HOSPITALS CLEARED, ELDERLY COVID SENT HOME

28 April 2022

Matt Hancock: Public Health England to blame for sending patients to care homes without Covid tests

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/27/discharging-covid-patients-care-homes-unlawful-high-court-rules/

As usual, Matt is deserving only of praise.

1. Sending patients back untested was a political decision since its purpose was to clear the wards. I personally know of care homes that refused to re-admit untested patients at that time period ie from day 1. So it is not true that the cause was ignorance or lack of awareness and everyone knows asymptomatic transmission is usual.

2. Secondly, Matt held the highest post in the land. It is a really inane comment he makes when he says "well no-one told me". a) it is not true, as cited above, but more fundamentally b) it is the manager's job to think and ask questions.

3. Last point. The NHS and Matt had plenty enough time to consider and report on this - why did it take two years and an external enquiry?

Having said all that, we must be forgiving of each other as intentions were not malicious.

The advice given at the time by the author of this blogg was to spend £15 billion on isolating care homes and re-inforcing all covid-related measures. The focus should have been very much on the vulnerable and not a whole-society "whatever it takes" treatment, with the population of young fit and healthy being free to acquire immunity naturally, and the economy kept up and running as far as possible.

The reason for blanket lockdowns and door-to-door testing was the policy of zero-covid, zero tolerance. Not only is that unrealistic, it is unecessary.

A focused approach was needed. And in the focus is first the elderly. This is widely known and was obvious at the time, but public fear reached fever pitch. Now here's the thing.

This also explains Partygate. It explains a lot of the troubles in our society. Those in positions of responsibility know very well the risks are to minority groups and are otherwise negligeable, so parties are fine amongst the healthy; but the public and MSM so whip up a frenzy of fearful emotions that managers have to temporarly cede control to the mob.

This is an important point, in my humble estimation.

Read More

ORIGINS OF THE WAR IN CENTRAL EUROPE

27 April 2022

A provocative title as politically Ukraine is in Eastern Europe, though geographically you might say Central Europe as the European plane sweeps from the Ural Mountains in Russia across northern Europe, to the Pyrenees on the French-Spanish border. The plane is broken notably by the Carpathian mountains, which might offer a partial natural defensive border to the Rus, except it is in Romania! 

The trouble is the only voice speaking for Europe to Putin was Emmanuel Macron and he failed. Strikes me there was no one listening to Moscow's severest warnings since 2008, no concerted diplomacy, or what there was - at Minsk - was ignored at the whim of Kiev. 

Macron's efforts weren't exactly helped by NATO and America. 

At the breakup of the old communist Soviet Union, NATO promised Russia that it would leave its near-abroad neutral, in particular East Germany, but instead it pushed its tanks right up to Russia's border and now what is happening in Crimea and Ukraine, with the West piling in wmd, just confirms Moscow's greatest fears. 

I don't think Moscow is bluffing when it says military imports are legitimate targets...what will the next leg in the escalation look like? 

Russian aggression, caused by its insecurity, has been met with the policy of Containment. The story starts from Woodrow Wilson in 1916 setting the goal of American foreign policy; to a more specific strategy fed from Mackinder's Heartlands of 1904, see also Peter Zeihan, as well as the Domino theory, fed to George Kennan and thence to Harry Truman in 1947. 

The end of WW2 meant the liberation of much of continental Europe, but instead of restoring the sovereignty of states in Russia's security zone, its near-abroad if you prefer, they became incorporated into Soviet Russia. Hence the Cold War that pitted America and NATO against the USSR and its Warsaw Pact. 

As a dentist might begin by anesthetising the patient, so America weakened Russian communism with an arms race and then Gorbachev came to believe in a free market economy with Perestroika and Glasnost. 

The move in Russia from a communist monopoly of power, to a system that permitted opposition, created a chaos wherein the Union broke up and Yeltsin, Russian president, took over. 

At this point, the dentist set to work, pulling out the former soviet provinces and throwing them into NATO in a number of waves ... 1999, 2004... 

To me, The Domino Theory is a political misreading of history. It's not wrong as all govts try to foment dissent in their neighbours, but it led to Viernam, Central America and Grenada and it doesn't explain pre-Communist Russian misbehaviour.

