Precht: The End of the West – or Why a Future That Can Improve Is the Most Important Invisible Institution

Actually, we don't need literary notes on Richard David Precht's conversation with Ivan Ivan Krastev to make it clear that geopolitical changes and the growing fear of the decline of the West raise fundamental questions about the future of democracy. I recorded the conversation on March 30, 2025, here to clarify that democracy and the success of health always go hand in hand.

Particularly noteworthy is Ivan Krastev's observation that in a democracy "the future, an open future, a future that can be influenced, a future that can get better, is the most important invisible institution." This perspective is crucial for my work with clients to anticipate an understanding of current developments.

Why should we try to anticipate the future?

It remains idle to engage with world contexts. At times, the current pace overwhelms us. From my perspective, the conversation made it clear that we should focus more strongly on our own hopes. By this, it means we should not wait or hope for developments from elsewhere but instead care for our own successful futures within our capabilities.

This also includes a critical engagement with what is described as Eurocentrism in other parts of the world. Due to our long history, the numerous disputes on the continent, we believe history always revolves with us and around us. Ivan Krastev reports on a study he conducted worldwide. In Western Europe, South Korea, and especially in Great Britain, the fear of Trump is pronounced. In other parts of the world, most people believed even before his inauguration that Trump would be good for America, the world, and their own country.

Capitalism and Health

The hypothesis that capitalism currently manages with the figure Donald Trump to establish itself as a future perspective for governing states is also evident, in my opinion, in how easily transactional relationships of deal-making are used to create facts. The speakers' speculation that the virtues of real estate capitalism could be transferred to political contexts. Greenland is then just a piece of land that can be accessed with the available means. The threats to want to take back the Panama Canal sound like the buyback of shares; because the USA will also have to pay a price, should this not remain just a narrative to negotiate with China over Taiwan. The attempt to bring Canada's economy to its knees feels like extortion to make the neighbor compliant, to then perhaps play the savior by allowing Canada to be absorbed into the U.S. union. The situation with Ukraine is similar.

It is about an objective rule of things that shows itself in the daily practice of transactions. Ivan Krastev and Precht make it clear in their conversation that the absolute control over things is increasingly being transferred to state relationships, by using countries and their resources as tradable goods. This development reflects what Eva von Redecker describes as a characteristic of objective rule – the combination of traditional rule (absolute control of property) and objective rule (capitalist exploitation logic), leading to the reification of relationships and life.

It is unimaginable if the state changes in this way and health systems, developed as the center of social care, submit to this pattern. Viewing hospitals and other health institutions as business objects would be the logical next step if we are not already experiencing these beginnings.

The merging of health policy and capitalism also leads to a world without traditional borders and values.

Solidarity Under Pressure

The stability of democracies is closely linked to social health. When people lose confidence in the future and fear upcoming developments, it has direct effects on individual and collective well-being.

A progressive anticipation of futures must therefore consider not only political and economic aspects but also keep humanistic values in view.

The fear of the future increasingly replaces hope for progress. This is what the two speakers observe. Democracies face the challenge of renegotiating their relationship with the future. The implosion of liberal democracies from within is seen as a greater threat than external enemies. Health policy always follows the state doctrine, and if this, as in the case of the USA, drifts into purely transactional decision-making processes, the principle of solidarity will dissolve.