» themselves want in order to capitalize on the ignorance of it’s elected bodies. The policymakers by rule of law lead into intentional blindness, by reasons of constitutional law within the framework of global governance.

The capitalistic movement and it’s an apparent effect, is in many ways looked upon as to be protected at the expense of the elected trustee, this is in order to secure self-determination by reasons of global exclusivity. These global companies and their influence range as within the global spectrum, obtained by manipulating means in order to find loopholes afforded by «globalization».

Thus the developing progress that we see today with regards to technological innovation factualized within the rule of law, is in many ways to be seen as nothing else than the accumulation of self-interest at the expanse of international law do «good» by capitalist dictatorship for the sole purpose of technological renewability.

6. Jacobsen: For the individual Member States of the United Nations, how do they operate under these general principles of international affairs in historicity into the current moment? 

Jørgensen: After the fall of the Axis powers in the wake of WWII, the Allies by preventive strategies, regards to the anthropogenic cataclysms that the world had just undergone. The salient dilemma regarding global stability by reasons of self-interest, achieved due to the effect of influencing by way through grounds of common interest. The general principle of international affairs within the act of sovereign rule, by and for every individual state hereby statute fact.

As father justified by the notion of being nothing more, then to be able to coexist within new world governance, again as the direct result of stately rule imbedded by factual sovereignty of the individual state. Concluding fact, the individual states back then and now today, has by that, no other factual reasons then the established rights for purpose alone, done by self-justification through measures of increase right of rule by an act of interference by any foreign state power.

7. Jacobsen: Traditional warfare involved physical space, geographic maneuvering, and long-range and short-range means of attack and infiltration, respectively. In an era of information, how does this change warfare?

Jørgensen: If one is to look at the concept of «Information Warfare», or (IW) as known, it is nothing new, but still a type of warfare that is growing exponentially. The potential power that lies within the use of IW by criminal intent or not, as to the intentional purpose of toppling one major state by another major state into political turmoil or vice versa. The cost benefits by the use of IW is today compared to before radically lowered, this in comparison to the cost-effectiveness of traditional weapons warfare. Though the clearest cost savings achieved by any nation as to criminal intent by strategic self-empowerment, goes to the political stage by the meddling of Russia in the last US elections of 2016, were said to secure Trump the presidency.

8. Jacobsen: Also, how does this change the orientation of the traditional understanding of politics and international affairs by adding another dimension to the typical principles used to understand global order?

Jørgensen: I will bring forward from the previous line of question and add to it by saying, if one is to look at the out of control use of the social media app herby (Twitter) as ones own personal political platform, where «I can say whatever I like and get away with it», because it is my god giving the right to use the principle by freedom of speech like the US president is now doing on Twitter with regards to his opinionated tweets, hereby as a source of outlet aimed at whoever is to be the target that day, well what can one say?! I have never before seen this level of abuse of any media platform in the manner that we see today, this by the clear intent of securing national and global empowerment to everyone’s disbelief.

I am shocked by the way Trump is going forward by addressing his nation, and the world for that sake, by proactively state his most intimate feelings about everything from politics, media, law and more in his tweets. The level of verbal filth and the general lack of manner on social media upstaged by President Trump, is not becoming of a major state leader, not now, not ever! We have all witnessed his misconduct on social media, as to verbal abuse of other stately leaders, thus bringing forward more tension between countries and their respective leaders alike. I guess we are all humans in some way, by the meaning of what you and I may say or mean, then later post some of our thoughts on Twitter or Facebook, but not by a major state leader in the manner that we now see almost daily on television.

They should have more self-control as to what may or may not be addressed towards the general public in the intent of NOT destabilize world order. I must proclaim, that the way we are now going forward, makes me ever so worried on the behalf of us all. The ongoing abuse of information technology like what we see today, by the manner of criminal intent, or for the purpose of securing political self-enrichment, will not benefit us in any way in the long run.

What or whom can we then trust from what is being said, not just by the exclaiming of «fake news!», or propaganda like tweets, by the purpose of self-empowerment. Where then is the systemic trust in global governance by the foundation on which it lays, other than by devaluating the status quo regarding the political stability on a global scale.

9. Jacobsen: What are the current points of tensions internationally?

Jørgensen: The international tensions that we see today are divided into many layers.

First: National border security by reasons as to prevent migration overspill in case of crippling of both the global and national economies alike. The number of global migrants in 2019, from what the UN report stated, was estimated to 272 million on the run caused by either, war, persecution, famine and more.

Second: Political turmoil within international trade policy caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, were baseline forecast envisions of a contraction of about 5.2 percent as to the global GDP in 2020.

Third: Unemployment numbers like the ones we see now today, can only be compared to what we had during the interwar years.

So to the summary of the question of tensions today within a global spectrum, is in many ways comparable to the days of the great depression in the 20s and 30s, in combination with the Spanish flu pandemic just previous of this event. Though the link between the Spanish flu outbreak and the great depression is not linked as a due cause by any means. But in case of, these two singular events in history can not be fully ignored, and can in many ways be seen as a possible link between one and the other of what we now see happening today.

10. Jacobsen: What, akin to other moments in history, will be pivotal decisions facing nations in the 2020s?

Jørgensen: In short, the more open policy as to border control, the strengthening of foreign relations, and lowering tariffs by means of increased global trade. These are just some of the issues, that the global alliance must address in the 2020s.

In my closing of this third edition, I will feel I must say the following reply. Do not let Trump be the endemic cause of national foreign relations, nor as to domestic relations between American states.

As I was pondering today at work about the way forward for The United States of America, will the future for this great nation, now be shortened into The States of America, where the «United» part, will in effect be no more.

Is Trump leading his own nation into a new Civil War, that could potentially spill over to Europe and father onto the rest of the world, thus bringing us all ever closer to a new world war likes what we have never seen before, I sure hope not!

Appendix I: Footnotes

[1] Member, ISI-Society; Member, Mensa; Grand Member, Grand IQ Society; Distinguished Member, THIS.

[2] Individual Publication Date: June 22, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three; Full Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2020: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.

*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.

Appendix II: Citation Style Listing

American Medical Association (AMA): Jacobsen S. An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three) [Online].June 2020; 23(A). Available from: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

American Psychological Association (APA, 6^th Edition, 2010): Jacobsen, S.D. (2020, June 22). An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three). Retrieved from http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

Brazilian National Standards (ABNT): JACOBSEN, S. An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three). In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A, June. 2020. <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three>.

Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (16^th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott. 2020. “An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A. http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

Chicago/Turabian, Humanities (16^th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott “An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal. 23.A (June 2020). http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

Harvard: Jacobsen, S. 2020, ‘An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three)‘, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 23.A. Available from: <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three>.

Harvard, Australian: Jacobsen, S. 2020, ‘An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three)‘, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 23.A., http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

Modern Language Association (MLA, 7^th Edition, 2009): Scott D. Jacobsen. “An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 23.A (2020):June. 2020. Web. <http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three>.

Vancouver/ICMJE: Jacobsen S. An Interview with Tor Arne Jørgensen on Historical Knowledge and Application from the Principles of History (Part Three) [Internet]. (2020, June 23(A). Available from: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/jorgensen-three.

License and Copyright

License

In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at www.in-sightjournal.com.

Copyright

© Scott Douglas Jacobsen, and In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 2012-2020. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, and In-Sight Publishing and In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.  All interviewees co-copyright their interview material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.