I would go for an explanation based in the unfortunate hand geography dealt the Rus.

What structures and drives this? It is almost a contest between the competing emotions of Fear and Love. 

John J Mearsheimer brilliantly offers a political-structuralist explanation for security conflicts. He teaches how these are resolved through balance-of-power arms races, which can break down eventually into the selfishness of war.

Or we have a structuralist-geographist kind of explanation, that can encourage sympathy from understanding the weaknesses of your neighbours, and accomodating them in Peace Treaties.

Read More

DE-DEGLOBALISATION AND THE SHANGHAI COVID OUTBREAK

25 April 2022

Strange how China, the world covid champion, is currently managing the latest outbteak in Shanghai.

There are 25,000 new cases a day and 9 deaths, offically. Only a third of over 65s are vaccinated as workers get priority. This is nothing, given popn.s of 57 million and 1.4 billion, compared to the UK's 27,000 new daily cases and 280 deaths daily - figures at 25 April.

The trouble for China is that the zero covid policy doesn't work with omicron. Especially not at Shanghai, a city as civilised as London or Edinburgh where much of the hi-so population voyage for conferences etc. And 45 other cities in that same area.

And so all the foreigners are leaving Shanghai. And the locals are under "house arrest", screaming and in rebellion. They've had this policy of confinement for two years now. The infected are shut into "concentration camps". Everyone is obliged to submit to regular testing. There are food riots. There are massive mental health problems. Shops and factories are closed. Entries to the city are blocked, with lorries backed up on the ring roads. 

And finally there are two separate communities: the infected and the healthy.

So to summarise, there are problems with health, social and mental, and economic.

But despite this suffering, there are few signs in the data of victory. And it is not clear if sinovac works so well. China has been unable to develop a messenger-RNA vaccine and yet at the same time, China cannot really go begging the States for three billion doses.

What should Chinese authorities do? Should they double down on quarantine? Should they admit zero covid doesn't suit omicron?

In October, there's the 20th party congress. So time is pressing for solutions. All that really matters is that the CCP continue in power with no competition. If they have to take an economic or health hit, so be it - all that matters is to stay in power. They learnt from Soviet Russia not to open up, not at any price, not let go. 

Yet Shanghai with a quarter of the popn of China is in lockdown for the last month and its port, the biggest port in the world, is shut.

Condo blocks and factories are locked, the the residents inside.

What we don't realise maybe is the extent to which the west, eg the automobile industry, relies on components made in China. We can't get them, so car prices go up and a second-hand car costs more today than a new car yesterday.

So we look for other suppliers. For example when I was with Airbus we used a lot of suppliers in the Magreb eg in Morocco there was a wiring factory in Tangiers. So why not give work to Tangiers?

And here are emerging the interesting points:

If this is all true, then the world is no longer flat and open, in fact it is round and countries have borders. We must decide where to place our orders, with what suppliers. But on what criteria?

Second, deglobalisation was already a trend but now you can see that this deglobalisation prompted by deteriorating balances of payments and growing civil unrest, has been sped up by the coronavirus and in particular by China's zero covid policy.

And thirdly, Yellen the US Sec of The Treasury, spoke somewhere recently of "friend-shoring". She is talking about a new primacy of politics over economics. This is the change. Ukraine is as responsible as China's zero covid. It's about choosing to work with partners who share our values, even if it means paying more. That's another new one and another nail in the Liberal coffin, which ordains that capital for investment flows to the areas where it will find the biggest returns. So work with other democratic countries and not the authoritarian ones, and this gives us two worlds and maybe to reserve currencies and two hegemons.

But, fourthly, having said that, how can Europe or America get away without the Chinese middle class, as suppliers and consumers? The deal with Airbus was that it had to install four production lines in China at Chinjing, if it expected China to buy its A320s. Same for German Mercedes. So China and covid is a far more importand driver than Russia and the war in Ukraine.

