Neo-Empire: Russia in the Modern World, by Rostislav Ishchenko
Translation by Scott Humor
Various historical epochs have not only seen the different internal structures of Russian state (Pre-Mongol Russia is not identical to the Moscow Kingdom Russia of the XVI-XVII centuries, and in turn, had little in common with Russia of the XVIII-early XX century, or the Russian Empire, which was fundamentally different from the Soviet Union,) but also different forms of state protection of its external interests. At the same time, such internally different organisms as the Moscow Kingdom, the Russian Empire, and the USSR in the first half of the twentieth century employed identical forms of actions in the international arena, seeking to solve the same problems by the same means and methods.
With time, the forms of interaction between states in the international arena begin to change critically.
Moving at the direction of the “last sea” Genghis Khan’s warriors practiced genocide of the conquered population and the establishment of direct Mongolian rule over the occupied territories.
Europeans of the colonial era preferred remote military and political control over local authorities, avoiding the introduction of direct mechanisms of control over the colonies when possible. Since the second half of the twentieth century, the formal sovereignty of dependent states has been scrupulously observed in the post-colonial era. The center of gravity of control has moved to the financial, trade, and economic spheres.
In our time, the most important role is played by the control of resources. At the same time, when we talk about the resource base, we mean not only and not primarily natural resources (although their availability is also important). We are talking about a complex of resources of raw materials, industrial, agricultural, financial, political, diplomatic, military, demographic, etc. And not only those resources that are owned by the state are taken into account. The most important factor is the control of resources beyond the own borders. It can be direct, through investments, purchase of the corresponding companies, etc., or it can be indirect, at the expense of use in the interests–it is desirable on a mutually beneficial basis–of allied and friendly states. The highest acrobatics is the use of resources and efforts of the geopolitical enemy and its allies and satellites for the realization of you own goals.
For a modern empire, the size of its territory and population is important, but with a certain value (providing military and political security) is not fundamental. The stronger and more dynamically developing modern empire would have greater inflow of resources produced by each invested unit. Just like in business, if your profit is equal to one hundred rubles per one invested ruble, then you have more potential than someone who produces only one ruble of profit per each ruble of investments. Hence, the desire of the mired in debts United States, and of quite prosperous in the financial sense Russia to maximize efficiency of foreign policy operations. They should not be placed on a list of expenditures and losses. After the first investment, foreign policy shares should begin to make a profit as soon as possible.
I would like to emphasize that this profit is not measured exclusively in billions of dollars coming to the Treasury. The end game of modern foreign policy operations is to establish control over the main resource flows, their intersection points, their direction, and closure to their territory. Under these conditions, old relationships often become irrelevant, supported by inertia, and the tendency to transfer them into self-sufficiency prevails.
The era during which the junior allies were sustained by dominant powers is over. Very clumsily, this transfer towards more pragmatic relations with allies was made by the USSR, which resulted in failure due to the low quality of the performers who made this attempt. Nevertheless, 25 years after the partition of the Soviet Union, both Russia and the United States are almost simultaneously declared a transition to pragmatic relations with their allies. Both empires offer no pay for being in a union with them. In the union framework, Russia offers to work together to make profit, and the United States offers to rob together.
This approach causes hysteria among both groups of states. They threaten Washington with “the loss of Europe,” while Russia is being blamed for “the loss of Ukraine, the loss of Belarus” (Kazakhstan, Armenia are further down the list). To avoid “losses,” both Washington and Moscow are asked to continue paying for loyalty to them by their respective allies, regardless of the cost.
These ideas are expressed not just by the “fifth column” or “enemies of the Fatherland.” Certainly, they are also present in the choir and among the speakers, but mostly the idea of a “payment Union” is being promoted by those who sincerely care about the greatness of the homeland. They are divided into two large groups. The first is made up of elites and the citizens of allied nations (or potential allies), as well as the business associates of these countries, earning on the benefits of being allies. They just don’t understand why to demolish something that works well for them, because they don’t separate the good for themselves from the good for Russia. They sincerely threaten “to be offended,” believing that their personal reaction is equal to the reaction of entire nations, which it is not, with some exceptions.
The second group of those calling for payments are patriots living in yesterday and preparing for yesterday’s wars. They, no less sincerely, consider it necessary to resolve any dispute on the battlefield, sending the army to war “to protect national interests” anywhere in the world where the United States received a temporary advantage. They have been waiting for twenty years for “the US missiles near Kharkov” and ” NATO tanks near Chernigov.” Any past defeats (including Afghanistan) they associate exclusively with “betrayal of the top” (though many occurred for objective reasons). Any potential war they see only as a Russian blitzkrieg, “a little blood on foreign soil.” Such problems as an overstrain of the economy, falling living standards, stagnation of trade, problems in the financial system (the inevitable consequences of even a victorious war) do not interest them at all. They see allies only as means to protect Russia from direct enemy attack. They must die, while giving Russia time to mobilize forces and means. In this paradigm, funds invested in allies don’t seem to be a pointless waste, but the cost of sacrifice. Just like with pigs fattened not for humanitarian reasons, but so that when the time comes to harvest them for food or trade.
