Erstelle eine Website wie diese mit WordPress.com
Jetzt starten

Russia’s homage to North Stream pipelines

By M. K. Bhadrakumar October 22, 2022

David Brinkley, the legendary American newscaster with a career that spanned an amazing fifty-four years from World War II once said that a successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks others have thrown at him. How many American statesmen ever practised this noble thought inherited from Jesus Christ remains doubtful. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s stunning proposal to Turkish President Recep Erdogan to build a gas pipeline to Turkiye to create an international hub from which Russian gas can be supplied to Europe breathes fresh life into this very “Gandhian” thought.  

Putin discussed the idea with Erdogan at their meeting in Astana on October 13 and since spoke about it at the Russian Energy Week forum last week where he proposed creating the largest gas hub in Europe in Turkey and redirecting the volume of gas, the transit of which is no longer possible through the Nord Stream, to this hub.

Putin said it may imply building another gas pipeline system to feed the hub in Turkiye, through which gas will be supplied to third countries, primarily European ones, “if they are interested.” 

Prima facie, Putin does not expect any positive response from Berlin to his standing proposal to use the string of the Nord Stream 2, which remained undamaged, to supply 27.5 billion cu. metres of gas through the winter months. Germany’s deafening silence is understandable. Chancellor Off Scholz is terrified about President Biden’s wrath. 

Berlin says it knows who sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines but won’t reveal it as it affects Germany’s national security! Sweden too pleads that the matter is far too sensitive for it to share the evidence it has collected with any country, including Germany! Biden has put the fear of God into the minds of these timid European “allies” who have been left in no doubt what is good for them! The western media too is ordered to play down Nord Steam saga so that with the passage of time, public memory will fade away. 

However, Russia has done its homework that Europe cannot do without Russia gas, the present bravado of self-denial notwithstanding. Simply put, the European industries depend on cheap, reliable supplies of Russian for their products to remain competitive in the world market. 

Qatar’s energy minister Saad al-Kaabi said last week that he cannot envisage a future where “zero Russian gas” flows to Europe. He noted acerbically, “ If that’s the case, then I think the problem is going to be huge and for a very long time. You just don’t have enough volume to bring (in) to replace that (Russian) gas for the long term, unless you’re saying ‘I’m going to be building huge nuclear (plants), I’m going to allow coal, I’m going to burn fuel oils.’” 

Quintessentially, Russia plans to replace its gas hub in Haidach in Austria (which Austrians seized in July.) Conceivably, the hub in Turkiye has a ready market in Southern Europe, including Greece and Italy. But there is more to it than meets the eye. 

Succinctly put, Putin has made a strategic move in the geopolitics of gas. His initiative rubbishes the hare-brained idea of the Russophobic European Commission bureaucrats in Brussels, headed by Ursula von der Leyen, to impose a price cap on gas purchases. It makes nonsense of the US’ and EU’s plans to put down Russia’s profile as a gas superpower. 

Logically, the next step for Russia should be to align with Qatar, the world’s second biggest gas exporter. Qatar is a close ally of Turkey, too. At Astana recently, on the sidelines of the summit of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA), Putin held a closed-door meeting with the Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. They agreed to follow up with another meeting soon in Russia. 

Russia already has a framework of  cooperation with Iran in a number of joint projects in the oil and gas industry. Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak recently disclosed plans to conclude an oil and gas swap deal with Iran by the end of the year. He said that “technical details are being worked out   – issues of transport, logistics, price, and tariff formation.” 

Now, Russia, Qatar and Iran together account for more than half of the world’s entire proven gas reserves. Time is approaching for them to intensify cooperation and coordination on the pattern of the OPEC Plus. All three countries are represented in the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF). 

Putin’s proposal appeals to Turkiye’s longstanding dream to become an energy hub at the doorstep of Europe. Unsurprisingly, Erdogan instinctively warmed up to Putin’s proposal. Addressing the ruling party members in the Turkish parliament this week, Erdogan said, “In Europe they are now dealing with the question of how to stay warm in the coming winter. We don’t have such a problem. We have agreed with Vladimir Putin to create a gas hub in our country, through which natural gas, as he says, can be delivered to Europe. Thus, Europe will order gas from Turkey.” 

Apart from strengthening own energy security, Turkiye also can contribute to Europe’s. No doubt, Turkiye’s importance will take a quantum leap in the EU foreign policy calculus, while also strengthening its strategic autonomy in regional politics. This is a huge step forward in Erdogan’s geo-strategy — the geographic direction of Turkish foreign policy under his watch.  

From the Russian viewpoint, of course, Turkiye’s strategic autonomy and its grit to pursue independent foreign policies works splendidly for Moscow in the present conditions of western sanctions. Conceivably, Russian companies will start viewing Turkiye as a production base where western technologies become accessible. Turkiye has a customs union agreement with the EU, which completely removes customs duties on all industrial goods of Turkish origin. (See my blog Russia-Turkey reset eases regional tensions, Aug 9, 2022)

In geopolitical terms, Moscow is comfortable with Turkiye’s NATO membership. Clearly, the proposed gas hub brings much additional income to Turkiye and will impart greater stability and predictability to the Russia-Turkey relations. Indeed, the strategic links that tie the two countries together are steadily lengthening — the S-400 ABM deal, cooperation in Syria, the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, Turk-stream gas pipeline, to name a few. 

The two countries candidly admit that they have differences of opinion, but the way Putin and Erdogan through constructive diplomacy keep turning adverse circumstances into windows of opportunity for “win-win” cooperation is simply amazing. 

It does need ingenuity to get the US’ European allies source Russian gas without any coercion or boorishness even after Washington buried the Nord Stream gas pipelines in the depths of the Baltic Sea. There is dramatic irony that a NATO power is partnering Russia in this direction. 

The US foreign policy elite drawn from East European stock are rendered speechless by the sheer sophistication of the Russian ingenuity to bypass without any trace of rancour the shabby way the US and its allies — Germany and Sweden, in particular — slammed the door shut on Moscow to even take a look at the damaged multi-billion dollar pipelines that it had built in good faith in the depths of the Baltic Sea at the instance of two German chancellors, Gerhard Schroeder and Angela Merkel. 

The current German leadership of Chancellor Olaf Scholz looks very foolish and cowardly  – and provincial. The European Commission’s Ursula von der Leyen gets a huge rebuff in all this which will ultimately define her tragic legacy in Brussels as a flag carrier for American interests.  This becomes probably the first case study for historians on how multipolarity will work in the world order.  

About Me (M. K. BHADRAKUMAR)

Empowering Qatar – Americans spy with

Secret documents show Qatar spy equipment.

Plans for a drone program, for WLAN surveillance and cell phone hacking: Qatar has equipped itself with spy equipment. Even their own spies feared surveillance in the desert state. What does that mean for visitors to the World Cup?

Anyone who sees a van parked in front of their hotel at the World Cup in Qatar should watch out for surveillance. Secret documents available to „SRF Investigativ“ show details of the Qatari state’s espionage equipment. Underneath camouflaged high-tech spy vehicles.

The vans, code-named „Mystery“ for the project, serve as mobile surveillance platforms. They can intercept signals from wireless WLAN networks, secretly record videos and automatically recognize license plates of cars. They are also capable of monitoring cell phone data traffic and phone calls in the vicinity.

The document now unveiled, titled „Enabling Qatar,“ lists a whole series of programs designed to make Qatar more powerful in intelligence missions.   

SRF research shows that Qatar did indeed buy the vans mentioned. 

Neither the Qatari embassy in Bern, nor the communications office of the Qatari government in Doha responded to an inquiry from SRF. Global Risk Advisors did not respond to a question about whether the programs were proposed or actually implemented. A spokesman for the security firm claimed the documents were forged and the allegations „completely false.“ The company had previously denied spying for Qatar and cast doubt on the authenticity of documents.   

SRF has taken several steps to verify the authenticity of the relevant documents. The Associated Press news agency also reported last year that it agreed with SRF about some of the spying programs described in the document. 

Full statement from Global Risk Advisors

Brian Glicklich, Digital Strategy Ltd, spokesperson for Global Risk Advisors (GRA) and Kevin Chalker:

„These new allegations are completely false and based on documents that appear to have been forged as part of a foreign influence campaign in which Mr. Chalker and his company have become collateral damage. It is disturbing that SRF continues to accept these claims as true without actually investigating the implausible allegations they make. It is also remarkable that this story is being pursued at the same time that a reputable media outlet in the U.S. has analyzed an intelligence report detailing how and by what means journalists are used to promote nation-state influence.  

The false SRF documents allegedly demonstrate a wide-ranging intelligence campaign targeting multiple governments, including illegal hacking, a fleet of „black“ vehicles, drones, and intelligence operations in many areas of government. However, SRF has not provided any evidence of such vehicles, drones, or government witnesses, let alone GRA involvement in such efforts. Such evidence would be easy to find if this massive intelligence operation were real, but it is not. Instead, SRF relies on patently false documents to make uncorroborated and fictitious claims.“

Continue reading the full text from Swiss Radio and Television here.

„May the entire republic point the finger at them“. -Brutal reckoning with the Corona system

Book and text analysis by Claus Stille, author and journalist

With the Corona pandemic, we have been asked to do a lot. First and foremost, through the measures that were enacted to combat it. Let’s keep in mind that at the beginning, in 2020, many things were still unclear. And politicians – after initially downplaying the Corona 19 virus – felt obliged to do everything they could to protect people. After all, what would they have looked like if they had done little or nothing and people had died like flies? That might have been the thinking of the politicians. Or – which is also conceivable, given what we now know – did other things play a role in driving government policy?

In any case, it is unprecedented in the history of the FRG what kind of merciless bombardment of measures and restraints rained down on the people for two years. I, who had lived in the GDR for over thirty years until the Corona pandemic came upon us, had never experienced anything like this before. Keeping a distance („social distancing“), there was talk of a „new normal“ – pardon: who thought up such a thing? And why were the terms and rules suddenly there? Had the WHO already been prepared for this for a long time? Questions arose. The measures were almost uniform in all countries. Wearing a mask – at the beginning still disposable gloves in the streetcar! Many of the measures adopted seemed contradictory, even nonsensical.

