deceiving "we — the people" — with "democracy and freedom".......

Ever since 25 July 1945, the U.S. Government has had, as its #1 objective, to take control ultimately over all other countries (“hegemony”); and its main targets to conquer have been the world’s largest country, which is Russia, and then the world’s most populous country, which has been China. In order to do this, the U.S. regime needed to deceive their public to believe that ‘freedom and democracy’ were what they spread around the world by their coups and invasions, ...

How the U.S. Government & Its Colonies Deceive Their Public

BY Eric Zuesse

... but most of their successful “regime-changes” actually replaced popularly elected democratic Governments, such as Mossadegh in Iran, Arbenz in Guatemala, and Allende in Chile, by imposing there instead decades-long murderous military dictatorships such as The Shah in Iran, a long succession of brutal juntas in Guatemala, and the fascist (Milton Friedman acolyte and propagandist for ‘freedom’) Pinochet in Chile. The deceits by the U.S. regime and its colonies, have enabled the U.S. regime to impoverish, torture, and murder, millions of people throughout the world, extracting wealth from the conquered countries for America’s billionaires, all the while pretending to be “a force for good in the world.”

I have previously documented how the U.S. regime grabbed Ukraine in a brutal February 2014 coup (pumped by them as being instead a ‘democratic revolution’) that it had been planning ever since June of 2011, and promptly turned that previously democratically led internationally neutralist country into a U.S.-imposed rabidly anti-Russian stooge-regime which quickly began an ethnic-cleansing campaign to get rid of the people who had voted for the neutralist Ukrainian President that the U.S. regime had replaced. This subjugation of Ukraine to the U.S. empire led ultimately to Russia’s 24 February 2022 (as the U.S. regime and its colonies call it) ‘unprovoked’ invasion of Ukraine; and, now, after over $400 billion in U.S.-and-‘allied’ taxpayer-purchased armaments and other assistance to the U.S.-imposed Ukrainian regime so as to defeat Russia with Ukrainian troops and U.S.-and-‘allied’ weapons and satellite intelligence, this imperialistic-expansion operation by the U.S. regime is finally going down to defeat just like its previous ones in Vietnam and Afghanistan did; and, so, the story here has been well continued by Glenn Diesen at RT News on November 3rd, right up till the present. His account describes the change in the U.S.-and-allied liars’ “narrative” about the war in Ukraine, so as to ease their fools into gradual acceptance of the by-now inevitable defeat in Ukraine of the U.S. empire, by Russia, in the battlefields of Ukraine, with Ukrainian troops and U.S.-and-allied armaments and training; and so Diesen’s account of this change-of-‘narrative” is presented below [along with my added comments to it, in brackets]:

“Is the West finally ready to admit defeat in Ukraine? The media is changing the narrative as the proxy war is running out of steam”

By Glenn Diesen, 3 November 2024

The Economist magazine reports this week that “Russia is slicing through Ukrainian defenses” and Ukraine is subsequently “struggling to survive.”Across the Western media, the public is being prepared for defeat and painful concessions in future negotiations. Journalists are changing the narrative as reality can no longer be ignored. Moscow’s coming success has been obvious since at least the summer of 2023, yet this was ignored, to keep the proxy war [between America and Russia] going.

We are witnessing an impressive demonstration of narrative control: For more than two years, the political-media elites [agents of U.S.-and-allied billionaires] have been chanting ‘Ukraine is winning’ and denounced any dissent to their narrative as [being] ‘Kremlin talking points’ that aim to reduce support for the war. What was ‘Russian propaganda’ yesterday is now suddenly the consensus of the collective elites. Critical self-reflection is as absent as it was after the Russiagate reporting, following the 2016 US election.

Similar narrative control was displayed when the media reassured the public for two decades that the US was in control of Afghanistan, before it fled in a great rush with dramatic images of people falling off an airplane [it happened not only in Afghanistan but also in the regime’s rushed evacuation from Vietnam, both planes and helicopters losing people].