These people simply do not understand that each era corresponds to its format of Empire and her military actions. If you continue to fight in the past format, then you get smashed, as in the Crimean or Russian-Japanese wars or in the summer of 1941. And no investment in the army or in the allies will help. The state and the army of the past are always inferior to the state and the army of the future.
The modern war has already started yesterday. It is a permanent war, that’s why is it called a hybrid. The parties are trying to do it without military clashes at all, since the use of the military is an extremely costly way to clarify relations. The disputes are being resolved in the information, political, and diplomatic spheres. The army is needed as a safety net in case our enemy, seeing that he is failing in the chess game he plays, will try to smash a two-by-four over your head and go to fight without the rules.
Simultaneously, you have to not only finance the fighting on the invisible fronts of the hybrid war, but also to ensure that the standard of living of your population, at least did not fall, but better would grew, as any economic and social problems will be immediately used by the enemy. And the modern army, as mentioned above, also needs to be funded, otherwise no one will compete with you in the intellectual field, and they will do to you what they did with Serbia and Iraq. In general, there are so many items on the expenditure list that it’s prohibitively expensive to buy loyalty and to finance the “allies” for fear that they will run over to the enemy and in exchange for them periodically making statements indicating their loyalty.
This is an unreasonable waste of resources, which means a direct path to defeat. In recent years, the superpowers, not being able to enter into a direct military clash with each other, but not willing to abandon the practice of global confrontation, are trying to force their enemy to waste resources unproductively. The more of these political black holes that consume resources, the more certain defeat.
Russia is pursuing a normal neo-imperial policy, for only this way she can protect national interests and sovereignty from the encroachments of the United States, conducting the same neo-imperial policy. If the actions of the United States, designed in the form of a strategy for the XXI century are responded with the strategy of the second third of the twentieth century, a rapid and catastrophic defeat would be inevitable, even despite the fact that Moscow is now much closer to victory in the global confrontation than Washington.
If you understand this simple point, you will understand the reason for Russia’s sluggish reaction to the protracted Ukrainian crisis. Moreover, the prospects for the development of relations between Russia and the territories that are now part of the Ukrainian state, as well as other post-Soviet States, will become clear.
Russia is not seeking a mechanical reunification of territories, even if they are home to “the same people” or “fraternal people.” In order to achieve inclusion into Russia (to achieve it, not just to agree to it favorably), the territory must have strategic importance (like Crimea) or its population must create conditions under which Moscow’s refusal to join the territory of its residence would entail greater moral and political costs than the possible material costs of integration. Donbass went this way, and almost solved its problem. The question now is not whether Donbass will be part of Russia, but when it will be, in what borders, and how will it happen. Just after five years of war, life under fire in a state of humanitarian disaster for the majority of the population of the region, Russia cannot, without prejudice to its international authority and the authority of the authorities in the country, abandon the reintegration of Donbass.
In all other cases, Moscow in neighboring countries is satisfied with any government that provides full-scale economic cooperation. This approach provides a serious geopolitical advantage is based on the strategy of “the thrifty Empire”. On one hand, a larger, more technologically advanced and more efficient economy always suppresses the smaller ones if it is put in conditions of equal competition with them. On the other hand, the local authorities are responsible to the population of allies for their standard of living and any other problems. The more independence this power demonstrates, the more convenient it is for Russia
Over decades of post-Soviet integration, “pro-Russian” Lukashenka squeezed out of the Kremlin many times more benefits and concessions than “multi-vector” Nazarbayev. At the same time, translating his language to the Latin alphabet from Cyrillic, the Kazakh leader Nazarbayev was an initiator of integration processes in the post-Soviet space in contrast to preserving the commitment of the Belarusian Cyrillic Lukashenka, who is blackmailing Moscow with his “turn to the West”.
Despite the growth of Kazakh nationalism and the lack of projects for the “Union state” of Moscow and Astana, the real integration of Kazakhstan into joint projects is much deeper, because it is based not on an emotional ideology, but on a mercantile economic basis. Kazakhstan is sovereign in its relations with Russia as much as its economic contribution to the common Treasury. Belarus is trying in exchange emotionally fraternal statements for more and more economic preferences, which significantly exceed its real weight in the implementation of joint projects.
Of course, nothing lasts forever, and Kazakhstan, under a new government, can change its foreign policy orientation. In any society there are always groups that are diametrically opposed in their views on the prospects for the development of their country and its foreign policy priorities. They can replace each other and the authorities, respectively changing policies. But it is far more difficult to turn a country connected with millions of economic threads, than the state emotionally declaring brotherhood in exchange for financial preferences. It took 30 years to turn Ukraine away from Russia, and it was finally accomplished only by completely destroying its economy. In any case, the brotherhood usually ends with preferences (as it did with the socialist Commonwealth of the states, and the Soviet Union).
