I don’t hear a straightforward answer to the question: if Dilma Rousseff is impeached, does that imply the end of BRICS? … or the beginning of the end (= a terminal agony) of BRICS? … or none of the above?… Or … is that going to be “RICS”? … “RC”? ………………………….
This coup in Brazil once again proves to me, what the lessons of history showed me years ago. A country that allows a foreign power to influence and control forces inside their country, will always be at the mercy of those foreign forces. And is doomed to lose their sovereignty. So if anyone here wants their countries to be free, they must understand that fact. And they must break,and break completely,the foreign influence on their countries. If they aren’t willing, or able, to do that. Then don’t bother wanting your sovereignty,for you will be wasting your time,you’ll never have it. When/if you elect to power a new government. Look at what they are doing.No matter how hopeful you are about a “new government”,look closely. And if they don’t move at once to clear the foreign controls from your country. Then give up on them,they are just another,doomed to failure, flash in the pan movement (the lesson of Greece should be your guide there).The countries in today’s World that will/can keep their sovereignty are those willing to make the hard decisions needed. They must expel the foreign NGO’s,and other foreign controlled groups. Penalize the internal traitors assisting them.And take (not ask for,take) control of your banking and media. If you aren’t willing to do that,you are just plain, doomed to failure. Like a multi-headed Hydra, the US has many separate ways (especially when in league with local 5th columnists) to harm your countries. So you must realize that this is a fight for survival.Not making the hard choices necessary will leave your country in the position of Greece,Brazil, Venezuela,or Ukraine,if not Syria. Can you be sure of success if you make those hard choices? No one can be sure of that. But you “can” be sure if you don’t, you will fail to have your sovereignty.
In that context, I am still wondering where Kadafi went wrong, exactly… Among his greatest achievements was independent banking (along the lines of Mary Ellen Brown’s model), and the A-Z Empire hated that move in particular. Apparently, they got to him because he did not have the military power to back all those great reforms up. Either one needs at least an alliance with a strong power for protection, or many small countries have to introduce such radical reforms all at the same time, synchronised with one another… The first solution, however, implies dependence on another bigger power (besides, Russia did not help him, did she?); the second one is more attractive – but is it realistic? Etc…
Do you think that naivete of large portions of the global populace contributed to this? I just mean that it created an opening for launching this kind of offensive on Libya without significant consequences to any of the aggressor countries at home, initially. An opportunistic, ‘seize the moment’ attack? Now that we have all witnessed the results from Libya, will that limit the ability of global powers to repeat that performance in other countries? I hope so! The previous propagandized belief that “freeing the country of the dictator will save the people from suffering” has so openly proved to be false.
I think you are right in him not trying to get allies (trying to ally with a US dominated EU was the worse thing he could have done). But his other mistake I believe was to allow the US in. He foolishly thought that he could make a deal with the US. Get in the “good graces” of the West. It never works that way. The US requires total obedience or they will end destroying you to get that obedience from your successor. Certainly they will play a game with you while it serves them. But as soon as they get enough influence in your society they will bring the hammer down. They “pretended” to have good relations with Yanukovich ,and Ukraine. And yet all along behind his back they plotted for several years a color revolution. They only waited until the control they had with a 5th column was enough to pull it off. And then struck when their timing was ready.These games work for the US,so they stick to the plan. We’ve seen it countless times. And for “some reason”,the victims always seemed to be “surprised”. And don’t know how to save themselves.
The time when elections or democracy could bring about change in most countries has past. Even insurgency or civil war will not succeed unless it has backing from a major power.
In the western world, total population control through propaganda and surveillance, which all tracks back to the US. Most countries have been completely compromised – politically, militarily, intelligence services and media.
As long as Russia and China stay solid, it seems only a matter of waiting for the US smash itself on the rocks of those two countries.
Every thing I read about the US military is about offence – how to break through destroy enemy defences. The term they use now for soldiers is “warfighters”, not military personal or defence forces.
There is nothing about defence of US mainland in any of the thinktanks papers. It is all about beating Russian and Chinese defence systems.
As long as the US does not go nuclear and destroy a big part of the world, they will destroy themselves financially. What they are doing is unsustainable. Even their protection rackets will not keep them afloat. As they suck more and more money out of their “allies” more and more people will see past the media propaganda.
It is only then that some form of democracy might return to most of the world.
You have just written the history of the world in a nutshell. The Cuban experience is a shining example of your thesis: people have to make a decision whether they wish to be independent of foreign domination and then make the hard decisions that that choice entails, namely your prescription.
The collapse of the USSR is also an object – and abject – lesson that fits the same principle, namely the workings of the 5th column in high places and how they planned the take-over of power and the looting of the country.
Stalin followed ‘your’ rules and that’s why Russia is not a German colony, although might yet become the Empire’s.
It is in this context that the USSR must be viewed. The moment Lenin declared Peace Land and Bread, the gloves came off, as if they weren’t off from the beginning, with Russia/Crimea attacked by several countries at once in the Crimean War.
Churchill used poison gas against the Bolsheviks. I believe diplomatic relations were cut off between the US and the USSR, socialists in the USA who wanted some dignity for average people were jailed or deported to the USSR, and it was only with Hitler losing against Russia and Hitler threatening the British Empire, that temporarily allowed for Russia to be considered an ally.
No one can condone Stalin for the horrible things he and his followers did, however, given the clear agenda, to destroy Russia, it is not surprising. “Even Paranoids Have Enemies”. They acted in response. As have most countries that have tried to free themselves from the death grip of Western imperialism. And when they, so to speak, self administer political chemotherapy, the Western lovers of human rights (who always overlook the violations of their own governments) demonize the country in the cross hairs.