Journalists deceived the public over the past while by presenting the stagnant front lines as evidence that Russia was not gaining an edge. However, in a war of attrition, the direction of the war is measured by attrition rates – the losses on each side. Territorial control comes after the adversary has been exhausted as territorial expansion is very costly in such high-intensity warfare with powerful defensive lines. The attrition rates have throughout the war been extremely unfavorable to Ukraine, and they keep getting worse [and U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media lied to say that Russia’s attrition-rates were higher than Ukraine’s]. The current collapse of Kiev’s front lines was very predictable as its manpower and weaponry have been exhausted.

Why has the former narrative expired? The public could be misled by fake attrition rates, yet it is not possible to cover up territorial changes after the eventual breaking point. Furthermore, the proxy war was beneficial to NATO [and to U.S.-and-allied armaments-manufacturers] when the Russians and Ukrainians were bleeding each other without any significant territorial changes. Now that the Ukrainians are exhausted and are beginning to lose strategic territory, it is no longer in the interests of the US-led bloc to continue the war.

Narrative control: Weaponizing empathy

Back in 2022, the political-media elites [billionaires-controlled ‘news’-media] weaponized empathy to get public support for war and disdain for diplomacy [for ending this extremely profitable violence]. The Western public was convinced to support the proxy war against Russia by endless messaging about the suffering of Ukrainians and the injustice of their loss of sovereignty [as-if Ukraine hadn’t already lost its sovereignty when Obama’s coup grabbed Ukraine in February 2014].

Those who disagreed with NATO’s mantra that ‘weapons are the way to peace’ and instead suggested negotiations, were quickly dismissed as puppets of the Kremlin who did not care about Ukrainians. Support for continued fighting in a war that cannot be won has been the only acceptable expression of empathy.

For the postmodernists seeking to socially construct their own reality, great power rivalry is largely a battle of narratives. The weaponization of empathy enabled the military narrative to become impervious to criticism. War was virtuous and diplomacy treasonous as Ukraine was allegedly fighting Russia’s “unprovoked” war with the objective to subjugate the entire country. A strong moral framing convinced people to deceive and self-censor in support of this noble cause.

Even criticism of how Ukrainian civilians were dragged into cars by their government and sent to their deaths on the front lines was portrayed as supporting ‘Kremlin talking points’, as it undermined the NATO war narrative.

Reporting on high Ukrainian casualty rates threatened to undermine support for the fighting. Reporting on the failure of sanctions threatened to reduce public support for the sanctions. Reporting on the likely US [blame for the] destruction of Nord Stream threatened to create divisions within NATO. Reporting on the US and UK sabotage of the Minsk agreements and the Istanbul negotiations threatened the narrative of the West merely attempting to ‘help’ Ukraine. The public was offered the binary option of adhering either to the pro-Ukraine/NATO narrative or the pro-Russia narrative. Anyone challenging it with inconvenient facts [that presented Russia as being right and America as being wrong in the war in Ukraine] could thus be accused of supporting Moscow’s objectives. Pointing out that Russia was winning was uncritically interpreted as taking its side [as-if, in a war, the side that wins is necessarily the better side in a moral sense, and not ONLY in a military sense].

There are ample facts and statements that demonstrate NATO has been fighting to the last Ukrainian to weaken a strategic rival. Yet, the strict narrative control entails that such evidence has not been permitted to be discussed.

The objectives of a proxy war: Bleeding the adversary

The strict demand for loyalty to the narrative hides the fact that US foreign policy is about restoring global primacy and not an altruistic commitment to liberal democratic values. The US considers Ukraine to be an important instrument to weaken Russia as a strategic rival.

The RAND Corporation, a think tank funded by the US government and renowned for its close ties with the intelligence community, published a report in 2019 on how the US could bleed Russia by pulling it further into Ukraine. RAND proposed that the US could send more military equipment to Kiev and threaten NATO expansion to provoke Moscow to increase its involvement in Ukraine:

“Providing more US military equipment and advice could lead Russia to increase its direct involvement in the conflict and the price it pays for it… While NATO’s requirement for unanimity makes it unlikely that Ukraine could gain membership in the foreseeable future, Washington pushing this possibility could boost Ukrainian resolve while leading Russia to redouble its efforts to forestall such a development.”

