By Francis Lee for the Saker Blog
One of the unstated and extant features of the contemporary age has been the demise of the Westphalian Treaty. This arrangement had in times past regulated the relationship and clashes of interest among the great powers. We should remind ourselves that the key precepts of the system were preceded by the carnage of the 30 years’ war in Europe circa 1618-1648, and eventually agreed upon at the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 – an arrangement which brought an end to the wars of the Reformation and agreed upon and binding on all parties. These precepts were:
‘’The Westphalian peace reflected a practical accommodation to reality, not a unique moral insight. It relied on a system of independent states refraining from interference in each other’s domestic affairs and checking each other’s ambitions through a general equilibrium of power. No single claim to truth or universal rule had prevailed in Europe’s contests. Instead, each state was assigned the attribute of sovereign power over its territory. Each would acknowledge the domestic structures and religious vocations of its fellow states and refrain from challenging their existence. A recognition of the existence of sovereign states within their own clearly defined borders and sphere of influence.’’ * So argued Henry Kissenger (2014)
Alas this is no more, and the system had undergone a long decline throughout its inception for reasons which in time were to become obvious. It was earlier in the wake of World War I that the Westphalian system began to falter. US President Woodrow Wilson joined the war not so much to defend American territory as to “make the world safe for democracy”. If “democracy” was a religion, rather than an ideology or a system of government, then Wilson would not sound very different from the most zealous Crusaders of medieval Europe. Despite Wilson’s idea for a League of Nations failing to gain congressional approval at home, the leaders of Europe went ahead and formed the organization themselves. While the main purpose of the League was to make war obsolete, it utterly failed to do so.
The putative new world ‘order’ in the shape of the UN Charter was first established in 1945 and was an explicitly globalist organization. Whereas Westphalian nationalism held that each country was its own sovereign unit, post-war globalism instead held that certain concepts such as ‘liberal democracy’ and ‘civil rights’ were universal to all humanity, and therefore any nation that restricted such things lost the protections of sovereignty. All very noble but roughly translated this should read.
The two or three great powers had the ability and resolve to structure the world in their own image and in doing so maximise and extend the reach of their power. As for humanity and the subaltern classes and nations; they were to be subordinated to the interests of larger powers and serve those interests. End of.
The great powers would go through the motions in pursuit of their interests – they always do, but the outcome would be tailored to those interests. For example. In 1991, US President George H. W. Bush announced a war against Iraq, which had invaded and occupied the neighbouring nation of Kuwait. However, when push came to shove the great power(s) – in this instance the US – did not hesitate to use their formidable resources – including war, annexation and starvation – against the weaker smaller states who became the objects of war.
Cold War 1 lasted until the break-up of the USSR in 1991. This was manna from heaven for the imperial juggernaut who saw a game-changing opportunity to push ahead with its global hegemonic agenda whilst Russia was entering the Yeltsin disaster years. This was made perfectly clear in a ground breaking directive issued by the then US Under Secretary of Defence for Policy at that time (neo-conservative) Paul Wolfowitz. This was to become known as The Wolfowitz doctrine: Not intended for initial public release, it was leaked to the New York Times on March 7, 1992. It read:
‘’Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat of the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defence strategy and requires that we endeavour to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.’’(1)
In short: Me Tarzan, you Jane. The US and its satellites were top of the pile and would remain so. Other potentially hostile states will be surrounded, threatened, and intimidated into accepting their subaltern status. This was described by Senator Edward Kennedy as “a call for 21st century American imperialism that no other nation can or should accept.” (2) And just to rub salt into the wound the US and its vassal states expanded NATO to include former Soviet republics and ex Warsaw pact states and pushed right up to Russia’s western borders.
Suffice it to say this geo-political arrangement involved a complete rejection of Westphalian principles and has imposed global liberal practise of hegemony and interventionism under the command of the principal global hegemon, the United States. This pursuit of global hegemony represents the implementation of the belief in America’s so-called ‘Manifest Destiny’ – a divine providence to spread the liberal-democratic global order to the rest of the planet and usher in a global Shangri-La of peace, prosperity … and so on and so forth. Of course, this puts the world on a permanent war footing. This has been instanced by wars waged by the empire against Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia and Syria with more in the pipeline as well as a cyber-attack on Iran – the Stuxnet attack – and a number of colour revolutions paid for and organized by the US, Georgia and Ukraine being the most obvious and well-known. But the big prize is and always has been the Eurasian bloc. This of course may well involve a nuclear exchange, but hey, America’s intentions are noble and worth fighting for are they not? It should be understood that the United States is the indispensable, exceptional nation, the shining city on the hill. Blah, blah, blah.