As the US establishment loses its legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens, does it ramp up the transparency, improve civic responsibility, facilitate fair elections, support independent journalists and whistleblowers? Yet they blather about corruption and human rights abuses, any excuse they can think of, often concocted outright lies, to create the coups. And if the coup doesn’t work as in Syria or Libya, send in the Marines or outsource the carnage to ISIS, the Contras, Al Qaeda, whatever impoverished people willing to be mercenaries.
This may well end up badly, unless the two countries that suffered the most in the last wholesale carnage, WWII, Russia and China play their hands extremely deftly.
This makes total sense to me.
(Only the first graf is confusing to me, mixing Lenin with the Crimean War. Wasn’t the Crimean War in the 19th C?)
Western imperialism will NEVER give up.
This is the great current danger to Cuba. (And of course, Brazil.)
Fidel sees it. Older people see it.
Meanwhile Starbucks, Airbnb, other corporate entities are licking their chops. Tourists are almost like the leading edge—most of them will be looking for little USA in te Cuba, having their coffee at Starbucks instead of at indigenous cafes. I expect. I haven’t been to Cuba, but that is the character of any kind of American mass tourism.
Very few American tourists will color outside the lines for their all-too-short one-week vacation.
It might be best for Cuba to confine tourism development to compounds, sort of like Club Med compounds, so that no one is encouraged to leave them!!
Let us hope that the next Congress of teh Communist Party gets its s–t together and clamps down hard on what any outside entities can do. And, no loans from the WEst. Is “investment” just a euphemism of some kind?
“A country that allows a foreign power to influence and control forces inside their country, will always be at the mercy of those foreign forces. And is doomed to lose their sovereignty. So if anyone here wants their countries to be free, they must understand that fact. And they must break, and break completely, the foreign influence on their countries [etc]”
You’re, of course, right, but the main problem in all these countries are their home grown oligarchs and how they always align their interests with the US. And I do mean always. They see no profit in being patriotic, let alone allowing a socialist-leaning government to eat into their “earnings.” Their natural ally is the equally parasitic US. They know the Yanks will allow them to continue to operate if they vow to them, plus, for their treachery, they might get some protection on the side as well. A bit like the Mafia shaking shopkeepers for protection-money, but unlike the shopkeepers, the oligarchs actually do looove their USian mobsters overlords. Oh, yes they do!
The oligarchs own anything that is economically or strategically important within a country including the media. From their point of view; they think the country belongs to them.
If somehow the people manage to vote-in a government genuinely willing to look after their interests, then it’s the government + the people against the oligarchs and their foreign sponsors.
From the get go the oligarchs have the upper hand; they own nearly everything, plus they own the media they’ll use to propagandize against both: the government and the people, and if that’s not enough to stave-off the tide against them, they can always rely on their foreign “partners” to work their ‘magic’ in the form of civil unrest, rent-a-crowd color revolutions, international negative media propaganda campaigns [always backed by their faithful dogs: Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (etc)]…
I’m not trying to sound defeatist, but I do wanna know how a regular person on the street – who’s usually one pay-check away from homelessness – is supposed to go against this kind of apparatus, one that have tentacles that expand beyond borders and is usually unlimitedly funded (?)
The only solution has to be; once in power, a ‘good’ government has to purge, not only the 5th Column or NGOs, but particularly the oligarchs. They need to be put on forced exile. And that’s just the civilized way to deal with them, me, personally, I would make a public list, and put a bounty on their heads. Let the mobs deal with them however they see fit, provided the body is identifiable when they finish with it. Added bonus; sooner rather than later, the oligarchs will be voluntarily exiling themselves out of the country.
Minus (maybe?) your last idea ,you are right. It is the alliance (sometimes not directly,but just a “friend of my friend” type) between the home oligarchs and foreign interests that is the way the empire destroys a nation’s sovereignty,and controls that nation.I’m seen it worked all over Latin America, in particular.And now it has spread its deadly virus throughout the rest of the World. As hard as it may seem to many,the only medicine for that disease is bitter.I really don’t think (for most) your last point is needed. But the confiscation of their ill gotten gains is the first step. And their “total” removal from government and media is essential.In the past,as bad as the local oligarchs might be.At least they,out of self-interest were patriotic. All their wealth came from their nation. And their nation being sovereign helped them.Today in the “modern” World that isn’t true in most cases anymore. They have connections with companies,banks,investments,on a global scale .As an (easy) example we can look at the Russian oligarchs. Many (maybe most) aren’t ethnic Russian.So you have one less tie to bind them to patriotism in a state.While their primary (with most of them) source of wealth is local. The profits from that are sent to other countries in the West.Many of them have homes (in some cases primary homes) in Western countries.Their bank accounts are in Western banks.Some of them have more than one citizenship.To me that right there is a bad sign for a persons loyalty to a particular nation.Many (maybe most) of their secondary investments are Worldwide,mostly in the West. Many of the greatest oligarchs invest in, or directly own sports teams in the West. Not in their own nation. I single these (to my thinking traitors) out,since we know,after 2 years of hearing about them.Quite a lot,that we might not know of some others.But certainly,we could change the name of the country from Russia.And probably insert any Latin American country in its place (minus Cuba). And I don’t doubt any oligarchical group in any other nation would have similar “resumes” attached to their names.
“But the confiscation of their ill gotten gains is the first step. And their “total” removal from government and media is essential.”
^ Those are two points I forgot to mention in my post.
You’re absolutely correct. You can audit them and investigate how, when and where they made their fortune.
While the investigation is ongoing, you should freeze all their assets, not allowing them access not even to their home address. If you time it right, you should be auditing all their friends and family as well at the same time so they can’t benefit from their ‘networking.’
Let them experience what is like to be left out in the cold penniless, let them go live under a bridge and subsist on soup kitchens. Far better than locking them up and forcing the tax-payer to pay for their keep.
If found guilty, the penalty should be indeed the confiscation of all their assets at home and abroad.
If found not guilty (unlikely, but it can happen), chances are they’re still in violation of things like; tax avoidance / tax evasion. In that case you should recoup said taxes retroactively and with interests on top.