This is not to say that Russia does not need an additional population. Territories beyond the Ural Mountains already require 30-40 million additional inhabitants. But we must understand that if Russia would absorb her historical territories somewhere in Europe or Asia, the local population won’t be sent in joyful columns to develop Siberia, but rather would stay where they are and begin to demand raising their standard of living to the all-Russian right in their place of residence (because they automatically acquire Russian citizenship by right of birth on those lands). In this regard, the state benefits from migrant workers who do not have to choose where to live, they move to live where there are jobs for them.
Moreover, judging by the fact that in recent years the adoption of Russian citizenship is limited to about two hundred thousand people a year–this is a number of people that Russia is able to integrate into society without overstrain, not just giving them all the rights and benefits available to natural citizens, but providing a material basis for their implementation. As in reality, the country employs up to ten million legal and illegal migrants who do not have citizenship (about half of them do not apply for it, and plan to earn extra money to return home), this means that Russia’s needs for additional labor significantly exceed its material capabilities for the integration of this labor force into Russian society on the rights of full citizenship.
The modern pragmatic empire looks cynical, but the romantics who tried to build a state policy on emotional and fraternal grounds, ended up destroying their own states, and with them the habitat of tens or even hundreds of millions of citizens of these dead states. By the way, Stalin, whom supporters of emotional and fraternal politics like to refer to, was the most pragmatic of the Soviet leaders. When he helped his allies, he always knew what he would get for it, or he realized that by not helping he would lose more than he would save.
We must understand that the global confrontation will not stop as long as there are at least two states in the world. If there are different countries, then will be a difference of interests, and if there is a difference of interests, then the transition of at least one of them from the regime of fair competition to the regime of power suppression of a more successful competitor is a matter of time, not principle. To successfully fight for their interests, in circumstances when the war (hybrid, which can be more destructive than hot) has become commonplace, the state needs a high stability. This stability is achieved through a balance of desires and opportunities, ideals and interests, objectives and resources.
Any state strives for the ideal, that is, to extend its power to the entire inhabited world (even if it does not realize this). However, the achievement of this ideal is a matter of the infinite future. It’s not even the fact that it is at all possible, because this contradicts the law of the unity and the conflict of opposites. if a political system is not balanced by anything outside, it is degenerating. Therefore, the state of war (in different forms) is the normal state of society for the foreseeable future. Therefore, we witness an appearance of current policy of saving resources that characterizes today’s successful neo-imperial formation. Own citizen has become a very expensive resource. An attempt to reduce its costs leads to a fall in living standards and threatens the stability of the state, which in turn is a necessary prerequisite for the successful conduct of a hybrid war. At the same time, the world around is full of cheap human resources that can perform the same functionality as their own citizens, but without any social guarantees and at times lower pay.
Neocolonial empires of the second half of the twentieth century moved production to states with cheap human resource. This, however, was contrary to the principle of resource concentration, as it weakened control over economic resources. Roughly speaking, a significant part of the industry and the economy controlled by the neocolonial empires began to work for the interests of the host states. Today, the neo-Empire has found another way out–the movement of cheap human resources to the regions that needs additional labor. And those States that do it on an ad hoc basis, benefit more than those who take the labor force on a permanent basis. “New Europeans” work much less and require much more resources than illegal migrants in the United States.
However, formation of the neo-imperialist attitude to a person as to an additional burden for the state is a weak link for any neo-empire. States are created to serve people. When a state starts to reject this function, then people lose their obligation to remain loyal to the state. Today, the ideology of dehumanization of a state, not just the priority of its interests over the interest of the individual, but the priority over the society of its citizens and even over all mankind, has not yet been formed completely. And it is in Russia that attempts are made to get away from the bad dependency of a thrifty empire on the theory of dehumanization of state. It is difficult to say whether they will be successful. In the end, not only the economic, but also the ideological model of a state is formed based on the needs of the real world. Better adapted to reality state survives, less adapted dies, the rest are trying to adapt, reforming their political system, in accordance with the requirements of the time and the changed world.
If dehumanization is a necessary condition for the survival of the state in the new conditions, sooner or later it will be recognized. But in this possible temporary victory will be laid its final defeat as a government without people cannot exist, disappears the meaning of its existence, as it makes no sense as existence of a car or plane in a deserted world. But, if in order for material values to become meaningless, the world must become really deserted, in order for the need for a state to disappear, it must only accept the principle of dehumanization as the basis of its activities.
If “extra people” are not needed, sooner or later this principle will be extended to its own population: first to one social group, then to another, and then to all. The Bolsheviks, having started to execute in the 1917 their class and ideological enemies, ended up to 1939 executing a large number of themselves, a fact that (with a small temporary backlash) was reflected in the renaming in 1952 of their party from the CPSU(b) to the communist party (since the Bolsheviks came to their end, so and the party of the Bolsheviks came to its end).