What is particularly disturbing is that this absurd and dangerous doctrine has become akin to a religious orthodoxy. Comparable perhaps to the fanaticism of Wahhabist cults in parts of the Muslim world. It is suggestive of an infantile mindset which views international relations as a Manichean struggle between good and evil. Whether the non-adult proponents actually believe in this doctrine is a moot point. But the pervasiveness of this cult is all but total; this is a 21st century inquisition complete with heresy hunts and a fanatical priesthood of the media and their security handlers in the deep state, in their attempts to close down any other or any independent counter-narrative.
However, once the ideological stranglehold on policy has built up momentum it becomes very difficult to change course. In the language and ideology of neo-con exceptionalism, diplomacy is akin to appeasement, the West is threatened, Russia-Putin is on the rampage, proof (sic) of this was his ‘’invasion’’ of Ukraine. China also is becoming a threat to the western way of life; Carthage must be destroyed. Of course, every one of these assertions are extremely contentious and could/should be countered, but of course they are not; the dominant narrative shall not be profaned or challenged.
As the US and its vassals therefore prepare for war, its populations must be conditioned to believe and accept such an inevitable outcome. The propaganda machine has been stepped up to unprecedented levels. The message is simple. Our side = good, Their side = bad. Our side does good things, their side does bad things. Thus, the media – now an asset of the deep state – plays an essential role of propagating this political construction among the populations of the Anglo-Zionist heartlands.
All of which is very reminiscent of Orwell’s short novel Animal Farm. After the Animal Revolution and the eviction of Jones the Farmer, the sheep were instructed by the ruling group – the pigs – into reciting the goodness of the animals and the badness of humans. The short and endless bleat of the sheep went as follows: ‘’Four legs good, two legs bad,’’ repeated endlessly.
That is about the level of western foreign policy. Good guys, bad guys, white hats, black hats, no compromise, no surrender. Result war. The question we must now ask is has this menacing process gone too far to go into reverse? This of course remains an open question. But the thrust of neo-conservative foreign policy would suggest this war would be a logical outcome. Either that or the whole thing is a bluff. Up to this point the US performance in attacking recalcitrant weak states has not been a roaring success. The same goes for Israel. Bombing countries with no air defence or shooting Palestinian kids with sniper rifles is easy-peasy. Taking on Iran is a different matter entirely. The irresistible force seems to be meeting its immovable object.
From a realist as opposed to a neo-conservative foreign policy the idea of an American world empire is frankly deranged. Pursuit of this pipedream can only result in mutually assured destruction; yes, M.A.D. still applies. The United States and its minions might not like it, but it will have to learn to live with other great powers. Russia, China have legitimate spheres of influence and this should be respected. This will involve an end to the gross provocations in the South China Sea and in Poland, Romania, and the Baltics, not to mention the ongoing series of colour revolutions.
This is true in spades with regard to Israel – a country of a mere 8 million souls with an ambition to create a greater Israel from the Euphrates to the Nile. This objective, involving a ruthless ethnic cleansing has been unremittingly pursued since the British left Palestine in 1948. According to one David Ben-Gurion about how to deal with Palestinians in their midst: ‘’There is a need for strong and brutal reaction’’ (to Palestinian opposition) ‘’ … We need to be accurate about timing, place and those we hit. If we accuse a family, we need to harm them without mercy, women and children included, otherwise this is not an effective reaction … there is no need to distinguish between guilty and not guilty.’’(3) This of course has been par for the course since the late 1940s. But Israel like its American sponsor, must learn to live within its own sphere of influence and not tempt fate by embarking on a Zionist crusade against its near neighbours. It would do well to remember that the Crusades were in their neck of the woods for nearly 200 years, but the invaders were finally driven out in 1291.