On your comment about their “total removal from government,” I’ve always had this idea – in the same spirit of separation of Church and State – about the separation of Capital Private Interests and State.
By all means, you’re more than free to be a successful business owner, but you can’t be in government, in any capacity; not as an advisor, not as a lobbyist, let alone in office of any kind. After all, how many toilet cleaners are currently in government, anywhere?
The regular person has to chose between working for living, or getting into politics. They can’t do both. In fact, they don’t have the luxury of choosing on the first place! Why should such privilege be extended to only those with enough money, enough clout and enough free time on their hands? Moreover; why should they be allowed to hold both simultaneously; a position in government while still owning a business?
Same way some countries forbid foreign-born people to run for office, there should be a similar law banning rich people from government for the same reason: they can’t be trusted, as they themselves demonstrated, time and time again.
Such law should be enshrined at a constitutional level [amendment number… whatever]. Put it to vote in a referendum if you must, to make it stick. Old or new money [after a certain threshold] should be banned from government. Period.
Oh! And another thing. No person working for government should have any rights whatsoever to a private life of any kind. Once you’re holding a public position, your life should be public too. Their entire lives should be an open book to anyone who cares to read it [I’d even put cameras in their homes, and stream them LIVE on the internet] If they don’t like such intrusion, they can always become a “successful business owner” (bared from government anyways) or a McDonalds burger flipper. Both; totally entitled to their private lives.
.
“Their bank accounts are in Western banks. Some of them have more than one citizenship. To me that right there is a bad sign for a persons loyalty to a particular nation. Many (maybe most) of their secondary investments are Worldwide, mostly in the West [..]”
I concur. But those could be easily stopped with capital controls. After all, we already have a system of a de-facto capital control in the West.
Try to sneak past the sniffer dogs [trained to detect cash] in the EU. I can’t remember now what the threshold is, something like 10k Euros, maybe (?)
Something similar is happening on the US/Canadian border.
Dog forbid if you’re found with a certain amount of cash crossing the border. It’s all in the name of the war on drugs and/or money laundering, you see?
Sure… :/
What they want is regular people, with their limited savings, to declare their funds before they exit a country so they can be taxed accordingly, even though, this is effectively a double tax, since they’ve already been automatically taxed on their pay-check once.
The only route they left open to them is via bank transfers [which carry hefty fees as high as 10 (or more) percent per transfer] or money transfer agencies like Western Union which also carry a minimum fee of 10% last time I’ve checked.
Point is: regular people are already under a system of capital controls. Why is so hard to extend that to the big-flyers sending millions abroad to tax havens?
Nothing! Apart from political will and/or corruption in the ranks of officials who ought to treat all of their citizenry the same. Oh! But they don’t, do they?
He says, “By implementing neoliberal economic policies urged on them by their economists trained in the Western neoliberal tradition, the Russian and Chinese governments are setting themselves up for Washington. By swallowing the «globalism» line, using the US dollar, participating in the Western payments system, opening themselves to destabilization by foreign capital inflows and outflows, hosting American banks, and permitting foreign ownership, the Russian and Chinese governments have made themselves ripe for destabilization.
If Russia and China do not disengage from the Western system and exile their neoliberal economists, they will have to go to war in order to defend their sovereignty.”
In the good article which you linked, Dr.Roberts says:
In response to Russia’s budgetary needs, Washington’s allies inside Russia are pushing President Putin to privatize important Russian economic sectors in order to raise foreign capital to cover the budget deficit and support the ruble. If Putin gives in, important Russian assets will move from Russian control to Washington’s control.
In my opinion, those who are pushing privatization are either traitors or completely stupid. Whichever it is, they are a danger to Russia’s independence.
My and everyone’s question is: What is Putin now going to do? Will he stand firm or give in?…
And on the Strategic Culture Foundation website, there is a second article from Finian Cunningham regarding the relationship between liberal Western leaders and Saudi Arabia.
I previously linked to another article by him, released today, (https://www.rt.com/op-edge/340764-west-trudeau-saudi-arabia-weapons/), where he expresses his dismay at Canada’s PM Trudeau who, “With astounding cynicism, the 44-year-old Canadian premier said he was duty-bound to fulfill the arms contract drawn up by the previous administration as “a matter of principle” in order to demonstrate that his country’s “word means something in the international community.””
Hello again, TL2Q! I admire your passion for integrity among those in public service, and you make some vitally important points about political will and corruption.
I just wanted to quickly suggest that the idea of constant surveillance of public officials encourages the rise of the ruthless and corrupt, rather than the rise of thosecwho are completely honest. This is my view on American politics at times. When such excessive attention is paid to all details of a candidates life, it seems to create a situation where most ordinary people are eliminated. They simply are too corrupt or flawed – or in practice, appear that way. So who prevails? Either those who can manipulate the system to conceal their imperfections or inconsistencies – or those who are sociopathic and can actually adhere to such strict protocols.
“[..] the idea of constant surveillance of public officials encourages the rise of the ruthless and corrupt, rather than the rise of thosecwho are completely honest.This is my view on American politics at times. When such excessive attention is paid to all details of a candidates life, it seems to create a situation where most ordinary people are eliminated.”
Unless I’m reading your comment wrong, I seem to have the feeling that you’re implying that the current American presidential candidates are under an undue lot of scrutiny from the media and beyond. Which may, or may not, taint them one way or another…
I’m guessing here… that Sanders is being scrutinized on his “Socialist” credentials, Trump is being scrutinized on his “successful business-man” credentials too (and probably other stuff, like his questionable head-piece / comb-over)
But, what about Hitlery? And why we don’t have access to the transcripts to her Goldman Sachs speeches [for which she was handsomely rewarded, btw] I wonder…
We all know how it goes… the hegemon keep telling us this, ALL the time! “If you don’t have anything to hide… you have nothing to worry about.”
