by Mikhail Khazin
Translated by Roobit
Or an attempt to describe how US problems correlate with international security.
On several past occasions I have written that the United States is deliberately destroying the entire system of international security, the same system that they had built together with the USSR. Why did they start dismantling the international security system is also understandable, in the 1990s the generation of “victors” came to power in that country, these people are convinced that they had “defeated” the USSR (as our theory explains it is obviously not so, please refer to http://worldcrisis.ru/crisis/188291 ) and because they are “victors” they may do anything they please. They decided that collective security arrangements are onerous, and that they need their own security system, the one that only they will have control over.
If we were to evaluate rhetoric of individuals who were in charge of the states that were admitted as new NATO members in the last 20 years, then we can figure out the logic that stands behind the expansion (and perhaps a bit even farther still). “We are being threatened and the USA is our only possible protection, therefore we must all be integrated within a US-centered security structure.” This was all going on while Russia, as a matter of principle, was not participating in affairs of those countries (not even in those of the Ukraine, which was abandoned to its own devices, something that has to a great extent caused the recent events in that country), Russia was not a threat to anyone (and of course it is not a threat to anyone now), the point of this all was deliberate destruction of the old global security system, in which Russia used to play a key role.
Obviously constructing a new security system from scratch is an endeavor that is both expensive and slow, and that is the prime reason why on some issues (such as nuclear disarmament) the United States continued to talk with Russia although the background of those communications can be best expressed through a formula: we only talk about questions which we consider to be of interest to us, and the rest is not really your business. The trouble is that all those plans, which were developed in the 90s and which they began to implement during 2000s (quite possibly, the events of September 11, 2001 http://worldcrisis.ru/crisis/86502 were organized to launch the execution of those plans, same way as the Pearl Harbor was staged to extract the United States from its “embrace of isolationism”), so those plans had been based on the premise of continuous economic growth, itself founded upon the primacy of America’s resources. Instead they ended up with a crisis, which has significantly reduced those available “resources.”
I must note that the period of capture of former Socialist Commonwealth’s markets has indeed become “the golden age” of American economy, even their budget scored a surplus. But our work in 2001 in which we evaluated the balance between different branches of American economy in the 1998 showed that ( http://worldcrisis.ru/crisis/73174 ) already then the US economy was standing on the brink of abyss comparable to where it found itself in the early 1930s. Today’s picture is far more frightening and what can be done about it unclear as well. The old security model has been destroyed. Trust cannot be restored, a new model does not exist, there are some elements of it here and there, but they function only if the US directly intervenes into the process. Intervention factually consists of allocating large sums of money to all participants in the process, and it is faulty: Palestine, ISIS, etc.
This is happening while the situation inside the US worsens. The problem is that for a long time they have a barrier in place that has separated the elite from the rest of the society, the barrier of the kind that’s only being built here (in Russia). American educational system, and I mean educational system that prepares societal leaders, has been destroyed already back in the 1960s, an average citizen (the sheep in the parlance of the elite) has actually no chances of advancement to an upper “elite” level, the one from which the society is being governed. A successful marriage could serve as a theoretical exception, but this social advancement mechanism cannot be employed in a systemic fashion. However for those few who are born active, unless the punitive psychiatry destroys them at a tender age or they fall victim to juvenile justice, something that now gets written a lot about, for them there are still mechanisms for upward social mobility which could bring them up to the level of technocratic elite.
The trouble is that in the course of this half of a century they’ve had accumulated lots of people who are absolutely unprepared to tolerate a sharp decline in their standards of living. But along with the worsening of the economic crisis, in order to maintain their grip on power and their status the “actual” elites must most definitely reduce the living standard of these population strata of the American society. And that can push the system up onto the critical level of mutual contradictions. Because internal resources necessary for maintenance of the quality of life of this so called upper middle class are depleted, they need to find some substitute external resources. To phrase it differently: the United States can only preserve domestic social stability at the expense of someone else.
Here we stumble upon remnants of the old security system. The Bretton Woods system was based upon a premise that all assets of participating member states will be dollar denominated. So fresh dollars were printed along with introduction of new assets into the system, and the US elites could then work out how those dollars are to be shared with the elites of those new countries (or regions) that were about to be incorporated within this dollar zone. How those regional elites were going to split those dollars with their own population was their own concern. But there are no more assets to be brought into the system, consequently no new dollars are being printed, and worse than that, existing dollars are being redistributed for America’s benefit through US controlled world dollar system. This makes internal conflicts in many of the world’s countries all but unavoidable.
Some of those conflicts are at their beginning stage while others are already burning hot, but their essence is all he same, counter-elites, the ones who were not let into the proverbial dollar cookie jar now make claims upon existing elites demanding either to restore the scale of support they get (that means that the old elites must commence financing of the economy from their own pockets) or yield power and get out of the way. Most obvious that because those existing elites are all pro-American, the scenario is developing under accompaniment of increasingly anti-American rhetoric.