The liberal-imperialist Anglo-Zionist regime change ideology is supplemented by the appeal to ‘human rights’ and Responsibility to Protect – R2P. Human Rights apparently override national sovereignty. According to one Francis Fukuyama:
‘’Dictators and Human Rights abusers like Serbia’s Milosevic could not hide behind the principle of sovereignty to protect themselves as they committed crimes against humanity particularly in multi-ethnic states like Yugoslavia where the borders of the sovereign state in question were themselves contested. Under these circumstances outside powers, acting in the name of human rights and democratic legitimacy, had not just the right, but the obligation to intervene. (4)
There you have it. The ‘intervention’ a 78-day bombing offensive by NATO resulted in the deaths of in excess of 5000 civilians in Serbia and elsewhere. But of course, this was not a crime against humanity. Doublethink!? Of course, the glaring anomaly in the regime change R2P ideology lies in its inconsistency. But this is to be expected. It should always be borne in mind that the mission of the AZ-Empire is world domination, not coexistence or democracy. This, however, must never be openly admitted. The veneer of a crusade to make the world a Garden of Eden, is simply a cover for imperial aggrandisement.
‘’Liberal democracies have little difficulty in conducting diplomacy with illiberal states when they are acting according to realist dictates, which is most of the time. In those circumstances, liberal democracies do whatever is necessary to maximize their survival prospects, and that includes negotiating with authoritarian leaders. They sometimes even support or form alliances with murderous dictators as the US did in WW2 when it worked with Joseph Stalin to defeat Nazi Germany, or when it cooperated with Mao Zedong after 1972 to contain the Soviet Union. Occasionally they even overthrow democratic regimes (all over Latin America – FL) which they perceive as being hostile. Liberal democracies go to great lengths to disguise such behaviour with liberal rhetoric, but in fact they are acting contrary to their own – professed – principles.’’ (6)
However, this unstable combination of outward authoritarianism and domestic democracy has inbuilt destabilising forces. Long ago it was pointed out by the Greek historian Thucydides that Empire and Democracy cannot co-exist in the long-term. Moreover, the methods of empire would be brought home to deal with the destabilising effects of empire on the state. (5)
Nowhere is this more an ever-present fact than in the great hegemon, the United States itself. It would appear that the United States polity has, at every level, descended into a variety of collective insanity. Witness Rachel Maddow, I know it’s difficult, but bear with me, asserting with complete conviction and sang-froid, night after night, that Donald Trump was a Russian agent! What made this worse was that no-one challenged this idiocy? Ms Maddow’s rant can be compared to the ‘two minutes hate’ in 1984 (only unfortunately it lasted for more than 2 minutes) and of the level of a latent pathology in the media in particular and the body politic more generally.
Speaking of Orwell, his essay Notes on Nationalism nailed this particular political phenomenon. He firstly made it clear that what he meant by nationalism was a more general description of particular religious, or political outlooks.
‘’By ‘nationalism’ I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’ – But secondly – and this is much more important – I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests.’’
Thus Neo-Conservatism, Pacifism, Political Catholicism, Zionism, and curiously enough, Anti-Semitism, are all types of nationalism, broadly understood.
Of course, the unprepossessing Ms Maddow is a virulent specimen of this type of mental aberration. The nationalist has to perform the most intricate forms of mental gymnastics in order to believe that their particular beliefs are true and will not tolerate profanation. As Orwell writes:
‘’The nationalist does not only disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has the remarkable capacity of not even hearing about them …All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts. A British Conservative will defend self-determination in Europe but oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency. Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them, and there is almost no kind of outrage – torture, the use of hostages, forced labour, mass deportations, imprisonment without trial, forgery, assassination, the bombing of civilians – which does not change its moral colour when it is committed by ’our’ side … Some nationalists are not far from clinical schizophrenia, living quite happily amid dreams of power and conquest, which have no connexion with the physical world … ‘’
Not far from clinical schizophrenia! I would say well ahead.
And there’s the rub. Realist foreign policy was often cruel and callous but rational, cold and calculating and unlike neo-conservatism it was at least generally non-ideological, which is to say, sane. Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, were ideological projects and Western Imperialism, particularly of the white settler variety, the US, UK Israel, Australia, NZ, were openly racist and murderous in both practise and theory.