In the pedestrian zone of our Dortmund suburb, for example, only a center section was marked with a mask-wearing requirement. Did the oh-so-dangerous virus give the rest of the street a wide berth? Once, at the end of the masked area, I took off my mouth-nose protection and almost experienced my blue miracle: a masked passerby screamed as if out of his mind: „Mask on!“ When I pointed out to him that there was no mask obligation on my street piece, he ran red and he yelled at me again: „Mask on, otherwise I’ll make you pine department!“
I was genuinely startled. So this was how politics had brought people, with the help of the daily more fear-mongering press, to be willing to become violent toward other people who they thought were violating decreed measures? I got away with it at the time.

And how most people spurted! That scared me the most. Why did so many people go along with it? Elderly people were no longer allowed to sit together on a park bench? Sledding children were literally chased by a police helicopter!

At the time, it spontaneously occurred to me that the Germans‘ obedience to authority, which had often come to light in earlier decades, was so firmly anchored that it apparently took only a brief trigger to bring it back into focus. Block wariness was also back. A professor wrote on Facebook that he had just reported to the train conductor a passenger who was not wearing the mask. When I replied that the block wardens were celebrating a happy return, he demanded that I delete this reply.

But it became really bad when the vaccinations were „offered“. With a new vaccine, which had not been tested for a long time and which had initially only received a provisional approval. The pressure to be vaccinated was constantly increased. However, anyone who thought it was possible at the time that vaccination might become compulsory was ridiculed, insulted and called a mumbling contrarian. People, who expressed their doubts concerning the vaccination and went on Querdenken demonstrators, called at that time the SPD chairwoman Saskia Esken without ever having apologized for it „Covidioten“. What kind of politicians are they?

But it came even thicker. Other politicians, artists, doctors, journalists – in short, people who like to be subsumed under the term elite – insulted the unvaccinated in the most subterranean way and were in favor of excluding them. That was often close to the crime of incitement of the people.

Presenter Günter Jauch and BAP singer Wolfgang Niedecken have been guilty of using the wrong word. And World Doctors President Montgomery also in a cynical way:
„But if they can’t work unvaccinated either, they won’t need public transport to get there. Yeah, it’s that tough!“

State cabaret artist Sarah Bosetti even saw dissenters as „right-wing appendixes.“ She said, „Would the division of society really be such a bad thing? It wouldn’t break apart in the middle, but rather far to the bottom right. And such an appendix is not essential in the strict sense for the survival of the entire complex.

In other statements made during this terrible time, the term „social pests“ has also appeared in reference to vaccination refusers. Does that ring a bell?

At least Nena found clear words regarding Corona measures and demands for vaccination certificates at concerts etc.: „Dear ones, at my concerts there will continue to be no two-class society. You are always all welcome“ and, she said after later hostilities, „it depends on what we are willing to do with ourselves.

Highly paid journalist Nikolaus Blome, columnist, Spiegel Online, on the other hand, took the cake:
„I, on the other hand, would like to explicitly ask at this point for social disadvantages for all those who voluntarily forgo vaccination. May the entire republic point its finger at them.“

Outrageous. Inconceivable! What is a seasoned journalist thinking when he expresses himself like this? No trace of journalistic responsibility. And certainly not of intuition. How could the editorial staff let such a statement pass?

Marcus Klöckner and Jens Wernicke have now published an important book in the Rubikon publishing house, entitled „May the entire republic point its finger at them“.

This book is important because it must not be forgotten what was done to the people in this country who were critical of the Corona measures and reacted with refusal to a questionable vaccination – of which, contrary to earlier claims, we now know that it at most protects against serious illness but not definitively against the virus and that vaccinated people can transmit the virus to others.

Another consequence of the monstrous events that we had to experience and suffer in the Corona period is the establishment of an official committee of inquiry. What the authors also demand vehemently in the book.

The quote from Voltaire that precedes the book stands for this:
„We are responsible for what we do, but also for what we do not do.“
The introduction to the book begins like this: „Is it actually still permissible in 2022 to ask to what extent German society has been denazified?“ A good question! All of us, dear readers, should answer it for ourselves and draw the consequences.

The authors quote the philosopher Michael Andrick, whom they call probably one of the smartest thinkers in the country. Andrick had asked in Der Freitag, „Does our state have totalitarian tendencies?“ The authors: „According to Andrick, the Federal Republic has ‚in the course of the Corona policy crisis […] demonstrated its capacity for selective totalitarian action […] and the vast majority of civil servants have demonstrated unquestioning docility in implementing it: Mass protest in offices and schools was not to be observed.“ Marcus Klöckner fully endorses this finding.
It is not for nothing that the world-famous experiment „The Wave“ by Ron Jone is referred to in the introduction. In 1967, he dealt with the subject of the Third Reich in class. Since the students did not understand that the Germans could fall so quickly to National Socialism. Jones inspired his students to create a fantasy movement. The result, as we know, was most frightening. Jones concluded to his students, „We would all have made good Nazi Germans.“

So what have we learned from history and this experiment?
How thin the varnish of our civilization is!

Marcus Klöckner writes about his first visit to Buchenwald concentration camp. It occurred to him: below, high culture, Weimar, the city of Goethe and Schiller; above, fascist barbarism in the Buchenwald concentration camp. What a contrast? That was possible?

It is commendable that the authors of the book have made use of the „Archive of Corona Injustice“ maintained by the portal „I participated“ (www.ich-habe-mitgemacht.de). The worst excesses and sagas are archived there. At the moment, the site apparently needs to be restored. Meanwhile, on the portal you can read this information: „Dear visitors to this site, as you would expect, our site was „hacked“ by cybercriminals who are loyal to the government, blind to reality and fanatical about power.“

Bang the monsters on the front page, one would almost like to say in slight variation of a movie title. For posterity should have preserved who behaved how shamefully at the time. Apparently, none of the people listed there has yet apologized publicly.

Hannah Arendt is rightly remembered, who spoke of the „banality of evil“ with regard to the image that Eichmann gave at the time of his trial in Israel. We should think of this again today: „Banal evil, in Hannah Arendt’s view, is actually repeatable. For it rages, according to her image, as the extreme evil ‚like a fungus on the surface, which can spread rapidly if one does not uproot the fungus,‘ according to Hannah Arendt in a letter to Gershom Scholem (cf. fn. 10 in Ingeborg Normann, p. 94)“

The authors of the book make clear that since the existence of the FRG there has never been such a contemptuous treatment of people.

If one should perhaps not immediately speak of fascism, there were nevertheless unmistakably fascist tendencies. All of this must be put on the table and meticulously reappraised, they say. Never again may fundamental rights – which are not called fundamental rights for fun – be negotiable, or as happened: even taken away from us.

With so some, which participated, the Faschistoide in humans had come out and to the carry. The policy had used the favor of the hour, in order to support and further extend its power.
Evilly with children in the Corona time had been proceeded. Of course, we read, they were not put in the oven, but many of them were permanently disadvantaged and traumatized.

Even if Chancellor Olaf Scholz does not want to know anything about a division of society (he has difficulties with his memory anyway) – society was already divided before Corona – and is even more so now.
And the book also rightly criticizes the federal president. The office is conceived as one that stands above the parties. As such, the federal president has a duty to integrate rather than to exclude people.

It is simply incomprehensible what all has happened. The book lists it all. Let’s just think about the leaked paper from the Ministry of Interior. In which children were made afraid that if they visited grandma and grandpa, they would possibly be to blame for their deaths.
Politicians made unvaccinated people pariahs, the book scandalizes.
Much of the jurisprudence was political, it says. Is this probably connected with the fact that all judges of the Constitutional Court were invited to the Chancellor’s Office by Chancellor Merkel? A Schelm, who thinks badly thereby!
The behavior of the media in the Corona crisis is also considered reprehensible. Instead of fulfilling their function as the fourth pillar of democracy, they would have disseminated predominantly government opinion one-to-one, stirred up fear on a daily basis and in some cases demanded even harsher measures than those imposed by the government. Also that, it means must hard and without view of the person or the respective medium worked up. I myself find, that must be taken so to speak the proverbial iron broom in the hand. A reappraisal is urgently necessary. In my opinion, some editors should then also no longer work in journalism. They failed badly in the Corona crisis because they did not do their job. But they didn’t do it properly even before that. And now regarding the Ukraine war, they are not doing it again. They made and make propaganda instead of journalism. This must not be allowed to pass – to use a phrase from Willy Brandt. The book correctly says: „They have perverted journalism.

Just take the quote:
„What it needs now is not more openness, but a sharp wedge. One that divides society. […] Properly and deeply driven, it separates the dangerous from the endangered part of society.“

Christian Vooren, Editor in the Politics, Economy, Society Department of ZEIT online.
The book asks, „How far would we have gone?“ How would we have reacted if we had been ordered to enter the supermarket only on a pink pony? Yes, you laugh, maybe. People went along with almost everything, after all.
Last week I met a former colleague. We were talking about vaccination. He replied, „I’ve now had the third one. I have done my duty.“ Huh? What duty? There it was again, the obedience to authority!

Yes, the pandemic showed how little it takes to give up freedoms. Let’s think about it! In the end, however, this also shows what abyss is opening up. Have we noticed it: We have – freely after Nietzsche – looked into it. Doesn’t it already look back, the abyss?

In „The Last Word,“ Tom-Oliver Regenauer laments the „deafening silence of Justice and the fourth estate since March 2020. The media splitting mushrooms would not have missed their effect. Regenauer: „We hear the final chord of casino capitalism in the post-factum of the media age. Accompanied by conformist art and intellectual incest, it advertises the result of its Social Darwinist metamorphosis into consummate corporatism. A consummate form of state as already praised by Benito Mussolini „as the perfect union of the state and corporations.““
Whatever. We seem to be dealing with a new totalitarianism and a forgetfulness of history that should lead us into a questionable „New Normal.“ Disturbing.

In the prologue, Franz Ruppert writes something about psychotraumatological terminology regarding perpetrators and victims.

Under the heading „Attack on Human Rights,“ political scientist Ulrike Guérot has written an interesting preface. Among them she quotes Hoffmann von Fallersleben: „The greatest scoundrel in the whole country. Is and remains the denunciator“
Absolutely recommended reading! This book will upset you often – alone, if you take numerous quotations to mind! Where has our society been led? Supposedly, many measures were about health. But now society is divided and also sick. Just think of the vaccination consequences. And the people who have had their jobs taken away and their reputations damaged. All of this must be dealt with down to the smallest detail. It must not remain without tangible consequences for the perpetrators. This does not mean revenge. What happened must not be repeated under any circumstances. And what has happened must not be forgotten. The book is an important element in initiating such a process.

Political talks in Washington and New York – Germany’s de-industrialization begins

SPD federal chairman Lars Klingbeil, 44, in an interview with „Welt“ magazine.
Source: Marlene Gawrisch/WELT/MARLENE GAWRISCH© Marlene Gawrisch/WELT/MARLENE GAWRISCH

WELT: Mr. Klingbeil, you have held three days of political talks in Washington and New York. What is your conclusion?

Lars Klingbeil: I was interested in three topics. First: analysis of the midterm elections, combined with the question of how the results affect U.S. policy on Ukraine. Second: Our transatlantic relations, of course now also shaped by Russia’s war.
Third, Joe Biden’s industrial policy, based on the Inflation Reduction Act. This is where I described our concerns. The U.S. must know that its industrial policy can lead to new competition with Germany and Europe.


WELT: We’ll come to industrial policy later. German politicians like to point out that Washington praises Berlin’s „turnaround. But what is more interesting is: What critical questions have you encountered about this?


Klingbeil: Government representatives have told me how happy they are about the cooperation between the two governments. The West has moved closer together with the war in Ukraine. Joe Biden has had similar talks with the Chinese president as Olaf Scholz did before. We both want China to take a clear position on Russia’s war.
I heard more critical questions from the think tanks, such as: How sustainable is the turnaround? How sustainable is Germany’s foreign and security policy commitment? How much money is there for defense?

WELT: And?

Klingbeil: No one knows how the U.S. presidential elections will turn out in 2024. That is one of the reasons why Europe must become more independent and mature. Germany has a decisive leadership role to play here.

WELT: For many years, the U.S. has spent more than three percent of its economic power on defense. Have you heard any calls to do the same?

Klingbeil: Of course the Americans would be happy if we invested even more than planned in defense. But they can see very well what a big step we are already taking with the special fund of 100 billion euros for the Bundeswehr and by meeting the two percent target in the future.

WELT: The two percent benchmark is only „what we would expect from allies,“ says U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. „We encourage going beyond that two percent.“

Klingbeil: „We reach the two percent, we spend 100 billion euros, we reorganize procurement. That’s how we strengthen the Bundeswehr. We are performing significantly better than before. Where there is still room for improvement: Europe must cooperate more closely. It is not acceptable that 27 EU states each pursue their own security policy and do not coordinate sufficiently.
But the turning point has more than just a military component. Olaf Scholz works day and night on international alliances. At the G-20 summit, there was an impressive alliance against Russia.

WELT: The Biden administration is sympathetic to Europe and NATO. Is Germany prepared for a U.S. president who is critical of Europe and NATO from 2025?

Klingbeil: We are grateful every day for Joe Biden’s presence in the White House. But we have to prepare ourselves for the fact that things could be different. Europe must prepare for this scenario. We still have two years to go.

WELT: What do you see as the „true values“ that unite Germany and the United States?
Klingbeil: We owe a lot to the Americans. Think of the liberation in 1945, the reconstruction, the return to the international community that was made possible for us. Our culture connects us, but above all values like democracy and freedom of expression.

WELT: What do you feel when you walk through the streets of New York or Washington?

Klingbeil: I lived in New York and experienced the attacks of September 11, 2001. That had an impact on me as a young student. I also lived in Washington once. I like this country, even if it ticks differently than Germany. The political culture is very different from ours.

WELT: What do you think of Biden’s strictly protectionist policy? Subsidies for e-cars are only available in the U.S. if they are completely manufactured in the U.S. …

Klingbeil: In the USA, the state is now making massive industrial policy. In fact, there are also protectionist tendencies. At the end of the day, it should not be the case that the U.S. is pursuing an economic policy against us Europeans, although it actually wants to hit China. We should be self-confident in voicing our concerns. Germany is cutting itself off from Russia, we want to reduce China’s influence, our energy prices are high.
All of this will pose an enormous challenge to our industry. It’s not good if our biggest ally also aligns its economic policy against us.

WELT: What do you mean by an „economic policy against us“?

Klingbeil: The buzzwords in the USA are „Buy American“ and „Made in America“. The U.S. does not distinguish between bringing jobs back to its country from China or from Europe. It doesn’t work that way. I hope the Inflation Reduction Act will still be changed in its design.

WELT: Energy prices in the U.S. are low, and subsidies beckon. Are you afraid that German industry will move to the U.S.?

Klingbeil: There are these signals from German industry. Let’s not kid ourselves: The danger of de-industrialization in Germany is real. Supply chains are broken in places, we have a shortage of skilled workers and high energy prices. That’s why some companies are making investment decisions against Germany.
When even the Federation of German Industries now calls for a strong state and investment, it shows that the market and the state must cooperate closely. This is already happening in the USA.

https://www.msn.com/de-de/video/nachrichten/droht-deutschland-eine-deindustrialisierung/vi-AA13mw85?ocid=winp1taskbar

WELT: France is talking about a „trade war“ with the USA. Are the Europeans pulling in the same direction?

Klingbeil: I will not adopt this term. And as far as a European economic policy is concerned, there is certainly more that can be done. Just one example: We need one capital market in Europe, not 27 different ones.

WELT: Who would have thought that? The SPD leader is disappointed that the capitalist U.S. is pursuing an industrial policy, imposing state intervention.
Klingbeil: (smiles) I’m always glad when smart social democratic ideas prevail – and I wish they would do the same in Europe.

WELT: When will there be a new attempt at a transatlantic trade agreement? Your party vigorously fought the last attempt.

Klingbeil: I have said several times in the U.S. that we are ready for this. However, my impression is that there is less interest in the U.S. than in Europe. There will be no TTIP 2.0. But we should talk about new trade agreements.

WELT: China has been Germany’s most important trading partner for six years. The Biden government is acting considerably more critical of Beijing than Chancellor Scholz. Have you been criticized for this?

Klingbeil: I have heard praise for Olaf Scholz’s trip to China. Especially with regard to President Biden’s meeting with Xi. Both of them persuaded China’s leader shortly after each other to condemn the use of nuclear weapons. These talks are important. We also need to talk to states like China. Foreign policy is about more than just indignation.
For our future China policy, I have the clear premise that we keep China out of security-relevant areas. We must not allow any unilateral dependency like we have with Russia. We must be able to flip the switch at any time. If China should attack Taiwan, we must be able to do without China in the shortest possible time.

WELT: But it costs China nothing to warn against nuclear weapons now.

Klingbeil: For Russia, this is a clear announcement. Putin thought he was uniting many countries behind him.

WELT: Why is the German government largely silent about the human rights violations against the Uyghurs?

Klingbeil: Olaf Scholz raised the issue in Beijing. The chancellor is clear on that.

WELT: Why isn’t Germany supplying battle tanks to Ukraine?

Klingbeil: Because we are deliberately saying that we are not going it alone. No Western country is supplying battle tanks. We supply Soviet-designed tanks, via the ring exchange. We are the third largest arms supplier to Ukraine.

WELT: What is your favorite place in the U.S., and which place would you like to visit for the first time?
Klingbeil: Definitely New York. Everything I experienced here in the days after „9/11“ has made me deeply attached to this city. Otherwise, I’d like to spend a few days away from the big cities. I think that when you talk to people there, you learn a lot about the country.

Trump holds course – His „Army“ too?

Former US President Donald Trump announced his 2024 presidential candidacy last week at his Florida home . In May 2020 he had already declared in a video that he would be available for the presidential elections in 2024. Anyone who was able to follow his speech on television saw a different Donald Trump than the one we had known before, at least that was my impression.

I got the impression that he wasn’t exactly thrilled with the results of the midterm elections. He, too, had hoped for a clearer lead over the Democrats. Overall, the Republicans won the midterm elections, but not with the strength they had hoped for. Because of their dominance in the House of Representatives, the Democrats are no longer able to rule and rule as they previously did. Presumably and also hopefully, the support payments for the Kiev gang will not be as lavish in the future as they have been up to now.

Trump was extremely calm in his speech, and his favorite topic, „the stolen 2020 election,“ only came up in a subordinate clause. The tenor of his speech was his irrefutable successes during his tenure and the serious failures of the Democrats. Trump eschewed the insults common in other public appearances, opting instead to criticize Biden’s presidency and look back at the political accomplishments of his own tenure. Trump said:

„Two years ago we were a great nation and soon we will be a great nation again.“

Of course, after the close outcome of the midterm elections, everyone is wondering whether Donald Trump is still the right candidate for the presidential elections in 2024. America’s pro-Democrat media is only too happy to use the close election results to discredit Trump’s candidacy. Ron DeSantis, the current governor of Florida, is presented as his opponent and Mike Pence, the former deputy of Donald Trump, is back in the media spotlight. I would say this is a golden opportunity for the media to get rid of Trump, especially since all legal and demagogic attempts to remove him from office have failed miserably.

Although the MAGA (Make America Great Again) faction in the Republican Party is still in the majority, isolated votes indicate whether Trump really is the best candidate for the upcoming presidential elections. Concerns and doubts are raised, much like the American media do. The seeds of discord are now sprouting, alas.

All three possible candidates, and there may be more in the remaining two years, could sit down and find a solution that would serve the cause and the Republican party. One suggestion could be to endorse Donald Trump as the presidential nominee, with Ron DeSantis as his running mate and Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State. After three years, Trump quits his job and hands it over to his deputy Ron DeSantis. The possibilities of an agreement must of course be announced before the election. That’s how it should be and it corresponds to Trump’s motto „Follow the Truth“. My wish will not come true because clocks tick differently in America than we do. American self-confidence and self-overestimation could actually be a crucial test for the Republicans. „Unpacking“ Trump’s statement about Ron DeSantis is typical of the American psyche. They always put everything on one card and are actually convinced that they are the greatest.

Ron DeSantis was reelected governor last week. Mike Pence has tried to distance himself from Trump while promoting a new book. Other potential Republican presidential candidates include Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

What Trump needs now is his “army” . Everyone and many more must support Trump in his rally, and this time I’ll say it to the bitter end. Now everything must really be put on one card, on the „Trump ace card“, otherwise it is possible that the Republicans will lose narrowly in 2024. There is still a long way to go before Trump is officially confirmed in the summer of 2024. The first state-level competitions are more than a year away.

Joe Biden also stated last week that he would be running for re-election and would make a final decision early next year.
In a poll by Edison Research, seven out of 10 voters said Biden, who remains very unpopular, should not run again. In the same poll, six out of 10 respondents said they had an unfavorable opinion of Trump.

Democracies vs Autocracies – America’s Last Stand?

America’s political agenda, especially foreign policy and the war in Ukraine in particular, largely determines German and European policies towards Russia, China and the rest of Eurasia. No secret is made of this either, but with every new sanction against Russia it is pointed out that everything was decided in consultation with the allies. Germany and other NATO countries have been ordered to self-impose trade and investment sanctions that will outlast today’s proxy war in Ukraine.

According to the US President and the State Department, Ukraine is just the opening scenario in a long-running clash between two opposing factions, the democrats and the autocrats, that is dividing the world into economic alliances. The global divide between East and West will drag on for many, many years. Americans want a unipolar US-centric dollar economy and Eurasia aspires to a multi-polar, multi-currency world centered on the Eurasian heartland with mixed public and private economies.

America’s Democrats want to shift the world economy out of the hands of governments to Wall Street and other financial centers under US control. US diplomats use the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank to promote privatization of the world’s infrastructure and dependence on US technology, oil and food exports. Countries that oppose American ideas of financialization and privatization are labeled dictatorships and autocracies.

The country suffering the most “collateral damage” in this global rupture is Germany.

The steel, chemical, machinery and automotive industries are most dependent on imports of Russian gas, oil and metals from aluminum to titanium and palladium. But despite two Nord Stream pipelines being built to bring cheap energy to Germany, Germany has been urged to decouple from Russian gas and deindustrialize, which of course suits climate rescuers very well.

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken said „Germany should replace cheap Russian pipeline gas with high-priced US LNG gas“. The Germans are now building LNG terminals in a hurry, in the false hope of being able to free themselves from dependence on Russia. The federal government has budgeted 5 billion for the expansion of the infrastructure and released it in the budget.

The result will be that German industry will become uncompetitive. Insolvencies will spread, employment will decline, and Germany’s prosperity will plummet. The Americans don’t care.

Most political theories assume that nations act in their own interest. Otherwise, they are satellite countries that do not have their fate in their own hands. Germany subordinates its industry and standard of living to the dictates of US diplomacy and the self-interest of the American oil and gas sector. It does so voluntarily — not because of military force, but out of an ideological belief that the world economy should be run by US Cold War planners.

The neoliberal demand for a US-dominated world economy is wrapped in flowery words and acts under the guise of „democracy“. America’s „world economic religion“ is the strict implementation of the Great Reset of Professor Dr. Klaus Schwab, „You will no longer own anything and you will be happy“. Already in 10 years the impoverishment of the population should have become reality.

The World Bank, IMF and central banks dictate economic practices and set the terms that all member governments must follow. As Margaret Thatcher said of her neo-liberal privatization that was destroying Britain’s public sector, „There Is No Alternative (TINA)“ .

Trade sanctions are a form of excommunication. They reverse the principle of the Westphalian Peace Treaty of 1648 , which made each country and its rulers independent of foreign interference. President Biden characterizes US interference as ensuring his new antithesis between “democracy” and “autocracy”. By democracy he means the well-funded establishment that creates financial prosperity by lowering living standards for working people, as opposed to mixed public-private economies that aim to promote living standards and social solidarity.

In today’s New Cold War, the West’s neoliberal ideology mobilizes fear and hatred of „the other“ and demonizes nations pursuing an independent path as „autocratic states.“

The broken promise

The dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 promised an end to the Cold War. The Warsaw Pact was dissolved, Germany was reunited, and American diplomats promised an end to NATO because the Soviet military threat was gone. The Russian leadership cherished hope that, as President Putin put it, a new pan-European economy would emerge from Lisbon to Vladivostok.

The Russians expected Germany, in particular, to get involved in Russia and build the largest economic area in the world together with Putin. Russia would pay for this technology transfer by supplying gas and oil, as well as nickel, aluminium, titanium and palladium.

A NATO eastward expansion was inconceivable for the Kremlin at the time. Today we know that American interests were different and that America did everything possible to prevent Putin’s vision of creating the world’s largest economy without America, China and the Middle East from becoming a reality.

The Germans had their hands full with reunification, and meanwhile the Americans were expanding their relations with the states on the eastern border of Western Europe. They promised the countries freedom, security and prosperity, sponsored pro-Western candidates such as B. Volodomyr Zelenskyj, invested in trade relations and the establishment of „democratic structures“. American Middle East expansion went hand in hand with the construction and placement of US military bases on the eastern border of Western Europe. The Kremlin felt increasingly threatened by NATO expansion.

Ukraine, the poorhouse of Europe and one of the most corrupt and criminal countries in Europe , is run by oligarchs and far-right parties that identify with German Nazi ideology in many areas.

The destruction of the Nord Stream pipeline sums up American underhandedness. Since reunification, the United States has been demanding that Germany detach itself from its dependence on Russian energy. These demands were rejected by Gerhardt Schröder, Angela Merkel and German business leaders. They pointed to the obvious economic logic of mutual trade between German manufacturers in Russian raw materials.
The US problem was preventing Germany from approving the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. Victoria Nuland, President Biden and other US diplomats showed that the way to do this was to incite hatred of Russia. The New Cold War was designed as a new crusade. This is how George W. Bush described America’s attack on Iraq to seize its oil wells. The US-backed 2014 coup created a puppet Ukrainian regime that has spent eight years bombing the Russian-speaking eastern provinces. NATO thus provoked a Russian military response. The result is that the world is splitting into two camps: US-centered NATO and the nascent Eurasian coalition.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz told China that it should stop subsidizing its economy, otherwise Germany and Europe will impose sanctions on trade with China. Exactly as Americans would like it to be. The German Council on Foreign Relations is a neoliberal „libertarian“ arm of NATO that calls for Germany’s deindustrialization and increasing dependence on the United States.

The last stand between America and Russia will be fought at the expense of the Germans. We are the ones who suffer, not the politicians, who will go on with their fine lives without restrictions. For us, a continuation of this policy means nothing less than having to make do with much less than has been the case up to now. The citizens of Germany have never been rich; the politicians in our republic made sure of that. The „rich Germany“ that one hears about all the time only affects the top of the social pyramid, but not the majority of Germans.

That is the context for today’s struggle in Ukraine, which is meant to be just the first step in an anticipated 20-year US struggle to prevent the world from being more honest with one another and undermining the imagined dominance of the US establishment. This process will force Germany and Europe into dependence on US supplies of LNG. The American strategy is to make it clear to the Germans and the EU that they are militarily and energy dependent on the United States. That may be true militarily, but not in terms of energy policy.

There have been no demands from Western governments for a negotiated end to this war because no war has been declared in Ukraine. The United States is not declaring war anywhere because, under the US Constitution, it would require a declaration from Congress. So US and NATO armies bombard, organize color revolutions, meddle in domestic politics (making the Westphalian treaties of 1648 obsolete), and impose the sanctions that are tearing Germany and its European neighbors apart.

America wants to harm other countries by denying them access to the world energy market, especially the Russian one, and increase their dependency on America.

Note on the world map: The sham or nominal democracies are not shown in the map. Germany, for example, is a sham democracy. Being able to vote does not mean living in a democracy.

The reorientation of the member states of the European Union

It’s about much more than just the fact that the Russian army has positioned itself against the Ukrainian military. The Prussian General Carl von Clausewitz said: „War is the continuation of politics by other means“. Politically, this war is about the reasons for Russia’s „special operation“. The West was not ready to hold serious talks with the Kremlin about the origins and development of the conflict. Putin’s hand was rejected. The consequences for Europe and the USA will be dramatic. Russia will win this meta-political and earthly war. The West is slowly beginning to realize this reality.

Only recently the French ambassador to the United Nations admitted that it is a pipe dream that Ukraine could liberate Donbass and Crimea.

A growing number of Western politicians are becoming aware of the cost this conflict is bringing to Europe, the United States and the world at large. And they realize that the outcome will not be what they had hoped. The masquerade of the West, the false promises, the rampant poverty and the moral and intellectual neglect of Europe and the United States of America can no longer be hidden.

The United States and Europe thought they could run the world, control the world’s energy security and supply, and impose sanctions on the Russian economy. The exact opposite has happened. In the west it goes steeply downhill. Businesses are closing and unemployment is rising, the cost of energy and food is no longer affordable for many citizens, and the millions of “needy people and skilled workers” from “Weissmannichtgenau” also cost taxpayers a fortune.

Europe and the United States were convinced that economic sanctions would bring Putin to his knees and he would „crawl“ out of the theater of war. The Russians, however, have seen through the lies and frauds of the West and have shown that they will no longer allow themselves to be dragged through the arena by the nose ring. Those times are over, and if things weren’t so dramatic, one might even feel „secret joy“ at the exposure of Western politicians.

Attack strategies of the West

How should the West react to Putin’s „special operation“ in Ukraine in February this year? No one thought of talking to Putin about the past, for „good reason“. Naming the facts, background and goals of Middle East expansion would reinforce Putin’s accusation against the West. One could not risk losing face, especially as the population’s trust in the politicians‘ credibility is decreasing and social unrest is to be expected. It was therefore necessary to keep the truth out of the game as far as possible, to maintain the illusion of peace, and to brand Putin as the „evil“ par excellence.

In the power centers of the West, a number of new additional strategies were then decided upon. Sanctions against the Russian economy and the support of the canonized Kiev „freedom fighters“ with weapons, war logistics, money and the corresponding propaganda should drive the „villain“ Putin „from the field“. Unfortunately, from the perspective of the Atlanticists, these strategies were also unsuccessful. Vladimir Putin’s retreat did not take place. Here, too, on the contrary, Putin grew stronger every day and his speeches and statements are attracting increasing interest.

“The Western system, […] a theoretical construct because it is not unified and it is clearly a highly complex conglomerate, has taken a number of steps in recent years, and especially in recent months, pointing to an escalation of the situation.” Vladimir Putin on 10/29/2022, Valdai meeting.

Defense Strategies in the East

The Russians indicated well before the Western sanctions that they were prepared for and capable of absorbing Western measures. In order to compensate for the loss of income from the terminated energy supply contracts, lucrative deals have been concluded with India, China and other countries in the East. But the West has no plan B.

The Russians took all this into account and calculated it. Basically, Putin doesn’t have to do much. The West is dismembering itself. dr With his speeches and statements, Vladimir Putin (Economics) accompanies the slow suicide of the West. His analyzes of the economic and spiritual chaos in the West, the causes of the Ukraine conflict, and the potential for an economic collapse in Western industries are also offers for discussion, but are not understood as such.

European-Ukrainian nationalism

Ukrainian nationalism dominates and undermines the European idea, I mean the real European idea, not the current one that has submitted to Ukrainian nationalism and, moreover, has declared it the political agenda of the West.

The European idea of ​​squeezing nationalism out of the minds of Western European populations and immigrating a Euro-international species is rightly criticized. Loss of national identity can never lead to diverse societies, multiculturalists should know. National identities must not be given up. They are the basis of our cultures.

Curiously enough, the practiced European-Ukrainian nationalism led to the strengthening of Polish, German, French, Hungarian and English nationalism. Each of the 27 EU countries is now thinking of itself.

The nation states will increasingly divide apart. Hungary has already broken away by forging its own energy deal with Russia to survive, and when the reality of the coming winter hits, more nations will break away from European Union and NATO policies and adopt policies that aimed at protecting the life and infrastructure of their own countries.

The war in Ukraine will change the face of Europe in a way that Europe has been trying to prevent since the end of World War II.

The map of Europe is redrawn.

Sensational speech by Putin at the Valdai meeting

Translation from Russian: OUR CENTRAL EUROPE
 

A Post-Hegemonic World: Justice and Security for All , speech 29-10-2022.

The four-day meeting was attended by 111 experts, politicians, diplomats and economists from Russia and 40 other countries, including Afghanistan, Brazil, China, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Iran, Kazakhstan, South Africa, Turkey, the United States and Uzbekistan to name a few.

Moderator of  the Valdai Club plenary session  was  Fyodor Lukyanov :

Good day Mr President,

We look forward to seeing you every year, but this year we may have been more impatient than usual as there are many topics to discuss.

Vladimir Putin:  Yes, I think so too.

Fyodor Lukyanov:  The forum mainly focused on international order issues, e.g. B. how the world is changing and, above all, who is actually at the helm of the world, who is directing it or whether the world can be directed at all.

However, we are only discussing this as observers, but you have the power – so please let us know your thoughts.

Vladimir Putin:  Thank you very much!

The Russian President’s speech in full:

Ladies and gentlemen, dear friends,
I had the opportunity to get an idea of ​​what you have been discussing here over the past few days. It was an interesting and rich discussion. I hope you don’t regret coming to Russia and sharing with each other.

I’m glad to see you all.

We have used the Valdai Club platform more than once to discuss the major and serious changes that have already taken place and are still taking place in the world, as well as the risks posed by the weakening of global institutions, the erosion of the principles of the collective security and substitution of „rules“ for international law. I was tempted to say,  „We’re aware of who came up with these rules,“ but that might not be the correct statement. We have no idea who came up with these rules, what these rules are based on, or what is contained in these rules.

It looks like we are witnessing an attempt to impose just one rule by which the powerful – we spoke of power, and I’m talking about global power now – could live by without obeying any rules, and with get away from it all. These are the rules that, as they say, they keep insisting on, that is, talking about incessantly.

The Valdai discussions are important because you hear a large number of assessments and forecasts here. Life always shows how right they were, because life is the strictest and most objective teacher. Life shows how accurate the forecasts of the past few years have been.

The events have escalated into a systemic crisis

Unfortunately, events continue to follow a negative trend, as we have discussed more than once in our previous meetings. In addition, they have escalated into a larger systemic crisis that extends not only to the military-political but also to the economic and humanitarian spheres.

The so-called West, which is of course a theoretical construct because it is not united and is clearly a highly complex conglomerate, has taken a number of steps in recent years and especially in recent months that point to an escalation of the situation aim They’re actually always trying to aggravate things, which is nothing new either. These include fomenting the war in Ukraine, the provocations around Taiwan, and the destabilization of global food and energy markets. Of course, the latter was not done on purpose, there is no doubt about that. The destabilization of the energy market was the result of a series of systemic blunders by Western authorities, as I mentioned at the beginning. As we now see the situation was exacerbated by the destruction of pan-European gas pipelines. It all sounds otherworldly, but we still witnessed these sad developments.

It’s about global power and a dirty game

Global power is what the so-called West is all about in its game. But this game is certainly dangerous, bloody and, I would say, dirty. It flouts the sovereignty of countries and peoples, their identity and uniqueness, and tramples on the interests of other states. Even if the word  „withdrawal“  isn’t used, they always do it in real life. No one except those who set up the rules mentioned are entitled to keep their identity: everyone else has to submit to these rules.

In this regard, I would like to remind you of Russia’s proposals to our Western partners to build trust and a collective security system. They were just discarded once more in December 2021.

But sitting out can hardly work in the modern world. As the saying goes, whoever sows the wind will reap the storm. The crisis has indeed reached global dimensions and has affected everyone. One should have no illusions about this.

Mankind is at a crossroads: either it will continue to accumulate problems and will eventually collapse under their weight, or they will work together on solutions – even imperfect ones as long as they work – that will make our world more stable and safer.

You know, I’ve always believed in the power of common sense. That’s why I’m convinced that sooner or later both the new centers of the multipolar world order and the West will have to start a dialogue on an equal footing about a common future for all of us – the sooner, the better, of course. In this context, I would like to highlight some of the most important aspects for all of us.

Current developments have pushed environmental issues into the background. Strange as it may sound, that’s exactly what I want to talk about first today. Climate change is no longer high on the agenda. But this fundamental challenge has not disappeared, it is still there and it is increasing.

The loss of biological diversity is one of the most dangerous consequences of the destruction of the ecological balance. This brings me to the central point that we have all come together to discuss. Isn’t it just as important to maintain cultural, social, political and civilizational diversity?

The West pursues leveling and annulment

At the same time, leveling and erasing all differences is essentially what defines the modern West. What is behind it? First and foremost, the West’s dwindling creative potential and its desire to inhibit and block the free development of other civilizations.

Of course, there is also an overt business interest. By imposing their values, consumption habits and standardization on others, our opponents are trying – I will choose my words with caution – to expand the markets for their products. The goal pursued is ultimately very primitive. It is remarkable that the West proclaims the universal value of its culture and worldview. Even if they don’t say it openly and often do so, they act as if it were part of life, in that the policies they pursue are intended to demonstrate that these values ​​must be unconditionally accepted by all other members of the international community.

I would like to quote from Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s famous 1978 Harvard graduation address. He said that what characterized the West was  „a notorious blindness to superiority“  – and it persists to this day – which  „upholds the belief that vast tracts of land across our planet should evolve and mature according to today’s Western system. He  said that in 1978. Nothing has changed about that.

Deformed excesses of the unipolar world order

In the nearly 50 years since then, the blindness that Solzhenitsyn spoke of, which is openly racist and neo-colonialist, has taken particularly deformed forms, especially after the emergence of the so-called unipolar world (order). What am I referring to? Belief in one’s own infallibility is very dangerous; it is just a step away from the infallibles‘ desire to annihilate those they do not like, or, as they say, their desire to cancel them („cancel culture“). Think about the meaning of this word for a moment.

Even at the very height of the Cold War, at the height of the confrontation between the two systems, their ideologies and military rivalry, it never occurred to anyone to deny the existence of the culture, art and science of other peoples or their adversaries. Nor did anyone think of it. Yes, there were certain restrictions on contacts in education, science, culture and unfortunately also in sport. Yet, nonetheless, both the Soviet and American leaders understood that in order to lay at least a basis for solid, productive relations in to ensure the future.

About former Nazis and today’s „Cancel Culture“

And what is happening today? Once the Nazis went so far as to burn books, and now the Western  „guardians of liberalism and progress“  have gone so far as to ban Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. The so-called  „cancellation of culture“  and in fact – as we have said many times – the real abolition of culture consists in eradicating all living and creative things and free thinking in all areas, be it economics, the politics or culture, to suffocate.

Today, liberal ideology has distorted itself beyond recognition. If classical liberalism initially understood the freedom of every human being to do and say what he wants, in the 20th century liberals began to name enemies of the so-called open society and to limit, if not eliminate, their freedom. It has reached the absurd point where any alternative opinion is declared subversive propaganda and a threat to democracy.

Anything coming out of Russia is   branded as “Kremlin intrigues” . But see for yourself. Are we really that almighty? Any criticism of our opponents – any – is perceived as  „Kremlin intrigue“  or  „the hand of the Kremlin  . “ This is insane. How low have they sunk? Instead, you should use your wits to articulate something more interesting or conceptualize your point of view. You can’t blame everything on the Kremlin’s intrigues.

Fyodor Dostoyevsky prophesied all this already in the 19th century. One of the characters in his novel  Demons , the nihilist Zhigalev, described the bright future he envisioned:  “Starting with boundless liberty, I end with boundless arbitrariness.”  This is where our western adversaries have arrived. Another character in the novel, Pyotr Verkhovensky, speaks of the need for general treason, reporting, and espionage, claiming that society needs no talents or greater ability:  „Cicero’s tongue is cut out, Copernicus‘ eyes gouged out, and Shakespeare is stoned.“ This is what our western opponents are getting at. What is that if not western annulment culture?

These were great thinkers and, frankly, I am grateful to my collaborators for locating these quotes.

History will know whom to annul

What can I say? History will certainly put everything in its place and know whom to annul, and these will certainly not be the greatest works of universally recognized geniuses of world culture, but those who for some reason have righted themselves to make world culture after theirs to use at will. Your self-esteem really knows no bounds. In a few years, no one will remember their names. But Dostoyevsky will live on, as will Tchaikovsky and Pushkin, much as they might wish the opposite.

The neocolonial model of globalization

Standardization, financial and technological monopoly, the eradication of all differences – these are what underlie the Western model of globalization, which is inherently neocolonial. Their goal was clear: the establishment of unconditional dominance of the West over the world economy and world politics. To this end, the West put at its service the natural and financial resources of the entire planet, as well as all intellectual, human and economic capabilities, while claiming that this is a natural feature of the so-called new global interdependencies.

At this point I would like to remind you of another Russian philosopher, Alexander Zinoviev, whose centenary we celebrate on October 29th. More than 20 years ago, he said that Western civilization, as a means of existence, needs the entire planet and all of humanity’s resources to survive at the level it has reached. That’s what they want, that’s exactly what it is.

Moreover, the West has secured a huge head start in this system from the start because it set the principles and mechanisms – such as the rules today, which they keep talking about, but which remain an incomprehensible black hole because nobody really knows how they are. However, as soon as non-Western countries began to benefit from globalization, especially the large nations in Asia, the West immediately changed or abolished many of these rules. And the so-called sacred principles of free trade, economic openness, equal competition and even property rights were suddenly completely forgotten. They change the rules on the fly, on the spot, whenever they see an opportunity.

Here is another example of the exchange of terms and meanings. For many years, Western ideologues and politicians have been telling the world that there is no alternative to democracy. Of course, they meant the Western, the so-called liberal model of democracy. They arrogantly rejected all other variants and forms of popular rule, and I would like to emphasize this with contempt and contempt. This behavior has evolved since colonial times, as if all people were second-rate while only they were the exception. This has been the case for centuries and continues to this day.

Democratic principles in international relations

At present, an overwhelming majority of the international community calls for democracy in international affairs and rejects any form of authoritarian dictation by individual countries or groups of countries. What is that if not the direct application of democratic principles in international relations?

What is the stance of the “civilized” West on this? If you were Democrats, you should applaud the billions of people’s natural urge for freedom, but no: the West calls it undermining the liberal rules-based order. It resorts to economic and trade wars, sanctions, boycotts, color revolutions, and prepares and carries out all kinds of subversions.

One of them led to tragic consequences in Ukraine in 2014. They supported the coup and even stated how much money they spent on it. They have the audacity to act as they please and show no scruples in anything they do. They killed (Qasem) Soleimani, an Iranian general. Think of Soleimani as you like, but he was a foreign state official. They killed him in a third country and took responsibility for it. What do you mean, for heaven’s sake? What kind of world do we actually live in?

US repression and sanctions even against allies

As usual, Washington labels the current international order as  liberal-American , but in reality this notorious  „order“ multiplies  chaos every day and becomes more and more intolerant even of Western countries and their attempts to act independently. Everything is being nipped in the bud, and they don’t even hesitate to impose sanctions on their own allies who agree with bowed heads to such activities.

For example, the proposals made by Hungarian MPs in July (this year) to enshrine a commitment to European Christian values ​​and culture in the Treaty on European Union were not even seen as an affront, but as an open and hostile act of sabotage. What does that mean? What is that supposed to mean? Some may like it, some may not.

Over a thousand years, Russia has developed a unique culture of interdependence between all world religions. There is no reason to eliminate anything, be it Christian values, Islamic values ​​or Jewish values. We also have other world religions. All you have to do is respect each other. In some of our regions – I know this first hand – people celebrate Christian, Islamic, Buddhist and Jewish holidays together and they like to do so because they congratulate each other and are happy for one another.

But not here. Why not? At least they could discuss it. Astonishing!

On the doctrinal systemic crisis of the neoliberal model

Without exaggeration, this is not even a systemic, but a doctrinal crisis of the neoliberal model of the American-style international order. They have no ideas for progress and positive development. They simply have nothing to offer the world other than to continue their dominance.

I am convinced that real democracy in a multipolar world depends primarily on the ability of each nation – I emphasize – each society or civilization to forge its own path and organize its own socio-political system. If the United States or the EU countries claim this right, then surely the countries of Asia, the Islamic states, the Persian Gulf monarchies and the countries on other continents also have this right. Of course, our country, Russia, also has this right, and nobody will ever be able to dictate to our people what kind of society we should build and what principles it should be based on.

An immediate threat to the political, economic and ideological monopoly of the West is that the world may produce alternative models of society that are more effective – I want to emphasize: more effective, smarter and more attractive than the current ones. These models will certainly come about. This is inevitable. Incidentally, American political scientists and analysts also write about it. Frankly, their government doesn’t listen to what they say, although they can’t help but notice these concepts in political science journals and debates.

Common foundation for the future of mankind

Development should be based on a dialogue between civilizations and spiritual and moral values. Indeed, civilizations may have differing understandings of what constitutes man and his essence, but these differences are often superficial, but all ultimately recognize the dignity and spiritual nature of man. A common foundation on which we can and must build our future is essential.

I want to emphasize something here. Traditional values ​​are not a rigid postulate that everyone must adhere to, of course not. The difference with the so-called neoliberal values ​​is that they are unique in each individual case because they are based on the traditions of a particular society, its culture and historical background. That’s why you can’t impose traditional values ​​on anyone. They simply must be respected, and whatever each nation has chosen for itself over the centuries must be treated with care.

This is how we understand the traditional values, and the majority of humanity shares and accepts our approach. This is understandable, since the traditional societies of the East, Latin America, Africa and Eurasia form the basis of world civilization.

Respect for the customs and customs of peoples and civilizations is in everyone’s interest. This is also in the interests of the  “West”,  which is quickly becoming a minority on the international stage as it loses its supremacy. Of course, the right of the Western minority to its own cultural identity – I would like to emphasize this – must be guaranteed and respected, but above all on an equal footing with the rights of all other nations.

About not interfering in the affairs of others

If Western elites believe they can get their people and their societies to embrace what I find to be odd and trendy ideas like dozens of genders or gay parades, then so be it. Let them do what they want. But they certainly don’t have the right to tell others to follow in their footsteps.

We see the complicated demographic, political and social processes taking place in western countries. That is of course her own business. Russia does not interfere in such matters and has no intention of doing so. Unlike the West, we mind our own business. But we hope that pragmatism will prevail and that Russia’s dialogue with the real, traditional West and other equal development centers will make an important contribution to building a multipolar world order.

Multipolarity of the world – the real and only chance

I add that multipolarity is a real and, in fact, the only chance for Europe to rebuild its political and economic identity. To tell the truth – and this thought is being expressed explicitly in Europe today – Europe’s legal capacity is very limited. I tried to put it mildly so as not to offend anyone.

The world is inherently diverse, and Western attempts to fit everyone into the same mold are clearly doomed to failure. Nothing will come of it.

Indeed, the vain pursuit of global dominance and, essentially, dictation, or maintaining leadership by dictation, belittles the international prestige of Western world leaders, including the United States, and generally increases distrust of their negotiating abilities. They say one thing today and another tomorrow; they sign and revoke documents, they do as they please. There is no stability in anything. How documents will be signed, what was discussed, what we can hope for – all this is completely unclear.

Previously, few countries dared to argue with America, and it looked almost sensational, while now it has become routine for all sorts of states to reject Washington’s baseless demands, although Washington continues to try to pressure everyone. This is a failed policy that leads to nothing. But let them – that too is their choice.

I am convinced that the peoples of the world will not turn a blind eye to a policy of coercion that has discredited itself. Each time, the West will have to pay a higher price for its attempts to maintain its hegemony. If I were a Western elite, I would seriously consider this aspect. As I said, some political scientists and politicians in the United States are already thinking about it.

In the current conditions of intense conflict, I will address certain matters head-on. As an independent and distinct civilization, Russia has never seen itself as an enemy of the West and does not see itself as such. Anti-Americanism, Anglophobia, Francophobia and Germanophobia are the same forms of racism as Russophobia or anti-Semitism and incidentally also xenophobia in all its manifestations.

There are at least two forms of the west

You just have to be aware that, as I said before, there are two Wests – at least two, maybe more, but at least two – the West of traditional values, especially Christian ones, of freedom, of patriotism, of great culture and now also Islamic values ​​- a significant part of the population in many western countries follows Islam. In a way, this West is close to us. We share with him common roots, even ancient ones. But there is also another West – aggressive, cosmopolitan and neo-colonial. He acts as a tool of the neoliberal elites. Of course, Russia will never agree to the dictates of such a West.

After being elected President in 2000, I will always remember what awaited me: I will remember the price we paid for busting the dens of terrorism in the North Caucasus, which the West was nearly closing at the time openly supported. All of us here are adults; most of you in this room understand what I am talking about. We know that in practice that is exactly what happened: financial, political and informational support. We’ve all been through it.

The West has not only supported terrorism

Moreover, the West has not only actively supported terrorists on Russian territory, but in many ways fostered this threat. We know this. However, once the situation had stabilized and the main terrorist gangs had been defeated, also thanks to the bravery of the Chechen people, we decided not to turn back, not to play the offended, but to go forward, to build relationships with those who are actually against our policy was to establish and develop relationships with anyone who wanted them, based on mutual benefit and respect.

We thought it was in everyone’s interest. Russia, thank God, overcame all the difficulties of that time, was steadfast, grew stronger, was able to cope with internal and external terrorism, its economy survived, it began to develop and its defense capability became better and better. We have tried to establish relations with the leading Western countries and with NATO. The message was the same: let’s stop being enemies, let’s live together as friends, let’s engage in dialogue, let’s build trust and thereby create peace. We were absolutely sincere, I want to emphasize that. We were aware of the complexity of this approach, but we agreed to it.

The West’s goal was annihilation, not cooperation

What did we get as an answer? In short, we received a „no“ in all important areas of possible cooperation. We experienced ever-increasing pressures against us with hot spots near our borders. And what, if I may ask, is the purpose of this pressure? What is it? Is he just there for practice? No of course not. The goal was to make Russia more vulnerable. The goal is to turn Russia into a tool to achieve its own geopolitical goals.

In fact, this is a universal rule: they try to turn everyone into a tool to use those tools for their own purposes. And those who do not bow to this pressure, who do not want to give up such a tool, are sanctioned: all sorts of economic restrictions are carried out against them and in relation to them, coups are prepared or carried out if possible, and so on. And in the end, when nothing can be done, the goal is the same: to destroy them, to erase them from the political map. But it is not possible and never will be possible to conceive and execute such a scenario in relation to Russia.

What else can I add? Russia is not challenging Western elites. Russia merely upholds its right to existence and free development. It is essential that we do not become a new hegemon ourselves. Russia is not trying to replace a unipolar world with a bipolar, tripolar, or other dominant order, or to replace Western dominance with domination from the East, North, or South. This would inevitably lead to another dead end.

Progress has to be made in all directions

At this point I would like to quote the words of the great Russian philosopher Nikolai Danilevsky. He felt that progress does not consist of everyone moving in the same direction, as some of our opponents seem to want. This would only cause progress to stall, Danilewski said. Progress, he said, consists in  „traversing in all directions the field which is the historical activity of mankind,“  adding that no civilization should presume to represent the pinnacle of development.

I am convinced that dictatorship can only be countered by the free development of countries and peoples; the degradation of the individual can be overcome by the love of man as creator; primitive simplification and prohibition can be replaced by the flourishing complexity of culture and tradition.

The new world order must be based on law and order

The significance of today’s historical moment lies in the possibilities of a democratic and independent path of development for everyone who opens up to all civilizations, states and unions of integration. Above all, we believe that the new world order must be law-based, free, distinctive and fair.

Abuse of global financial structures must be prevented

The global economy and trade must also become fairer and more open. Russia considers the creation of new international financial platforms to be inevitable; this includes international transactions. These platforms should be above national jurisdictions. They should be secure, depoliticized, and automated, and not dependent on a single control center. Now is this possible or not? Of course it’s possible. However, it will require great effort. Many countries will need to pool their efforts, but it can be done.

This eliminates the possibility of abuse in a new global financial infrastructure. It would make it possible to conduct effective, convenient, and secure international transactions without the dollar or any of the so-called reserve currencies. This is all the more important now that the dollar is being used as a weapon; the United States and the West in general have discredited the institution of international financial reserves. First they devalued them through inflation in the dollar and euro zones and then they took our gold and currency reserves.

About the need for a new fiscal policy

The transition to transactions in national currencies will quickly gain momentum. This is inevitable. Of course it depends on the status of the issuers of these currencies and the state of their economies, but they will become stronger and these transactions will inevitably gradually prevail over the others. This is the logic of sovereign economic and financial policies in a multipolar world.

In addition, the new global development centers already have unmatched technology and research in various fields and can successfully compete with Western transnational companies in many fields.

It is obvious that we have a common and very pragmatic interest in free and open scientific and technological exchange. When we act together, we can gain more than when we act separately. The majority should benefit from this exchange, not individual super-rich corporations.

How does it look today? When the West sells drugs or seeds to other countries, it tells them to destroy their national pharmaceutical industries and choices. Basically, its supplies of machine tools and equipment are destroying the domestic engineering industry. I recognized that when I was prime minister. As soon as you open your market to a certain product group, the local manufacturer immediately goes under and it is almost impossible for them to come back up. This is how they build relationships. In this way, they take over markets and resources, and countries lose their technological and scientific potential. This is not progress, but enslavement and returning economies to primitive levels.

Progress should reduce – not increase – inequality

Technological development should not increase global inequality, but rather reduce it. This is how Russia has traditionally conducted its technological foreign policy. For example, when we build nuclear power plants in other countries, we create centers of excellence and train local staff. We create an industry. We’re not just building a plant, we’re building an entire industry. We give other countries the opportunity to break new ground in their scientific and technological development, reduce inequality and bring their energy sectors to new levels of efficiency and environmental friendliness.

I would like to emphasize once again that sovereignty and one’s own path of development in no way mean isolation or self-sufficiency. On the contrary, it is about vigorous and mutually beneficial cooperation based on the principles of fairness and equality.

If liberal globalization is about depersonalizing the whole world and imposing the Western model on it, integration, by contrast, is about unlocking the potential of each civilization for the benefit of all. If globalization is a dictate – which is what it ultimately amounts to – then integration is a concerted effort to develop common strategies from which all can benefit.

About the great spaces and multipolar world order

In this regard, Russia believes that greater use must be made of the mechanisms for creating large spaces based on the interaction between neighboring countries, whose economies and social systems, as well as their resources and infrastructure, are complementary. Indeed, these great spaces form the economic basis of a multipolar world order. Their dialogue leads to a true oneness of humanity that is far more complex, unique, and multidimensional than the simplistic notions of some Western masterminds.

The unity of humanity cannot be brought about by commands like  “do as I do”  or  “be like us”  . It is created by taking everyone’s opinions into account and by carefully examining the identity of each society and each nation. This is the principle that can underlie long-term cooperation in a multipolar world.

Revision of the structure of the United Nations

In this regard, it might be worth revising the structure of the United Nations, including its Security Council, to better reflect the diversity of the world. After all, much more will depend on Asia, Africa and Latin America in tomorrow’s world than is commonly believed today, and this increase in their influence is undoubtedly a positive development.

I would like to remind you that Western civilization is not the only one in our common Eurasian space. In addition, the majority of the population is concentrated in eastern Eurasia, where the centers of the oldest human civilizations arose.

The value and importance of Eurasia lies in the fact that it is a self-sufficient complex, possessing enormous resources of all kinds and enormous opportunities. The more we work to increase Eurasia’s connectivity and create new ways and forms of collaboration, the more impressive results we will achieve.

The successful work of the Eurasian Economic Union, the rapid increase in the authority and prestige of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the large-scale  “One Belt, One Road” initiatives, plans for multilateral cooperation in the construction of the North-South transport corridor and many other projects are the beginning of a new era, a new stage in the development of Eurasia. I am sure of that. The integration projects there do not contradict each other, but complement each other – of course only if they are carried out by the neighboring countries in their own interest and are not introduced by external forces with the aim of splitting the Eurasian space and turning it into a zone of bloc confrontation transform.

Many leaders of Europe have made themselves vassals

Europa, the western end of Greater Eurasia, could also become its natural part. But many of its leaders are inspired by the conviction that Europeans are superior to others and that they are not entitled to engage in ventures with others as equals. This arrogance prevents them from realizing that they themselves have become an alien periphery and have in fact turned themselves into vassals without determining their right.

Colleagues,

The collapse of the Soviet Union upset the balance of geopolitical power. The West felt like a winner and proclaimed a unipolar world order in which only its will, its culture and its interests found the right to exist.

Mankind is facing a turning point in world events

Now this historic period of boundless Western dominance in world affairs is coming to an end. The unipolar world is about to become a thing of the past. We are at a historic crossroads. We are facing what is probably the most dangerous, unpredictable and at the same time most important decade since the end of the Second World War. The West is unable to rule humanity single-handedly, and the majority of nations are no longer willing to put up with it. This is the main contradiction of the new era. To quote a classic, to some extent this is a revolutionary situation – the elites cannot and the populace no longer wants to live like this.

This state of affairs is associated with global conflicts or a whole chain of them, which pose a threat to humanity, including the West itself. The main task of history today is to resolve this contradiction constructively and positively.

The symphony of human civilization must be created

Changing epochs is a painful, albeit natural and inevitable, process. A future world order is taking shape before our eyes. In this world order, we must listen to everyone, consider every opinion, nation, society, culture and system of worldviews, ideas and religious concepts without imposing a single truth on anyone. Only on this basis, and aware of our responsibility for the fate of nations and our planet, will we create a symphony of human civilization.

At this point I would like to close my remarks by thanking you for the patience you have shown while listening.

Thank you very much!

Hatred and agitation against Elon Musk – The totalitarian legacy of postmodernism –

Written by Christian Mutzel, Germany, Author, on 3 november 2022, on 3 November 2022

It is certainly not the first time that parts of the left spectrum have complained about too much freedom of expression. Be it calls to sanction climate change denial or to ban views from public discourse that take a critical look at the corona measures. At the moment it is the perennial favorite „Hass und Hetze“ that has once again become the focus of self-appointed guardians of democracy, who are now complaining that a single person is said to determine the scope and permissibility of opinions – mostly people who had no problem with it, that although there was previously a board of directors at Twitter, this obviously did not seek an in-depth examination of the enforcement of company house law and the deletion policy, but rather supported ideologically shaped arbitrary deletions. The best way to illustrate it is that Jordan Peterson, who never threatened or insulted anyone but at best only hurt fragile feelings, was banned, while the Iranian regime is allowed to happily continue to tweet in the context of the current protests. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. that Jordan Peterson, who never threatened or insulted anyone, but at best only hurt fragile feelings, was banned, while the Iranian regime is allowed to happily continue to tweet in the context of the current protests. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. that Jordan Peterson, who never threatened or insulted anyone, but at best only hurt fragile feelings, was banned, while the Iranian regime is allowed to happily continue to tweet in the context of the current protests. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. but at best only hurt fragile feelings, while the Iranian regime is allowed to happily continue to tweet in the context of the current protests. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. but at best only hurt fragile feelings, while the Iranian regime is allowed to happily continue to tweet in the context of the current protests. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. If, then, the return of Donald Trump inspires more fear than a rogue state with a proven track record of promoting terror and inciting violence (through death fatwen) around the world, then this does not indicate a will to preserve democracy, but rather this perverted perspective shows narrow-mindedness and ideological small-mindedness. The interesting thing is that the political left’s fear of an open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. The political left’s fear of open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism. The political left’s fear of open and free discourse is not a modern fringe phenomenon. It feeds directly on the philosophy of postmodernism.

The philosophical roots of woken totalitarianism: Foucault’s theory of discourse

„Power is everywhere,“ said the French philosopher Michele Foucault. The core of his discourse theory could also be summarized with exactly this sentence. Every human being exercises power. Every word, every gesture, every emotion is a form of influence on other people, who in turn exert an influence through their habitus. Inherent in every human interaction is an interplay of power that ultimately shapes and alters discourse as individuals shape, vary, realign, and perhaps even question their store of experiences through interactions with fellow human beings. With new knowledge, people change their minds and then exert a different influence, which in turn leads to renewed rethinking. In this way, the discourse is always in a state of natural flux. In Nietzsche’s sense, power also means.

The fatal lessons of postmodernism

While Foucault wanted his theory of power to be understood in a more descriptive way, it was the representatives of postmodernism who seamlessly followed his theses, but who learned that power relations had to be broken and torn down. The pioneer of this erroneous path was the sociologist Herbert Marcuse, who coined the term „repressive tolerance“. This is exactly the thought that sparked the furor that Elon Musk is now facing. Repressive tolerance is based on the assumption that free discourse always favors existing power relations and oppresses others. This is precisely why certain opinions must be banned and pushed out of the discourse. Marcuse also put forward the thesis that the discourse should always only be conducted in the sense of progress – i.e., that only progressive views should have weight and those that are, or are characterized as, regressive should not enjoy protective value. With this basis, the discourse should no longer be viewed as a volatile object that can always develop in different directions and thus also question new things and their justification. No! He may only follow one direction of the supposed progression.

Starting point for left identity politics

On this basis, the modern left-wing identity politics rests with all its ideological battle terms like „cultural appropriation“, „white fragility“ or „white tears“ and other crude ideas that people like Robin di Angelo and other epigones of postmodernism come up with in their schools of ideas, to start a power struggle. However, the power to be exercised no longer takes place between individuals, but in the collective: patriarchy vs. feminism, white vs. black, CIS people vs. trans people. There is always one group that has power and one that has to submit to it. The conclusion in the sense of Herbert Marcuse: The group that holds power must be deprived of it through active measures in order to give the supposedly inferior group the chance to evade the influence. The individual deserves no attention here. There are no longer any people with individual personalities, people are degraded to being puppets on the strings of power, puppets who have to be guided in such a way that the spectacle unfolds exactly as it is written in the script of the postmodern world of thought.

The contempt of the tolerant of tolerance

Exactly this mentality comes to light when Elon Musk now hits blind anger. Freedom of expression is the new fascism, as is personal responsibility in times of Corona. Too much freedom supposedly gives too much power to the wrong groups, which is why it needs to be restricted. When Elon Musk comes along and announces that he will stand up for free discourse, then the concern of the woken angry citizen is not that real crimes now enjoy the freedom of fools, but rather those who oppose the victory of the allegedly progressive. Jordan Peterson, Boris Reitschuster, Alice Schwarzer, JK Rowling, Kathleen Stock, Hamed Abdel Samad, Henryk M. Broder, Nena, the collective around #allesdichtmachen – if we get a rough overview of who, in the eyes of progressive justice, no longer has a stage should receive it can be clearly seen that this is a community of people that is as diverse as it is heterogeneous. There are neither fascists here, nor anti-democrats. If the spectrum that implements this practice of demonization on a large scale is outraged by freedom of expression, then it is highly doubtful that they are thinking that there could be a boom in relativizing the Holocaust on Twitter. Rather, the concept of hate speech is reinterpreted to mean that it is speech that is to be hated and what is to be hated, defined by whether an opinion still fits into the ideological corset or threatens to break it. The new epigones of postmodernism speak of tolerance, but demand unwavering acceptance and refuse to be tolerant in the slightest. They also like to refer to Karl Popper’s „tolerance paradox“ in order to justify their own intolerance and without realizing that they themselves resemble the real enemies of freedom, as Popper described them. The goal is clear: Germany should not become a free society, but a panopticon, that social construct as described by Foucault in his work „Monitoring and Punishment“ and in which everyone disciplines themselves out of fear of the invisible guardian of morality. I have what the Panopticon is all about Germany should not become a free society, but a panopticon, that social construct as described by Foucault in his work „Monitoring and Punishment“ and in which everyone disciplines themselves out of fear of the invisible guardian of morality. I have what the Panopticon is all about Germany should not become a free society, but a panopticon, that social construct as described by Foucault in his work „Monitoring and Punishment“ and in which everyone disciplines themselves out of fear of the invisible guardian of morality. I have what the Panopticon is all aboutdescribed in more detail here . To put it briefly: It is not about justice and justice, but solely about power and the will to control. Something that Musk is now accused of.

Title-Image by: blog.crazyegg.com

The Italy election and the impotence of the German know-it-all

Written by Christian Mutzel, Aspiring author, staunch right-wing liberal and Nietzscheaner.

Weeks before the Italian parliamentary elections, the German media gave themselves their rendezvous of hyperboles and dramatising adjectives: right-wing, radical right-wing, ultra-right, post-fascist, neo-fascist. Wild was juggling around with these different terms, which can definitely be differentiated in their meaning. Suddenly, however, Berlusconi was also the moderate and Salvini was no longer targeted as much as in the days when he held the post of deputy prime minister. If we think back months or years, then similar media reports could be found about these two people. From the point of view of the German media landscape, there is always a new player on the right-wing spectrum who marks the outer flank of this spectrum or can even be located beyond it. If this disappears again, then the next preceding gradation advances and takes the place of the extreme. If the successor then does the same as his predecessor, another one moves up. Either way: whoever occupies the right spectrum is only the moderate in this narrative until he has been able to defeat the formerly stronger competition. But ultimately, under the judgmental eye of this undifferentiated perspective, there are no legitimate rights anyway. The perpetual escalation in descriptive terminology uses rabulistic methods to suggest differentiation, when in fact a whole political spectrum is being held hostage. And the bottom line is: unlike the Germans, the Italians have learned nothing from history. It’s that kind of Teutonic know-it-all

The teacher is everywhere

It wasn’t long ago that the Sweden Democrats were among the big election winners in Sweden and were integrated into an electoral alliance by established conservatism – accompanied by similar reporting from the Federal Republic as garnished the Italian elections. And before that, warnings were given of the right-wing danger when Le Pen went into the runoff as Macron’s competitor – at a time when Macron’s cabinet was also recognizing the signs of the times and embarking on an intensified migration course. Before you knew it, there was talk of a shift to the right. But dismissing any restriction as a counter-proposal to the German open border policy as a shift to the right is not the only delusion that the FRG grandees indulge in.

Perhaps someone still remembers the immigration initiative in Switzerland in 2014, which the SPD chief rowdy commented on by paraphrasing Obelix: “The Swiss are crazy”. Even then it became apparent that the ugly German was still alive. He is still alive, even in 2022, and gaining strength. Whether against the immigration policy of the Danish Social Democrats or against Polish Catholicism or now against countries in which the election results are unwelcome. The ugly German finds his reason to exalt himself by degrading others and, stunned by the haze of his overconfidence, sells his hallucination of an ideal image as reality, which should kindly apply to everyone.

So German complacency is directed not only against right-wing governments, but against anything and everything that deviates from their European archetype. And for a long time she has not only drawn the ire of the political right. The left-wing Melenchon in France was already getting angry and spoke of an attempt to achieve a German hegemonic position. And the Greens in Scandinavia were even harsh on their sister party in Germany because of the anti-nuclear agenda that was decoupled from reality. Under Merkel, the Federal Republic has embarked on a path of making itself unpopular throughout Europe and it is continuing on this path under the traffic light with the green shadow chancellor Habeck.

Activists lend a helping hand

In Italy, too, the German blind flight may have contributed to Giorgia Meloni winning the election. Migration has become an important issue there, as it has in Sweden and also in France. While our western neighbor focuses on the excesses of Islamic ideology, in Italy it is African parties (meaning orgies of destruction) that made the headlines and the fact that the Mediterranean country is still one of the largest port of call for the transport of illegal migrants from the African continent is – with friendly support from Germany. German activists have set up a tugboat system here under the guise of sea rescue, financed by the Protestant Church and media self-promoters such as Jan Böhmermann, who also like to insult other countries or domestic dissenters if their own ideological corset simply doesn’t suit others. And should someone rebel for a moment, a little fury of moral indignation, blown up like a puffer fish, is enough to immediately destroy this germ. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. when your own ideological corset simply doesn’t want to please others. And should someone rebel for a moment, a little fury of moral indignation, blown up like a puffer fish, is enough to immediately destroy this germ. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. when your own ideological corset simply doesn’t want to please others. And should someone rebel for a moment, a little fury of moral indignation, blown up like a puffer fish, is enough to immediately destroy this germ. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. And should someone rebel for a moment, a little fury of moral indignation, blown up like a puffer fish, is enough to immediately destroy this germ. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. And should someone rebel for a moment, a little fury of moral indignation, blown up like a puffer fish, is enough to immediately destroy this germ. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses. The FDP drops its own staff and constantly apologizes for its own positions in a vain attempt to get the AFDP label, and Friedrich Merz delivers a heroic speech against political over-correctness and for free discourse, only to be dictated to by the Greens shortly afterwards which events he may attend and with which personal data he may speak. As soon as the aggressive moralizing picks up speed, they crawl back to the crosses.

And because the whole thing is not enough, Markus Söder comes along and reprimands those Union colleagues who protect Berlusconi’s party and advocate continuing to build bridges to the sister party. At the same time, the Bavarian Prime Minister is in favor of taking care of the autonomous Alpine region of South Tyrol to protect against the allegedly reawakened Italian fascism. How the man came to be, that one was waiting for his help there, of all things, the answer can only be read from his reflection. But the German as a model democrat saves the world.

The European values

It’s no wonder that people, disgusted with so much self-importance, turn to those parties that oppose an encroaching EU, which in many places is only understood as an extension of Berlin. And when politicians like Barley or Hofreiter now express their concern that Italy is losing sight of European values, then I wonder what those values ​​should be. Some treaties were made without the people being able to vote on them. Since then, party soldiers in the Brussels echo chamber have been tinkering with the implementation of their idea of ​​a Europe that is to be completely subordinate to the EU Parliament as the central body, with no transparency for the citizen, with the result that the state sovereignty of the member states is being increasingly undermined, without the individual peoples having any say in the matter. Ursula von der Leyen is hoisted into the highest office in a tirade of post-bargaining and then has the audacity to threaten the use of tools directly before an election if politicians are dissatisfied. When an encroaching European Union and German moral imperialism are so closely intertwined, it is no wonder that resentments against this Union and against the Federal Republic are equally entrenched and both left-wing and right-wing parties have an easy time playing them off in the election campaign. And if the political right gets its chance, then this is to be accepted. Anyone who covers any form of national politics with insult and disgrace should not be surprised if at some point he comes across as a fellow without a country.

You don’t have to like the election result in Italy, but you can at least seek lessons for self-reflection. However, the latter is not apparent and it is only a matter of time before we experience the next media campaign of outrage. Italy and Sweden were not the last countries in which a shift to the right is taking place, or in which at least positions critical of the EU are finding their way into politics. Germany will be caught in the lethargy of its delusion and will only be able to face it powerlessly until its supremacy is reversed and the Federal Republic stands alone against the continent.

The murder of Samuel Patty. Shall not be forgotten.

%d Bloggern gefällt das: