Connexion
Le cessez-le-feu entre les États-Unis et l’Iran est mis à l’épreuve après que les deux camps ont ouvert le feu
L’article Le cessez-le-feu américano-iranien en péril après des échanges de tirs dans le détroit est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le ministère russe de la Défense a décrété un cessez-le-feu à l’occasion des célébrations du Jour de la Victoire, les
L’article La Russie décrète une trêve en Ukraine pour les 8 et 9 mai est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le soir du 29 avril, le président russe Vladimir Poutine et le président américain Donald Trump se sont entretenus par
L’article La Russie propose un cessez-le-feu en Ukraine pour le 9-Mai, le troisième de l’année est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les autorités libanaises et israéliennes ont convenu de prolonger le cessez-le-feu de trois semaines, a annoncé le président américain Donald
L’article Trump : Israël et le Liban vont prolonger le cessez-le-feu de trois semaines est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le Liban et Israël sont parvenus à un accord de cessez-le-feu, a annoncé le président américain Donald Trump. Le chef
L’article Trump annonce un cessez-le-feu entre Israël et le Liban est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les Forces de défense israéliennes (FDI) ont annoncé un cessez-le-feu contre l’Iran conformément aux directives des dirigeants politiques, a rapporté
L’article Tsahal annonce une trêve avec l’Iran est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les États-Unis et l’Iran ont annoncé un cessez-le-feu de deux semaines. Cet accord a été annoncé une heure seulement avant
L’article Téhéran et Washington annoncent un cessez-le-feu de deux semaines est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
By Epic Economist.
Video Description:
“The American economy is crashing right now, and it’s worse than most people realize. From banks refusing cash withdrawals to nearly a million jobs lost to automation, from healthcare premiums doubling overnight to stores packed with inventory nobody can afford, the warning signs are everywhere.
In this video, we’re looking at what’s really happening on the ground. Not the official numbers or media spin, but what everyday Americans are experiencing: being interrogated at banks for their own money, losing jobs at profitable companies, watching healthcare become completely unaffordable, and seeing the retail economy grind to a halt.
This isn’t just a recession. Multiple systems are breaking down at once, and most people don’t realize how connected it all is. The crash is already here, the question is whether you’re prepared when it hits your situation directly.”
Act now while still have options:
see: our Prepping and Survival Thread
From the archives: “U.S. game-plan to conquer Russia & China is clarified”
Posted on December 29, 2016 by Eric Zuesse.
America’s Secret Planned Conquest of Russia
The U.S. government’s plan to conquer Russia is based upon a belief in, and the fundamental plan to establish, “Nuclear Primacy” against Russia — an American ability to win a nuclear war against, and so conquer, Russia.
This concept became respectable in U.S. academic and governmental policymaking circles when virtually simultaneously in 2006 a short-form and a long-form version of an article endorsing the concept, which the article’s two co-authors there named “nuclear primacy,” were published respectively in the world’s two most influential journals of international affairs, Foreign Affairs from the Council on Foreign Relations, and International Security from Harvard. (CFR got the more popular short version, titled “The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy”, and Harvard got the more scholarly long version, which was titled “The End of MAD?”.)
This article claimed that the central geostrategic concept during the Cold War with the Soviet Union, Mutually Assured Destruction or “MAD” — in which there is no such thing as the U.S. or the U.S.S.R. conquering the other, because the first of the two to attack will itself also be destroyed by the surviving nuclear forces of the one responding to that attack — will soon be merely past history (like the Soviet Union itself already is); and, so, as the short form of the article said, “nuclear primacy remains a goal of the United States”; and, as the long form said, “the United States now stands on the cusp of nuclear primacy.” In other words: arms-control or no, the U.S. should, and soon will, be able to grab Russia (the largest land-mass of any country, and also the one richest in natural resources).
Neither version of this article mentioned the key reason why nuclear victory is exceedingly dangerous even under the most favorable conditions, which reason is the concept (and the likely reality in the event of nuclear war between the two superpowers) “nuclear winter” — the scientific studies showing that a resulting sudden sharp cooling of the atmosphere after all those enormous explosions would produce a global die-off. America’s aristocracy and its vassal-aristocracies controlling the U.S.-allied nations (billionaires, centi-millionaires, and their top agents in both the public and private sectors) are buying and building deep-underground nuclear shelters for themselves, but they wouldn’t be able to stay underground and survive on stored feedstuffs forever. (As for everybody else, those other people are not involved in geostrategic decision-making, and so are being ignored.) However, many of America’s (and associated) elite are paying those bomb-shelter expenses, but none of the West’s elite are condemning the path toward nuclear war that their governments are on. So: buying or building nuclear-war shelters is more acceptable to them than is stopping America’s planned conquest of Russia. The higher priority is to conquer Russia.
A far less influential scholarly journal, China Policy, published later in 2006 a critical article arguing against nuclear supremacy, but that article has had no impact upon policymaking. Its title was “The Fallacy of Nuclear Primacy” and it argued that, “American nuclear supremacy removes the root source of stability from the nuclear equation: mutual vulnerability.” It presented a moral argument: “U.S. leaders might try to exploit its nuclear superiority … by actually launching a cold-blooded nuclear attack against its nuclear rival in the midst of an intense crisis. The professors discount significantly the power of the nuclear taboo to restrain U.S. leaders from crossing the fateful threshold. If crisis circumstances grow dire enough, the temptation to try to disarm their nuclear adversaries through a nuclear first-strike may be too strong to resist, they argue.” The concept of “nuclear winter” wasn’t even so much as just mentioned (much less dealt with) in this article, just as it was ignored in the two that it was arguing against.
The co-authors of (both versions of) the article that had proposed and endorsed nuclear primacy, then published in 2007 (this one also in International Security), a response to that critical article. This reply’s title was “U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent”. But it had no more impact than did the obscure article it was arguing against.
Thus, nuclear primacy has become U.S. policy, and MAD no longer is U.S. policy (though it remains Russian policy). The U.S. government is planning to take over Russia (basically, to install a puppet-regime there). That’s the reality.
Central to the nuclear-primacy concept is that of what’s variously called a “Ballistic Missile Defense” (BMD) or “Anti Ballistic Missile” (ABM) system: a system to disable or knock out Russia’s retaliatory nuclear weapons so that a U.S. blitz nuclear attack won’t be able to be met by any nuclear counter-attack.
As “The End of MAD?” put it: “Russia has approximately 3,500 strategic nuclear warheads today, but if the United States struck before Russian forces were alerted, Russia would be lucky if a half-dozen warheads survived.”