We would like to remind you that similar processes already took place in Latin America after the investment flows from the United States changed their direction in aftermath of the Second World War. There the finale was either a breakdown of the economy or emergence of new forces at the helm of the state, frequently personified by brutal dictators, and sometimes, like in Chile, both a combination of both developments. What is going to happen to the world’s regions is an open question, but the choice of means to control the situation which remains at America’s disposal is shrinking dramatically.
The United States are obviously witnessing these processes and are impotent to do anything about them. From that standpoints, Obama’s officials are no different from Putin, he might not like Nabiullina’s policies but he cannot just fire her because giving her the boot would destroy the consensus of the elites (and he’s too hesitant as doesn’t venture to reign in the elites), likewise the administration team in the US is unable to go against their elites, which adamantly refuse considering anything that might somehow threaten their status. And that in turn means that rocking the boat is forbidden!
That can be defined as: sudden moves that can be interpreted as a game changer which in turn might alter the very rules that the United States has introduced in the decade of 2000 and such moves are not allowed. For example, you cannot just change borders. Possibly, if the United States could turn the clock back, then they might have left the Pandora’s box safely closed and would not have amputated Kosovo from Serbia, but what’s done is done, besides that all happened during prosperous 90s. But to permit the phenomenon of Crimea (or anything similar) is just impermissible. Because if we allow to change borders on a regional level, then entire Eastern Europe, the Middle East and many other areas will turn into serious war theaters.
Essentially we are the ones who understand that this is unavoidable, but American elites will never come to grips with that (and that’s why our economic theory is something they would never agree with), this why they will do whatever it takes to postpone their own end, they’ll drag it until the whole structure collapses upon them on its own. In that sense, it is implausible to expect that they would remove sanctions or that they will somehow agree to us acting independently. Perhaps they would be happy to but they are prisoners of their own system.
re “Because internal resources necessary for maintenance of the quality of life of this so called upper middle class are depleted, they need to find some substitute external resources. To phrase it differently: the United States can only preserve domestic social stability at the expense of someone else.”
This was the thesis of William Appleman William’s seminal work “The Tragedy of American Diplomacy”. Because of the closing of the American frontier in 1890, there was no longer free land as a safety valve for the discontented masses, leading to major social unrest. Therefore the American frontier had to expand to the rest of the world thought the Open Door policy, all countries had to open themselves to American imports, through most-favored nation treaties. Those that didn’t faced the consequences, and still do. Nothing has changed.
The whole premise is faulty. The Britten woods treaty was made to help the bankrupt England with American dollars of American tax payer so the whole system was set upbto benefit the englishbrace and no body else -not even nonanglo Americans.
IMF like wise was created to help the English race.
It is eupidity of Russia to so much want to enter Wto that Rusdia even betrayed her allies like Iran,Syria and Libya for the lure of Anglo pirate club of Wto.
I agree with all except Crimea. Even from far-off Canada Ukraine was seen over the years as part of Russia, Crimea in particular. But yes, we are in very dire times …
I am puzzled by a statement in the last sentence of this paragraph:
“The Bretton Woods system was based upon a premise that all assets of participating member states will be dollar denominated. So fresh dollars were printed along with introduction of new assets into the system, and the US elites could then work out how those dollars are to be shared with the elites of those new countries (or regions) that were about to be incorporated within this dollar zone. How those regional elites were going to split those dollars with their own population was their own concern. But there are no more assets to be brought into the system, consequently no new dollars are being printed, and worse than that, existing dollars are being redistributed for America’s benefit through US controlled world dollar system.”
Sorry, how can the author say that “no new dollars are being printed” when it is common knowledge that many trillions of dollars have been created via “quantitative easing” (that is, through the hyperinflationary policies of the Fed/Treasury/executive branch)??? From what was said earlier, I assumed the statement would be that no new assets are being created in anywhere near the magnitude that new dollars are being printed/created electronically (unsterilized monetary intervention by the Central Bank, i.e. the Fed). This would make sense . . . but surely the author cannot contend that “no new dollars are being printed” . . . perhaps there is an error in translation?
This piece by Khazin is contradictory. He obviously gets it yet comes up with these “gems”:
“I must note that the period of capture of former Socialist Commonwealth’s markets has indeed become “the golden age” of American economy, even their budget scored a surplus.”
Selling a few trinkets to some newly impoverished people in the 90’s is not what gave the USA a budget surplus then. Scraping domestic social expenditures to the detriment of the society as a whole is what did it. The ZPC/NWO decided it was time their premier colony did a bit of “Yeltsin” self-buggery at home, probably as a necessity to finance their newly acquired former “evil commie” colonies and provide the initial “liquidity” (gag) to finance Israel’s up coming wars in the Mideast (thanks Jewish zios/mafia – you made goddamn sure this 21st century nazi говно would take root by destroying the leftwing opposition that would oppose it).
вот так
bot tak, the essential dimension often overlooked in these discussions is that which takes into account that the USA, the great globe-bestriding Colossus, is, in fact, a subject state itself. Its politics, down to even the local level, its business, primarily the ever-increasingly influential and controlling financial industry and its MSM, advertising and ‘entertainment’ mass indoctrination system are all controlled by Jews and compliant Sabbat Goy Toys. Naturally this situation, quite blatantly apparent and ceaselessly boasted of by indiscreet Jews, is denied forcefully, those who point it out are slimed as ‘antisemites’, and discussion of the facts is utterly verboten.
I can think of few historical analogies to this situation, and believe that the implications are quite chilling. I have no idea what hold certain Judaic doctrines (and Judaism contains a plethora of often contradicting dogmas and beliefs, endlessly disputed)have over the Israeli and Diaspora power elite, but certain amongst them see Jews as global overlords, not just in religious belief, but is straight power terms. And the actions of the Jewish Fifth Columns in countries like the USA, where the most belligerently aggressive elements eg the ‘neo-conservatives’ are entirely Jewish or Sabbat Goy compradores shows that the extraordinary belligerence and aggression of US foreign policy, so like Israel’s, is driven by this Jewish element. The religious undertone, too, of a God-ordained ‘mission’ for Jews and ‘Christian Zionists’, ‘Dominionists’ and the like, to rule the world, forever, must not ever be dismissed as mere madness. It does, however, further illuminate the essential priority of ZioAmerican strategy now and for the foreseeable future -the ‘bringing down’ and fragmentation of China, that great non Judeo-Christian civilization where God’s Chosen People will never, ever, pull the strings from behind the scenes.
FDR was such a good errand boy for Churchill and Stalin, enabling Pearl Harbor and duping the American public into war, so what did he do wrong by the Yalta conference where he looked like he was suffering from slow arsenic poisoning with those huge dark circles under his eyes and so gaunt and frail looking? Stalin remarked that he looked like he was being poisoned — he would know. Maybe someone thought FDR’s avuncular image was too soft to drop the Bomb, and Harry Truman, who joined the KKK in the Twenties would have the necessary temperament. Secret Service agent William Greer served on the FDR detail towards the end, and he was also the presidential limo driver in Dealey Plaza. What a Black Widow spider that guy was.
“The Bretton Woods system was based upon a premise that all assets of participating member states will be dollar denominated.”
No. You need to rethink all that.
As far as dollars not being printed goes, the US government deficit number is the exact number of dollars being created.
About a trillion this year from memory.
“The Bretton Woods system was based upon a premise that all assets of participating member states will be dollar denominated.”
No. You need to rethink all that.
As far as dollars not being printed goes, the US government deficit number is the exact number of dollars being created.
About a trillion this year from memory.
So what American imports in most of European countries except perhaps military products? Hardly anything at all. We don’t buy American consume products at all. We buy raw material and energy from Russia or OPEC, cars and devices from Asia. Even Hollywood and “American Dream” is not selling well like before. Japan, China and Korea are much more in our every day life than rather mediocre American industry. And who is missing American education or wellfare system in Europe? For most of Europeans America is somehow backward idea.
printed? yes. backed by assets? no.
kind of off-topic but in retrospect of all the events that have happened it was refreshing to read this old article (2010) from a renowed (albeit) controversial UK journalist.
27 September 2010
“As Ukrainians force Russians to turn their back on their language and change their names, I ask, is this the world’s most absurd city?”
By Peter Hitchens
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1315318/As-Ukrainians-force-Russians-turn-their-language-change-names-I-ask-Is-worlds-absurd-city.html
Here’s the money quote from Khazin’s article:
“To phrase it differently: the United States can only preserve domestic social stability at the expense of someone else.”
There are Many Websites that say that the overwhelming majority of Russian Bolsheviks were Jews, and some People say that even Lenin was Jewish.
There is nothing Anti-Semitic or Anti any Ethnicity in knowing the Ethnicities of those who were Responsible for the Soviet Union committed the Crimes of those, and if I were to be Slandered, then I would prefer to be wrongly accused of being Anti-Khazaric, because a small minority of Jews are of Semitic Ancestry.
The British Empire knew that it could use the Jewish Leaders of Europe to Control and Manipulate Continental Europe, and for this co-operation, Britain promise Palestine to the Zionists.
I think that Britain was behind the 1917 Revolution, because Tsar Nicholas did not want to create the Soviet Union, or because Bolshevism was the only way to create the Soviet Union.
This is because the Soviet Union was Vital to keep Britain as the Global Power, or to remain for as long as possible, as the Dominate Power in the emerging Anglo-American World Power, which came into being because Britain needed America’s help in WW 1.
There could be People who think that Russia should build a City, which is named Refugee City, and which is one tenth of the number of People who have become Refugees because of the Nazi Euro-American interfering in the once Democratic Ukraine, and which is now Nazi Ukraine.
That City should be built with 0 % Loans from Russia’s Central Bank, and those who live there do not have to be Refugees, but it will show the World, what is one tenth of the scale of one aspect of the Nazi Activities of Nazi Euro-America and of Nazi Ukraine.
This City should be built very close to Moscow, and visiting Foreign Leaders could visit Refugee City in the same way that Israel uses their Holocaust Museum.
Perhaps Moscow could build a “Refugees from Nazi Ukraine Museum”, and the Euro-American Embassies must be next to them, and when Russia summons a Foreign Ambassador, then they must meet with the Russian Officials in Special Facilities that are a part of that Museum.
Russia could give prizes of a two weeks fully paid holiday for 1,000 People from the Continental European Union each year, and these prizes would be selected at random, in order for all Subjects of the Continental European Union to know that they have a chance of a free holiday.
Perhaps Citizens of Ukraine could also be included in the offer for a free holiday in Refugee City.
If any Nazi declines the invitation, or if any Person is too busy for the free holiday, then the offer will be extended to others.
Perhaps the Palestinians should build a Holocaust Museum of the Activities of Nazi Zionists, and make Foreign Leaders visit that Museum of the Activities of Nazi Zionist committing Genocide against the Palestinians at https://buildingbridgesvancouver.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/skytrain-ad-1.jpg .
Even if Lenin was not a Jew, the way that the Anglo-America work is to find those who have been Secretly Filmed or Photographed, when they were thought they had Total Privacy, and now they must be Puppets of Anglo-America.
This is why all European Politicians should say: “While I Deny All such Accusations regarding myself, I must Admit that it Could Be Possible that Some Politicians and Some Journalists in my Country, Could have been Bribed with Money, and they Volunteered to be Secretly Filmed murdering someone, or with having sex with a child, and they are now Traitors and Fifth Columnists against their Own People, because they do not want to go to jail.”
We know that the Polish Foreign Affairs Minister is married to an American Journalist, and the Anglo-Americans know how to tempt someone and to Secretly Film them to become Puppets of Anglo-America.
But they can still dream.
http://orientalreview.org/2014/12/28/at-what-point-will-putin-bend-under-obamas-ukraine-extortion/
Especially given, ” Now the US Congress, speaking on behalf of the entire human race,…”
Categorical imperatives are strategic Achilles heels to be exploited, not regretted.
A little off-topic, but the Russians are pushing a new theory about the perpetrators of MH17:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/12/29/mh17-dmitro-yakatsuts-anna-petrenko/
Kind regards,
Dutch
Off topic but awesome video
Russia-Crimea Bridge Video Presentation
http://fortruss.blogspot.com.au/2014/12/russia-crimea-bridge-video-presentation.html
Malaysia has just had an unprecedented third large aircraft “lost” in less than a year. Prior to that Malaysian Airlines had an excellent safety record.
Third time unlucky for Malaysia? Or CIA payback for hosting an International War Crimes Tribunal that indicted Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, and their associates for bombing and invading Iraq under false pretences, killing hundreds of thousands of people to seize Iraq’s oilfields.
As a judge once said, when co-incidence is piled on co-incidence piled on co-incidence, at some point it ceases to be a co-incidence.
great article, its a shame those links to worldcrisis.ru arnt in english! Just finished reading Erich Fromms The Fear of Freedom, more relevant than ever, and the US completetly fits the model of authoritarian, obsessed with the past, entertaining anything ‘new’ is seen as unacceptable and is condemned, open mindedness and looking for creative workable solutions is an admittance of failure so they will be entrenched in the past and determined to ‘claw their way back’ to whatever delusional ‘heyday’ they believe existed. Remember that Fromms book was written in response to the rise of fascism/nazism and it’s a pretty frightening vison of the future. (potentially) This is precisely why a lot of people are looking towards Russia as potential saviours of the planet in a way, those looking at a ‘new way’ (even if it includes oligarchies of private industry)Eurasia has massive world potential and potentially massive world responsibilities but there has to be a better way and a better vision.
I’m sorry, but either there is a severe mistranslation or else Mr. Khazin is very, very wrong.
Bretton Woods did NOT denominate all trade in dollars. It specifically was a mechanism for evening out imbalances in various currencies – including but not limited to the dollar – by setting fixed rates for exchange of excess foreign currency for gold from the nation that issued said foreign currency.
It is only after Nixon closed the gold window that dollar accumulation outside of the US began in earnest, and clearly this abrogation of the fundamental basis of Bretton Woods cannot constitute a continuation of said agreement.
What we have today is Bretton Woods II – begun via the Smithsonian agreement – whereby the original Bretton Woods agreements were fundamentally altered in light of the US’ closing of the gold window. The alterations are such that it can be reasonably argued that nothing of the original Bretton Woods’ goals survive – for example, that various national currencies are no longer pegged into narrow trading bands with respect to each other. This is, of course, in addition to the removal of the balancing mechanism of gold convertibility which in turn is what caused the US dollar to turn fully fiat and which was the first step in the path which led to the present US economic situation.
In substance, Mr. Khazin is correct in the effects of the present international currency regime on the US’ behavior – hence my suspicion that there may be some form of mistranslation involved.
Pepe Escobar wrote an upbeat article about Eurasian geopolitics, upbeat for Russia that is. Here my comments:
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2014/12/28/pepe-escobar-on-the-state-of-eurasian-geopolitics/
Kind regards,
Dutch
“Because internal resources necessary for maintenance of the quality of life of this so called upper middle class are depleted, they need to find some substitute external resources. To phrase it differently: the United States can only preserve domestic social stability at the expense of someone else”.
Here Mr. Khazin appears to affirm the zero-sum theory of wealth: wealth comes from looting, production of new wealth is impossible because US internal resources are depleted. Ridiculous. Our shortage is of capital since it is flowing only to speculation. Also the legal structure has been corrupted to favor overseas production while depriving govt at all levels of corporate taxes and taxes on capital.
Even island nations with few resources are able to create wealth by adding labor to imported resources. America’s problem is a corrupt economic and banking structure which has corrupted its governing structures.
“So fresh dollars were printed along with introduction of new assets into the system, and the US elites could then work out how those dollars are to be shared with the elites of those new countries (or regions) that were about to be incorporated within this dollar zone. . . . But there are no more assets to be brought into the system, consequently no new dollars are being printed, and worse than that, existing dollars are being redistributed for America’s benefit through US controlled world dollar system.”
I wonder why Khazin thinks US dollar-creation (QE3, etc) is linked to the introduction of new assets into the system. At home the dollars are used for speculation (stock market & derivatives). Abroad they are used to invest in developing economies and for more nefarious purposes.
Khazin says there are no more assets to be brought into the system. My goodness what an overstatement. Look at what’s going on in Brazil & Ukraine & Nigeria, for example.
He says that as a consequence no new dollars are being printed, but they are printing dollars to bail out the financial system, not to balance the money supply with new assets.
Anonymous said…
BTW said…
@elsi:
24 December, 2014 02:42
To paraphrase one of Marx’s theses on Feuerbach.
Philosophers to date have merely described the world, the purpose however is to change it.
He could have usefully added –
generally “philosophers (intellectuals)” roughly describe a world changed by others at a time when others are engaged in facilitating further lateral change – although the “division of labour” was not quite so apparent when Marx wrote the theses.
Therefore generally the “world” roughly described by “philosophers (intellectuals)” no longer exists when they describe it, since it has been subject to lateral change.
“I somehow want the Russian intellectuals”
Perhaps your want is unwarranted and the actors you perceive as being capable of facilitating your want ill chosen.
elsi’s observation of hypothesis testing i.e. the lateral interaction of theory and practice is the way out of an “apparent” conundrum.
Anatoly Chubais had/has utility as well as Mr. Khazin, although such utility may not necessarily conform to that which they perceive for themselves.
The weak points of both of these gentlemen include the notion of “I”, which is a norm in some cultural zones including the “Anglo-Saxon”, illustrated on occasion within this blog.
As Engels was reported to remark – the proof of the pudding is in the eating – some courses recently being brought to table.
We are not in dire times, just time.
28 December, 2014 16:20
“So fresh dollars were printed along with introduction of new assets into the system, and the US elites could then work out how those dollars are to be shared with the elites of those new countries (or regions) that were about to be incorporated within this dollar zone. . . . But there are no more assets to be brought into the system, consequently no new dollars are being printed, and worse than that, existing dollars are being redistributed for America’s benefit through US controlled world dollar system.”
I wonder why Khazin thinks US dollar-creation (QE3, etc) is linked to the introduction of new assets into the system. At home the dollars are used for speculation (stock market & derivatives). Abroad they are used to invest in developing economies and for more nefarious purposes.
Khazin says there are no more assets to be brought into the system. My goodness what an overstatement. Look at what’s going on in Brazil & Ukraine & Nigeria, for example.
He says that as a consequence no new dollars are being printed, but they are printing dollars to bail out the financial system with interest-free money, not to balance the money supply with new assets. The Fed is buying junk assets from the banks; maybe that’s what he is confusing with new assets?
“But [for the US] to permit the phenomenon of Crimea (or anything similar) is just impermissible. Because if we allow to change borders on a regional level, then entire Eastern Europe, the Middle East and many other areas will turn into serious war theaters.”
Khazin misunderstands US intentions, which are precisely to change borders. They are actively trying to partition Iraq and Syria at this time. They have cast doubt on the legitimacy of the borders of the entire mid-east because they arose from the colonial period. They are in the process of doing away w the borders that separate US from Canada & Mexico. And they desire to partition both Russia and China.
Further, there is no indication that the US would like to reduce the number of war theatres. Instability means inability to resist their NWO.
US opposition to Crimea having rejoined Russia has nothing to do with the desire to preserve the rule of law or a desire for stability.
“US are prisoners of their own system.” No, they have the fixed intention to bring about a worldwide oligarchy ruled by the elites. They continue to vastly change their system in the belief that it improves their chances of achieving this end.
@Anonymous said at
28 December, 2014 16:20
29 December, 2014 17:24,
Dear frined senior strategist, I missed you longing for, how are you?
As enigmatic as ever, I have to think a lot to see what you mean …..
Look, the other day, in that other thread about Khazin, I asked myself who were those “siloviki”. I searched around but I found that scheme that was of 2009, and I saw that some positions have changed, but many, like the two Ivanovs remain…. Tell me, please, are they who form the roof? Since they are placed in such strategic locations ….
Well, I do not want to tire you more… the holidays are short …. I wish you a Happy Orthodox Christmas with your loved ones, to you and all the Russian world.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYj7v60–Fs
Peace, health and strength for the New Year!
The Henry Kissinger quote is from The Clash of Civilizations by Ben Hunt. Vladimir Putin is called a realist by Alexandr Dugin in Putin vs Putin: Vladimir Putin Viewed From The Right, as is Henry Kissinger. Deng Xiaoping was a realist, as evidenced by his famous quote…who cares if the cat is black or white as long as it catches mice! Ben Hunt is a realist who attempts to put aside ideology or personal preference to see the world as it is.
M. Khazin fears the realists have insufficient influence in the USA, to cooperate going forward in the world’s Prisoner’s Dilemma. M. Khazin’s article has a deeper insight, than his weak understanding of monetary theory and practice. He is not a realist, as is VVP….but he lived through the collapse of pure ideological state
socialism and sense’s the similar dilemma in the USA. How to change without collapse! The USA is a socialist oligarchy, without realism to accommodate a dynamic world change in political economy and international monetary affairs.
Anyway….here is Ben Hunt’s favorite war criminal concerned about fanatics of ideology blowing up the vertical structure of the world to please their domestic fanatics ….The world is a mixtus orbis and hard to judge!
“Side by side with the limitless possibilities opened up by the new technologies, reflection about international order must include the internal dangers of societies driven by mass consensus, deprived of the context and foresight needed on terms compatible with their historical character. As diplomacy is transformed into gestures geared toward passions, the search for equilibrium risks giving way to a testing of limits. …
Because information is so accessible and communication instantaneous, there is a diminution of focus on its significance, or even on the definition of what is significant. This dynamic may encourage policymakers to wait for an issue to arise rather than anticipate it, and to regard moments of decision as a series of isolated events rather than part of a historical continuum. When this happens, manipulation of information replaces reflection as the principal policy tool.”
– Henry Kissinger, “World Order: Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History” (2014)
Sir:
The above paragraph #7:
” The Bretton Woods system was based upon a premise that all assets of participating member states will be dollar denominated….”
You have omitted a vital datum, namely, the Bretton Woods agreement was based on the GOLD-BACKED/CONVERTIBLE [for int’l trade settlement] USDollar.
When Nixon defaulted on the GOLD-BACKED CONVERTIBLE aspect, Bretton Woods was uncreated.
That was clear to any so-called “economist” whose competence was demonstrated by real, measured experience.
A GOLD_BACKED/CONVERTIBLE USD has inherent limits. The fiat USD has no limits on morphing into nothingness due to human nature.
There was no way to miss it except to mis-estimate the gigantic swindle that that was set in motion. A slow-motion, unstoppable global
disaster that is now approaching climax.
To many observers, it was surely unbelievable that diplomats, ambassadors, learned bankers, the privileged “Very Best People” could create such a monster.
How could “they” not know that the entire arrangement depended on GOLD-BACKED CONVERTIBILITY?
And when Nixon eliminated the CONVERTIBILITY, the fuze was lit.
None of the above means there was not a “good reason” or justification for the default on CONVERTIBILITY.
In fact, the act of default enabled the path to global control that now promises to create a unipolar tyrannical oligharchy in-charge of the world.
A coincidence?, that BW’s Achilles Heel, CONVERTIBILITY, could be abrogated to unleash the path to unipolar tyranny? I think not.
The enabling instrument for global tyranny was a reserve-currency backed by nothing [pure fiat] and printable without limit while, as the only reserve-currency, its use became necessity.
Simultaneously it was accepted by the non-printers who realized too late they have little chance of stopping it, and that chance will involve great harm to Mankind and other life forms.
from Rick with hope that the spiritual aspects of life will endure somehow to get life’s nasties sorted-out and handled.
Steven,
Maybe you are puzzled because QE is not actually “money printing”. The FED buys a financial instrument (say your* promissory note) at face value and pays for it with $. The firm selling your note simply replaces one asset with another …. cash.
Now it’s a different story if the fed pays over “par” for the asset. The fed pay’s face value but the seller has omitted to tell the fed that you stopped paying your mortgage. That’s not money printing, that’s theft or fraud.
But in this situation where did the money printing occur??? It happened when you spent the money you borrowed but are now unable/unwilling to pay back.
Money printing only applies if there is fraud so don’t call it money printing call it fraud.
*For illustrative purposes only.
QE = Money printing ONLY if there is fraud.
What Mikhail Khazin is saying correctly is almost the definition of an “economy” or the “purpose” of an economy. It’s to monetise the raw untapped resources of a nation/zone. The land, forests, water, products. A relentless accumulation of the assets onto the balance sheets of the corporations. What we have is a system where these are all “dollarised” and when this happens to a country it’s soveriegnty has been usurped
elsi said…@ 29 December, 2014 22:58
“Philosophers to date have merely described the world, the purpose however is to change it.
He could have usefully added –
generally “philosophers (intellectuals)” roughly describe a world changed by others at a time when others are engaged in facilitating further lateral change – although the “division of labour” was not quite so apparent when Marx wrote the theses.
Therefore generally the “world” roughly described by “philosophers (intellectuals)” no longer exists when they describe it, since it has been subject to lateral change.”
The references below also conform to these observations –
http://www.globalresearch.ca/kicking-the-vietnam-syndrome-u-s-interventionism-and-the-victory-of-perception-management/5421897
http://www.voltairenet.org/article186328.html
You will likely have tested these hypotheses by,
“I asked myself who were those “siloviki”. I searched around but I found that scheme that was of 2009, and I saw that some positions have changed, but many, like the two Ivanovs remain…. Tell me, please, are they who form the roof? Since they are placed in such strategic locations”
To return to paraphrasing Marx.
“Philosophers to date have merely described the world, the purpose however is to change it.”
Some on this blog are of the view that full disclosure and “better public relations” are pre-requisites for transcendance. It is one of the implicit premisses of this blog.
However some are of a different view and so I cannot answer your question, but pose other questions to ponder –
Do “siloviki” exist?
If so what is their relevance?
Try to remember the tortoise and the hare, and always test hypotheses.
I realise you do not suffer from the disadvantage of living in the space where “We hold these truths to be self-evident”.
bob kay said…30 December, 2014 02:07
Mr. Kissinger taking up embroidery perhaps?
“
Because information is so accessible and communication instantaneous, there is a diminution of focus on its significance, or even on the definition of what is significant.”
Perhaps you remember the various roles and utilities of Mr. Kissinger.
Given this his contention that
“information is so accessible”
is an exercise in obfuscation.
“communication instantaneous” seeks to conflate communication with transmission/broadcast, whilst obfuscating information re-routing and censoring.
The extrapolations being posed as
“there is a diminution of focus on its significance, or even on the definition of what is significant.” which not only affords a pre-alibi for “errors”, “inefficiences” etc, but deflects focus from possible lateral challenge such as contributed to the demise of the STASI.
When a glutton wants to eat offer myriad courses.
Penelope said…@ 29 December, 2014 19:11
” Instability means inability to resist their NWO.”
There is no equilibrium (stability) in any lateral system.
” Instability means inability to resist their NWO.”
As to your assertion – if everything was self-evident omniscience would prevail precluding the “need” for hypotheses testing.
“intention”- intention and achievement are not synonymous.
“They continue to vastly change their system in the belief that it improves their chances of achieving this end.”
How precisely do they ( as prime actors operating in a vacuum perhaps ?) continue to vastly change their system?
Is this activated change linear or lateral?
This is a posteriori explanation, but not a usable theory.
Social and political dynamics involve more than that. I wrote several articles about all this:
part 2
part 3
@ Anonymous, friend senior strategist,
on 30 December, 2014 09:40,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ri9_z1uqMI
elsi said…@ 30 December, 2014 23:37
Beware of false binaries and mapping of expectations on “divisions of labour”.
Marx did not write the bible, koran, talmud etc or a devotional text, but made a contribution to lateral change.
@Anonymous said on 31 December, 2014 09:51,
“Beware of false binaries and mapping of expectations on “divisions of labour”.
Friend, it’s not the first time that you warn me about mapping expectations …
Tell me, please … in what way do you think I am doing it?
That Marx did not write the Bible, or “the other books” I am aware, and though he had written it, I do not believe that he was right in everything. Do not think there is anything written by men who constitute an absolute truth.
Incidentally friend, if you had a moment this holiday ( but I fear that you are a busy person in transcendental matters ) I would like to know your opinion on some statements that make many on this blog about that the Bolshevik Revolution was instigated by a Western ( some add even a Jew ) 5th column and not a revolution of the people against a medieval order of things where citizens could only be servants unable to aspire to anything more.
If you could provide me some link about this, I would be grateful.
( but if you have very important and momentous things to do, do not bother, I will investigate on my own ).
I wish you a happy new year, particularly health and peace, and holidays plenty of rest.
elsi said…@ 01 January, 2015 22:11
The reference is to Sergei Prokofiev and the notion of professorship, a false binary – also illustrated in Marx’s theses on Feuerbach.
“Do not think there is anything written by men who constitute an absolute truth.”
Quite correct omniscience doesn’t exist. Your recognition of this was a motivation to address your points in a lateral way – addressing linearly merely re-enforcing the prevailing linear paradigm.
“I will investigate on my own”
There is no such thing as investigating on my own, as some interaction always takes place, even if restricted to documents with which you interact.
However if you mean I will test hypotheses and not receive gospels from “professors”, then that is wise.
Wisdom lies in choosing the purpose of interaction and with what/whom/how to interact.
On your “question” it appears that you have partly progressed to the intention/recognition of what, which suggests a predisposition to the tactical, which is amply illustrated, including in this blog.
However the key is always purpose – the strategic – which often times is opaque, and this blindness leads to some “unintended consequences”, whether that is knocking on doors or something more terminal, as many older people in your location will have had experience even at arms length.
” I would like to know your opinion on some statements that make many on this blog about that the Bolshevik Revolution was instigated by a Western ( some add even a Jew ) 5th column and not a revolution of the people against a medieval order of things where citizens could only be servants unable to aspire to anything more.”
On the above it would appear that some purport to be omniscient, which has utility but perhaps not in the way they may perceive.
Complex interactive lateral processes are the antithesis of unicausality and stasis – “an event”, “an answer” -; however the opponents still contend that such antithesis is not the case; they contend the “end of history” and frame their narratives of utility on these bases.
Certainty is usually disadvantageous to continued well being.
Strange that so many high level officers were fired..So were some of the comments from top US nuts cases.. But here is a conspiracy theory on it..
US Senator Lindsay Graham further warned South Carolinians about the threat of a “terrorist nuclear attack” on the same day that Infowars.com warned that high level military intel revealed to them that nuclear warheads were being shipped to South Carolina from a major Texas air force base under an “off the record” black ops transfer.
While the predictable US propaganda media organs loyal to Obama have reported that these military officers firings were due to incompetence, gambling issues, and (maybe) alcoholism, this GRU report notes that these “pathetic excuses” are to beyond belief to give credence to as these four distinguished officers were “beyond reproach” and held the highest security clearances anyone could hold in the United States.
Even though this report doesn’t speculate on what Obama’s next move will be after his failure to nuke Charleston, it does grimly note that the former Presidential candidate and US Congressman Ron Paul has added his voice this week to those warning the American people of an impending state of martial law and economic collapse being engineered around them.
and the General Staff this past Tuesday (8 October) that at 01:58:11 GMT/UTC an atomic device was exploded in the seabed off the US Atlantic Ocean, barely 1,000 km (620 miles) from Charleston, causing a 4.5 magnitude earthquake measurement that SMF experts equate to being a 1-kiloton yield, which is equal to the power of 1,000 tons of TNT.
This report notes that SMF experts are able in differentiate an earthquake from an atomic blast in that in the former the ground starts shaking slowly as plates slide against each other, and then the seismic activity slow picks up as the ground really starts to move. In an atomic explosion scenario, however, the initial blast is extremely powerful, and the subsequent shaking of the ground grows progressively less severe as was the case with the 8 October blast.
http://worldtruth.tv/obama-ousts-top-officers-after-nuke-explodes-in-ocean-instead-of-charleston/
Something Strange About ISIS
Simply put, jihadists don’t just walk through Lebanon. This leaves only two possibilities, they travel through Turkey, something more than obvious or they receive transit across Israel. A cursory examination of the geography of the region leaves only two other remote possibilities. One is that they manage to cross the Red Sea like Moses or they are flown in somehow, magically passing through airport security checkpoints all overseen by Interpol, America’s Department of Homeland Security and NATO financed security forces.
It is assumed that any Islamic male, traveling alone or with others, in transit toward Iraq or Syria, is a terrorist. I was certainly questioned several times. One could only assume that perhaps planes the CIA had used to transport narcotics or torture victims had been “retasked” for the purpose of bringing terrorists into Syria and Iraq. There are certainly reports of unmarked planes flying in and out of Mosul despite the fact that American fighter/interceptors maintain what they claim is a “stranglehold” on airspace in the region.
Syrian officials informally voice their own suspicions about ISIS. Though not publicly spoken of, they are of the opinion that American and Israeli advisors are serving with ISIS. Based on an analysis of ISIS tactical capabilities and their apparent access to secure communications, easily jammed by the US if they wished, such beliefs are not without foundation. Simply put, not everyone can operate complex American built mobile artillery pieces or armoured vehicles. ISIS seems to have no problem with this or any difficulty acquiring Stinger missiles to shoot down aircraft as well.
It is claimed that these missiles move from Libya, through Sinai and somehow magically jump over Israel. Oddly, none seemed to make their way into Gaza as evidenced during last summer’s Israeli air assault.
To say that there is something strange about ISIS is perhaps the understatement of all time. Can we call them “The Not Very Islamic State?” What they seem to have is friends, people who give them intelligence help, satellite photos, people who train them to operate complex American weapons, people who shepherd their personnel around like diplomats. What they also have are business partners, partners who are clearly above the law. Who has that kind of influence?
However, the militia leaders brought evidence. They had photographed not only ISIS dead but their identity papers as well. One group of 74 killed in fighting near Kobani included 15 Ukrainians and 8 Chechens. Others included fighters from Saudi Arabia, Yemen but the rest were from North Africa. There was no gloating over the dead despite the fact the exchange took place in a restaurant at the Damas Rose, a government owned hotel in Syria. There was a sadness, a solemnity about this as even ISIS dead, reputed to be mass murderers, looked no different than others, all young, bearded though many distinctly European.
http://journal-neo.org/2014/12/31/something-strange-about-isis/