Russia’s task in the “beautiful new world” of neo-empires is non-trivial. It is necessary to walk between the Scylla of efficiency while fighting against the constant external threat and the Charybdis of dehumanization for the sake of efficiency, which undermines, however, the very foundation of the state. Our advantage over competitors (US, China, EU) is that we at the very least acknowledge this task and try to solve it, while other neo-empires are about to bring the meaning of their existence (representation of people) to Molek of abstract efficiency.
Mr. Ishchenko wrote: “If your profit is equal to one hundred rubles per one invested ruble, then you have more potential than someone who produces only one ruble of profit per each ruble of investments.”
What a terrible Capitalist I am, who can only make a small fraction of profit per invested dollar. I would be happy to invest in Russia if my return per year were only a ruble of profit per ruble of investment. :^)
In America, the best investment is to purchase corrupt politicians. This can mean that for a few million in political investments, a crony capitalist can then receive billions in returns from corrupt laws being passed in their favor. See Big Pharma as one big example, but not the only one.
Yes, for a typical business investment, a rate of return of 10% profit is a very good result. But, when you purchase the US Congress, they can generate rates of returns of several 100 percent or even more.
Butte, remember that the First Commandment of the capitalist religion is ‘Thou MUST maximise profit’. No ifs, buts or maybes. And the labour that produces everything human, and the natural world and all future human generations can, and will, go to Hell.
This is why there are phd degrees available to most professions, to avoid the consequences of your statement. It sounds better and is more accurate if stated that “capitalists of the western world are wicked who insist profits be maximized” then it would be the gods honest truth.
Thank you,Scott for the translation. This is a seriously deep article and deserved your skilled attention.
I’ve read it slowly, marked a printed copy for some more thoughts, to post them tomorrow.
Ishchenko is always superb, Crafting this theme, neo-empire, is a profoundly insightful way to view geopolitics, hybrid war, and the relative states of the economies of the ’empires’.
I’ll comment further tomorrow. This is a rich topic.
I agree entirely Larch. A new paradigm.
The following book is one of the foundation stones of Silicon Valley. In the English speaking West there are echelons of thinkers grown of age who hold a nest of these types of documents in their dream centre.
http://library.uniteddiversity.coop/More_Books_and_Reports/The_Culture_Novels-Iain_M_Bainks-Anarchist_Science_Fiction/iain%20m%20banks%20-%201987%20-%20consider%20phlebas/Iain%20M.%20Banks%20-%20Consider%20Phlebas%20v2.html
Bank’s Culture books are quite interesting. All 9 of them. I am currently rereading all of them as I like Bank’s version of utopian pan-human civilization. Unfortunately his version is not one which humanity can adapt. Consider only the Culture motto: Money is a sign of poverty. For the average humans money is the ultimate goal and they seek money at all costs never understanding that money is in fact function of power. In Bank’s series even the normal average Joe/Jane from the Culture is massively educated and able to understand societal system without prerogatives. I am sorry that I am saying that but the average human is lost cause with a massive savor complex stuck in the debt slavery matrix.
I appreciate and applause your pick of sci-fi books, Mr. Banks was one bright example of a man with outstanding imagination. Too bad he left for the sublime infinite fun land.
The essence of capitalism, of ‘religions’ like Wahhabism, Talmudic Judaism and various Protestant sects and of ideologies like ‘American Exceptionalism’, ‘Western Judeo-Christian Civilization’ and the ‘Rules-Based International Order’, and of the pathopsychology known as that of the ‘Rightwing Authoritarian Personality’, is fear and hatred of the Other. Jingoism, chauvinism, supremacism, xenophobia etc are all manifestations of the basic sickness, which is often expressed through brutal violence, destruction and genocide, plus the latter-day frenzy of ecological carnage that will shortly render all such actions, and everything else, null and void.
Spot on indeed.
Fascinating!!
The theory explains Trumps call for Europeans to pay more for armaments, China’s BRI and to some extent Ukraine. But how does it explain Russia’s actions on Syria, Iran and the Middle East?
Couldn’t make sense of the last paragraph. Hope someone will explain.
Jiri
This is not an easy article to read and understand. For example:
“Russia is pursuing a normal neo-imperial policy, for only this way she can protect national interests and sovereignty from the encroachments of the United States, conducting the same neo-imperial policy”.
I am not sure this can be accepted. Yes, the US is pursuing a neo-colonial policy, as evident in Venezuela. However, to state that Russia is pursuing a “neo-imperial policy” cannot be accepted. Russia, in conjunction with China, has created international organizations like the BRICS, The Shanghai Cooperation Organization and The Eurasian Economic Union, which are quietly attracting countries the world over. These same countries are slowly moving away. For example, not even Merkel in Germany dared go against the interests of German industrialists, who wanted to see the Nord Stream – 2 gas pipeline completed. Had they accepted US gas, they would have seen their expenses rise, as US gas costs double compared to Russian gas.
as for the Donbass, the author is being diplomatic when it comes to the future frontiers of eastern Ukraine. The point is that Ukraine is an artificial creation, having no reason to exist. The actual name means “frontier region”, which it was in Russian history. By December of 2017, some 4.4 million Ukrainians fled to Russia, while the latest news is that Poroshenko is preparing to flee Ukraine after the elections, something I personally expected.