In other words: America’s aristocracy aren’t necessarily hoping to protect all of the U.S. population from a counter-attack, but are willing to sacrifice perhaps a few million Americans here and there, in order to achieve the intended result: conquest of Russia.
That article then says that a BMD-ABM system wouldn’t necessarily indicate America’s determination to pursue nuclear primacy against Russia, because it could instead be intended purely and authentically defensively, to protect against nuclear attack from Iran, North Korea or some other country. However: “Other U.S. nuclear programs are hard to explain with any mission other than a nuclear first strike on a major power adversary. For example, the decision to upgrade the fuse of many SLBM warheads (the W76s) to permit ground bursts makes sense only if the mission is destroying hundreds of hardened silos. One might argue that ground bursts could be useful for a variety of other missions, such as destroying North Korean WMD bunkers or remote cave complexes housing terrorist leaders. The United States, however, already has a large number of highly accurate, similar-yield warheads that would be ideal for these purposes.” The article even notes that: “Other analysts have noted that the current U.S. nuclear force looks surprisingly like an arsenal designed for a nuclear first strike against Russia or China.” And, “A group of RAND analysts agrees: ‘What the planned force appears best suited to provide beyond the needs of traditional deterrence is a preemptive counterforce capability against Russia and China. Otherwise, the numbers and the operating procedures simply do not add up.’” So: the co-authors here are claiming to be merely giving a name, “nuclear primacy,” to America’s existing strategic military policy — not to be inventing or creating it. They are, above all, saying that this is the reality now in U.S. policy-making circles; that MAD no longer is.
And their article has, indeed, described the guiding strategic-planning objective not only of the George W. Bush Administration, but also of Barack Obama’s — as will now be documented.
U.S. President Obama has always been saying that the reason why America is installing anti-ballistic missiles (“ABM”s, otherwise known as ballistic-missile defense or “BMD”) in Romania, Poland, and other nations that border (or are near to) Russia, is in order to protect Europe against Iranian missiles that might be aimed against Europe. He says that this is purely defensive, not aggressive, and that what it’s defending from is Iran, not Russia — so, Russia has no reason for complaint about it.
But then, Obama reached his nuclear deal with Iran; and this deal ended, for at least ten years, any realistic possibility that Iran would develop any nuclear-weapons capability — Obama himself emphasized that this was the case; he wasn’t denying it.
So: Obama’s claimed reason for installing ABMs in Europe was now, quite simply, gone. (Not that it had been credible anyway, since Iran didn’t have any nuclear weapons. It was merely a pretext, not honestly a reason.)
Here is how Russia’s President, Vladimir Putin, stated the matter, at that time, during the meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club, on 22 October 2015:
“The use of the threat of a nuclear missile attack from Iran as an excuse, as we know, has destroyed the fundamental basis of modern international security – the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The United States has unilaterally seceded from the treaty. Incidentally, today we have resolved the Iranian issue and there is no threat from Iran and never has been, just as we said.
The thing that seemed to have led our American partners to build an anti-missile defence system is gone. It would be reasonable to expect work to develop the US anti-missile defence system to come to an end as well. [But] What is actually happening? Nothing of the kind, or actually the opposite – everything continues.
Recently the United States conducted the first test of the anti-missile defence system in Europe. What does this mean? It means we were right when we argued with our American partners. They were simply trying yet again to mislead us and the whole world. To put it plainly, they were lying. It was not about the hypothetical Iranian threat, which never existed. It was about an attempt to destroy the strategic balance, to change the balance of forces in their favour not only to dominate, but to have the opportunity to dictate their will to all: to their geopolitical competition and, I believe, to their allies as well. This is a very dangerous scenario, harmful to all, including, in my opinion, to the United States.
The nuclear deterrent lost its value. Some probably even had the illusion that victory of one party in a world conflict was again possible – without irreversible, unacceptable, as experts say, consequences for the winner, if there ever is one”
He called Obama there a “liar,” and that’s a blatantly truthful characterization of the situation. But Putin missed there saying what’s even more basic for an understanding of what Obama was doing in this matter — and which makes that “lie” from Obama particularly heinous: Putin missed saying that an anti-missile system can be at least as important as an aggressive weapon as it is as a defensive one, because if a first-strike attacker wants to eliminate the defender’s ability to strike back from the attacker’s first-strike attack, then an anti-missile system is the weapon to do that, by eliminating the defender’s missiles before those strike-back missiles can reach their targets. It nullifies the other side’s defense — and to do this is enormously aggressive; it strips the victim’s retaliation. The whole distinction between offensive and defensive can thus be pure propaganda, nothing having to do actually with aggressive and defensive. Whether the use will be defensive, or instead offensive, won’t be known until the system is in actual battlefield use. Only the propaganda is clear; the weapon’s use is not.
So, Putin understated the heinousness, and the danger to Russians, that was actually involved in Obama’s tricks. All that Putin did was to vaguely suggest an aggressive possibility: “It was about an attempt to destroy the strategic balance, to change the balance of forces in their favour not only to dominate, but to have the opportunity to dictate their will to all.” Most people don’t relate to such abstractions as “strategic balance.”
Obama and other agents of the U.S. aristocracy know that their public have been trained for decades, to hate, fear, and despise, Russians, and especially the Russian government, as if it were the Soviet Union, and as if its Warsaw Pact and communism still existed and Russia hadn’t ended its hostility to the U.S. in 1991 (though the U.S. continued its hostility to Russia — that rump remaining country from the former communist empire — and during Obama’s second term the hostility soared). So, for example, at the conservative website Breitbart, when that statement quoted here from Putin was posted as part of an honestly written and presented article titled “Vladimir Putin: U.S. Missile Defense System Threatens Russia”, almost none of the reader-comments indicated any ability or inclination of the readers to sympathize with the plight for Russians that Putin had just expressed. Instead, to the extent that the comments there were relevant, they were generally hostile, such as:
“Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday he has concerns that the U.S. ballistic missile defense system threatens Russia’s nuclear capability.”
Vlad, its supposed to, its called defense. The only way it could harm your nukes is if they were shot down…………….after you launched them!
and
How can a defense system threaten anything? Like Obama would attack Russia. That is laughable.