In the present geopolitical configuration, it is difficult to assess the outcome of the Anglo-Zionist crusade against the Eurasian bloc. Russia and China are reading from a Westphalian text, the US is reading from a neo-conservative playbook, with its European allies being reluctantly dragged along. In this situation it is difficult to know how this titanic struggle will eventually pan out and to whose benefit. One of the problems which besets any appraisal lies in the fact that the Westphalian system depended upon dialogue with rational actors. These have become as rare as hen’s teeth, if not extinct species in the western centres of power. The US and its reluctant allies will seemingly not give up on its strategic objective of world domination and Russia and China are going to defend themselves. Something has to give, but what?
(1) Defence Planning Guidance for the 1994–99 fiscal years (dated February 18, 1992)
(2) Orlando Caputo Leiva and Marlene Medrano- Latin American Perspectives Volume. 34, No. 1, The Crisis of U.S. Hegemony in the Twenty-First Century (January 2007), pp. 9-15
(3) Quoted in Pappe, – Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine – p.69. For background on Ben-Gurion’s comment, see Ibid, 61-72. Quoted in – The Israel Lobby – John J Mearsheimer and Stephen M Walt p.99, fn.95
(4) Francis Fukuyama – State Building, Governance and World Order in the 21st Century – p.131.
Other US Realist Diplomats saw things somewhat differently. Commenting on the expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe In 1996, the 92-year-old veteran US geopolitical realist, George Kennan, warned that NATO’s expansion into former Soviet territory was a “strategic blunder of potentially epic proportions.” I think it is the beginning of a new cold war … ‘’I think the Russians will gradually react quite adversely and it will affect their policies. I think it a tragic mistake. There was no reason for this whatsoever. No one was threatening anybody else. This expansion would make the Founding Fathers of this country turn over in their graves. We have signed up to protect a whole series of countries, even though we have neither the resources nor the intention to do so in any serious way. NATO expansion was simply a light-hearted action by a Senate that has no real interest in foreign affairs.” (5) John J Mearsheimer – The Great Delusion, Liberal Dreams and International Realities – p.157.
A 1,4 billion state (China) that keeps growing and growing will not be defeated by a 329 million state with a *fictitious* economy.
Raw power: we all know about the circa 800 US bases around the world. Did they stop the Chinese (2000-2020) from becoming the main trade partner almost everywhere? No. Therefore these bases are / were irrelevant economically speaking because they could NOT prevent Chinese dominance.
The Chinese order their fleets to turn back = empty shelves in their enemy’s home (let’s say US + vassals) = they will start killing each other in a couple of weeks or months. China would suffer but they would almost certainly destroy US / EU social fabrics. THIS China might do it. THIS the US empire cannot control it.
There’s no need for war though: the US should implode soon enough. There’s no way the US middle class can survive. Their 1% should be very busy taming (fighting?) a very hostile impoverished (yes or yes) 99%. An oligarchic dictatorship is the most likely outcome. But this will make the US more vulnerable. Let’s not forget the US prosperity or American Dream (RIP) could buy the loyalty of most of the US populace: the social fabric was healthy. Meanwhile the challenger (China) can deliver: 800 million were lifted out of poverty, now they want a 500 million middle class by 2030… Chinese populace’s loyalty is guaranteed that is ;)
Like most empires (if not all), implosion is what matters, not external agents.
Sit back and enjoy the show.
How to “enjoy the show” with no popcorn from Ukraine?
What middle class? 10 years ago it was down to 18%. In California you can find the middle class living in cardboard boxes by the American River. Become an oligarchy? Harvard and other ‘institutions’ say we are already an oligarch. But the loyalty of most of the US populace … they only have to buy half to pay them to kill the other half. US gov’t and their praetorian guards, the police, are parasites all. The things we fear are already here. We’re just not supposed to notice. I agree with you 100% Federico that it will get worse and it will become noticeable. This piece is satirical but true enough:
The West is driven by its elites for a sociopathic unattainable goal. The breakdown of this fallacious pursuit will result in chaos internally that is now unavoidable.
This is true derangement that in all probability may lead to epic catastrophe unless there is an appearance of mature realistic non ideological individuals very shortly.
The necessary reset is the purge of Western elites on a universal scale forthwith.