The upcoming elections in Ukraine are a joke. It would appear that the fovorite to win the elections is a comedian by the name of Zelenskiy. Hardly a good omen for Ukraine’s future. As I have written before, Putin is playing the waiting game. Analysts have since 2017 been stating that it is only a matter of time before Ukraine breaks up into three parts. At least 75 % of the country will be reunited with Russia, where it belongs.
The US Empire merely encompasses the entire world and then, ‘To Infinity and Beyond (to the infinity of infinities!)’. The essence of ‘American Exceptionalism’ is the totalist rejection of all other social arrangements (and thus of all other histories and civilizational traditions no matter how ancient eg China)and the demand to become ‘little Americas’, at pain of destruction and genocide.
Ishchenko speaks above the last paragraph about sacrificing the society of native born citizens to cheap labor immigrants, legal or illegal. He sees this capitalist tendency as the poison that can end a neo-empire.
Thus, the last paragraph directly warns of the Molek (Moloch–biblical satanic god to whom sacrifices of children were made).
Contemporary flirtation and adaptation to transhumanist features of AI, robotics, and feudalist solutions to economic challenges are the temptations facing the leading nations (neo-empires).
Russia is cautiously entering the AI-digital economy stage, and has ten million easily transformed into serfs migrant laborers, so they are dealing with this temptation in a very rational approach. Russia, because of its cultural history and values, knows the danger of Molek.
China seems to have embraced technology to control its society. But within the Chinese society is the universal agreement (their social contract with the Communist Party regime) that stability is the foundation of Chinese life. The massive population submit to facial recognition via tens of millions of CCTV sensors gladly. Whether the new social credit system which punishes the “different”, the “variant”, “the delinquent” or “dissident” with enforced restrictions that keep them off trains and planes, and other punishments is long-lasting—this is to be determined over time.
In China, things can happen quickly, and even the CCP has to react and back down when the “crowd” on the Internet barks loudly at some unhappiness. There is no question the new Mao, Xi Jinping, demands obedience to CCP dogma. This could be a fatal flaw in his domestic plans. Marrying ideology and technology is a very dangerous mix.
So far, the CCP is enraptured by the tools of control available through high technology.
‘Made in China 2025’ may turn out to be a huge prison instead of high value products, services and infrastructure that display Chinese invention, innovation and inspiration. We shall soon see . . .
In the US, Molek is embraced at the highest, most powerful levels. Technology is worshipped for itself. Creative Destruction is the chant (motto), and all the leading personalities of high tech are model deviants or demi-gods in the transformed society. Bezos, Zuckerberg, the Google duo, Twitter and Netflix leadership have long left basic American values and the 250 year-old social contract. For these hierarchs, Moloch is their inspiration.
The pitched battle between Trump’s inspired MAGA and the Dems devolution of sovereignty, Bill of Rights, tripartate government, Federalism in favor of a Cult of Liberalism and its analog, globalist order, is the war between God-centered philosophy and Satan-centered feudalism. It is destroying the USA regardless of who might win. It makes the hegemony the US operates that much more dangerous.
Like every Cult confronted by the outside authorities trying to control it and free the enslaved within the Cult, the natural impulse of suicidal last days arises. The US is approaching that as Empire.
Ironically, Trump’s policy imperatives (and neo-cons enforcing them) propels the Hegemon toward serial disasters in many regions.
Molek demands worship. Kneeling in adoration and feeding the monster is America. No one talks about all the missing children . . . Nor, do they look closely at the children being “sponsored” into the mill through the southern border. This is one manifestation.
From the long view of changes in American society, it is amply evident that the Empire is unchained and devouring the nation that once was a Republic, democratic and self-corrective. The great threat to the USA is within its systems and psyche. It has poisoned itself with Molek worship. Its spawn, the Hegemon, roams the Earth. Only Russia stands in its way.
We will soon see if the Russia-China Double Helix arises also. There are plenty of crises for their resolute resistance. Syria, North Korea, Iran, Afghanistan-Pakistan, the Arctic, Sanctions Regimes, SWIFT, Internet, Freedom of Navigation confrontations, biological laboratories, false flag chemical weapons, and scores of hybrid wars already underway to fracture Eurasia, Latin America, Middle East and Africa.
Larchmonter445
You have stated that the “the new Mao, Xi Jinping, demands obedience to CCP dogma”. Yes. But why ? Who was the old Mao ?
Back in 1917 the New York bankers financed the Bolshevik revolution by giving Lenin 20 million dollars in gold. Lenin was joined by Trotsky, who came from New York, bringing with him an estimated 500 New York gangsters, whom he used to enforce the Bolshevik “revolution”.
The Chinese were watching this. They understood what was going on, namely capitalists in the form of bankers introducing communism. They knew they were next for the same treatment. They decided to outsmart the bankers. The Chinese Royal House created a secret society known as the Red Dragons, whose modus operandi was based on the modus operandi of free masons in the West. This Chinese secret society created the Chinese Communist Party. For it’s leader they chose Mao Tse Tung, “a man from the people”. For his right hand man they chose Chu En Lai, who was Western educated, and who understood the West. The Chinese thus outmaneouvered the Western bankers, creating a “communist” Party which was outside Western control (the West lost control of the Russian Bolsheviks when Stalin assumed power, which is why we got Hitler in Germany and World War Two. Hitler, by the way, was financed by the Bank for International Settlement, opened in Basel, Switzerland, in 1931. The Bank was situated next to the German border.).
When the Chinese Communist Party came to power after World War Two, it removed the emperor, but did not execute him, which says plenty. He was removed in order to be saved. In demanding obedience to the “communist” Party, the Chinese were, and still are, demanding obedience to the Chinese Royal House, which is working behind the scenes. It’s only a matter of time before the monarchy is restored both in Russia and in China. History and tradition demand it.
In the 1970’s Kissinger goes to China in order to open the West to China, to tempt it to accept capitalism, and to persuade it to move away from Russia and join the capitalistic camp, so that Euro-Asia would never rise as a political and economic power. The Chinese accept the game. Patience is a Chinese virtue, just as it is Russian. The Chinese accept the best that capitalism has to offer, rising millions out of poverty. However, they do not move away from Russia, with whom they establish an economic and political partnership. Euro-Asia is on the rise, the last thing the West expected.
What I wrote above was presented by an analyst in 2018. I am strongly inclined to believe it.
B.F, please let us know who this ‘analyst’ is, because he has a brilliant future in comedy. Please forgive my candour, but that ‘potted history’ of modern China is indeed ‘potty’, and belongs in the potty. Behind gigantic movements like the Chinese Revolution are huge mass movements of millions headed by great figures like Mao, Zhou, Chu Teh, Chen Yi, He Long and countless others, not cabals of secret societies and banksters.
Mulga Mumblebrain
The analyst is American and is well known. I don’t think he has a brilliant future in comedy, as his analysis of the American domestic economy and it’s finances is first class, and this includes his analysis of the international economic and financial situation.
As for China, it is not ruled by “banksters”, as is the case in the US. What you have is an interesting situation that a “communist” Government has introduced a free market economy and capitalism. Perhaps you would care to explain why after the Second World War the Chinese emperor was not executed, as happened to the Russian tzar, and as happened to the English and French kings. Strange, don’t you think ?
B.F, the last Emperor, Pu Yi, lost his throne after the First Chinese Revolution in 1912, got a brief return in July 1917 thanks to a war-lord, then ‘ruled’ the Japanese puppet-state of Manchukuo from 1934 to 1945. Then he did ten years, a fair cop, as a war criminal under the Chinese Communist Government after 1949, and was re-educated in prison to see himself as an ordinary man, not a godling. He did some street-sweeping then worked in a literary agency.
The evidence that the ruling Western elites engage in massive child abuse for diabolical purposes, as well as pathopsychological ones, is quite copious, if you know where to look and have the stomach for it. The recent Royal Commission here into Institutionalised Child Abuse revealed a huge extent of child abuse, physical and sexual, although not the purely psychological which is rampant particularly manifested in ubiquitous bullying. And it could have gone on much longer, but the ruling elite had plainly begun to feel uncomfortable over the revelations. One fact revealed was that abuse in the Holy Roman Catholic Church was a very long established occurrence, or rather a ritual, one might say. When Cardinal Pell, a favourite of the patron saint of priestly paedophiles, Wojtyla, was found guilty, and that fact publicly announced recently, his allies on the Right went ape-shit with rage, screeching abuse at the courts, the victims, the ‘Left’ and all their multifarious enemies. Getting too close to home, I imagine, and there’s plenty of scuttlebutt out there about our political Masters and various notable figures in the Establishment, too.
Russia intervened in Syria to protect the Syrian people from the most bloodthirsty and Evil death-squad army that the Troika of Malevolence, the USA, Sordid Barbaria and Talmudistan had ever raised, with the aid of sundry thugs like NATO. There may have been other motivations, but that is the one that Putin might quote at the Pearly Gates when Peter asks him what good he had done in his life.
Yes. Lots to ponder here of various orders of significance.
The “war” started yesterday! Ongoing war, in perpetua, until the end. The West has evolved to the fatal point of imminent dehumanization; a narcissan fallacy of false self-agency — the proud and rich, will neither see nor hear. It is war, not necessarily “the” war, but it is war. The question I see here for America’s black future, is what is to become of her people when they must face the resulting annihilation of the above “efficiency” equation. The question for Russia is, will there be a breathing space before the next phase begins: the inheritors of the crumbling hegemony surely plan to out do, and to out pragmatize, every prior failing, especially the one failure that looms large; that Faith still exists on earth.