However, the same RAND report recognized that the strategy of bleeding Russia had to be carefully “calibrated,” as a full-scale war could result in Russia acquiring strategic territories, which is not in the interest of the US. After Russia launched its military operation in February 2022, the strategy was similarly to keep the war going as long as there were not significant territorial changes.

In March 2022, Leon Panetta (former White House chief of staff, secretary of defense, and CIA director) acknowledged: “We are engaged in a conflict here, it’s a proxy war with Russia, whether we say so or not… The way you get leverage is by, frankly, going in and killing Russians.” Even Zelensky recognized in March 2022 that some Western states wanted to use Ukraine as a proxy: “There are those in the West who don’t mind a long war because it would mean exhausting Russia, even if this means the demise of Ukraine and comes at the cost of Ukrainian lives.”

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin outlined the objectives in the Ukraine proxy war to as weakening its strategic adversary:

“We want to see Russia weakened to the degree that it can’t do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine… So it [Russia] has already lost a lot of military capability. And a lot of its troops, quite frankly. And we want to see them not have the capability to very quickly reproduce that capability.”

There have also been indications of regime change as a wider goal of the war. Sources in the US and UK governments confirmed in March 2022 that the objective was for “the conflict to be extended and thereby bleed Putin,” as “the only end game now is the end of Putin regime.” US President Joe Biden suggested that regime change was necessary in Russia: “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.” However, the White House later walked back these dangerous remarks.

A spokesperson for then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson also made an explicit reference to regime change by arguing, “the measures we’re introducing, that large parts of the world are introducing, are to bring down the Putin regime.” James Heappey, the UK minister for the armed forces, similarly wrote in the Daily Telegraph:

“His failure must be complete; Ukrainian sovereignty must be restored, and the Russian people empowered to see how little he cares for them. In showing them that, Putin’s days as President will surely be numbered and so too will those of the kleptocratic elite that surround him. He’ll lose power and he won’t get to choose his successor.”

Fighting to the last Ukrainian

Chas Freeman, the former US assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs and director for Chinese affairs at the State Department, has criticized Washington’s decision to ‘fight to the last Ukrainian’.

Meanwhile, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham outlined the favorable arrangements the US had established with Ukraine: “I like the structural path we’re on here. As long as we help Ukraine with the weapons they need and the economic support, they will fight to the last person.” The Republican Senate leader, Mitch McConnell, cautioned against conflating idealism the hard reality of US objectives in the proxy war:

“President Zelensky is an inspiring leader. But the most basic reasons for continuing to help Ukraine degrade and defeat the Russian invaders are cold, hard, practical American interests. Helping equip our friends in Eastern Europe to win this war is also a direct investment in reducing Vladimir Putin’s future capabilities to menace America, threaten our allies, and contest our core interests… Finally, we all know that Ukraine’s fight to retake its territory is neither the beginning nor end of the West’s broader strategic competition with Putin’s Russia.”

Senator Mitt Romney argued that arming Ukraine was “diminishing and devastating the Russian military for a very small amount of money… a weakened Russia is a good thing,” and it comes at a relatively low cost as “we’re losing no lives in Ukraine.” Senator Richard Blumenthal similarly asserted: “we’re getting our money’s worth on our Ukraine investment”because “for less than 3 percent of our nation’s military budget, we’ve enabled Ukraine to degrade Russia’s military strength by half… All without a single American service woman or man injured or lost.” Congressman Dan Crenshaw agrees that “investing in the destruction of our adversary’s military, without losing a single American troop, strikes me as a good idea.”

Retired US General Keith Kellogg similarly argued in March 2023 that “if you can defeat a strategic adversary not using any US troops, you are at the acme of professionalism.” Kellogg further explained that using Ukrainians to fight Russia “takes a strategic adversary off the table” and thus enables the US to focus on its “primary adversary which is China.”Former NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also argued that defeating Russia and using Ukraine as a bulwark against Russia “will make it easier” for the US “to focus also on China… if Ukraine wins, then you will have the second biggest army in Europe, the Ukrainian army, battle-hardened, on our side, and we’ll have a weakened Russian army, and we have also now Europe really stepping up for defense spending.”

In search of a new narrative

A new victory narrative is required as a NATO-backed Ukraine cannot realistically defeat Russia on the battlefield. The most obvious is to claim that Russia has failed in its objective to annex all of Ukraine to help recreate the Soviet Union and thereafter conquer Europe. This spoofery would enable NATO to claim victory. After Ukraine’s disastrous counteroffensive in summer 2023, it was flagged by David Ignatius in the Washington Post, where he argued that the measurement of success is the weakening of Russia:

“Meanwhile, for the United States and its NATO allies, these 18 months of war have been a strategic windfall, at relatively low cost (other than for the Ukrainians). The West’s most reckless antagonist has been rocked. NATO has grown much stronger with the additions of Sweden and Finland. Germany has weaned itself from dependence on Russian energy and, in many ways, rediscovered its sense of values. NATO squabbles make headlines, but overall, this has been a triumphal summer for the alliance.”

Sean Bell, a former Royal Air Force air vice marshal and Ministry of Defense staffer, argued in September 2023 that the war had significantly degraded the Russian military to the point it “no longer poses a credible threat to Europe.” Bell therefore concluded that “the Western objective of this conflict has been achieved” and “The harsh reality is that Ukraine’s objectives are no longer aligned with their backers.”

The Ukrainian proxy has been exhausted, which ends the proxy war unless NATO is prepared to go to war against Russia. As NATO is preparing to cut its losses, a new narrative is required. Soon it will be permitted to call for negotiations as a display of empathy for Ukrainians [thus completing its deceit of their own supporters].

——

PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.). I am not asking for money, but I am asking my readers to spread my articles far and wide, because I specialize in documenting what the Deep State is constantly hiding. This is, in fact, today’s samizdat.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.

https://theduran.com/how-the-u-s-government-its-colonies-deceive-their-public/

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without americaca…”

Gus Leonisky

By Gus Leonisky at 6 Nov 2024 - 7:46am
Gus Leonisky's blog
Login or register to post comments

fake dangerous game...

Sad West, what have you come to!…

BY José GOULÃO

We hear and read that the current episode of the North American presidential elections is the most important electoral act of all time in the country, perhaps in world history.

An alarm. Once again the empire is looking at its own navel and its satellites are anxious to know whether they will pay allegiance to a certain Kamala Harris, a loud-mouthed megaphone, or to the well-known Donald Trump, a populist and fascist narcissist who plays with the world as if it were a scoundrel imitating Charlot’s brilliant scene in “The Great Dictator”.

This is the “democratic” choice par excellence. The model of selection of “representatives of the people” that all “civilized countries”, the privileged members of the elite of the collective West, must follow in order not to be marginalized within this sacred Olympus. This is how “liberal democracy”, formerly “Western democracy”, works, the only one that is accepted within the framework of the “rules-based international order”, that is, international law bending to the interests, arbitrariness and expansionism of the empire. We have reached the moment when, in the West, the nominal head of the empire is designated with a happening in which one of two imbeciles is selected: one ignorant, hollow, functioning like a broken record but dangerous due to the apparatus that manipulates her; and ignorant, visibly sociopathic and dangerous for who he is and for the narrow-mindedness, alienation and potential violence of the layers of a sick society that support him.

The North American electoral duel between democratic Kamala and Republican Donald defines the virtues of our “liberal democracy” like few others. It imposes voters’ “freedom” of choice between candidates nominated by a duet of parties that differ little or nothing in practical action and are both emanations of the so-called military, industrial and technological complex, the real power in the United States and its Western satellites; a fusion between state and corporate power that, as far as we are directly concerned, manifests itself through the term “Blob” – created during the Obama administration and which reflects the bipartisan consensus on the need for a robust United States military presence throughout the world, also known as “Washington rules”. Figureheads associated with the “blob” concept are Hillary Clinton and Bill Gates – and that’s all said.

With no intention of distorting reality, the political system based on this fusion between the State and large corporations works, in practice, as a single party with two mimetic tendencies that have long since severed relations with voters, except in idiotic scenarios, but in filling the Hollywood-style eye, which multiply in times like this, of “electoral campaigns”.

Notice now how this model has been gradually exported to all agents of “liberal democracy” throughout the West: two political currents with a “vocation for government”, social democrats and conservatives, harmlessly divergent on social issues and absolutely convergent in the inhumane system neoliberal economic and financial, neoliberalism, to which all political activity is subject. Between “liberal democracy” and the one-party system there is a practical twinning, increasingly penetrated by the fascist environment as irreversible economic and social problems intensify.

Fake game

The alleged duel between Kamala and Donald is nothing more than the fulfilment of a ritual in quadrennial cycles that, one after the other, changes the faces (not always) that will be the protagonists of the tragicomedy brought to the scene, with unhealthy obsession, by the monster tentacle into which the global info-propaganda apparatus formatted as infotainment has become, information as alienating entertainment.

Despite the system’s stubbornness and the massive poisoning of the populations, there are encouraging signs that, although in a more or less long term, the spell could turn against the sorcerer. Imagine that, in the United States, the prestige of journalists is already lower than that of congressmen, according to the research company Gallup, unaware of their insertion in power environments. In the simplicity of its formulation, the Gallupian conclusion says everything about the decrepitude of the marvellous regime and sanctuary of “liberal democracy”, of “our civilization”, of the garden threatened by barbarism which, by the way, took on an even more demonic form at the recent summit of the BRIC held in Kazan, provocatively in Russia.

Research tells us that the prestige of congressmen, that is, of politicians “chosen” by voters to represent them, is traditionally known to translate the lowest level of credibility, which only ennobles the prestige of this type of democracy; because imagine that journalists, a layer for which North Americans still seemed to have some respect, managed to surpass the “elected” in this fall into the abyss of contempt. Nothing that surprises us or should surprise us: it is one of the misfortunes of our daily lives also in Portuguese lands, by its own vocation and also as subsidiaries of the miserable European and Western scene in general. Imperial osmosis is rapid and lethal in the strategic terrains of info-stupidification.

For the most part in relation to congressmen, the respectability of presidents will certainly be at a low level. Hence the duel between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump is nothing “more important” compared to so many others. It is not because Joseph Biden, the incumbent president, withdrew from the scene because he had finally assumed (or had assumed for him) his physical and cognitive insufficiencies, that the United States stopped functioning. The state-corporate apparatus is always in activity, it governs 24 hours a day because this determines the permanent and globalist urgencies of its interests, the fulfilment of which is ensured by disposable entities that believe they live in or have found the “paradise of opportunities” before being thrown in the trash.

The fight between Kamala and Donald, as happens in wrestling sessions, is rigged by definition, although in fights in the ring it is not conceivable that there will be attempts to eliminate one of the competitors by shooting. Hence, as everything indicates that this has happened regularly, suspicions regarding the transparency of voting and unlikely confusion between electronic voting, in-person voting and voting by mail are to be expected. Distrust was further amplified by the fact that representatives of the candidates were not present at the counting events. What paragons we would be subject to if anomalies like these happened – which they don’t – in Venezuela, Bolivia, Russia, South Africa, Angola and so on. However, none of this should bother us, it is only up to us to vehemently deny the signs of fraud: the cyclical appointment of the president of the United States is the supreme act of “liberal democracy”, it has the seal of guarantee whatever happens, it is the model that we all must – rather, have – to follow.

It could be argued, as souls who do not allow suspicion regarding the perfection and superiority of “our civilization” and its respective democratic mechanisms always do, that there is no proof of this bias, the suspicions are nothing more than speculation, the bad loss of the defeated, or even fake news or ill-fated conspiracy theories.

Let’s be clear: do you think there is transparency in discrimination and differences in treatment between parties during pre-campaigns and electoral campaigns? Aren’t there parties that, by definition, have a “vocation” to govern while the others, mere supporting actors, are doomed to ensure innocuous pluralism? Are the financial means of candidates and applications fair and balanced? Are the financiers of parties and candidates people and entities interested only in the clear and limpid functioning of democracy and do they never intend to collect the agreed rewards downstream that justified the investments made upstream? And the insidious info-propaganda covers electoral events in a balanced way, does it give voice and opportunities equally to all competitors or just to the “appointed”, those who represent the two tendencies of a democratic regime as it should be, plus their respective adjacencies?

These and many other questions that we could add are pertinent to identifying and defining the democratic standard, our lighthouse and our guide; and, fulfilling the natural order of things, it applies equally to the proud and unctuous satellites orbiting the planet that reflects the sun of “our civilization”.

What will change

Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. The credibility of these candidates is such that for the first time in many decades the Washington Post, one of the regime’s instruments and a very faithful instrument of expansionism and imperial militarism, does not recommend voting for any of the putative presidents. Normally it does so to favor the Democratic Party candidate, wanting to be in harmony with the “fine” and “chic” clientele of the Beltway, the sanctuary of the powers that be. Kamala, however, does not fit into the standards of this elite, she cannot align two ideas with savvy, she does not meet the metrics of verbiage and borders on nonsense, she has frequent difficulties in repeating the messages, even if primary, that are explained and recommended to her – resembling – to Biden when dementia made him even more dependent on headphones and the teleprompter. Furthermore, he lacks style, the souplesse typical of politicians with pedigree. It can be seen that it was the possible solution, found outside the usual so-called democratic formalities designated as “primary elections”; was hastily removed from the vice presidency when it was realized that Joseph Biden would not notice the end of this term, much less a new term.

The Washington Post paid the price for its “abstention”: it lost 200,000 subscribers in the blink of an eye – Democrats do not forgive anyone who falters, even in the face of a stairwell candidate. Yet the influential Los Angeles Times and USA Today made the same decision. Kamala Harris is more or less left to her disabilities and a device that supports her unwillingly because she has no other choice. Research slays it but, as Western rules in this matter reveal, they are not reliable, because they essentially serve to lie and manipulate. Furthermore, depositing the ballot in the ballot box is just one detail of the “liberal democratic” game,

What about Donald Trump? It corresponds to what is most ultramontane in the United States, to the mafias of religious sects, to the ignorance that flourishes like thistles across the country. He’s a cheater and a liar. He ended the war in Syria but quickly decided to attack the country with missiles and occupy it with more contingents of troops to guarantee – he said – the theft of oil. He was withdrawing from Afghanistan but preferred to leave the NATO humiliation to Biden. The Guantánamo concentration camp, an exponent of imperial terrorism, has not yet been closed. The consequences of the logs he set on fire in the Middle East thanks to his unhealthy support for Zionist Nazism are visible.

We thus predict what will happen with his promise to end the war in Ukraine in the blink of an eye while ensuring that he “puts Putin in order”. An oligarch, kleptocrat and eternal politician’s apprentice, a dangerous, very dangerous unconscious.

What will follow this electoral scenario that unfiltered displays the degrading, painful, incompetent and disoriented state that a drifting West has reached?

The ruling military, industrial and technological complex, the centre of imperial power that functions as presidents and congressmen pass by, will continue to speak, as always, the decisive words.

These guarantee us more of the same, although variations can be seen so that everything remains the same regardless of the candidate to whom the White House tenant is assigned.

Domestically, more taxes, less taxes, the rich will continue to be even richer and the poor will become poorer and in greater numbers, whether the crisis is benign or catastrophic. Education will sink even further into starvation, health will continue to be less and less for some; Public infrastructures, from bridges to transport, schools and housing in disadvantaged neighbourhoods will continue to crumble due to lack of maintenance. The environment will deteriorate further as the “green transition” advances, genetically modified organisms will poison food more, crime will ruin and murder without rest, the trade and consumption of natural or chemical drugs, which are renewed every day , they will produce more zombies and liquidate millions of human beings on a scale. “Our” paradise tends to be confused with hell.

On the external front, with Kamala or Donald, war will continue to be the priority of priorities in the form of military aggression, colour revolutions or economic and political sanctions, no matter what they promise now.

Ukraine’s announced defeat by Russia raises doubts and uncertainties about the future behaviour of the Pentagon and NATO, regardless of the current president. The military and economic pressure on China and the terrorist manipulation of the situation in Taiwan will continue to escalate while Zionism will follow its path (and that of the planet?) towards the abyss, always with the support and protection of the United States and its respective satellites, commit whatever atrocities you commit. Ultimately, he is the defender of “our civilization” in the Middle East, Netanyahu dixit, and he has not been disproved.

Trump appears to be more threatening on Chinese and Middle East issues, but the Democratic Party’s foreign policy is not far behind in aggressiveness and irresponsibility.

The European Union and NATO are in tears, alarmed by Trump’s hypothetical victory. Needless desires: they should be more confident in the essence of imperialism. With one president or another, the mission of the Atlantic Alliance will be to continue expanding to the borders with Russia, tighten the siege around this country and divide it into a conglomerate of submissive states. The European Union will continue to be despised by Washington and enjoy being treated that way. Germany has just honoured Biden, the president who broke the Nord Stream, indispensable for its economic strategy and for getting out of the hole in which it continues to sink.

The plunder of world goods and wealth – or at least the continuous attempts to guarantee it – will not depend on the choice between Kamala or Trump: it is a routine part of the history of the last centuries of colonialism and imperialism.

In their conviction of civilizational superiority, which leads them to confuse desires with realities, to live in a parallel reality or to pretend the non-existence of developments that they do not control, the Western economic, military and political classes, under the command of the United States, make many mistakes often targets or confuses the sources of their concerns. In reality, choosing between Kamala and Donald should be far from his biggest problem. The transformations that are taking place in the world and quite consistently threaten the so-called “civilizing” authoritarianism of the “rules-based international order”, these are to be taken seriously, telling us that nothing will ever go back to the way it was just a short time ago, for example before of the open war started in Ukraine. The status of 500 years of colonial and imperial impunity is for the first time being questioned by an overwhelming global majority representing more than five billion human beings of the eight billion who inhabit the Earth. And in that regard, it doesn’t matter if Kamala Harris or Donald Trump are the imperial bosses on duty.

We also know that one or the other, whatever, will have their finger on the trigger of a nuclear arsenal capable of destroying the planet and humanity several times over and that, regardless of who is chosen, both are driven by interests tempted to activate it as if it were possible. produce only “limited effects”; or even, as happens with the crazy Zionists in power, to prefer the hecatomb of the final judgment so as not to witness a hypothetical end of Israel.

And for that matter, Kamala or Donald are both part of the problem, not the solution.

This is what we must fear and fight with all our strength and means. We are part of the solution.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2024/11/05/sad-west-what-have-you-come-to/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without americaca…”

Gus Leonisky

By Gus Leonisky at 6 Nov 2024 - 10:13am
Login or register to post comments

great speech by harris....

KAMALA (HARRIS)'S SPEECH WAS A GREAT MOTIVATIONAL SPEECH...THE TROOPS GOT THEIR BUTT KICKED AND ONE NEEDS TO FIND WAYS TO PREPARE THEM FOR THE NEXT FIGHT....

DONALD (TRUMP)'S SPEECH WAS ATROCIOUS APART FROM AN IMPORTANT PROMISE:

Donald Trump makes a promise in his victory speech to end US wars and not start any in his new term. The rest of the speech can be found here.

Nobody’s ever seen anything like that. They came from, they came from all quarters. Union, nonunion, African American, Hispanic American, Asian American, Arab American, Muslim American, we had everybody and it was beautiful. It was a historic realignment. Uniting citizens of all backgrounds around a common core of common sense. You know, we’re the party of common sense.

“We wanna have borders. We wanna have security. We wanna have things be good, safe. We want great education. We want, we want a strong and powerful military and ideally, we don’t have to use it. You know, we had no wars four years. We had no wars. Except we defeated ISIS, we defeated ISIS in record time. And, but we had no wars. They said, ‘He will start a war.’ I’m not going to start a war. I’m going to stop wars. But this is also a massive victory for democracy and for freedom. Together, we’re going to unlock America’s glorious destiny. We’re going to achieve the most incredible future for our people.

https://scheerpost.com/2024/11/06/big-promise-from-trump-im-going-to-stop-wars/

AS LONG AS ONE IS PREPARED TO DO UNAVOIDABLE DEALS WITH THE DEVILS....

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

“It’s hard to do cartoons without wisdom…”

Gus Leonisky

By Gus Leonisky at 7 Nov 2024 - 10:12am
Login or register to post comments

Primary links

Search

Recent comments

Democracy Links

Member's Off-site Blogs