Read More

RUSSIAN AIMS AND STRATEGY

23 April 2022

🎉🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿Happy St. George’s day🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🎉

It is the land power (Russia, the Rus, the Mongol Hordes of Asia) v. The sea power (formerly the UK now America) for position as World Hegemon No. 1. That's why America and Russia are always fighting. Many think it's China? No. It's the no.1 land power v. the no.1 sea power. That's the game.

 Russia could take in Iran & Pakistan, even Japan?, so Islam and Asia, and seek to separate the UK from Europe, while fomenting dissent along race woke etc lines in the US. Their plan. Seems mad?

The Russian homeland, home to four out of five Russians, is in the European Plain. The plain stretches from the Volga to the Yangzie and the Artic to the Caspian.  Russian Govt policy is mainly made for Moscow and St Petersburg, the homeland - it is in Europe, we are fighting Europeans v. Europeans, thanks America.

That boundary Europe-Russia, in East Europe, is the world peace pivot. If you control that, you control Europe and Asia and should be able to dominate the world.  It is 2,000 kms from Finland and the Baltics, South to Romania, and has Russia's natural geographic protective anchors, such as the Baltics, Suwalki, Carpathian, Volgograd, as well as nine gateways through these, gateways that Russia must protect from historic invaders. 

So, taking Ukraine and Moldova would reduce its patrol area from 2,000 to 600 kms.

If it lost Georgia it would lose the Volgograd Gap and potential access to the Black Sea, Caucuses and Caspian.

You'd think cyber and air today, but after the artillery come the tanks and troops. How will they get through? Think Napoleon or Hitler.

You could ask, why the need for natural defensive frontiers when you've got nuclear?

Ultimately, Russian govt authority and legitimacy comes from conquest and respect abroad, as well as - as for us - meeting the needs of the core popn at home (well, our govts used to..).

As crises go, this one is more interesting than the debt 2008 crisis and coming liquidity; much more intetesting than covid; Woke is a distraction and a Big Yawn; but I wonder what comes next ... any ideas?

America is pushing Russia to the edge. Will it go nuclear?

It's true Putin has reduced countries to rubble when he can't get what he wants but in previous cases it has had little to no repurcutions on his own country whereas deploying nuclear missiles would be disastrous for him aswell and he may be crazy ( I dont think so, as above), but surely not suicidal.

Read More

CAN YOU IMPOSE NEUTRALITY ON INDEPENDENT COUNTRIES?

23 April 2022

Why is Russia in perpetual insecurity?

Putin is treated to madman or throwback to Soviet or czarist (caesar) times, but careful examination of the geopolitical, demographic, economic and social constraints show how he perfectly rationally interprets a country's - his country's - primary need for security.

As the West seeks an adequate response to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine, it is useful to understand what Vladimir Putin thinks he is doing, and why. Understanding Putin is not to apologize for him, but understanding is important in any negotiations.

Finland invaded. Sweden twice. France. Germany twice. The Turks through the Crimea.

Why Russia is so big?

It is because it is mainly flat open steppe and tundra, with no natural defences that would normally make for a border. It means one power - the Rus, the Mongols - can come to dominate this central asian plain and on to the central european plain. Russia is the heartland of Asia although its home territory, where 80% of its people live, is in Eastern Europe.

The world's weak spot is the east european border where the Russian land power meets the European (formerly British, now American) sea power. How can one power protect itself from the other?

From Russia's point of view, its natural defences - the Baltics, Suwalki Gap, Carpathian Mountains, Volgograd Gap - are also home to independent nations and so tantalisingly out of its reach, unless - for reasons of its own survival - it moves by force to take them over.

For example, taking Ukraine and the Transnistra (Moldova) would reduce the border it has, a great expense, to protect, from 2,000 km to 600.

Another example. Losing the Volgograd (Caucuses) would mean losing access to the Black Sea, Crimea and the Caspian.

Another example. When the Baltic trio got independence in 1999, Kaliningrad (Konigsberg) - a wedge-shaped piece of land along the Baltic Sea between Poland and Lithuania - was almost cut off, access is via Belarus and the Suwalki.

Do you think NATO parking its tanks on Russia's "front porch", its "near abroad", was a good idea if NATO's intentions were purely peaceful? What of promises to respect the neutrality of the 14 former Union republicks in 1991? What is your opinion?

Read More

THE STATE OF THE MARKETS THIS WEEK 17

23 April 2022

The market leader industries at the moment are food and farming, and the laggards biotech. From leaders to laggards, the whole market has been falling these last two days. It is very unusual for leading as well as lagging sectors to all fall at the same time.

This is bear territory, heading maybe for recession, who knows.....I don't! There are surely technical indicators, indicators that I don't understand and indicators that are anyway probably no longer valid because the economy is so weird.

Read More

LEAD UP TO THE WAR

23 April 2022 

https://youtu.be/zSZokTkBIfs

Baud points out in his new book "Putin, Master of the Game", that the Minsk accords were and then modified and re-signed, by Ukraine and the two self proclaimed republics, witnessed by Russia and by Fr and Germany, then registered and approved with the UN and its five permanent members.

So in 2015, there was a political solution. But instead we have war and his book explains how the West is responsible for the devt of this conflict. 

The Americans, he says, admit this and  Baud draws on mai ly American sources, none Russian, and he quotes from an interview in 2019 with Zelensky's advisor Olexei Restovitch who says that Ukraine would be admitted to NATO if Russia attacked. This was the deal. That interview is posted on Youtube.

Baud wrote the book because with his inside information, he could see that western observers had holes in their knowledge, were presenting the situation in black and white, and after the invasion simply did away with the Russian case altogether.

What happened?

Ukraine and the Ukranians are the victims. They are being sacrificed for objectives of a higher order. The EU did not do its job properly. Josef Borrell admits there isn't a military soln. And each point of disagreement should be the subject of political negotiation, not cause for military conflict.

Putin, claims Baud, only decided to invade in the preceeding weeks, from about late-Jan 2022. Zelensky's adviser in 2019 had also announced the conditions for resolution that would necessaily be ubacceptable to Russia and inevitably lead Putin to make war - it's also on Youtube. 

From mid-Feb, shelling from Kiev increased. 21 Feb, the separatist asked him for help defending themselves against Kiev, they and Putin then signed a Treaty of Support and Assistance, which the provinces used 22 Feb to seek military assistance from Russia, which then allowed Putin to invoke Art.51 of the UN Charter.

 Although, instead of providing arms, Russia decided to attack and entered Ukraine the 24 Feb, as we all know. Why no graduated response and straight for all-out war?

Putin explains that there came a moment when, faced with the aggression against the mainly Russian popn of the Donbas, to do nothing, or something, something big, or something small, would cost Russia the same price, same consequences for Russia, Russia would be lacerated with sanctions, regardless.

So he went in big. 

Putin knew that come what May, Russia would receive the heaviest sanctions. Baud argues that Russia was therefore left with no other choice.

In non-western circles, Putin passes for a dove. He has the backing of his people since his purpose is to protect the Russian diaspora in Ukraine.

Read More

THE SINKING OF THE MOSKVA

19 April 2022

is.gd/YHTz8v

                 From what I can gather there were 12 Russian navy ships in the Black Sea and now there are 10 and I would imagine that in the next couple of months there will be none.

It is hard to see how any of those 10 ships could leave the Black Sea and rejoin other Russian Navy fleets in the Baltic or Arctic ports, sailing past NAT lands; and similarly it is hard to see how those ships in other ports could come to support the 10 in the Black Sea or indeed to support the war.

Furthermore, once the Black Sea is emptied of Russian vessels, I'd imagine that NATO will sail up the Bosphorus which is Turkey and take over the Black Sea and presumably Sebastopol and Crimea.

But I also find it hard to imagine that happening without Russian resistance and this would surely be the situation for the use of tactical nuclear weapons.

Incidentally, today's tactical nuclear weapons carry a charge of two to three times those used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which were 10 kilotonnes. The West's reaction to the use of nuclear weapons is unknown - this is what is meant by dissuasion. And how would China react? or Ukraine? Or the Russian people? This sinking of the flagship is a new segment in the war, as is the attack by Ukraine on Russian villages over the border.