“A state of 1.4 billion (China) that keeps growing and growing will not be defeated by a state of 329 million with a *fictional* economy”
China has certainly become the biggest factory on the planet, and Russia the biggest military technological power on the planet. When I look at the faces of the military and leaders of China and Russia, I see serious faces, men with testosterone. When I look at Western leaders, I see Kamala Harris laughing hysterically, Ursula sweet, and female ministers with high progesterone and female hysteria. Therefore, we already know who is standing in reality. Westerners love to put women in charge, to direct. Maybe it’s some fetish that men in the west have. China and Russia will prevail, will win. Asia chose to follow the natural law of things, and the West chose to be artificial. The machine cannot replace reality. Who is based on realism are china and russia. May this western passion for the easy lying path not lead us to world war 3.
The West has developed a new politico-societal form:
Corporations. Corporations have to fall, they push US politicians into this madness. It is they that want to control the world, take the whole Planet hostage. They own politicians in all ”Western” countries and their minions.
They are that ”elites” that pushed for a NWO with a single Government, OMS, UN, a single religion and so on. The even had a ”Church of three Religions” in Berlin. The House of One. They wanted to mix al Abrahamic religions in one I guess, with the pope the leader (atrocity, this one that doesnt believe in Jesus and he say this loud and clear – said now he doesn’t believe Jesus resurected and int he past something about his sins and birth and so much more blasphemy).
Black Rock, vanguard, they are the ones doing all this. Splitting the world will cut their power and money and we should never allow a group to have as much power they are an octopus and wanna dominate the world. These kind of corporations that own msm, governments, all should be obsolete. No one, no one ever have to concentrate as much power.
There have been different religions and factions that have strived and planned for some kind of organized maybe financial, take the whole planet hostage, regimes.
And one is trying to organize right now, the problem is only 2 of the 3 have come to the table and shown their cards, the 2 are franticly waiting for the 3rd to appear and complete the triangulation of power.
The two are the jews and the catholics naturally, the jews finally having been given land from their overwhelming financial holdings, and the catholics, just the remainder of the roman empire and its large financial holdings.
Now what would have made them play their hands in hopes of the 3rd’s, sudden arrival and “quick” coup, one will probably never know.
But what is a known is the 3rd wheel, and it just so happens to be the pride of the U.S. military, but what to make of the delayed show up? Bumped into a war instead?
This we may never find out, but watch the “crazies” as they seem to be both the target, and the offenders in this new battle of the ages.
Precisely, Valeria. About 250 years ago – about the time of the American Revolution – the West took a fatal misstep. Governments were induced to pass laws authorising the creation of corporations that enjoyed the legal status of persons but without most of the obligations of human beings.
Today a group of people can form a corporation and pursue profit for its own sake, recognising no limitation or moral laws. If the corporation is found guilty of breaking the law, it is usually fined a tiny percentage of its vast profits. At most, the corporation might conceivably – once in a thousand times – be broken up. In which case the individuals who owned and worked for it suffer no penalty; they are free to start another corporation the following day and carry on doing the same things.
As time passed and corporations became ever bigger and richer, they began inexorably to influence, and then to control, governments themselves. Today the actions of governments such as those of the USA, UK, and the other “Western” nations are almost wholly controlled by corporations, which in turn feed off the taxpayer revenue that governments channel to them. They pay politicians millions in so-called “campaign donations” or straight bribes, and benefit to the tune of billions in profits.
Now corporations are taking a long step further. Having taken over governments, they are now seeking to control the very minds of individual citizens through instruments such as facebook, Twitter, Youtube, and the entire “mainstream media”.
Human beings have already been at war with artificial intelligences for over a century. But we simply didn’t recognise those AIs as what they are, just because they are made up of human beings rather than electronics.
Awesome article ! The problem is getting people that cannot recognise themselves in a mirror, to read it.
Regardless of the time frame, if one uses the premise that God gives and satan takes, its not to hard to figure out who is who over a long period of time.
Supposedly these things are on record, but even if just recorded in memory’s, they should still balance out in the givers favor toward the end (when ever that date is approached) or the giver has the option to respond as is necessary, I would assume, especially if the giver has some kind of stake in the evolutionary process of the giving. Again I’m figuring they do, just my thoughts.
Sorry, Europe was at war pretty much continuously from 1450 to WWII. The Westphalian Treaty was signed after the 30 Years War and did pretty much nothing to prevent war, and many of these wars went on for decades.
French v Dutch 1643 -1715
Augsburg League 1689 – 1697
Spanish Succession 1702 – 1713
Austrian Succession 1740 – 1790
Seven Years War 1756 – 1763
Napoleonic Wars 1803 – 1815
Crimean War 1853 – 1856
Wars for German Unification 1862 – 1871
1st Balkan War 1912 – 1913
2nd Balkan War 1913 – 1914
As part of the insanity, i do believe that maddow is an in-your-face tranny, which, at its core, is living and pushing a lie.
Francis Lee’s essay is brutally realistic and accurate.
It brings the current dispute into focus.
We are looking at two different worldviews.
Russia and China (and most of the Global South) are Westphalian.
The West is not.
In 1991, US President George H. W. Bush announced a war against Iraq, which had invaded and occupied the neighbouring nation of Kuwait.
Iraq invaded Kuwait as they had refused to stop slant-drilling, and Iraq was green-lighted by the US govt., with the objective of destroying emerging powers and occupying Saudi Arabia. Thus this was ultimately a war of aggression by the U$, despite all the babies thrown out of incubators.
The US not only green-lighted Hussein’s attack on Kuwait, they staged the provocation. Who was running those Kuwaits oil drilling platforms? Halliburton.
Babies tossed from incubators was a complete fabrication, just like the Gulf of Tonkin attack on US warships, WMDs in Iraq, Bin Laden being repsonsible for 9/11, RussiaGate, Jeffrey Epestein’s suicide, Russia’s civilian atrocities at Bucha … the list goes on and on and on.
To see this nonsense all you have to do is turn on a TV or glance at a newspaper or magazine.
Kuwait was historically part of Iraq anyway, just as Ukraine is historically part of Russia.
And, incidentally, several states of the “USA” are historically part of Mexico.
No wonder history is no longer taught (in any recognisable form) in most Western schools.
Iraq, and Libya, were about to drop oil dollar transactions, both were destroyed and gold looted, exactly what Russia is doing right now.
This time it is different.
See the article here on Rublegas.
Pepe Escobar :
‘(1) If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of 100 battles. (2) If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will suffer a defeat. (3) If you know neither the enemy or yourself you will succumb in every battle.’ The Art of War – Sun Tzu
That a ruthless un/elected bunch of parasitic psychopaths are able to rule over us with an iron fist using a thousand year old weapon from Chapter One p.6 of their Playbook, headed, Divide & Conquer is alarming. It also establishes that the 1% all fit snugly into category (1) with the vast majority of western civilisation living the dream in varying states of comatose represented in categories (2) and in the main (3).
Zone A is morally and financially bankrupt and it will require a generation or two before it can compete, offer something of use other than WMD’s to Zone B. Zone B who’ve suffered great hardships for centuries can flourish alongside, not under, Russia, China and Iran. Zone A’s 5th & 6th columns, NGO’s and other vermin must be cleansed from Zone B, including those leaders/puppet governments/dictators/militias they’ve installed (start with the filthy Pakistani military ).
Borrell to Lavrov – Stay out of Africa, we own them – is all you need to know about the mentality these dirty rotten scoundrels, these genocidal Plantation Owners.
You guys are saying it all, for you see the truth, in a world where lies are supreme.
Russia is not really self-sufficient country. Depends too much on exporting raw materials. In that perspective there are some truths on claim: “just a gas station”. Most western nations are almost totally abandoning oil heating. Next step: abandoning natural gas. Especially if Russian. Heating systems favor heating pumps and geothermal heating. Oil heating is most expensive. Germany on average produce 35% of annual electricity by windmills and share of solar production is growing fast. Capacity now 59 GW.
Cold comfort those green technologies on a Dark Windless night.
They lack consistency and easy scalability. Nuclear or fossil fuels are the only option currently for running a manufacturing base the size of Germoney but, they abandoned/are abandoning Nuclear.
German Green delusionist?
Ever thought about being self-sufficent when you can afford exporting resources?
You might think, that in the German bubble, the sun shines 24/7 and the wind blows with constant intensity for 365 days a year.
Ever recognized, that’s not only about heating? You won’t have any industrial production without gas, no pharmaceuticals, no metal plants, no fertilizer et al.
I know, for warmth you just extend your fof-jumping to all 7 days and for the rest, you store your photovoltaic-cobolds in your electrical wire.
So keep on dreaming and smoking your bad stuff. In time you will be begging for a gas-station.
People will suffer, me and my family will suffer, because of ideologists like you, but be sure, we will not forget,nor forgive.
Tell that to BASF director, and step well back…
The COP26 green Flop which ended in Sharma whimpering that he could not deliver.
Now we know why he blubbered on camera, poor thing.
Thank you for a very well expressed article.
Quoting Orwell as a moral figure is not bound to end well. Remember: Orwell wrote Animal Farm not to be anti-authoritarian or anti-communist but to be anti-stalinist, and an anti-stalinist in the worst way possible. Animal Farm lionizes Trotsky as the rightful successor to Lenin! Orwell was a Bolshevik anarchist who fought with people in Spain who raped nuns and dug up saints to execute their dead bodies. Frankly, he may as well have been 1930’s Azov Battalion.
How are you going to speak of Anti-Zionism when your moral figure though the man who should have led the Soviet Union was Levi Bronstein (Trotsky’s real name). Not only that, but he and the other, numerous Jewish Bolsheviks wanted an alternative to Israel established in the Soviet Union as New Khazaria near Odessa? These are basically the forces that Russians are currently fighting right now!
This is what happens when you won’t say the three letter word that starts with a J.
“Speaking of Orwell, his essay Notes on Nationalism nailed this particular political phenomenon.”
Speaking of Orwell, I came to the realization while reading his novel 1984, that he was rather advertising for the order he was imagining than condemning it or warning about it. It was through the part of the book where a man is made to beg for more than his life so that he would not be made to enter a certain room. He offers his children or family if only he will not have to enter the room. The man – the victim – is mocked (denigrated). I knew Orwell there.
“an infantile mindset which views international relations as a Manichean struggle between good and evil.
this is a 21st century inquisition complete with heresy hunts and a fanatical priesthood.”
Perfect. Thank you.
This also applies to woke/antifa/anti-Nazi/anti-racist/gay friendly/pro-democracy/feminist/anti-atheist/whatever delusion ideologies of which this site’s comments are laden.
“The putative new world ‘order’ in the shape of the UN Charter was first established in 1945 and was an explicitly globalist organization.”
“Whereas Westphalian nationalism held that each country was its own sovereign unit, post-war globalism instead held that certain concepts such as ‘liberal democracy’ and ‘civil rights’ were universal to all humanity, and therefore any nation that restricted such things lost the protections of sovereignty.”
The article is correct in the general direction but utterly fails at historical references form the modern age.
The UN is founded and stand purely Wesphalian concepts as sovereignty is at its core. The whole concept of the UN is ANTI-thetical to the “suporior” nation/state and later “liberal democracy” or the “civil rights” concepts of the “West”. These concepts were invented as a reaction to the Cold War and to UNDERMINE the founding principles of the UN charter.
“Civil rights” purpose (for those in real power, lots of naive people believed in them) was first ans foremost to BYPASS any UN charter protections/saveguards. Not to further them. This was the case when they were introduced to the fore and shown in plain sight after the end of the Cold War.
This is why Russia (and China) stick to the UN charter and UKUS does everything possible to undermine the institution. It is “in their way” on the road to supremacy. Part of undermining it is to casually abuse the UN mechanisms as they see fit.
Buttressing the author’s position some may wish to read > ABOVE AND BEYOND INTERNATIONAL LAW:
GEORGE W. BUSH AS THE AUSTINIAN SOVEREIGN,Professor Ali Khan,Washburn University School of Law
JURIST Contributing Editor. (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=940519 ) not my caps!
” The End of the Cold War and Shakespeare’s Macbeth”, Vladimir Golstein, October 9, 2017
(excerpt) “It is naïve to think that Macbeth is only about some “vaulting” and murderous ambition. Macbeth does not acquire the throne with the intention of controlling his subjects. In fact, in his quest to secure his rule, he strives to control the very idea of time and change. It is thus hardly surprising that when he is killed, Macduff declares: “behold, where stands/The usurper’s cursed head: THE TIME IS FREE.”
Enslaving time, means stopping its flow; it means attacking the very idea of change, and therefore destroying the agents of change: the young. ” (https://offgraun.wordpress.com/2017/10/09/the-end-of-the-cold-war-and-shakespeares-macbeth/ )
In re the latter, some may observe that AZE is in process of destroying the youth by ignorance,dope and perversions, including chemical and physical “voluntary” castration, sodomy, etc. Let us refer to the Gracious and Esteemed re-haired female https://twitter.com/charliespiering/status/1516382899603447808 (Psaki)… (I agree with the Lady insofar as her estimation of herself as crazy)
So far as the near future, the internal contradictions of AZE create ketosis, which is visible. It may be that the Fine Gentlemen of ruling junta intend to release more diabolical germ weapons, and retreat to their deep bunkers, imagining that they will emerge in a vast latifundia with breeding stock to create a slave race to serve them…after all, they’re crazy. Like MacBeth (and his suicidal wife “exsex me!” she prayed!), imagine that and think about Psaki and the rest…but of course, Birnam Wood doth come, as we see the Classical Empires of Eurasia are not insane, nor weak
Cheers & Blessings, P
Excellent. Mearsheimer rather missed the point. “NATO protect”? NO. Let’s try NATO Safari Club, membership 2% of GDP for guns, etc, sport is any weak country that can’t fight back. Oh, if you don’t join, you become “game”.
There, fixed it.
Noting the number of Golf Clubs in NATOstan, membership obligatory, look what happened to Pakistan’s Khan, the worlds very best cricket player!
To remedy nationalist blindness as well as the progressives blindness information may help
Here an extract about who actually already in 1919 helped Mao on the way to power.
Odd omission there of Lord Bertrand Russell, and Dewey, teaching Marxism in China after Russia. Mao basically was a Russell student, later differing in tactics.
Russell, sponsored by the Anti-Religion outfit, blamed all ills on Christianity and Confucianism.
China today has revived Confucianism, with tremendous success.
A very telling omission in the article.
It was Prime Minister Blair, recently dubbed Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter by the British Monarch, that declared the post-Westphalian Era.
Previously Henry Kissinger, also knightly dubbed by the British Monarch, endorsed Blair’s post-Westphalia Era.
President Bush upon retiring was knighted Honorary Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath by the British Monarch.
For Her Majesty’s grand knights of treachery
Weinberger, Powell, Scowcroft, Schwarzkopf, … what an American Entourage the Queen has in tow!
Forgot ex-Bank of England chief Marc Carney, Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, now UN Climate Finance czar.
The typical American blindspot is astounding, considering the queued line-up at Buckingham.
For those interested in Orwell, here is the best view I have ever seen :
Why Propaganda is Vital In Upholding The Illusion of a Democracy
Patrick Lawrence identifies : “Infantile imperialism.” ‘These are not serious people.’
and was previously identified by Sargant and Orwell as the key :
“this instinct of imitation when it exists in its highest degree, is also united a loss of all power over the will, which occurs as soon as the impression on the senses has become firmly established, producing a condition like that of small animals when they are fascinated by the look of a serpent.”
There is much more to this in that report.
Exactly correct. If you read all of Orwell’s books you see him shifting his views based on experience at the time. First it was Burma and a scathing rebuke of colonialism, that he was a part of. Then working in the coal mines and the inhumanity he witnessed.
He went on to the Spanish war, fighting against Franco, and then he saw the USSR as a alternative to the greedy uncaring imperialism. But then he recognized flaws in their system: then came animal farm. At the time the Jew Bolsheviks seem a better alternative. But that was then, and decades later, we see those people for what they truly are. Power, no matter what ISM it is, just power and control, as in what we live under today.
1984 tells you what this world has become, and he predicted it. If Orwell were alive today, he would write the greatest work about how evil Zionism is and even link it with the financial hegemony that has plagued this world for centuries.
“The message is simple. Our side = good, Their side = bad. ” Well, yes this is completely true. Of course, the obverse is also just as true; “Our side bad, their side good.” Much like the difference between Capitalism and Communism: “Capitalism is man against man, while Communism is the opposite”.