^Also, that’s how they justify themselves for spying on everybody, at all times, without any need for warrants to do so, in clear violation of several countries laws, including their own…
All I’m saying is that the same principle should apply to ‘them’: if they don’t have anything to hide… they should have nothing to worry about!
Hence; the reason I believe their lives should be public property.
This should include chicanery such as Hitlery’s camp trying to block the release of her speech transcripts to Goldman Sachs.
To the point all we have left to console ourselves, is a satirist version of them…
Hillary Clinton’s Full ‘Speech’ To Goldman Sachs
“Given the fact that a snowball has a better chance in hell than the American public ever seeing a transcript of Hillary Clinton’s various million-dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs employees, K.J. Noh, Counterpunch’s resident satirist in chief, unleashes his best guess at what was said [..]”
One could take Andrew Korybko’s advice and apply America’s “Color Revolution” tactics against it.
This would be another example of what people like Ward Churchill to Malcolm X meant when they talked about the “Chickens Coming Home to Roost” for America:
The only way this can happen if there is a movement in the US of the people against the state – true democracy at work. This way, the US will not be able to project power outside its borders.
The people from the other 5 eyes will copy that movement. Sovereignty will be restored when presidents have full authority of their countries and not act in the best interests of a foreign power. Only the people can force their hand. It will be the AZ Empires death knell. No media bias if governments regain the power to once again control banks and corporations.
The problem for the elites is that they have declared war on its citizenry. As the noose tightens, the elites risk the rise of these opposition movements.
Pepe, I did buy your book Globalistan..in fact I read it in Greece…and I think you are a top man – one of the best journalists in The World…so what do you reckon to this…
I am not a journalist, and I am not a musician…but I love music and I love reading books
“”Nothing Compares 2 U” is a song originally written and composed by Prince for one of his side projects”
“Sinead’O’Connor Nothing Compares to you Deutsch übersetzt”
Recently, within the last couple of weeks, I read in Russian press that Russia is now increasingly purchasing the U.S. government bonds.
Which surprised me, since Russian purchases of gold have been rapidly increasing for already a while, the trend supposedly being that of creating Russian fiscal independence, coupled with replacement of the dollar as the world reserve currency. I am not sure what is actually going on here.
As you know, what keeps the entire U.S. economy afloat now is the world’s continued confidence in the dollar. As long as that trust exists, people (rich individuals, companies, governments) will be placing their money’s in the U.S. Treasury for “safekeeping” by means of purchasing the U.S. government bonds. Should that trust evaporate, everybody will ask their money back, and the American financial house of cards will collapse. Keep in mind that the U.S. industrial capacity has been all but destroyed, irretrievably, which is not any news for already decades, the last nail in the coffin being the “outsourcing”.
So: what is Russia doing by making these U.S. bonds purchases? Some temporary measure?
Is it possible that Russia is buying bonds now, in order to have a weapon in the future: Dump the bonds as a coup de grace?
Look at the leverage China has over the US economy because of its bond holdings. But because their economy is so integrated with the American one, the ability to actually use the weapon with out self-harm seems to be limited (so I read).
If Russia becomes more and more economically self-sufficient and thus buffered from USA turmoil yet holds these bonds, could that be a good “position” (chess-speaking-wise)?
Just a speculation from an economic ignoramous.
Katherine
An interesting site here. Gives the monthly US treasury bond holdings of various countries over the last 12 months plus some other interesting info.
https://smaulgld.com/foreign-holdings-u-s-treasuries-2/
The United States dollar became the world’s reserve currency in 1944 towards the end of World War II. Because the U.S. dollar is the world’s reserve currency, demand for dollars remains strong as countries hold dollars in reserve to buy oil, settle international trades and to hold as their nations’ savings. These dollar reserves are held in the form of U.S. Treasury bonds (T Bonds).
That is trash… PT is calling the impeachment process a coup because it had almost complete controll of the lower house and the senate. PT IS NOT ALSO MODERATE LEFT, it is revolutionary left in a country with sound institutions that they are trying to sap since 2002. The two goverments of Lula went alright but the first one of Dilma Rouseff there were several breaches of the fiscal law that were hiden from public knowledge untill after the elections. After a close election with a Neo-Liberal candidate the fiscal mess emerged and with it a SEVERE RECESSION, anyway nothing of note happened untill severeal mass demonstrations hit the streets and she lost control of the political class because of it. The crimes she is being accused are all written in the constitution and there’s NO COUP! All there is is the cries of a political party being ousted forcebly (and legally) from power after controlling the houses…
Exactly. Impeachment is not a coup, is a legal process that can only be triggered if certain criteria are met. A coup is what happened in Brazil in 1930 and 1964, or what the US routinely does in the Middle East.
You also make a good point about elections and recession. Before the elections Rousseff attacked the opposition and used fear tactics, saying that if elected, the opposition would raise taxes, raise the price of gas, raise interest rates, etc. Not even ONE MONTH after reelected she did exactly that! And now the country is in severe recession.
But still, Mr. Escobar acts like there couldn’t possibly be a legitimate reason for the people to be mad at the government, it has to be a US plot!