It is not that America's strategic military planners have not thought through all this: they have. It's just that there are so many scenarios to plan for and each scenario has an uncountable number of factors with incalculable weightings for each. The usual American trick is to throw all the cards up into the air see how they land and look at the opportunities that this presents. 

The Americans since the end of the Cold War can absolutely be relied upon to create the most monumental disasters the world has ever seen.             

Read More

POLITICAL DIRECTION OR CRISIS MANAGEMENT - WHAT FUTURE DEMOCRACY?

         17 April 2022

We are led by managers responding to crises with technical solutions that are costly and limit our freedom. Instead, what we need is what he had, politicians responding to the people with programs and policies.

For anyone following the French elections the campaigning and has been very very thorough and everyone all the candidates have had plenty of time to present their particular programs and the electorate has had a lot of time and still more to come to reach their conclusions and vote.

But it is interesting to note that the traditional moderate left and the right have faded out and all we have is extreme political views on the left and the right and then a crisis manager in the middle.

So the fundamental problem we have with democracy these days - and I mean since the the financial crisis let's say - is that the world has become a very complex place. This complexity has produced just a series of crisis and we roll from one criss to the next. If all you have is a series of crises, then all the electorate can do is pick rhe competent manager and then suffer his or her apolitical pragmatism.

The point is that democracy needs democrats, it needs potential leaders with a political philosophy and a vision of the good life, from which is derived their program and policies, and then competition at the hustings over different visions to actively create the future.

But all we have is reactive politics, crisis managers spending our money on short-term technical programs and we do not really have a choice about the quality of life and the culture that we want for us and our children. We have views about the ki d of world we want to live in, but only the elite, the oligarchs,are listened to; and the rest of humanity is flanneled and smothered in propaganda and given nonsense to believe such as The Woke or The Singularity.

Read More

THE HEARTLANDS (Sir Halford John Mackinder)

15 April 2022

John J Mearsheimer has been spot on for years.

https://youtu.be/XgiZXgYzI84

He has a theoretical framework understanding that he can lay over any IR security problem and explain it and offer solutions. But those that be (the people who1 govern us), they don't listen, not to him, and not to the people in this "democracy" of ours  We are there to vote them in and give our support to their madness and a sense of legitimacy.

You could argue they flannel us with distractions like covid or wokism. So there is geopolitics, propaganda, and democracy. Mearsheimer is right, but rejected by government and the people. We are dissenters, heretics, free-thinkers, driven by facts and reason, not short-term hubris.

There are many determinants of foreign policy. Geography is very deterministic.

The Rus were dealt a really poor hand. They are like The Hordes, a people of the plains, the Eurasian landmass is their land. The plain continues to the West onto the plain of central Europe, with - as I see it so maybe I've misunderstood - defensive natural barriers for Russia, but these are just beyond Russia's grasp.  Russia has 2,000 kilometers of long and vulnerable borderland that it must defend to stop any invasion from a well-funded and technologically sophisticated Western European sea-power - originally the British until Chrchill ceded to the American maritime power in 1945.

What are these natural defences? The Carpathian mountains - but alas, they're in Romania! Access to the Black Sea - it's in Ukraine! (or was). The Suwalki Gap which also gives access to the Baltic Sea - it's the other side of the Balkans (but Russia has Kaliningrad at the other end of the Gap - see a map)!

And so on - there are nine such gateways that enemies use to routinely invade Russia (identified in a Zeihan Youtube pres.), and Russia must have them all under lock and key, to feel secure. They've been invaded 50 times and more.

They'd need to plug the Transnistrie gap, a Russian separatist enclave in tiny Moldovia. Russia's also been invaded by the Swedes through the three Baltic countries so there are three NATO countries Putin would also need to invade (was he really planning this? Surely not.)  The French through Belarus. Twice by the Germans through the Polish gap. The Bessarabian gap in Romania favoured by the Turks. Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia complete the nontep.

Now, it has NATO at its door, bristling with weapons. The Soviet Union had all nine of these gaps in its land mass, but Russia today has only Crimea and Kaliningrad. It needs to move West and take the seven remaining, five in NATO lands.

So this is about geography, as it affects security, ie Geopolitics. It's about security and insecurity, existence and (ominously) whatever it takes to survive. And this is the starting point of Mearsheimer's position. He is an "offensive structural realist". (Russian demographics - second worse in the world after China - is another factor, for another time.)

Geography means Russia needs to expand westwards into central Europe and capture the nine gateways. So it's not about personal ambition or nationalism or imperialism or historic revenge, it is a purely rational strategy to ensure national survival, it is about Russia's understandable insecurity.

And how does America respond to this? America is insecure too, being at the top of the greasy pole - it wants to rub out any regional competitors ... but what to put in their place? America responds with a deaf ear and aggression, as usual. Surely America has learnt by now that confrontation is followed by failure. And as a consequence of confrontation, America is throwing Russia into the arms of China, the new rising world hegemon, or so they tell us. China, with maybe Pakistan and Iran and even Turkey too, why not in its axis. But America needs Russia, as does Europe, for different reasons.

Contrast Russia's geography and insecurity with America's. The Americans feel supremely secure and confident, with oceans West and East, and Canada and Mexico North and South, so they are unassailable. Russians, on the other hand, are tremendously insecure: their citadel has no walls and Ukraine - where NATO could site Weapons of Mass Destruction - is just 500 kms away ... a lobster without a shell, ready for the pot, an egg without a shell.

Surely, this is understood and something cleverer than war, a response based in cooperation, as prefered by France and Germany, can be the tool to peace? I feel like there should be a parable in the bible to help understanding of this, next to Noah's Ark...maybe that sounds daft, but this whole conflict does go all the way back to a story about The People of the Trees v. The People of the Seas  (though I can't find an internet reference).

In its orginal form, trees and seas, and the separating rimlands in between, is a neat geopolitical theory known as The Heartland Theory. One side or the other must take or defend the rimlands that separate them to win the heartland, giving that side victory and World Hegemon accolade. It is almost a board game. (Except the winner, America, is in the Americas, not the heartland of Asia, Africa, Eurasia.)

Sir Halford John Mackinder was a British geographer who wrote a paper in 1904 called "The Geographical Pivot of History." Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland.

Many many strategists have been drawn to this theory:
a) it gets to the crux of the ambitions and weaknesses of world super-powers and explains the hatred for Russia
b) the Theory was passed onto George Kennan and thence Truman, and goes deep into the second world war, WW1 and WW2 ; and American understanding of how to deal with Germany, Russia and China (heartland powers) ; and Japan and UK (rimland)
c) Mackinder was a Scottish MP.

"Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; who rules the Heartland commands the World-Island; who rules the World-Island commands the World."

Russia is the great Eurasian land-power. It is, by its geopolitical nature, eternally opposed to America, the liberal Atlantic sea-power. The worry is that Russia use its wealth of natural resources and manpower (intermi al decline now) to conquer the rimlands - which offer up 2,000 kilometers of central European near-abroad for Russia to plug and defend - to defeat the seapowers of Western Europe. America can only rest once Russia is contained and kept out of central Europe. Hence Truman's policy of containment.

By an identical logic, China - or the Eastern side of the heartland this time - is to be contained within its first island ring, of great strategic importance, consisting of Japan, S Korea, Taiwan and the Phillipines; and down as far as Indonesia, Singapore and Malaysia. So it is vitally important in the containment strategy for China to keep these countries "on program". And any American war alliance would extend to Australia, India, Russia (sic) and Turkey, not to mention Western Europe and UK.

Here is some reading on The Heartlands Theory.

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2019/01/halford-mackinder-father-geopolitics

https://youtu.be/MkrLUFAcjH0
(view from place 4'27")

The right-wing ideologue Aleksandr Dugin
https://youtu.be/TrafXfDL2CA

Peter Zeihan
https://youtu.be/rkuhWA9GdCo

Read More

A STUPID WAR

         1 min ago

This is just Stollenberg trying to plump up his remit, on the basis the Russians cannot be trusted.

The truth is that there is a fault line in Europe that runs from the Baltics to the Black Sea. This is the buffer zone that Russia needs having been invaded by the Swedes, the French and twice by the Germans.

Russia requested three things in its Note. It requested that NATO never admit Ukraine. It requested that Ukraine be neutral with no offensive weapons. And it requested that NATO withdraw from its near abroad: that buffer-zone from the Black Sea to the Baltics.

As far as I can see, this is a stupid war because NATO was never going to admit Ukraine in the first place and there are no weapons planted by America or NATO in Ukraine. As for the third demand, this was just a bargaining chip and Russia knows very well that NATO will never withdraw from all those countries shown on the Daily Telegraph map.

Russia has Belarus and a treaty should be agreed recognising the neutrality of at least Eastern Ukraine, which includes the Crimea, home to the Russian Navy at Sebastopol.

What has amazed everyone is how Germany has finally come off the fence. The great fear has always been that German capital and technology allied with Russian commodities and manpower would create a regional hegemon that America would have good reason to fear.

The worry is that under normal circumstances treaties are only signed after one side has won total victory over the other, but this would put Russia in a position where its very existence was threatened and that's where the nukes come out.

Read More

MASTERING THE ART OF MANIPULATION

8 April 2022

Robert Greene:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Greene_(American_author)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Laws_of_Human_Nature

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastery_(book)

Greene is a bit of a master manipulator machiavellian figure, except he tells all through a string of best sellers on POWER, SEDUCTION, WAR, STRATEGY, MASTERY and THE LAWS OF HUMAN NATURE.

His last book - the one on human nature - explains how we work, as a biological and human being. What drives us - me, you, others - and how to optimise our life and fight off bad people.

Worth adding that he is a Google brain and a best selling author. Many top people have turned to him to realise their ambitions.

How Greene can help

For example, perhaps you feel elites today are partly responsible for the serial  crises that afflict us, or at least, they take advantage of the opportunity to control, silence and railroad us.

They spend taxes receipts on their hobby horse subjects - QE, covid, woke, war.

They care for us in paternalistic ways that deny us agency in our lives, distract us from important questions of what direction we want to go in, with trivia and irrelevency.

We feel if not abandonned, then humoured, not consulted, powerless.

We are more and more impoverished, our assets slip through our fingers into their pockets.

What's helpful with Greene is that his $20 books let you get past the string of crisis that we are forced to submit to, see through the propaganda, the why of "why are they doing this to us?" and get a bit of perspective and tools to fight our corner.

Read More

EUROPEAN STRATEGIC COMPASS

8 April 2022

WIP Here is a negative review of a positive development

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2022/04/06/ultra-remainers-mobilising-prepare-ground-rejoining-eu/?li_source=LI&li_medium=liftigniter-rhr

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/european-union-unveils-new-strategy-become-global-power

"European Union Unveils New Strategy to Become a Global Power

by Soeren Kern • April 3, 2022 at 5:00 am

The goal is "strategic autonomy" — the ability for the EU to act independently of, and as a counterweight to, the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization — in matters of defense and security.

The key component of the Strategic Compass is the development of a so-called EU Rapid Deployment Capacity (RDC), a military force able to intervene in "non-permissive environments" anywhere in the world.

The RDC is to become fully operational by 2025 and commanded by an institution called the "EU Military Planning and Conduct Capability." (The term "capability" is a politically correct substitute for "headquarters," as in "military headquarters.")

The push for Europe to achieve strategic autonomy from the United States is being spearheaded by Macron, who, as part of his reelection campaign, apparently hopes to replace former German Chancellor Angela Merkel as the de facto leader of Europe.

The danger is that many of the pie-in-the-sky policy proposals in the Strategic Compass will divert and drain resources and finances from where they are actually needed: NATO.

A logical course of action would be for EU member states to honor past pledges to increase defense spending as part of their contribution to the transatlantic alliance. That, however, would fly in the face of the folie de grandeur — the delusions of grandeur — of European federalists who dream of transforming the EU into a geopolitical "great power." "

Gate stone Institute April 3rd

Read More

ROTATOR CUFF AND CHARACTER

7 April 2022

Sunday, day 0

Tomorrow is Friday, day 5 after the operation on my shoulder, which was last Sunday. That op. put me into a light trauma, a kind of post traumatic shock syndrome someone said to me. 

Monday, day 1

So Monday I was quite disoriented. Some friends noticed this and rallied round, asking me questions about the experience and getting me to talk; for those here in CM, offering practical help as the shock of a six hour operation was one thing, but in practical terms, I've only got one arm! Just try to imagine that!!

Tuesday, day 2

But by Tuesday, when I left hospital, two days after the six hour op., my high spirits had returned. How a person deals with adversity tells you a lot about the strength of character of the person.

Wednesday, day 3

Yesterday Wednesday was OK too - I went out for a walk round the park. And again today.

I have a set of exercises to do four or five times a day at my room, to restore flexibility, but not overdoing it as the tendon has been freshly sewn back.

Thursday, day 4

And today Thursday is more normal still. The person who takes care of my room on a Wednesday morning, while I go for Thai massage two hours, has called daily with food and helped me wash and dress. Good practise for when I'm truly old and decrepid, you might think!!!

Friday, day 5

Then tomorrow, Friday, is the third day after I left hospital and the dressing that protects the wound must be changed every three days. So back to hospital - probably in the morning.

I write all this nonsense as a kind of therapy, away to stay attached to reality.

How to measure the strength of character of a person. Observe them:

-How do they deal with adversity? Do you analyse and draw lessons for yourself, or do you point the finger of blame?

-Faced with a headache of a problem, do you say "oh, I can't do it", or do you persevere till they find the solution?

-Do you stick stubbornly to your decisions, right or wrong, or do you review and are you able to learn from experience?

-Can you accept new thinking without becoming emotional or feeling challenged?

- Are you able to work with others and not feel "ruffled"?

Character is the most important quality a person possesses. It is more important than intelligence, reputation or beauty. What do you think about "character"?

I looked up the etymology of the word "character". It seems to come from the word for an engraving instrument, to carve...carve, carve and carve again. Interesting, eh?!

Read More

PUTIN'S PLANS

1 April 2022

As to Russia's goals. 

Looking at a map, the trouble for Russia geographically, is that its western border opens smoothly onto the plains of Eastern Europe and there are those gateways that give access to invaders.

So a Russian leader would like to plug the gaps with neutral buffer states, all the way from from Estonia to Bulgaria included.

That's the dream. Perhaps from the Baltics, or Finland even, down to Ukraine and Moldovia. 

The minimum a Russian leader would want is what Biden referred to, in the first of his many gaffes, when he said it'd be ok a little bit in, can take the Donbas, that'd be OK. And I think everyone is agreed there's no giving back Crimea, that's gone for good.

(Reminds me of the bar girls here - "I only let them go little bit in and I don't let them stay for long".)

As to the means. 

Whatever the press says to give us foolhardy confidence, Putin's army is massive and the opposition is Ukrainian. Aswhere, outside Ukraine, he'd be up against NATO, which is the Anglo-Saxons - that's clearly now an impossible dream. 

So if I've got it right, he can realistically have Crimea and Eastern Ukraine / Basarabia: I think the two gateways in Moldovia are called that after the name of a former ruling family.

As to a strategy for getting that little lot. 

He knows by now that America will concede nothing, never, while they have a breath left in them. All empires fight to the death (except UK). 

Why not hold peace talks for tactical reasons, but meanwhile continue the groznyization, as this will accelerate the exodus of the local people. The Ukrainians hate Putin by now,  ethnic Russians or not. Remember, just before invading he moved out half a million ex-pat Russians back to Russia.

So he could flatten the country and empty it of people. That would definitely stop the war as there'd be noone left to fight, nor object to his occupation, no population to subdue, no problem holding what he's taken.

 ("I no give change. You can pay my taxi?".)

Then he could shunt back enough Russians, and maybe from Belarus too, to rebuild and replant.

Like that, he would have rubbed out the border on the map and little Russia would have rejoined its big brother.

As to risks.

So the only flies in the ointment are that this relies on the Russian army being strong enough to scare the shit out of the people and kill those who won't run away. 

Also, looking at the demographic table, Russia doesnt really have the youth to work the Russian economy, let alone shift millions to Ukraine. Hence Belarus, but it's probably got the same problem.

...maybe from China? It's demographics are worse.

Read More