Most people’s minds are straightjacketed in bigotries of various sorts, preconceptions such as that a “missile defense” system, and a “Defense” Department, can’t be aggressive — even extremely aggressive and war-mongering. The first thought that comes to mind about anything that’s ‘defensive’ is that something else must be ‘aggressive’ or ‘offensive’, and that whatever is ‘defensive’ (such as an ABM) is therefore good and even necessary. That’s thinking, and receiving the term “defense,” like thinking just one move ahead in a chess-game, but this is the mental limit for most people, and every propagandist (such as the people who professionally design propaganda or PR slogans and campaigns) do precisely what Obama and the rest of the aristocracy and their agents do in order to deceive their gulls: they phrase things for one-move-ahead-limit thinkers, like that. The cardinal rule in the deception-professions is therefore, first, to find people with the desired prejudices, and then to play them as that, with one-move-ahead-limit sales-pitches, which are directed to precisely those prejudices. This report at the Breitbart site was instead presenting a high-quality news-report, to a low-quality audience, and so the reader-comments it generated were few, and generally hostile.
Obama is a master at deception. Another good example of this was 26 March 2012, during Obama’s campaign for re-election, when he confidentially told Dmitry Medvedev, “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him [the incoming President Putin] to give me space. … This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.” Obama was privately communicating to Putin (through Medvedev) that Obama was pushing the ABM installations only so as not to be politically vulnerable to charges from the knee-jerk Russia-haters, Republicans, and that Obama’s fakery regarding the supposed ABM-target’s being Iran was only in order to appeal to yet another Republican bigotry (against Iran), and so Obama was intending to back away from supporting the ABM system during his second term.
But actually, Obama had had Russia in his gunsights even prior to his coming into office. Two specific objects in focus were Moscow-friendly leaders of nations: Assad of Syria, and Yanukovych of Ukraine. America’s strategy, ever since 24 February 1990, has been to strip Russia of allies and friends — to leave Russia increasingly isolated and surrounded by enemies. When Obama entered the White House on 20 January 2009, there already was a plea in the pipeline from the Syrian government for urgently needed food-aid to address the all-time-record drought there, which had decimated Syrian agriculture. Obama’s Administration never even answered it. Well before the Arab Spring demonstrations in 2011, Obama was hoping for turmoil in Syria and the overthrow of Assad — lots of starving Syrians would be just the thing.
Moreover, the planning for the February 2014 coup to overthrow the Moscow-friendly democratically elected President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, started in the U.S. State Department by no later than 2011.
So: when Obama told Medvedev and Putin, on 26 March 2012, not to worry about Obama’s intentions toward Russia, he was lying. He wanted his intended victim to be off-guard, unprepared for what was soon to come.
On Obama’s way out the door, he did two things that significantly advanced America’s ABM-BMD threat against Russia.
On 10 December 2016, ‘Defense’ Secretary Ashton Carter stated, burying it in a speech he gave in Bahrain — site of a major U.S. military base — “just this week, we reached an agreement for Qatar to purchase a 5,000-kilometer early-warning radar to enhance its missile defenses,” and he said nothing more about it, as if this announcement weren’t the bombshell it actually was. Alex Gorka headlined about that at Strategic Culture, “US-Qatar Deal Threatens Russia: Reading News Between the Lines” and he explained that this system “is designed to be used as an early warning system against strategic offensive assets – something Iran does not possess.” Near the start of Carter’s speech, Carter had said that he would be talking about “checking Iranian aggression and malign influence, and helping defend our friends and allies,” including Bahrain, Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia. Gorka noted, “The announced range of 5,000km (3,100mi) by far exceeds the requirement to counter a missile threat coming from Iran,” and, “There is no other reasonable explanation for the choice, except the fact that the AN/FPS-132 can monitor large chunks of Russian territory,” the objective being “to surround the Russian Federation with BMD sites and neutralize its capability to deliver a retaliatory strike if attacked.”
One of Obama’s last actions as the U.S. President was to sign into law a bill that had been quietly passed in Congress, which included a key change in U.S. law that would enable the government to spend unlimited funds on realizing former President Ronald Reagan’s dream of a space-based ABM system, “Star Wars.” On December 22nd, David Willman of the Los Angeles Times, headlined “Congress scrapped this one word from the law, opening the door to a space arms race”, and he reported that the eliminated word was “limited.” Willman explained that, “The nation’s homeland missile defense system is designed to thwart a small-scale, or ‘limited,’ attack by the likes of North Korea or Iran. As for the threat of a large-scale strike by China or Russia, the prospect of massive U.S. retaliation is supposed to deter both from ever launching missiles.” He noted: “The bill awaits action by President Obama. The White House has not said what he will do.” Willman also noted that on an earlier occasion, “the Obama administration criticized the changes in the Senate bill, saying it ‘strongly objects’ to removing ‘limited’ and to placing anti-missile weaponry in space. The statement stopped short of threatening a veto.” But then, the next day, on December 23rd, Willman bannered, “President Obama signs defense bill that could spur new space-based arms race”. Whereas Obama’s public rhetoric portrayed himself as being the type of person who had deserved to win the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, almost all of his actual decisions in office were the exact opposite — and here was a superb example of that.
Whether Obama’s successor, Donald Trump, will continue with that longstanding (ever since 24 February 1990) plan to conquer Russia, or instead finally end the Cold War on the U.S. side (as it already had ended in 1991 on the U.S.S.R.’s), isn’t yet clear.
This is what happens when what President Eisenhower called “the military-industrial complex” takes over the country, and everything (including the ‘news’ media) serves it, rather than the military-industrial complex’s serving the public.
It fits in with the massive data which indicates that the U.S. government is run by an aristocracy or “oligarchy”, instead of run by people who represent the public — a “democracy.” Obama as President fit right in.
Additional details “Summing Up Russia’s Real Nuclear Fears” were provided by a superb article from Jonathan Marshall, on December 28th.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Current events in America gallop towards the dark.
with appreciation to Dr. Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.
Most Gym readers are familiar with Orwell’s 1984 and how he envisioned the role of technology in controlling the masses. Much of what he described is now reality, although some are unaware that your “smart” TV is capable of watching you. We have security cams placed with high densities inside cities, and almost every store starting with banks has a video surveillance system. Facial recognition is now a norm. Cellular phones have tracking devices within them so you can be targeted and bombed. Computer chips have backdoors allowing the so-called security agencies to discover what you’re doing. The GPS system in your car can also be a tracking beacon. I recall what the Supreme Court ruled years ago on the issue of privacy—you essentially have none. Highly tuned “ears” can hear what you say to your partner as you take a walk in the woods. Walls can now be seen and heard through. The eye way up in space can read the license plate on your car. The resolution’s so good that your lips can be read as you talk. With the age of the semiconductor and microchip, Big Brother arrived in ways only imagined by Sci-Fi authors and Mr. Orwell.