Rabbi Kook the Elder indicated how a ‘trans-human’ future might evolve, and who the trans-human rulers would be, with his observation, encapsulating Talmudic ‘wisdom’, that, ‘There is a greater difference between the soul of a Jew and that of a non-Jew….than there is between the soul of a non-Jew and that of an animal’. The vast over-representation of Jewish elites in Western technology industries, surveillance, the Internet, recombinant DNA etc, is a worrying fact. I don’t imagine that the Judaic elites are any more malevolent than their goy allies and servants, but the religious element, seen in even more debased form in ideological fascists like Satan-yahoo( who again today declared that Israel is a State ONLY of the Jews)surely ought to give us all reason to be very, very, worried.
One thing that has not been stressed enough is quite paradoxical:
Armed disarmament, or the use of superior arms and their positioning, special troops for negotiation techniques, all of which lead to quick disarmament.
Huge tracts of land have been liberated in Syria with no blood, no material destruction, with lots of hope on all sides. This is on the other end of entropy spectrum, compared to western mode of operation. Apparently, it is the first time in the history of warfare that it was used so systematically and to such an extent. It might have started with Chechen wars when V. Putin and R. Kadirov decided to quit pointless fighting/destruction and rebuild Chechnia and Grozny. Correct me if I am mistaken.
Something tells me that RF is possibly using the same approach with Israel, which is a much harder nut
compared to the other terrorist entities. So, I am not discounting the possibility that once Israel agrees to
some comprehensive negotiated ME settlement, guaranteed by RF, China, Iran, Turkey, etc, all the pompously quoted reasons for western involvement collapse. What happens then should be interesting.
Regards, Spiral
Sorry to disappoint you but Israel falls in the category of ‘the West’, Israel is the largest land carrier in the world. It survive on war and more war both kinetic and otherwise, take Netanyahu for instance he only listen to his inner voice which tells him a neocapitalistic way that: you have to do all what is necessary in order to remain the premier even if it means war with Syria. The West is a list cause.
I like your aproach, Spiral, and think the same. It is kind of a tactic/operation/strategic movement that makes the use of kynnectic forces way more efficient and effective at the same time. I would also include here the liberation of Crimea.
Now that Syria has been effectively saved from the takfiri butchers, and Thanatopia, Sordid Barbaria and Talmudistan’s diabolical plans thwarted, some of the vilest scum among Western presstitutes and ‘human rights’ (easy, stomach!)hypocrites are raising their hissing and spitting voices to demand that Assad and the Syrian Government be prosecuted for ‘crimes against humanity’. Obviously these vermin are outraged that the Oded Yinon Plan has been halted, and their takfiri idols defeated. Of course, in a just world, it would be the Western presstitute scum who would face justice, with the monsters of the Guardian cess-pool and their friends in the ‘Integrity Initiative’ first in line.
Very complex.
Am I correct in thinking that one of the basic nuggets of this essay is the question of whether the state serves the existence of the people, or the people the existence of the state?
And if the former is desirable, how to achieve this within the context of empires with global reach, or striving to achieve global reach?
Katherine
Katherine, my understanding is that the author contemplates the question and comes to the conclusion that both are necessary and not mutually exclusive as some would like to suggest. There is only a level to be agreed upon but he states that if any is to suffer, the other one is not far behind.
There is also a bit of financing the Empire and the best one, for me at least, the need for friends to stand up and take their place in the fight. Is there a war going on? Yes. Then why are you sitting on the fence and not doing your part? Are there not your interests involved? Yes they are but we would like if someone else would come and do the heavy lifting and finance our ineptitude to infinity. That is the immature thinking for a modern day leaders of any country. It just signifies the willingness to switch from one Hegemon to another, certainly not a will to be sovereign and treat others in that respect within international rules, which have to be strengthened and amended.
Those willing to share the burden and behave responsibly are embraced and helped because that help contributes way more to the fight and the resources to do so are not limitless. Others get a chance and a get going tap. What they do with it is up to them as it should be. RF has foremost responsibility to their own citizens. There will not be countless deaths of RF citizens rescuing forever ungrateful “brothers” because brothers do not act in such a manner. Brothers shoulder responsibility not shy away from it.
That lack of shouldering responsibility and willingness to be “saved” shows which level of commitments should be granted. That is the responsible way. My take is that there is a debate going on in Russia regarding what to do with “traditional allies” and this might help educate that in State affairs emotions could, if not checked, with which this thinking should help,lead to ruin.
If anyone could point me to some reading regarding Orthodoxy’s stance toward State i would be grateful. I am sure there exist something written along those lines.
In the American empire, it works like this. The state expends extreme amounts of money on the empire. It is estimated that the US military consumes over $1 billion per year. This is more than the official Pentagon budget, as large sections, such as the production of nuclear weapons, are in other agencies besides the War Department. Add to this also the costs of a massive (in both size and number of agencies) Intelligence front, as well as large expenditures for Fatherland Security and large domestic paramilitary police forces.
The money for this comes from taxes, largely on the middle class, and from debt, which is also expected to be repaid, eventually, by the middle class.
The profits from all of this massive expenditure do not flow to the state, but to private corporations. For example, under Trump, we often hear about large weapon sales to for instance the Saudi state, or the Europeans are encouraged to spend more on American weapons. But these sales are not by the US government, and all of the money from such sales flows to private corporations. Likewise, when the US fights yet another war for control of oil, it is not the US government that receives the profits but the big oil companies.
A portion of these profits to private corporations is then recycled back into payments to politicians for control of the political system. There are also payments to the media corporations to ensure their support. If you ever watch any of those Sunday morning American political talk shows, you will see adverts for expensive jet fighter planes and missiles. Of course, the typical American viewer/voter is not going to go buy a $150 million F-35, so the adverts are not for that purpose. The payments for the adverts are so the Merchants of Death can later threaten to withhold that money should the media corporation ever feel like opposing a war or opposing a weapon system or fail to crucify some awful peacenik like Rep. Omar or Rep. Gabbord. These payments of a portion of the profits to politicians and the media is also done to make sure the rich and the corporations are not taxed to pay for the costs of all of this, and that instead the costs land firmly on the middle income debt slaves.
One description of this is “Socialism for the Rich”, as all of the costs are borne by the government and middle-class taxpayers, while all of the profits go to the rich and corporations. And should there ever be any losses, the of course the government (and the middle-class taxpayers) are expected to bear those costs for the rich and the corporations.
“over $1 billion per year”…I think you meant trillion.
Of course, the vast majority is spent on offense not defence!
Cheers
Col
Col, all in all it’s much more than one trillion. There are hundreds of billions in black money, ‘official’ and clandestine, through decades old operations like the illegal drug trade, a source of hundreds of billions in profits and laundering through the bankster operations, to be taken into account.
this is great. i would like to read more like this. the world new and old being laid out open. thank you
It seems in the USA that the state is “withering away “through a parasitic process of being eaten away as NGOs embed themselves in local governments and corporations increasingly privatize social services like education and health care. Infrastructure corporations set up toll roads and “the state” increasingly devolves into a bureaucratic and regulatory middleman between a techno fascist corporate/financial elite and the i demoralized populace.
Soon international corporations will increasingly run the world in order to concentrate and control resources and to move them at will. Social engineering via mass migration and introduction of trade pacts like TPP which essentially bypass national law as they redefine international norms and rules are here to stay.
Cultures will be manipulated and changed to facilitate the cold blooded use of labor as primarily just another raw material. It is a grim and gruesome
Vision and in it lies the destruction of humanity as we knew it.
Life -human carbon based life-has never been all about the “bottom line “ and it is about time to lay down some red lines and make those worth fighting for.
Of course, any “economy” worthy of the name “Human Economy” is about the reproduction of Human Society as an aggregate of individual human beings, on a higher level of culture, cognition, intelligence and capacity to create greater happiness for oneself and others than it is about the multiplication looted, stolen or even fairly produced monetary sums. …a meaningless, empty abstraction if it is divorced from any humanist purpose…as we have seen all around us during the last few decades…inexorably leading to the cannibalization of the future, not just metaphorically, but in some of the darkest places, or “power centers” literally…ie in the flesh….in sacrificial rituals to “Molek” to steel the ruthlessness and discipline of the “elite” participants to sacrifice billions of other lives with no pity whatsoever.
If you accept that the false idea of Prince Phillip that the population of the planet is “excess” and cannot reinvent its resource base away from dependence on Royal Dutch Shell …for example…..then you will be inexorably led to the conviction that such pitiless ruthlessness and psychopathy is in fact “a necessary evil”, because even if you don’t like it, and couldn’t do it “someone will have to!”
I am not that happy with the term “Neo-Empire”. I would prefer “Sovereign World Power” amongst a community of a few other such World Powers (that might actually cooperate instead of struggling to the death of all but one….and then that one…..lol…)and also. many more numerous lesser powers that are not world powers, but that the world powers recognize they must defend the sovereignty of…….or else become a degenerating Empire based on abuse and exploitation of all lesser powers…leading to their own moral and eventual material collapse, as violation of the rights of others…..does tend to increase repugnance and resistance without fail, in a historically short number of decades. “What goes around, comes around.”, you know.
(Imperial) “Karma is a Bitch.”
Some argue that Russia and China today are considerably less “sovereign” than the current United States of America……but I am sceptical about that proposition……as I always take the Long View……and even a casual observation of the Medium-Term View……1963 to at least Nov 6, 2016 (maybe longer…we’ll find out soon enough…..LOL) tells me that in return for entertainment and the temptation of turning their brains off……….most Americans willingly gave up their sovereignty, morality and individual will….in exchange for immediate creature comforts and social acceptance within their wider communities of other lazy, corrupt and spineless losers, from the sixties and seventies on.
One of the costs inherent in being materially more lucky and well -off materially than residents within most other of the worlds more populous nations: softness and corruption and moral cowardice.
Where the is no higher vision or purpose than dollar signs.followed by numerical digits…the people and the nation perish.
What is sovereign about that half century (at least) downward trend within the US population??
UNLESS the trend is reversed, there is no sovereignty there at all…………..manifestly!