I don’t hear a straightforward answer to the question: if Dilma Rousseff is impeached, does that imply the end of BRICS? … or the beginning of the end (= a terminal agony) of BRICS? … or none of the above?… Or … is that going to be “RICS”? … “RC”? ………………………….
probably … at least there will be a huge loss of relevance
This coup in Brazil once again proves to me, what the lessons of history showed me years ago. A country that allows a foreign power to influence and control forces inside their country, will always be at the mercy of those foreign forces. And is doomed to lose their sovereignty. So if anyone here wants their countries to be free, they must understand that fact. And they must break,and break completely,the foreign influence on their countries. If they aren’t willing, or able, to do that. Then don’t bother wanting your sovereignty,for you will be wasting your time,you’ll never have it. When/if you elect to power a new government. Look at what they are doing.No matter how hopeful you are about a “new government”,look closely. And if they don’t move at once to clear the foreign controls from your country. Then give up on them,they are just another,doomed to failure, flash in the pan movement (the lesson of Greece should be your guide there).The countries in today’s World that will/can keep their sovereignty are those willing to make the hard decisions needed. They must expel the foreign NGO’s,and other foreign controlled groups. Penalize the internal traitors assisting them.And take (not ask for,take) control of your banking and media. If you aren’t willing to do that,you are just plain, doomed to failure. Like a multi-headed Hydra, the US has many separate ways (especially when in league with local 5th columnists) to harm your countries. So you must realize that this is a fight for survival.Not making the hard choices necessary will leave your country in the position of Greece,Brazil, Venezuela,or Ukraine,if not Syria. Can you be sure of success if you make those hard choices? No one can be sure of that. But you “can” be sure if you don’t, you will fail to have your sovereignty.
@ Uncle Bob 1
In that context, I am still wondering where Kadafi went wrong, exactly… Among his greatest achievements was independent banking (along the lines of Mary Ellen Brown’s model), and the A-Z Empire hated that move in particular. Apparently, they got to him because he did not have the military power to back all those great reforms up. Either one needs at least an alliance with a strong power for protection, or many small countries have to introduce such radical reforms all at the same time, synchronised with one another… The first solution, however, implies dependence on another bigger power (besides, Russia did not help him, did she?); the second one is more attractive – but is it realistic? Etc…
Do you think that naivete of large portions of the global populace contributed to this? I just mean that it created an opening for launching this kind of offensive on Libya without significant consequences to any of the aggressor countries at home, initially. An opportunistic, ‘seize the moment’ attack? Now that we have all witnessed the results from Libya, will that limit the ability of global powers to repeat that performance in other countries? I hope so! The previous propagandized belief that “freeing the country of the dictator will save the people from suffering” has so openly proved to be false.
Of course, that leads to your question of how to prevent one’s nation from being subjected to opportunistic attacks… :-)
I think you are right in him not trying to get allies (trying to ally with a US dominated EU was the worse thing he could have done). But his other mistake I believe was to allow the US in. He foolishly thought that he could make a deal with the US. Get in the “good graces” of the West. It never works that way. The US requires total obedience or they will end destroying you to get that obedience from your successor. Certainly they will play a game with you while it serves them. But as soon as they get enough influence in your society they will bring the hammer down. They “pretended” to have good relations with Yanukovich ,and Ukraine. And yet all along behind his back they plotted for several years a color revolution. They only waited until the control they had with a 5th column was enough to pull it off. And then struck when their timing was ready.These games work for the US,so they stick to the plan. We’ve seen it countless times. And for “some reason”,the victims always seemed to be “surprised”. And don’t know how to save themselves.
The time when elections or democracy could bring about change in most countries has past. Even insurgency or civil war will not succeed unless it has backing from a major power.
In the western world, total population control through propaganda and surveillance, which all tracks back to the US. Most countries have been completely compromised – politically, militarily, intelligence services and media.
As long as Russia and China stay solid, it seems only a matter of waiting for the US smash itself on the rocks of those two countries.
Every thing I read about the US military is about offence – how to break through destroy enemy defences. The term they use now for soldiers is “warfighters”, not military personal or defence forces.
There is nothing about defence of US mainland in any of the thinktanks papers. It is all about beating Russian and Chinese defence systems.
As long as the US does not go nuclear and destroy a big part of the world, they will destroy themselves financially. What they are doing is unsustainable. Even their protection rackets will not keep them afloat. As they suck more and more money out of their “allies” more and more people will see past the media propaganda.
It is only then that some form of democracy might return to most of the world.
@ Uncle Bob 1
You have just written the history of the world in a nutshell. The Cuban experience is a shining example of your thesis: people have to make a decision whether they wish to be independent of foreign domination and then make the hard decisions that that choice entails, namely your prescription.
The collapse of the USSR is also an object – and abject – lesson that fits the same principle, namely the workings of the 5th column in high places and how they planned the take-over of power and the looting of the country.
Stalin followed ‘your’ rules and that’s why Russia is not a German colony, although might yet become the Empire’s.
Kim
It is in this context that the USSR must be viewed. The moment Lenin declared Peace Land and Bread, the gloves came off, as if they weren’t off from the beginning, with Russia/Crimea attacked by several countries at once in the Crimean War.
Churchill used poison gas against the Bolsheviks. I believe diplomatic relations were cut off between the US and the USSR, socialists in the USA who wanted some dignity for average people were jailed or deported to the USSR, and it was only with Hitler losing against Russia and Hitler threatening the British Empire, that temporarily allowed for Russia to be considered an ally.
No one can condone Stalin for the horrible things he and his followers did, however, given the clear agenda, to destroy Russia, it is not surprising. “Even Paranoids Have Enemies”. They acted in response. As have most countries that have tried to free themselves from the death grip of Western imperialism. And when they, so to speak, self administer political chemotherapy, the Western lovers of human rights (who always overlook the violations of their own governments) demonize the country in the cross hairs.
As the US establishment loses its legitimacy in the eyes of its citizens, does it ramp up the transparency, improve civic responsibility, facilitate fair elections, support independent journalists and whistleblowers? Yet they blather about corruption and human rights abuses, any excuse they can think of, often concocted outright lies, to create the coups. And if the coup doesn’t work as in Syria or Libya, send in the Marines or outsource the carnage to ISIS, the Contras, Al Qaeda, whatever impoverished people willing to be mercenaries.
This may well end up badly, unless the two countries that suffered the most in the last wholesale carnage, WWII, Russia and China play their hands extremely deftly.
Eric
This makes total sense to me.
(Only the first graf is confusing to me, mixing Lenin with the Crimean War. Wasn’t the Crimean War in the 19th C?)
Western imperialism will NEVER give up.
This is the great current danger to Cuba. (And of course, Brazil.)
Fidel sees it. Older people see it.
Meanwhile Starbucks, Airbnb, other corporate entities are licking their chops. Tourists are almost like the leading edge—most of them will be looking for little USA in te Cuba, having their coffee at Starbucks instead of at indigenous cafes. I expect. I haven’t been to Cuba, but that is the character of any kind of American mass tourism.
Very few American tourists will color outside the lines for their all-too-short one-week vacation.
It might be best for Cuba to confine tourism development to compounds, sort of like Club Med compounds, so that no one is encouraged to leave them!!
Let us hope that the next Congress of teh Communist Party gets its s–t together and clamps down hard on what any outside entities can do. And, no loans from the WEst. Is “investment” just a euphemism of some kind?
Katherine
@ Eric
USA broke off diplomatic relations with (then still) Russia (although under Bolsheviks) in December 1917.
The USSR itself was formally founded in 1922.
USA established diplomatic relations with USSR for the first time in November 1933.
Thus, the USA had no diplomatic relations with either Russia or USSR for 16 years.
@ Uncle Bob:
“A country that allows a foreign power to influence and control forces inside their country, will always be at the mercy of those foreign forces. And is doomed to lose their sovereignty. So if anyone here wants their countries to be free, they must understand that fact. And they must break, and break completely, the foreign influence on their countries [etc]”
You’re, of course, right, but the main problem in all these countries are their home grown oligarchs and how they always align their interests with the US. And I do mean always. They see no profit in being patriotic, let alone allowing a socialist-leaning government to eat into their “earnings.” Their natural ally is the equally parasitic US. They know the Yanks will allow them to continue to operate if they vow to them, plus, for their treachery, they might get some protection on the side as well. A bit like the Mafia shaking shopkeepers for protection-money, but unlike the shopkeepers, the oligarchs actually do looove their USian mobsters overlords. Oh, yes they do!
The oligarchs own anything that is economically or strategically important within a country including the media. From their point of view; they think the country belongs to them.
If somehow the people manage to vote-in a government genuinely willing to look after their interests, then it’s the government + the people against the oligarchs and their foreign sponsors.
From the get go the oligarchs have the upper hand; they own nearly everything, plus they own the media they’ll use to propagandize against both: the government and the people, and if that’s not enough to stave-off the tide against them, they can always rely on their foreign “partners” to work their ‘magic’ in the form of civil unrest, rent-a-crowd color revolutions, international negative media propaganda campaigns [always backed by their faithful dogs: Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (etc)]…
I’m not trying to sound defeatist, but I do wanna know how a regular person on the street – who’s usually one pay-check away from homelessness – is supposed to go against this kind of apparatus, one that have tentacles that expand beyond borders and is usually unlimitedly funded (?)
The only solution has to be; once in power, a ‘good’ government has to purge, not only the 5th Column or NGOs, but particularly the oligarchs. They need to be put on forced exile. And that’s just the civilized way to deal with them, me, personally, I would make a public list, and put a bounty on their heads. Let the mobs deal with them however they see fit, provided the body is identifiable when they finish with it. Added bonus; sooner rather than later, the oligarchs will be voluntarily exiling themselves out of the country.
-TL2Q
Minus (maybe?) your last idea ,you are right. It is the alliance (sometimes not directly,but just a “friend of my friend” type) between the home oligarchs and foreign interests that is the way the empire destroys a nation’s sovereignty,and controls that nation.I’m seen it worked all over Latin America, in particular.And now it has spread its deadly virus throughout the rest of the World. As hard as it may seem to many,the only medicine for that disease is bitter.I really don’t think (for most) your last point is needed. But the confiscation of their ill gotten gains is the first step. And their “total” removal from government and media is essential.In the past,as bad as the local oligarchs might be.At least they,out of self-interest were patriotic. All their wealth came from their nation. And their nation being sovereign helped them.Today in the “modern” World that isn’t true in most cases anymore. They have connections with companies,banks,investments,on a global scale .As an (easy) example we can look at the Russian oligarchs. Many (maybe most) aren’t ethnic Russian.So you have one less tie to bind them to patriotism in a state.While their primary (with most of them) source of wealth is local. The profits from that are sent to other countries in the West.Many of them have homes (in some cases primary homes) in Western countries.Their bank accounts are in Western banks.Some of them have more than one citizenship.To me that right there is a bad sign for a persons loyalty to a particular nation.Many (maybe most) of their secondary investments are Worldwide,mostly in the West. Many of the greatest oligarchs invest in, or directly own sports teams in the West. Not in their own nation. I single these (to my thinking traitors) out,since we know,after 2 years of hearing about them.Quite a lot,that we might not know of some others.But certainly,we could change the name of the country from Russia.And probably insert any Latin American country in its place (minus Cuba). And I don’t doubt any oligarchical group in any other nation would have similar “resumes” attached to their names.
@ Uncle Bob:
“But the confiscation of their ill gotten gains is the first step. And their “total” removal from government and media is essential.”
^ Those are two points I forgot to mention in my post.
You’re absolutely correct. You can audit them and investigate how, when and where they made their fortune.
While the investigation is ongoing, you should freeze all their assets, not allowing them access not even to their home address. If you time it right, you should be auditing all their friends and family as well at the same time so they can’t benefit from their ‘networking.’
Let them experience what is like to be left out in the cold penniless, let them go live under a bridge and subsist on soup kitchens. Far better than locking them up and forcing the tax-payer to pay for their keep.
If found guilty, the penalty should be indeed the confiscation of all their assets at home and abroad.
If found not guilty (unlikely, but it can happen), chances are they’re still in violation of things like; tax avoidance / tax evasion. In that case you should recoup said taxes retroactively and with interests on top.
On your comment about their “total removal from government,” I’ve always had this idea – in the same spirit of separation of Church and State – about the separation of Capital Private Interests and State.
By all means, you’re more than free to be a successful business owner, but you can’t be in government, in any capacity; not as an advisor, not as a lobbyist, let alone in office of any kind. After all, how many toilet cleaners are currently in government, anywhere?
The regular person has to chose between working for living, or getting into politics. They can’t do both. In fact, they don’t have the luxury of choosing on the first place! Why should such privilege be extended to only those with enough money, enough clout and enough free time on their hands? Moreover; why should they be allowed to hold both simultaneously; a position in government while still owning a business?
Same way some countries forbid foreign-born people to run for office, there should be a similar law banning rich people from government for the same reason: they can’t be trusted, as they themselves demonstrated, time and time again.
Such law should be enshrined at a constitutional level [amendment number… whatever]. Put it to vote in a referendum if you must, to make it stick. Old or new money [after a certain threshold] should be banned from government. Period.
Oh! And another thing. No person working for government should have any rights whatsoever to a private life of any kind. Once you’re holding a public position, your life should be public too. Their entire lives should be an open book to anyone who cares to read it [I’d even put cameras in their homes, and stream them LIVE on the internet] If they don’t like such intrusion, they can always become a “successful business owner” (bared from government anyways) or a McDonalds burger flipper. Both; totally entitled to their private lives.
.
“Their bank accounts are in Western banks. Some of them have more than one citizenship. To me that right there is a bad sign for a persons loyalty to a particular nation. Many (maybe most) of their secondary investments are Worldwide, mostly in the West [..]”
I concur. But those could be easily stopped with capital controls. After all, we already have a system of a de-facto capital control in the West.
Try to sneak past the sniffer dogs [trained to detect cash] in the EU. I can’t remember now what the threshold is, something like 10k Euros, maybe (?)
Something similar is happening on the US/Canadian border.
Dog forbid if you’re found with a certain amount of cash crossing the border. It’s all in the name of the war on drugs and/or money laundering, you see?
Sure… :/
What they want is regular people, with their limited savings, to declare their funds before they exit a country so they can be taxed accordingly, even though, this is effectively a double tax, since they’ve already been automatically taxed on their pay-check once.
The only route they left open to them is via bank transfers [which carry hefty fees as high as 10 (or more) percent per transfer] or money transfer agencies like Western Union which also carry a minimum fee of 10% last time I’ve checked.
Point is: regular people are already under a system of capital controls. Why is so hard to extend that to the big-flyers sending millions abroad to tax havens?
Nothing! Apart from political will and/or corruption in the ranks of officials who ought to treat all of their citizenry the same. Oh! But they don’t, do they?
-TL2Q
@ TLTQ
Paul Craig Roberts shares your concerns and echoes some of your thinking in his latest article, “WWIII Has Begun.”
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/04/25/world-war-iii-has-begun.html
He says, “By implementing neoliberal economic policies urged on them by their economists trained in the Western neoliberal tradition, the Russian and Chinese governments are setting themselves up for Washington. By swallowing the «globalism» line, using the US dollar, participating in the Western payments system, opening themselves to destabilization by foreign capital inflows and outflows, hosting American banks, and permitting foreign ownership, the Russian and Chinese governments have made themselves ripe for destabilization.
If Russia and China do not disengage from the Western system and exile their neoliberal economists, they will have to go to war in order to defend their sovereignty.”
A chilling thought.
@ S113 (April 24, 2016, 9:41 pm UTC)
In the good article which you linked, Dr.Roberts says:
In response to Russia’s budgetary needs, Washington’s allies inside Russia are pushing President Putin to privatize important Russian economic sectors in order to raise foreign capital to cover the budget deficit and support the ruble. If Putin gives in, important Russian assets will move from Russian control to Washington’s control.
In my opinion, those who are pushing privatization are either traitors or completely stupid. Whichever it is, they are a danger to Russia’s independence.
My and everyone’s question is: What is Putin now going to do? Will he stand firm or give in?…
And on the Strategic Culture Foundation website, there is a second article from Finian Cunningham regarding the relationship between liberal Western leaders and Saudi Arabia.
I previously linked to another article by him, released today, (https://www.rt.com/op-edge/340764-west-trudeau-saudi-arabia-weapons/), where he expresses his dismay at Canada’s PM Trudeau who, “With astounding cynicism, the 44-year-old Canadian premier said he was duty-bound to fulfill the arms contract drawn up by the previous administration as “a matter of principle” in order to demonstrate that his country’s “word means something in the international community.””
In contrast, in Cunningham’s second article released today, (http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/04/24/what-obama-shares-with-assad-russia-yemens-houthis-saudi-blackmail.html), he explains that Obama is actually being blackmailed by Saudi Arabia.
@ TL2Q
Hello again, TL2Q! I admire your passion for integrity among those in public service, and you make some vitally important points about political will and corruption.
I just wanted to quickly suggest that the idea of constant surveillance of public officials encourages the rise of the ruthless and corrupt, rather than the rise of thosecwho are completely honest. This is my view on American politics at times. When such excessive attention is paid to all details of a candidates life, it seems to create a situation where most ordinary people are eliminated. They simply are too corrupt or flawed – or in practice, appear that way. So who prevails? Either those who can manipulate the system to conceal their imperfections or inconsistencies – or those who are sociopathic and can actually adhere to such strict protocols.
@ S113:
“[..] the idea of constant surveillance of public officials encourages the rise of the ruthless and corrupt, rather than the rise of thosecwho are completely honest.This is my view on American politics at times. When such excessive attention is paid to all details of a candidates life, it seems to create a situation where most ordinary people are eliminated.”