All this has become very important because it’s now being made into a threat to what freedom Americans have remaining. It’s not just ICE. It’s the fact that an enemy needed to be invented for ICE to be deployed—the dreaded immigrant, or what the Scorpions called The Alien Nation. Once upon a time it was Communists and Socialists, Labor Union organizers, and the workers themselves, all of which remain to be resurrected when needed. But the main instigator is the intrusion of Zionist control of the federal government and its need to control American public opinion. And here I defer to the awesome work done by the team at The Grayzone—Max Blumenthal and his comrades. What began as an investigation into the clear political assassination of Charlie Kirk has become an investigation into the deep subversive activities of Zionist-American Billionaires aimed at controlling—distorting if you will—American public opinion of Zionism and Occupied Palestine: The state committing Genocide with the active complicity of the US Government beginning with Biden and continuing with Trump that in reality began in 1948 with the first Nakba. The presentation of evidence by Mr. Blumenthal to Judge Napolitano during this 40-minute chat is an absolute must see if you want to know how your freedom and children’s future are threatened. I highly suggest watching it before continuing to read this article.
Now that you’ve seen and understood the insidiousness of what’s planned and grasped the fact that it will be close to impossible to halt, I suggest you stop and take the time to notify your close circle of what you’ve learned and where they can also learn what you now know. This isn’t about immigrants anymore; this is about the ability of Americans to be free from undo influence, to not be propagandized, to be left alone, and certainly not to be goaded into doing something that’s actually very un-Christian. They are trying to get commonfolk to support Genocide; to somehow see benevolence in Zionist actions. They’re going to track you via your phone so they can further harass you with propaganda, and who knows what else they’ll do to you. Look at what they did to innocent Lebanese with their pager and cellphone terrorist devices. And they laughed and applauded. Occupied Palestine is a land populated by a people lacking morals of any sort.
There are other presentations of evidence by other people that have examined the ways and means of the Head Genocidal Zionist Netanyahu. One of them is the retired US Army Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson who revealed a great deal in his chat today with Nima of Dialog Works that complements what Blumenthal revealed. Previous revelations by others have detailed the extent of Big Brother infiltration into American lives and those of the entire planet. Much was provided by Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. Indeed, Wikileaks still provides a great deal of information the US government would rather you not know. Reading Snowden’s Saga is highly educational. Now the big issue is AI, which the Zionists employ in their Genocide and assassination programs. Recent US Supreme Court rulings have okayed racial profiling despite the fact that there’s only one Human Race. Given what the Outlaws are doing and getting away with, the Constitution is now what George W. Bush called it: Just A God Damned Piece of Paper. The Enemy Nation must constantly be reinvented. Trump now calls everyone who disagrees with him a terrorist, including members of Congress and judges.
What can citizens do now that they know they’re being targeted? The only real way to defend ourselves is to form community groups based on the neighborhood watch format while making it clear what the aim of the group is—to protect our Civil and Legal Rights from a federal government gone rogue. And it must be made clear that the D Party is just as complicit in this behavior as the R Party since both are controlled by AIPAC and Zionist Billionaire monies—Team Biden supported the Genocide just as much if not more than Team Trump. I’m not advocating going around with firearms. Just being in solidarity with your neighbors and community is enough, while also informing local government what you’re all about. Adopting a name like Citizen Civil & Legal Rights Brigade says what you’re all about to whoever you meet. Read the Second Amendment—being well armed begins with being well informed. Know that the military and almost all government officials at every level of federalism swears an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. Implore those people to obey their oath, local police especially since they’re the ones your Brigade will come into contact with. I did, and I consider what I’m doing part of my neverending duty. One of our oddities here in America is that Naturalized Citizens must also take that oath but not native-born citizens. The Declaration of Independence says the duty of the citizen when confronted by Tyranny is to rebel to secure what were seen as Natural Rights.
IMO, it’s imperative you watch the talk between Max Blumenthal and Judge Napolitano and share the link with everyone you know. The only way to beat the foes we face is to act collectively, and that means everyone as every conceivable group is being targeted except Zionists and Billionaires.
Exploring the dystopian technofeudalism at heart of the western A.I. race
The unnamed book EMPIRE OF AI is mine, based on 300+ interviews, 7 yrs covering AI, & my time as the first reporter who got extensive access to OpenAI. I sought OpenAI’s perspective throughout. For months they said it was coming. It never did. Pre-order: https://t.co/i5rNJ45fNo. https://t.co/Drr8Gzv7vW pic.twitter.com/0aJpF9P26U
— Karen Hao (@_KarenHao) April 4, 2025
The A.I. Religious Cult: “Just like empires of the past were competing against one another, so are these tech giants. There was this aggressive race of we, the French Empire, are better than the British Empire. We, the British Empire, are better than the Dutch Empire.
And we need to continue to relentlessly race and be number one because we’re the ones that have the right civilizing mission to bring modernity and progress to all of humanity.
And where their missions might have once been about scientific exploration and transparency, they are now about profit, which has resulted in a landscape where they are just scaling at all costs.”
this is about controlling “the civilizational transformation” of the “one global village.” “Our collective attention is their Manifest Destiny.” From Maggie’s “there is no society” to now, “Culture is just what is Next on your phone — and that is A.I.”
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
What’s emerging in America is not a retreat from hegemony, but a reformatting of it.
By Artyom Lukin on Russia in Global Affairs.
[Ed.: this is a machine translation]
For half a thousand years, the West has been the dominant civilization in the world. Recently, this dominance has weakened, but has not completely disappeared. The West – and above all the United States of America as its core – is still the most powerful subject in world politics and economy. The colossal power of the West can be both a creative force and a source of existential threats to the rest of the world.
Today, in the West, primarily in the United States, a new ideology is being built, under certain circumstances no less dangerous than fascism and Nazism a hundred years ago. The second term of President Donald Trump could be a turning point when America will be under the control of ambiguous people and ideas.
The emerging ideology of the “new America” is still heterogeneous and represented by at least four key groups. The first is Trump himself and those his entourage, who professes views borrowed from the era of classical great-power imperialism and economic nationalism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The second is politicians and media figures, which can be attributed to right-wing populists. The third is Silicon Valley, committed to libertarian hypercapitalism and the cult of technology. Fourth, intellectuals who generate and promote the ideas of the “dark Enlightenment.”
If the views of the first two groups are not new to the American political landscape, then the last two are the phenomenon of the 21st century.
[1] Good old imperialism?
Trump’s ideology is in many ways a classic inconclusive imperialism on the “right of the strong.” Already in his inaugural speech, he openly declared the desire for territorial acquisitions: “The United States will again become a growing nation – increasing its wealth, expanding its territory, building its cities…”[1] Here, Trump speaks of America as an “exceptional nation” and “the greatest civilization in the history of mankind.” America’s geopolitical ambitions and exclusivity will be backed up by “the most powerful military force ever seen by the world.”
Claims to exclusivity, the desire for territorial expansion, military-force domination are essential signs of imperialism.
It is no coincidence that in the same inaugural speech, Trump approvingly mentions William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt, presidents who have introduced the United States to the club of imperialist powers.
[2] Right-Populist Conservatism
This ideological faction includes figures such as Vice-President JD Vance, political strategist Steve Bannon and journalist Tucker Carlson. Their main slogan is America First. They act from the standpoint of the cultural and value traditionalism of the deep American people and the hostility to the liberal-cosmopolitan elite, which concentrates on the east and west coasts, position themselves as defenders of the working class, advocate tough economic protectionism for the revival of American industry, and in the sphere of foreign policy gravitate towards isolationism.
[3] Libertarian Techno-Capitalism
This trend of the new American ideology is represented by technillionaires – mainly immigrants from Silicon Valley. The most famous, of course, is Elon Musk, who from January to May 2025 served as head of the Department of Efficiency of the Government [DOGE] in the Trump administration. However, the level of publicity does not always correspond to the degree of political influence. The notorious venture capitalist Marc Andreessen (the creator of the first mass Internet browser Netscape) may have had an influence on the White House initially, being an unofficial adviser and helping Trump recruit to key posts. [2] Until recently, Andreessen was a supporter of the Democratic Party, but in 2024 he supported Trump – in part because Andreessen did not arrange the Biden administration’s course of tighter regulation of the crypto industry and artificial intelligence.
Andreessen, like Musk, advocates maximum freedom of business activity and minimize state interference in private business.
In 2023. Andreessen has published the Techno-optimistic Manifesto. The main idea is simple: scientific and technological progress is the greatest benefit and the key to solving the problems of mankind, but only free markets, coupled with the elimination of burdensome restrictions and barriers, will ensure the development of a high-tech economy. Andreessen advocates for “accelerationism” – the spurring of technological development, which should accelerate progress to unprecedented speeds. This is the literal way of the word “undisper” acceleration will be achieved through the synthesis of technological innovation and the capitalist economy (techno – capital machine), the term that Andreessen borrowed from the British philosopher Nick Land. Artificial Intelligence: “We believe that artificial intelligence is our alchemy, our Philosopher’s Stone… We believe that artificial intelligence should be approached as a universal solution to problems. [3]
However, in the optimistic picture drawn by Andreessen there are semantic nuances. With a clear reference to Frederick Nietzsche, whose name is mentioned in the manifesto in the list of the most respected Andreessen thinkers, the techno-billionaire sings the upcoming “technological supermen”: “We are not victims, we are the conquerors… We are the strongest predator on top of the food chain (apex predator).”
When Andreessen, talking about “technological superhumans”, uses a predator metaphor, is it not a typical Freud clause? At the top of the food chain, by definition, there can be only a few, the strongest predators, while the rest of the creatures have a different role. The Andreessen Manifesto contains a response to who is supposed to be the main predator: “We believe that America and its allies should be strong, not weak. We believe that the national power of liberal democracies is derived from their economic power (financial force), cultural power (soft power) and military power (hard force). Economic, cultural and military power stem from technological. Technologically powerful America is the power of good in a dangerous world. Technologically powerful liberal democracies guarantee freedom and peace. Technologically, weak liberal democracies are losing to their authoritarian rivals.
In the extensive list of “sacraments-patrons of techno-optimism” and Andreessen are Filippo Marinetti, the founder of futurism and one of the ideologues of Italian fascism. The last act of Marinetti was a voyage as part of the Italian expeditionary corps to the Eastern Front, where he was wounded near Stalingrad.
The most politically influential techno-billionaire is apparently the founder of Paypal Peter Thiel. It is probably not a mistake to call it the second most important ideologist of the “new America” after Trump himself. Although Thiel has never held official political posts, he is the key figure that unites Silicon Valley, intellectual right conservatism and Trump populism.
Thiel became the first of the most authoritative figures of Silicon Valley who openly supported Trump and became a donor to his presidential campaign back in 2016. However, Thiel’s most successful political investment was not Trump, but the current vice president (and, quite likely, the future president) J. D. Vance, for whom Thiel became a mentor and employer (Vance was at one time an employee of the Thiel Mithril Capital Investment Fund). Subsequently, Thiel donated $15 million to Vance’s election campaign in the U.S. Senate from Ohio and presented a young promising politician to Trump.
As befits a businessman, Thiel diversifies political investment. Simultaneously with Vance, he sponsored another young and promising politician (also his student and former employee) – Blake Masters, who was given $20 million for the Senate elections from Arizona (unlike Vance, Masters lost the election).
Thiel calls himself a Christian and often quotes the Bible, although he is an open homosexual (in 2017 he married in Vienna with his partner Matt Dunzesen, an investment banker). The techno-billionaire is known as a philosopher and thinker, being very widely read and himself being a prolific author of books and essays. Unlike Musk and Andreessen, who give away the expositions and memes designed for the public, Thiel’s target audience is an educated elite. He categorically quotes such difficult political philosophers as Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss, is a fan of the ideas of anthropologist René Girard. Thiel positions himself as a libertarian, but does not hide that he has long believed in liberal democracy, as well as in democracy at all: “I no longer think that freedom is compatible with democracy”. [4]
It is significant that Thiel compares today’s America with Germany on the eve of Hitler’s arrival:
“There are undoubted parallels between the United States of the 2020’s and Germany of the 1920’s in the sense that liberalism has exhausted itself. It can be argued that democracy … has exhausted itself and we will have to ask ourselves a number of questions that go very far beyond the window of Overton. [5]
Thiel’s Libertarianism did not prevent him from founding Palantir Technologies, which is engaged in developments in the field of artificial intelligence in the interests of the Pentagon and intelligence services. He also acts as a major investor in young billionaire Palmer Lucky Anduril Industries, who creates drones and other autonomous weapons systems.
Thiel believes that in recent decades, America has plunged into the abyss of degradation and stagnation. We need a leap to new heights and great goals. Like his billionaire counterparts from the valley, Thiel is convinced that the formulation and achievement of ambitious scientific and technological goals should be the main priority of society and the state. His personal favorite is transhumanism technologies associated with the improvement of the human body, the prolongation of life and, potentially, the achievement of immortality. One of Thiel’s current projects is the organization of the alternative “Enhanced Games”, where doping control will be weakened and athletes will allow the use of biohacking methods. One of the co-organizers of Enhanced Games is the son of President Donald Trump Jr.
Of all the billionaire libertarians close to the current government, it is Thiel who has the most articulated views on foreign policy. Its geopolitical concept is quite simple and boils down to the fact that the main external threat to the United States is China.
Unlike a friend and former business partner Elon Musk, who is considered a Pro-Chinese figure, Thiel is a supporter on Beijing’s firm deterrence policy, including by forming a broad anti-Chinese coalition led by Washington. The US should go for an economic divorce from China and put pressure on other countries so that they also minimize ties with Beijing. Thiel believes that the Trump supertariffs on Chinese goods are a step in the right direction. Back in November 2022, he declared: “I believe in free trade, I am not a supporter of tariffs, but I would make an exception for our major geopolitical and ideological rival.”[8] Thiel is one of the most synophobic figures in the highest echelon of the current ruling elite. He calls China “semi-fascist, semi-communist gerontocracy,” accusing Beijing of “nationalism,” “racism,” and “xenophobia. [9]
Thiel treats Russia without sympathy, but much more calmly – he does not see it as dangerous as China as a geopolitical adversary, but perhaps also because Russia is racially and culturally much closer to the West. Thiel believes that the West should not push Moscow into Beijing’s embrace.
Thiel has repeatedly spoken out in support of Israel, and Palantir Technologies supplies AI technology to the Israeli military. Chance or not, the Trump administration’s foreign policy is still almost identical with Thiel’s views.
[4] Theorists of the “Dark Enlightenment”
Finally, the fourth group of representatives of the new American ideology is the intellectual provocateurs that create narratives of the Dark Enlightenment. Also called the “neo-reactionary movement” (NRx), it is an intellectual and philosophical current that denies many ideals of classical Enlightenment, was formed in the late 2000’s – early 2010’s, mainly in the countries of the Anglosphere.
One of the fathers of the “dark Enlightenment” and the author of the term itself is the British philosopher and writer Nick Land, now living in Shanghai, mentioned in Andreessen. At the beginning of the academic career in the 1990s, Land, who then taught at the University of Warwick, held leftist views, but then swung sharply to the right. [10] Land believes in the onset of a singularity – a moment when artificial intelligence and other technologies will surpass a person and get out of control, which will mark the beginning of a “post-human” era. Land draws inspiration from the aesthetics of cyberpunk, predicting the arrival of hyper-capitalist techno-authoritarian systems that are controlled by technology and markets, not traditional politics. Such systems, in his view, are much more effective than classical liberalism and democracy. In the spirit of Techno-Social Darwinism, Land predicts the emergence of post-human beings, which, thanks to the merger with super-technologies, will dominate the new world.
Land rejects anthropocentrism, arguing that human values and morality are insignificant in the face of much larger and impersonal forces such as capital and technology. In his philosophy, humanity is nothing more than a temporary stage in a more significant evolutionary process that is driven by machine and economic systems.
Another intellectual father of the Dark Enlightenment is the American programmer and blogger Curtis Yarvin, also known under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug. Unlike Land, Yarvin is directly involved in the political process. He is friends with Thiel and is well acquainted with a number of politicians and officials from the Trump entourage. Yarvin is in favor of replacing a more effective political system in the form of an autocratic monarchy or a business corporation where the sole governing body has absolute powers. One idea is the creation of a system of numerous corporate-controlled sovereign entities (Patchwork), within which it will be possible to freely experiment with laws, rules and technologies.
Like most of the ideologues of the “new America”, in the sphere of foreign policy, Yarvin advocated the dismantling of the “liberal international order” that developed after 1945, where the United States played the role of a world police officer and a guarantor of security. Yarvin advocates the withdrawal of the United States even from Europe, although it is stipulated that Great Britain, being an Anglo-Saxon country, should remain under the protection of America.[11] Yarvin will have nothing against if, for example, Turkey and Greece begin to fight each other. This is exclusively their business, not America’s problem. Unlike his billionaire friend Thiel, Yarvin calmly and even with restrained admiration speaks of modern China.
Yarvin, whose Jewish ancestors emigrated from Odessa during the Russian Empire, holds an unorthodox view of World War II. In his opinion, Hitler did not thirst for world domination. He wanted “only” to recognize his domination in continental Europe by using European Jews as hostages for negotiations with the US and Britain. If Roosevelt had agreed to a deal with Hitler, the World War and the Holocaust, it might have been possible to avoid. [12]
Land, Yarvin and other “dark Enlightenment” intellectuals can, at first glance, seem much less significant figures compared to billionaires Musk and Thiel. But one of the main capitalists of Germany, Gustav Krupp, who supported Hitler, or the brilliant political philosopher and subsequently the chief lawyer of the Third Reich, Karl Schmitt (by the way, like to quote Yarvin and Thiel), who developed the theory of the “exceptional case” and later, by the way, by which in 1933 the Reichstag was adopted?
American hegemony – end or reformatting?
The emerging ideology of the “new America” is heterogeneous and it has different scenarios. It is not necessary that it materializes into something malignant, reminiscent of the Third Reich or the “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere”. But in the ideas and meanings circulating today in America and other countries of the English sphere, there are many things that can not but alarm.
This is the desire for the cultivation of either “technological superhumans”, or “super-predators”, or “post-human beings” and rationalization proposals to delegate absolute power to the “single executive body”.
Although the ideologues of the “new America” are contemptuous of the liberal international order “rules” that for many years has been considered the sacred cow’s global hegemony of United States, this does not mean that they want to see America only one of the sovereign subjects of the multipolar world. American legions can be withdrawn from Europe, the Middle East or South Korea, but there will be more sophisticated and “technological” ways to control and dominate the bodies and souls. The main concept permeating the writings of Curtis Yarvin is “power”. Peter Thiel’s favorite book, a man who wants to live forever, is The Lord of the Rings.
Author: Artem Lukin, Professor of the Department of International Relations of the Eastern Institute of the Far Eastern Federal University.
[this is the RT (A.I.-abbreviated) version]
The superhumans are coming – and so is the danger
By Artyom Lukin, an associate professor of international relations at Far Eastern Federal University in Vladivostok, Russia
For the past 500 years, the West has reigned as the world’s dominant civilization. Though its grip has loosened in recent years, the West – especially the United States – remains the most powerful force in global politics and the international economy. This power, while capable of building plenty, also carries the potential to destroy a lot.
Today, a new ideology is taking shape in the West, particularly in the US. Under the right conditions, it could prove as dangerous to humanity as fascism and Nazism were in the last century. The reelection of Donald Trump may mark a decisive turning point, transferring power to people and ideas that are, at best, deeply ambiguous.
This ‘New America’ is not driven by a single worldview, but rather by a convergence of four ideological factions.
[1] The Imperial Restorationists
At the center stands Trump himself and his allies – throwbacks to the era of great-power imperialism. Trump’s inaugural speech to launch his second term left little doubt: He called for territorial expansion, industrial growth, and a resurgent military. America, he declared, is “the greatest civilization in the history of mankind.” He spoke approvingly of President William McKinley and Theodore Roosevelt, both architects of American imperialism.
The vision is unmistakable: American exceptionalism, enforced by military might and driven by the logic of conquest. It is the language of empire.
[2] The Nationalist Conservatives
Then there are the right-wing populists – figures like Vice President J.D. Vance, strategist Steve Bannon, and journalist Tucker Carlson. Their rallying cry is ‘America First’. They champion traditional values, claim to speak for the working class, and disdain the liberal elite concentrated in coastal cities.
They oppose globalism, support trade protectionism, and promote isolationism in foreign policy. This faction is not particularly new in American politics, but its influence has deepened, especially under Trump’s patronage.
Vice President JD Vance visits Los Angeles after unrest over ICE raids © Getty Images / Getty Images
[3-A] The Techno-Libertarian Billionaires
A newer – and perhaps more unsettling – element of America’s emerging ideology is represented by Silicon Valley billionaires. Elon Musk is the most visible figure, briefly heading Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency in early 2025. But the more influential actor may be Marc Andreessen, the venture capitalist and early internet pioneer who became an informal adviser to Trump.
Andreessen’s political turn followed his frustration with Biden-era regulations on crypto and artificial intelligence. In 2023, he published a manifesto called ‘The Techno-Optimist’, a document that preaches unrestrained technological acceleration. In his view, scientific innovation and free markets can solve all of humanity’s problems – if only government gets out of the way.
Andreessen quotes Nietzsche and invokes the image of the ‘apex predator’ – a new breed of technological superman who sits atop the food chain. He writes, “We are not victims, we are conquerors… the strongest predator at the top of the food chain.”
Such language might seem metaphorical, but it is revealing. Andreessen’s list of intellectual inspirations includes Filippo Marinetti, the Futurist who helped lay the aesthetic groundwork for Italian fascism and died fighting the Red Army at Stalingrad.
Marc Andreessen © Getty Images / Getty Images
[3-B] The Philosopher-Kingmaker
The most intellectually developed thinker of the techno-libertarian camp is Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal and the data surveillance firm Palantir Technologies. Thiel is no longer a marginal figure – he is now arguably the second most important ideologue of the New America, after Trump himself.
Thiel is also a master strategist. He personally mentored and funded Vance, now vice president and possibly Trump’s heir apparent. At the same time, he backed Blake Masters in Arizona, although that bet didn’t pay off. Thiel reads the Bible, quotes Carl Schmitt and Leo Strauss, and speaks openly about the limits of democracy. “Freedom is no longer compatible with democracy,” he has said.
He has compared modern America to Weimar Germany, arguing that liberalism is exhausted, and a new system must rise. Despite his libertarian leanings, Thiel’s companies develop AI tools for the Pentagon and fund next-generation weapons systems through firms like Anduril.
Thiel believes that America has entered a long decline – and that radical technological leaps are needed to reverse it. One of his pet projects is the ‘Enhanced Games’, a competition where doping and biohacking are allowed. Co-organized with Donald Trump Jr., the event reflects Thiel’s obsession with transhumanism and human enhancement.
In foreign policy, Thiel views China as America’s primary enemy. He has called it a “semi-fascist, semi-communist gerontocracy” and pushed for complete economic decoupling. Interestingly, Thiel is far less hostile to Russia, which he sees as culturally closer to the West. In his view, pushing Moscow into Beijing’s arms is a strategic mistake.
Peter Thiel © Getty Images / Getty Images
[4] The Dark Enlightenment
The final group behind the New America are the theorists of the ‘Dark Enlightenment’, or neo-reactionary movement. These intellectual provocateurs reject the Enlightenment values that once defined the West.
Nick Land, a British philosopher living in Shanghai, is among the founding thinkers of this school. He predicts the end of humanity as we know it and the rise of posthuman, techno-authoritarian systems governed by capital and machines. For Land, morality is irrelevant; what matters is efficiency, evolution, and raw power.
Curtis Yarvin (aka Mencius Moldbug), an American programmer, is another central figure. A friend of Thiel and an insider in Trump’s intellectual circle, Yarvin advocates replacing democracy with a corporate-style monarchy. He imagines a future of sovereign city-states run like companies, where experimentation with laws and technologies is unrestricted.
Yarvin is clear in his rejection of American global leadership. He believes the US should withdraw from Europe and let regional powers settle their own disputes. He speaks warmly of China, and his views on World War II are unorthodox to say the least – suggesting Hitler was motivated by strategic calculation rather than genocidal ambition.
Curtis Yarvin
What comes next?
Many of these ideas may seem fringe. But fringe ideas have power – especially when they echo through the corridors of political and technological influence. Carl Schmitt’s legal theories enabled Hitler to seize dictatorial powers in 1933. Today, the intellectual allies of Trump and Thiel are crafting their own narratives of ‘emergency’, ‘decadence’, and ‘reawakening’.
What’s emerging in America is not a retreat from hegemony, but a reformatting of it. The liberal international order is no longer seen as sacred – even by the country that built it. The new American elite may be withdrawing troops from Europe, the Middle East, and Korea, but their ambitions have not shrunk. They are turning instead to subtler methods of control: AI, cyber dominance, ideological warfare, and technological superiority.
Their goal is not a multipolar world, but a redesigned unipolar one – run not by diplomats and treaties, but by algorithms, monopolies, and machines.
The threat to the world is not just political anymore. It is civilizational. The superhumans are on the march.
This article was first published by Russia in Global Affairs, translated and edited by the RT team
Israël a accepté l’initiative du président américain Donald Trump d’un cessez-le-feu avec l’Iran, a annoncé le cabinet du Premier ministre
L’article L’Iran et Israël acceptent l’initiative de cessez-le-feu de Trump est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
There are auspicious signs on the other side of dystopia. And right here in Russia.
By Pepe Escobar at the Strategic Culture Foundation.
The Global Digital Forum last week in delightful Nizhny Novgorod represented a landmark in the quest for a more equitable media landscape across the whole Global South.
Pride of place was taken by a new ambitious association, the Global Fact-Checking Network (GFCN). The last session of the forum was focused essentially on how to fight all the toxic declinations imposed by the post-truth anti-cultural ambiance – as in fact-checking an avalanche of fake news coming in most cases from states and official institutions.
Guest of honor was superstar Russian Foreign Minister spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, relaxed, in great spirits, who went full Deng Xiaoping by urging everyone to “fight for the truth and seek out the facts”.
By a twist of fate, the timeline left me with only two minutes to somehow wrap up our quite enlightening discussion. So I went hardcore and quoted Nietzsche: “There are no facts, only interpretations”. Later on, I was surprised at how that had struck a nerve especially among African delegates.
The key point is that in the artificially fabricated post-truth environment, not only facts are only facts if we say so; most of all, only one interpretation is allowed – be it from the Empire of Chaos, whoever may be in power, or from a Kafkaesque mechanism such as the European Union (EU)/European Commission (EC).
If you deviate from the official interpretation, they will come after you. That has led, for instance, in Europe, to journalists/EU citizens being prevented even from traveling to their own nation-states, and having their accounts frozen, or EU citizens being prevented from covering a supposedly democratic election (in Romania), and immediately deported (outside of the EU).
A startling essay on Nietzsche amplifies the diagnostic of Europe’s current cultural suicide. Nietzsche was an “untimely” outsider, a steppenwolf, pledging allegiance to no one and nothing, silently grappling with “the flat exhaustion of bourgeois modernity”, and searching, in vain, for “silhouettes among shadows”.
Nietzsche, in the late 19th century, was already a symbol of Resistance. Resistance as we see it today – from the Axis of Resistance in West Asia to Orthodox Christian military batallions fighting for the freedom of Novorossiya. No ceremony ever greeted Nitzsche: he was always alone. He shattered illusion after illusion as his solitude “became liturgy” and “his body turned into protest.” He impersonated “the ghost of nobility”. A species in extinction – indeed.
Tech visionaries want it all
That crystal clear Nietzsche intuition – arguably the best definition of truth in the history of philosophy – may be our guide in the labyrinth of post-truth where, to quote post-modernist masterpiece Twin Peaks, “the owls are not what they seem”.
Errol Musk, Elon’s father, showed up early this week in Moscow for the Future 2050 forum. Daddy Musk effusively showered praise on Russia as Ancient Rome 2.0 and Moscow itself as the “capital of the world”. Quite on point – in both cases.
But what really matters is why Daddy Musk is in Russia. That may align with a strategy of luring powerful sectors of Silicon Valley into doing business with Russia. Main actors/participants would be tech visionaries which used to be part of the notorious PayPal Mafia: Elon Musk and Peter Thiel.
That may pose a series of serious problems. Martin Armstrong has been instrumental in portraying this band of tech visionaries as a ubiquitous new oligarchy: active in social media, biotech, space, the surveillance industry, engineering policies and influencing monetary systems with their hardcore brand of venture capitalism, and not to mention shaping worldwide-interfering narratives.
The new tech elite shines brightly via the Trump-Musk love affair turned staged catfight. But its tentacles reach much further. J.D. Vance is Peter Thiel’s perfectly positioned candidate to become the next POTUS. Palantir, controlled by Thiel and totalitarian Alex Karp, have been awarded a massive contract to design a U.S. federally centralized database using very sophisticated AI models.
Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill is heavy on AI – including a 10-year moratorium during which any U.S. state and local government cannot regulate AI. This will allow free reign for deepfakes and Big Tech doing whatever they feel like to manipulate unsuspecting consumers.
So that’s the key question. How to fact-check the tech elite? How to counterpunch multiple instances of techno-feudalism – when tech companies feed intel to governments, commit unlimited funds to political operations, and set up censorship platforms disguised as “democracy”, drenched in AI-generated fake news?
Go East, to Siberia, young man
At least there are auspicious signs on the other side of dystopia. And right here in Russia. This is a mesmerizing interview by Nora Hoppe and Tariq Marzbaan with legendary Prof. Sergey Karaganov, Honorary Chairman of the Council for Foreign and Defence Policy (Russia’s leading public foreign policy organisation) and academic supervisor at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow.
Welcome to a magic carpet ride through the really deep origins of Russia’s heritage. Starting with the Scythians: “Now we are rediscovering within ourselves these roots that unites us with the peoples of Eurasia.”
All the way to Byzantium: “The Russian princes, who baptized Russia, chose Byzantium ― at that time the richest, the most developed and intellectually flourishing country in Central Eurasia, much more developed than Europe was (…) The Russian princes’ astute choice of Byzantium largely predetermined Russian culture, Russian architecture, and, of course, Russian religion, that is, our Orthodoxy.”
And then reaching Pax Mongolica: “The Mongol Empire left a deep mark on Russian history also, because it was multicultural and very tolerant religiously, and this is where I think (although there is no complete agreement amongst historians on this matter) the Russians ― the dominant people in the former Russian Empire and the USSR ― inherited their unique cultural, religious, and national openness.”
Karaganov forcefully proposes that everything positive about Pax Mongolica should be re-examined to “substantiate the unity of Eurasia.” And “we must rely just as much on the heritage of the Scythians, who were the forefathers of so many peoples in Greater Central Eurasia.”
This is the essence of a true multipolar Russia in action – leading to the fascinating concept of “Siberianization”: a “spiritual, cultural, political, and economic development of Russia in the eastern direction to the Urals and Siberia. The western direction of our policy and economic ties has bleak prospects.”
Karaganov, whose analyses are deeply appreciated by President Putin, is adamant: it all amounts to a “civilizational struggle against techno-barbarism and techno-paganism”, and “against dehumanization”. Against, essentially, techno-feudalism.
Le 8 mai à 00h00, heure de Moscou, le cessez-le-feu dans la zone de l’opération spéciale, annoncé par le dirigeant
L’article La trêve de trois jours pour les 80 ans de la Victoire est entrée en vigueur est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le président russe Vladimir Poutine a annoncé un cessez-le-feu à l’occasion du 80e anniversaire de la Victoire – de 00h00
L’article Poutine annonce une trêve de trois jours pour les 80 ans de la Victoire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi)