THE TORY PARTY LEADERSHIP DEBATES SHOW THE WEST IS OUT OF IDEAS

30 July 2022

 Liz Truss's thinking seems to be restricted and contained in rivers of cliches and I can just imagine the 169,000 Conservative Party voters waving their walking sticks in her favour because smartypants Sunak comes across as too slick and self-interested an operator.

There's no one who can think "outside the box" and get their head round the real-world issues and offer a clear coherent compact vision and path for getting there. Noone to provide a solid long-term leadership. There's no one there! There's no purposeful leadership, there is not that fundamental and simple grasp of the situation, no handles or ideas or options, only cliches, mental knots.

And in this situation of mental exhaustion, all the leaders in the west can do is offer distraction politics, like the woke or the war and China, all these other non issues - they are there to keep the people's attention away from the reality facing the West, to stop people mounting 6th January type insurgency operations, taking to the streets to shout their frustration at the stupidity and pettiness of the leaderships. 

The great thing about these non-issues is that whether they are resolved or not, they make absolutely no difference to the future, it doesn't matter one way or another, just the mass of ordinary people are given this mental food to chew on and digest.

It's a McDonald's political-mental diet really.

The West's leadership is the US and UK, but of course the West includes Europe as well as Japan and so on.

France has a pretty good leadership and there are many options that are widely and freely debated, but of course everything that happens in France is totally ignored and pushed aside by America. Same in Germany. 

So all that is left is the  American military, the only answer is violence. As they say, when all you have is a hammer, you make every problem look the same - a nail.

Japan just exists, it rots, it survives, it does nothing and goes nowhere.

And so we are looking across a sea but are incapable of formulating a destination. We are looking at a sea, at the parting of the Red Sea and looking through the channel to the other side we see China advancing towards us, strong, united, determined, the people seemingly marching in step with their leadership.

It's unlikely that China has the strength to make it all the way across the channel to our side of the sea, but along the way there could be much death and mayhem,  confusion.

Read More

IS AMERICA STILL APPEASING CHINA OVER TAIWAN?

26 July 2022

Mercurius is right when he says (https://youtu.be/V9dS-eb7qmI) that all the warning lights are flashing in Europe (collapse of the Euro...see next post), in Ukraine likely to be the most disastrous of all American foreign policy Adventures), the American economy (( the impossible choice between deep and long recession and hyperinflation and destruction of the currency) and why on earth would America want to start a new conflagration with China?

From the history book, in 1971 ambassador George Bush proposed dual recognition of Taiwan and the PRC as a way to keep Taiwan in the UN but both sides rejected this. Even so, Nixon in his 1972 "week that changed the world" visit to China and meeting with Mao Zedong, kept up recognition of Taiwan. Nixon was a strong anti-communist and the purpose of that visit was to pull China away from Russia. Nixon was then swamped with Watergate.

It was Jimmy Carter - not known as America's strongest president - who in 1979 dropped Taiwan and recognised China as the sole representative of the Chinese people. ...without any good reason as what could China have done then, as now, other than grumble? 

The next American initiative was when Clinton welcomed Deng Xiaoping to America in 1979. Surprising to us today, the main or the most important outcome of that visit was Deng's warning to America (sic) that it, that Carter, should not appease Russia, or seek not to offend Russia, because this would just encourage Russia's world hegemonic ambitions.

This opened both countries to closer trade relations and led to get China's admission to the World Trade Organisation in September 2001 after 15 years of negotiations. The economic growth that came from China selling into America middle-class resulted in its position today as as the world's second largest economy by GDP.

But should we be seeing the subject of pelosi's visit to China as America calling China's bluff and how this flouts the first rule of diplomacy vis-a-vis to China - your bluff will always be called by the Chinese? Because maybe it's more about America ending its policy of "strategic ambiguity" (where relations between countries and Taiwan continue, though not officially; and an official future status of Taiwan is never discussed) and acting independently and on its own initiative. 

Given the rising level of threat, America doesnt want to be seen simply reacting to Beijing, as though Beijing determines American foreign policy.

Inaddition, Taiwan is important to America, not just for its advanced microchip factories, but as a longtime ally, with Japan and South Korea, in East Asia and thus to Americas containment policy towards China.

As remarked by John J Mearsheimer, America will not accept any competition or constraints or threats of any kind in any region of the world.. not even from the Solomon Islands.

So this trip is more about America's "splendid isolation", which could actually qualify as a peace role!!!

Yes, America sailing a frigate through the Taiwan Straits and now sending the house speaker to a supposedly neutral country is provocative. As is China threatening the security of the American speaker of the house. And obviously America is not going to let Chinese ultimatums decide its policy or Freedom of manoeuvre. 

Getting serious for a moment, can you imagine America's reaction if Pelosi's plane were shot down or even if it were prevented from entering Taiwanese airspace? So what can China do and given hostilities between America and china it would not be surprising if this president recognised Taiwan.

There are plenty of good reasons to co-operate with China, from climate change to trade, but these are all shared benefits.

I read that there is a 1933 Montevideo Convention which establishes the conditions for "statehood," : defined territory, stable population, functioning government, and some independence over foreign policy. Taiwan meets them all. Plus the popular vote in Taiwan is for independence and there is no one unless sent by the PRC in Taiwan supporting reunification. 

So what is holding America back from recognising Taiwan if it isn't Beijing opposition?

Read More

FORCING AMERICA TO SHARE ITS POWER

23 July 2022

https://youtu.be/57obnJf_Tik

With covid it was a common enemy with brexit the vulnerabilities were more mixed but now with energy the vulnerabilities are very varied.

America is accountable for Europe's security and Russia is more or less accountable for Europe's energy. Europe is not independant and to change either of those is a 20-year plan so it is open to political manipulation.

Europe complains that Russia is blackmailing it, that Russia is dividing it, that Russia controls the taps to manage the price and sow dissent, that this is part of Russia's hybrid war, that this is a test of Winter nerves.

The trails all lead back to Washington. If you believe America maintains its monopoly of power through violence, then means must be found - eg the UN or expanding BRICS - to force America to accept this is a mulipolar world and it must cooperate and share its power.

Read More

NEW PM FOR UK

21 July 2022

I think everyone would like this American order because it keeps the shipping lanes open, sends capital to the most efficient parts of the world economy, and ensures everyone prospers through fair trade ... at least that was the founding rhetoric.

But the reality is that America has always been high on testosterone and and the government sees its only role as protecting and advancing American industry and its only method is Force.

But these sanctions have shown us that the world outside of Europe and America no longer listens or obeys us. Everyone wants an order with its rules and institutions and rule keeper, but no one wants to be dominated or pushed aside.

So we have to recognise that if we want to be respected and followed, this method based on Force has failed and it's because we no longer have a monopoly of power.

So to keep our leadership and our room for manoeuvre, we must operate by persuasion, by example and by conviction, not by imposition.

America and the UK have a very black and white view, it's got to be total victory, and they do not want or feel they need to talk to anyone, just load in the arms, training and money, and let me little ukrainians get on with the fighting. So the question is, how do you change this leadership attitude from conflict to cooperation and consensus? In America first of all.

We're busy voting in Liz Truss as our new leader - a neocon. I would judge her purely on her foreign policy as if things go wrong - as they are doing - there will be no domestic policy decided by a UK government.

Read More

SANCTIONS - UKRAINE

21 July 2022

<<If sanctions worked, it would be a victory over Russian boots ("une victoire à la Pyrrhus", cruel joke.)>>

We enter the sixth month of the war. Russia has taken a quarter of Ukraine and its most valuable industrial part and continues to advance militarily for the time being at least. The West has imposed the toughest sanctions imaginable, but Russia has escaped with ease, while the West appears trapped and discredited, and to have shot itself in the foot, the head and the stomach.

Sanctions are in place of war. It is war by economic means. The West does not approve of this "unprovoked invasion", but isn't willing to fight a nuclear power. The West (America and Europe, with popular - if "manufactured" support, despite great hardship) provides Ukraine with arms, training and money, but has sent in the locals to fight a superpower.

But are sanctions an effective alternative to war? What is their purpose? What does the historic record of sanctions teach us? Who pays the price? Are there any other ways of getting international law and human rights respected?

Action in the UN is blocked by the Russian veto, so war cannot be approved as it was in the case of Libya.

The aim of sanctions is to modify the behaviour of a regime. However, in this case the Russian people appear to strongly support their leadership and there is no Gorbachev figure around to ease a transition. Gorbachev dropped Russia's ally Iraq to permit the 1991 Iraq war.

Cuba, Venezuela. Sanctions did not top all the Communist leadership and despite the harshest of blocades, Fidel Castro died in his bed.

Iraq. From 1991 the date of the first invasion to 2003 sanctions caused the deaths of half a million Iraqis but it took an invasion by the West to topple Saddam Hussein.

Syria. The west plus the Arab League imposed sanctions after a failed sunny uprising in 2011 but the Shia are still running the country, with assistance from Russia and Iran.

Iran. Iran was the most sanctioned country in the world before Russia invaded Ukraine. 

-Sanctions were first imposed in 1979 after revolutionary students stormed the US embassy and were lifted in 1981 when the hostages were released. 

-Sanctions were reimposed in 1987 after years of Iranian harassment of Gulf shipping and other alleged acts of terrorism. 

-The sanctions were expanded in 1995 

-and a third set were imposed in 2006 when Iran refused a UN resolution to stop uranium enrichment. 

-The sanctions started in the petrochemical industry, then expanded to banking and insurance, then shipping and then the web where Iran was denied DNS access. 

-Then in 2015, there was the JCPA deal, that was cancelled by Trump in 2018 and sanctions were reimposed. 

-In February 2020, Iran was placed on the FATF Blacklist.

All this to say that the Iranian theocracy is still going strong and has just held a meeting in Tehran with Turkish and Russian leaders, presumably on the sanctions and how to take advantage of them.

South Africa. Here the sanctions worked a white minority government handed over power to a representative government in the face of universal condemnation of apartheid. This cases not like those above because the world United against an apartheid regime.

Israel. An apartheid regime with a vision of hegemony from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean, that has escaped sanctions due to a powerful Jewish-US lobby and a history of pogroms and the Holocaust.

So looking at the overall history of sanctions and their effectiveness, we could ask why, if sanctions have not been effective against small and medium-sized countries, then how could we expect a large and economically and militarily important country like Russia, led by shrewd and experienced president, to fold? Did the West really think this through? Did the reference frame include Brexit, Covid, the debt crisis and rising inflation, the Middle East, Taiwan, de-globalisation. Were the lessons of previous interventions really learnt? Was this belligerent and conflictual attitude to problem-solving ever re-evaluated?

Because what sanctions appear to have achieved is to have weakened and split the world economy and the world powers. Sanctions are really a story of a dominating power imposing its will on the dominated or slave or student power - something that worked well for a couple of hundred years. But now, the third world or the South doesn't like or appreciate this and do not approve of the Western narrative, seeing it as colonial and disrespectful, and they are now in a position to express themselves.

Perhaps the reason why Europe and America impose sanctions on Russia is that, well,  what else could we do? But the problem is this has exposed our impotence and isolation. Sanctions have failed to modify Putin's behaviour on the country he has found ways around Western sanctions and is building relationships, that may or may not endure, with the South. This at a time when China can be expected in this decade to make its first moves towards Taiwan.

So it seems that the mistake was that the sanctions were designed in America, approved in Europe and imposed on the South. We should not be asking the South to sign at the bottom of the page on the right, but we should be discussing and persuading and negotiating.

So this article should not be taken as an anti Western rant. Not at all. But it does question the attitude and the methods. It follows the principles of the West, it wants the West to be respected and followed, but this article recognises that this method employed of imposing rules has failed because we in the West no longer have a monopoly of power so to keep our leadership and our room for manoeuvre we must operate by persuasion by example and by conviction, not by imposition.

Read More

SANCTIONS - SOUTH AFRICA

21 July 2022

These sanctions worked. A white minority government handed power to a forming black government as a result of a universal condemnation of apartheid.

 In 1968, the then SA president Vorster banned a UK cricket tour because the team contained a black player. Sanctions started in the sports industry, in particular cricket and rugby, mutch loved by all South Africans.

 And later, the ban extended to music with for example a concert by Elton John transferred to neighbouring Botswana.

 In 1985, foreign banks called in their loans.

 In 1976, civil unrest began amongst children in Soweto, which eventually made the country ungovernable.

 The collapse of communism in 1991 and changing world politics as the world became more inclusive following globalisation also played into the the worldwide anti-apartheid movement and global support for human rights. There was a popular world wide boycott of goods from South Africa. All this especially at a time when in the mid 1980s CND were marching through the streets of London, the conial power. 

 The US didn't have the same sporting and commercial links, but protests started there in churches and eventually forced big business to disinvest and the US government to impose financial sanctions.

 So we see that following decolonisation there was a worldwide revulsion at apartheid and this coupled with boycotts and sanctions lead to the transfer of power to a black majority government.

We could at the same time ask why sanctions were not applied against Israel another apartheid regime. And the answer lies in the very active support from the essentially American Jewish lobby and the history of pogroms and the Holocaust. 

So in this case, we might expect to see a flourishing, if contested, Zionist regime from the Jordan river to the Mediterranean.

Read More

ENERGY WILL BE RATIONED

The EU has a plan to reduce energy consumption by 15% by next March.

It's a clever and detailed plan that breaks down your permitted consumption levels by EU state, first public sector must make economies, then commercial and finally individuals.

It's a proposal from the commission and needs to be approved. 

I just wonder how they will decide the split between states, industry and private individuals; and I wonder how they (the EU) will ensure compliance (by states with their plans). Do people get (digital) ration books? Is it done with the smart meters?

So I guess that's hundreds of new processes and hundreds of thousands of new staff to run all this for the EU bureaucracy. Love it.

What about the effect - on top of recent vertiginous price rises and caps- on GDP, on employment and share prices?

Will Germany shut down its automobile production lines? The principal Industries using up energy are automobile and chemicals, the biggest consumers of Russian gas. These industries will suffer the most and in particular ... the manufacture of fertiliser - oh rich irony! No food.

The Europeans can join the starving billions of the South.  And no doubt there will also be new covid-style handouts for industry and the public to keep them off the streets.... I mean there's the price caps on energy and petrol and the subsidies that they require; and now there'll be more subsidies to keep industry open even if the wheels aren't turning, and for people who lose their jobs. And surely this subsidies should be means-tested, or perhaps we have given up caring about the effects on future generations, to further plump up the state bureaucracy. Or we could organise auction sales of gas, at least for industry.

Just gets dumber and dumber with more and more hot air.

How will the public take price rises and now rationing? I guess in France the gilets jaunes are ok as they keep themselves warm on their roundabouts with braziers of foraged wood. But yes, how will we deal with heat waves and winter freeze-overs? We need an energy lockdown, obviously. And they are recommending that we turn offer our Wi-Fi at night, but what about turning off the data centres as there's so much duplicated and obsolete data?

What started as a western boycott, is now Russia turning off the taps. And just as we go into the final death spiral of debt along comes LNG at four times the price, I gather, of piped gas....More top ironies.

And we're told it was Putin who miscalculated!*

*PS Putin started cutting back delivery of gas over a year ago, it seems, to stop Germany from topping up its reserves. E'ez a clever bugger!!

Read More

A THREE FRONT WAR

AMERICA'S GOALS IN ITS WAR WITH RUSSIA

 Interesting view from Russel Brand

https://youtu.be/uAnpvte1l10

I'd imagine that many people do not like RB's manner. He's a bit shouty, a ranter.

While his style is popular tabloid, he's making the profound points of all political analyst able to think freely about "America's war with Russia". Brand is someone not misled by propaganda or emotion, it's the facts that count. He is also by nature a contrarian and a self-publicist.

Three complementary points to his video:

1. Yanukovych (2005 - 22 Feb 2014) - popular opposition because he backed away from EU membership, supposedly...

2. He makes a moral point: Ukrainian people should not be used as cannon fodder. That's true, but irrelevent to foreign policy. Europe and RoW objects to America ripping up the world as we want to live here. (The American Order needs profound reform, which the UN or a sovereign Europe can propose as basis for ending this war. But Europe is helpless, because 100% dependent.)

3. He could make reference to New Russia - the Donbas was conceived by Catherine II and designed & built by Potemkine.

THE FINAL COUNTDOWN

I am curious to know why zelenski was making all those return trips to Israel and what is the purpose of biden's visit this week to the Middle East.

I think the agreement this week that Israel be allowed to over fly Arabia was not made for commercial reasons, but it was to allow Israel to bomb Iran.

This would prevent an opportune moment for China to take to Taiwan.

And that we will open a three-front war that is likely to crack the planet open like a soft-boiled egg. 

Read More

LANGUAGE LEARNING

Naom Chomsky was first a linguist and then a political activist. His idea is that grammar is a set of Rules that given an input of all known words in a language can produce the infinite array of all possible grammatically correct sentences visa rules for grammar but there are also rules for words for accent.

Now we have computers that are so powerful we can build neural networks and these are are tools that allow for artificial intelligence and learning.

Below, is a video that explores this idea for for adults learning a second language

What are your thoughts?

https://youtu.be/qyjorhutyr4

Read More

JOURNALISM AS PROPAGANDA

The journalist today have been eaten up by the blob and become the soft power that sells America. The Intelligence agencies and the military prepare their daily briefings, which they send to the news channels, who then edit and publish them

Journalism used to be objective, neutral and balanced, but today it is subjective and political. 

Instead of being left to make up our minds, today we have the views of the elite that support their interest, repeatedly imposed on us. The elite manipulates and exploits the public at large, and serves itself from the wealth of future generations.

As you've probably guessed I don't really have a lot of faith in the Anglo-Saxon news channels. They seem extreme in their vehement support of causes that are wrong. They misrepresent and mislead their publics. US and UK governments, serving big business, cancel their opponents.

Whereas if you read the stuff from Deutsche World or from some of the French channels, they seem a lot more balanced, both sides are usually given fair and thorough hearings. Democracy seems to work better.

Read More

OUR LEADERS HAVE ABANDONNED US

10 July 2022

 https://rumble.com/v1bjo2d-biden-reads-teleprompter-instruction.html

Our leaders have abandonned us.

Biden reads through the stage directions as well. He has no thoughts of his own. Kamala Harris is as vacuous, she is hairdresser material and gives hairdresser interviews.

You're left with a feeling of unreality, it's phony, our leaders have abandoned us for publicity and self-display on the international stage, they are out of ideas, they have no plans, the whole setup is Potemkin village.

Viewers of this Biden interview are left feeling weightless, with scores of missiles rushing past them, to thud into old familiar landmarks. The past is being wiped, rewritten, the headlines do not tell us the truth, the narratives are see-through propaganda, we are told by Biden and others that we are the white supremacist oppressors.

Disconcerting. End of the "unipolar moment", alas. Leaders on their way out everywhere across the Western world. Most of the world is privately wishing Russia wins, get rid of these arrogant American bullies, can't reform the USA, can't reform the EU, NATO is headquartered in Arlington County, Virginia, not Brussels. 

Reform of these and other institutions created after the last World War is impossible, just we wait for their collapse....but then a new Order will emerge and this is not going to be favourable to us and our interests.

Read More

AND THE MORAL OF THIS STORY IS ...

9 July 2022

 America wants to weaken Russia? Why?

If you look at 10,000 years of recorded history, you might think it's all familiar and predictable.

It's one power seeking to take the territory of its neighbour, subjugate its people and put its resources to work, to build its own empire.

What might have started as the Monroe doctrine and a policy of containment is looking more and more like America wanting to steal the resources of Russia in order to solve it Order-threatening debt problem.

RISK OFF

If you always think the worst of your neighbour and protect yourself against this risk, then you might miss out on a few opportunities, but you will reduce the chances of some very bad surprises.

Manage the risks before go-getting the objectives. 

Preserve what you've got before going for more.

Read More

THE FUTURE OF THE WEST

9 July 2022

 Here, we will look at this American war in Ukraine from three perspectives: military, economic (sanctions) and diplomatic.

 So militarily, the Russians are advancing quite rapidly, albeit metre by metre rather than street by street, and now need a bit of time to re-group and to integrate the captured territory into Russian administrative systems. 

Ukraine is holding firm, waiting for Western arms; and longer-term for the effects of sanctions on the Russian economy and on Russia's being deprived of western technology. "We'll be back", they say, but this does not recognise Russian - human! - ingenuity.

Russia has won the war in the war in the Donbass, but can it hold it?

The sanctions seem to be working against the interests of the West. 

We know that Russia is a land full of resources on which the West depends, with a weak and vulnerable western frontier. But here is one possibly lesser-known example of the failure of the sanctions regime to grip the support of the world. 

India is buying Russian oil, I gather, at discounted prices and selling it on to the West. India's military is supplied by Russia. India stands geographically on the lookout to Middle East oil routes. India has not played in the trading setup provided by America and won't participate in the sanctions. 

Sanctions are shooting the west in the foot and rivals to the American trading reserve currency and to inter-bank transfer systems are being set up to shoot the west in the other foot.

The price the public is paying to support Ukraine is high and resistance is growing.

Diplomatically three quarters+ of the world is either against or at least does not support the West, meaning the effects of NATO containment policy, meaning do not support the USA & "Global Britain", with Europe being nothing more than an American protectorate. 

And now Macron publishing that confidential telephone call with Putin is final evidence that France can no longer hold its Gaullist internationalist position.

Although the West may hope for Russian support in any final conflagration with China, isn't the reality on the ground that Russia and China are increasingly cooperating on military, economic and diplomatic matters and the American order on which we depend is in peril?

CONCLUSION

The public need access to objective, neutral and balanced reporting, in order to assess what is an American war in Ukraine, from the military, economic and diplomatic positions.

If we then put these assessments into a longer-term perspective on the financial crisis, brexit, the pandemic, the Woke (Marxist) challenge and civil unrest, the Chinese "threat" ... where does that leave the future of the West?

Uncertain? Hanging on a thread? There is a lot of (stifled) dissatisfaction with the current leaderships, and eventually, as we know, history works to the benefit of the people. Was it the accumulation of scandals that forced Boris out or was it economic failure and a search for new goals, strategies and especially new winning plans?

Read More

CURRENT ACCOUNT DEFICIT SHOCKER

4 July 2022

LEVELLING UP SHOULD INCLUDE THE SOUTH-EAST

Ref the UK government's decision to take £100 million from the devolved budgets of Scotland and Wales for military aid to the American war in Ukraine.

First of all, we will make sure that we understand what the news article is talking about. Then we will define "devolution" and we will consider whether this re-purposing by the UK government of assistance it had previously given is morally ok or not. Then ask what the the subordinate governments can do about it if anything and what Westminster government could or should have done instead.

So here's the news article:

Looks like Boris' Westminster govt has simply reallocated the money previously given to the two devolved governments of Scotland and Wales, without even informing them or seeking their opinion.

This is an example of the difference between "consult" and "inform", or the difference between asking permission before the fact and apologising after for what you've done.

Devolution - "Delegation of authority or duties to a subordinate or substitute." - is implemented through block grants or budgets. But it seems that the Westminster govt can "repurpose" ie take with the left hand what it has given with the right.

I'd imagine that the warmongering - the West provoking Russia into war in Ukraine - comes out of Westminster exclusively, and Scotland and Wales are not much interested in fighting foreign wars, so this money - purposed originally for levelling up for "development" of local economies and social infrastructure - if it had to go to Ukraine, could have gone to Ukraine for humanitarian purposes, but is unlikely to get support from the Scottish and Welsh peoples if it's for military purposes. 

What is the sentiment in Scotland and Wales towards this war? What do the polls tell us?

Overall it looks like an outrageous abuse of devolution and a disrespect of the wishes of the local representatives of the people, a high-handed way to treat these two countries as "client states".

The devolved governments are not in much of a position to fight back as they both take more from the UK deal than they put in... but then again the whole of the UK is in hock to its foreign lenders and the printing presses, as we saw yesterday the 22Q1 current account deficit is an astonishing 8.3% of GDP, the highest it's ever been and for comparison purposes India's in 2021 was 1.5%.

Isn't really the best idea to include the southeast itself in "levelling up"?! The UK has plenty of problems but as to economic, it comes down to poor productivity and lack of competitivity....another devaluation anyone?

I wouldn't have thought it was worth it politically, for the sake of 100 million quid, to alienate Scotland and Wales, with already a breakup of the kingdom on the cards. Boris have rolled the worn out, tired old, counterfeiting printing presses again. 

Read More