Unless I’m reading your comment wrong, I seem to have the feeling that you’re implying that the current American presidential candidates are under an undue lot of scrutiny from the media and beyond. Which may, or may not, taint them one way or another…
I’m guessing here… that Sanders is being scrutinized on his “Socialist” credentials, Trump is being scrutinized on his “successful business-man” credentials too (and probably other stuff, like his questionable head-piece / comb-over)
But, what about Hitlery? And why we don’t have access to the transcripts to her Goldman Sachs speeches [for which she was handsomely rewarded, btw] I wonder…
We all know how it goes… the hegemon keep telling us this, ALL the time! “If you don’t have anything to hide… you have nothing to worry about.”
^Also, that’s how they justify themselves for spying on everybody, at all times, without any need for warrants to do so, in clear violation of several countries laws, including their own…
All I’m saying is that the same principle should apply to ‘them’: if they don’t have anything to hide… they should have nothing to worry about!
Hence; the reason I believe their lives should be public property.
This should include chicanery such as Hitlery’s camp trying to block the release of her speech transcripts to Goldman Sachs.
To the point all we have left to console ourselves, is a satirist version of them…
Hillary Clinton’s Full ‘Speech’ To Goldman Sachs
“Given the fact that a snowball has a better chance in hell than the American public ever seeing a transcript of Hillary Clinton’s various million-dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs employees, K.J. Noh, Counterpunch’s resident satirist in chief, unleashes his best guess at what was said [..]”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-24/hillary-clintons-full-speech-goldman-sachs
-TL2Q
One could take Andrew Korybko’s advice and apply America’s “Color Revolution” tactics against it.
This would be another example of what people like Ward Churchill to Malcolm X meant when they talked about the “Chickens Coming Home to Roost” for America:
Color Revolution Technology Isn’t Just Black And White
/color-revolution-technology-isnt-just-black-and-white/
UB
The only way this can happen if there is a movement in the US of the people against the state – true democracy at work. This way, the US will not be able to project power outside its borders.
The people from the other 5 eyes will copy that movement. Sovereignty will be restored when presidents have full authority of their countries and not act in the best interests of a foreign power. Only the people can force their hand. It will be the AZ Empires death knell. No media bias if governments regain the power to once again control banks and corporations.
The problem for the elites is that they have declared war on its citizenry. As the noose tightens, the elites risk the rise of these opposition movements.
Pepe, I did buy your book Globalistan..in fact I read it in Greece…and I think you are a top man – one of the best journalists in The World…so what do you reckon to this…
I am not a journalist, and I am not a musician…but I love music and I love reading books
“”Nothing Compares 2 U” is a song originally written and composed by Prince for one of his side projects”
“Sinead’O’Connor Nothing Compares to you Deutsch übersetzt”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTS_DLZptkw
Tony
Recently, within the last couple of weeks, I read in Russian press that Russia is now increasingly purchasing the U.S. government bonds.
Which surprised me, since Russian purchases of gold have been rapidly increasing for already a while, the trend supposedly being that of creating Russian fiscal independence, coupled with replacement of the dollar as the world reserve currency. I am not sure what is actually going on here.
As you know, what keeps the entire U.S. economy afloat now is the world’s continued confidence in the dollar. As long as that trust exists, people (rich individuals, companies, governments) will be placing their money’s in the U.S. Treasury for “safekeeping” by means of purchasing the U.S. government bonds. Should that trust evaporate, everybody will ask their money back, and the American financial house of cards will collapse. Keep in mind that the U.S. industrial capacity has been all but destroyed, irretrievably, which is not any news for already decades, the last nail in the coffin being the “outsourcing”.
So: what is Russia doing by making these U.S. bonds purchases? Some temporary measure?
Is it possible that Russia is buying bonds now, in order to have a weapon in the future: Dump the bonds as a coup de grace?
Look at the leverage China has over the US economy because of its bond holdings. But because their economy is so integrated with the American one, the ability to actually use the weapon with out self-harm seems to be limited (so I read).
If Russia becomes more and more economically self-sufficient and thus buffered from USA turmoil yet holds these bonds, could that be a good “position” (chess-speaking-wise)?
Just a speculation from an economic ignoramous.
Katherine
An interesting site here. Gives the monthly US treasury bond holdings of various countries over the last 12 months plus some other interesting info.
https://smaulgld.com/foreign-holdings-u-s-treasuries-2/
The United States dollar became the world’s reserve currency in 1944 towards the end of World War II. Because the U.S. dollar is the world’s reserve currency, demand for dollars remains strong as countries hold dollars in reserve to buy oil, settle international trades and to hold as their nations’ savings. These dollar reserves are held in the form of U.S. Treasury bonds (T Bonds).
That is trash… PT is calling the impeachment process a coup because it had almost complete controll of the lower house and the senate. PT IS NOT ALSO MODERATE LEFT, it is revolutionary left in a country with sound institutions that they are trying to sap since 2002. The two goverments of Lula went alright but the first one of Dilma Rouseff there were several breaches of the fiscal law that were hiden from public knowledge untill after the elections. After a close election with a Neo-Liberal candidate the fiscal mess emerged and with it a SEVERE RECESSION, anyway nothing of note happened untill severeal mass demonstrations hit the streets and she lost control of the political class because of it. The crimes she is being accused are all written in the constitution and there’s NO COUP! All there is is the cries of a political party being ousted forcebly (and legally) from power after controlling the houses…
Exactly. Impeachment is not a coup, is a legal process that can only be triggered if certain criteria are met. A coup is what happened in Brazil in 1930 and 1964, or what the US routinely does in the Middle East.
You also make a good point about elections and recession. Before the elections Rousseff attacked the opposition and used fear tactics, saying that if elected, the opposition would raise taxes, raise the price of gas, raise interest rates, etc. Not even ONE MONTH after reelected she did exactly that! And now the country is in severe recession.
But still, Mr. Escobar acts like there couldn’t possibly be a legitimate reason for the people to be mad at the government, it has to be a US plot!
This is a history of a major player in the Brazilian situation, the dominant tv network TV GLOBO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0u6L4Gqxd0