Here’s the explanation in one tweet for the fall of Europe and who we’re dealing with, internally.
We’ve met the enemy and it is us.
This is a rather extraordinary speech by Mario Draghi, former head of the EU Central Bank and currently tasked with producing a report on EU competitiveness.
If I were to summarize it: "we f*cked up big time and need radical change".
geopolitique.eu/en/2024/04/16/…
The "we f*cked up big time" part is partly captured in this quite stunning admission he made in the speech:
"The approach we took to competitiveness in Europe after the sovereign debt crisis [was to pursue] a deliberate strategy of trying to lower wage costs relative to each other – and, combine this with a procyclical fiscal policy, the net effect was only to weaken our own domestic demand and undermine our social model.
But the key issue is not that competitiveness is a flawed concept. It is that Europe has had the wrong focus.
We have turned inwards, seeing our competitors among ourselves, even in sectors like defence and energy where we have profound common interests. At the same time, we have not looked outwards enough: with a positive trade balance, after all, we did not pay enough attention to our external competitiveness as a serious policy question."
I think he's fundamentally right. Europe was always promoted to EU citizens as a way to protect them, and a way to compete at scale against other giants out there like the U.S. or China. Instead it's turned into an internal competition machine where EU countries undermine each other, with zero coherent pan-EU industrial and global competitiveness strategies. Basically the opposite of what it was supposed to be: less security - including job security - for EU citizens, and not even attempting to run the race against the other giants.
Of course it's a bit rich for him to say this now, given he was one of the key actors of this... He seems to discover, a good 25 years too late, that the EU's competitors do actually compete.
For instance he writes that "the US, for its part, is using large-scale industrial policy to attract high-value domestic manufacturing capacity within its borders – including that of European firms – while using protectionism to shut out competitors and deploying its geopolitical power to re-orient and secure supply chains."
This is just the latest episode in a long-running saga. The U.S. has systematically been competing against Europe in a very strategic way for a long time. For instance they completely ate the EU's lunch during the internet boom, as they developed an extremely efficient system to scale powerful companies domestically and impose them on the rest of the world through the guise of "internet freedom". China developed its great firewall, which enabled it to maintain its sovereignty in the digital space and build its own homegrown ecosystem. The EU, meanwhile, naive as hell, was like "this internet freedom thing is wonderful, we're all connected now"... All connected, yes, via US companies who now get paid every time an EU citizen clicks somewhere on the internet, know absolutely everything about our lives and control the information we have access to. That's not internet freedom, it's digital slavery!
I don't blame the U.S. by the way, or China. It's all fair game. It's absolutely the EU who were stupid enough to not even realize there WAS a game!
Draghi now says he "prepares radical change, because that is what is needed". He lists a bunch of stuff but he forgets by far the most important: it all begins with elite education. And the sad fact is that elites in Europe are educated in such a way so as to become the naive and non strategic folks who led the EU where it is now (Draghi very much included).
For instance in France most elites who then go on to become politicians study in Sciences Po, which is a factory to produce Atlantists, meaning people who believe it is paramount to promote policies that strengthen EU's bond with the U.S., as well as people who are very ideological in their outlook on the world (promotion of Western "values" and the like), which is antithetical to being strategic.
Or look at the universe of think tanks in the EU, which are of course incubators for policy, where elites shape their thinking. Some of the most influential are American: Rhodium Group, German Marshall Fund, Carnegie Endowment, Eurasia Group, etc.
Heck in France we had our president, Macron, directly paid billions of dollar to U.S. consulting firm McKinsey to shape French policy (nytimes.com/2022/03/31/wor…), which is insane!
Until we see real efforts to radically transform the way EU elites think, you can safely dismiss all this talk about "radical change" coming, it won't happen. It needs to start with a reform of mindsets.
And by the way, I'm not speaking about becoming hostile. You can very much compete and defend your interests without veering into hostility. In fact it's the smart way of doing it as becoming hostile is often against one's interests. The EU can remain friendly with the U.S., become friendly with China, etc. In fact it should be friendly to everyone... BUT it should know that we live in a Jurassic park world where, if you're weak and don't defend your interests, you get eaten. That was the key lesson from China's century of humiliation, which is why they're so educated on this and are extremely strategic in defending their interests and their sovereignty. The EU should do the same, hopefully without passing by the century of humiliation stage where it's headed at the moment.
https://geopolitique.eu/en/2024/04/16/radical-change-is-what-is-needed/
(the dog)
He “got his vaccination” yesterday.
To just accept any of this, any of it, anymore. Is profoundly naive
You know when I hear people say it, anywhere, on TV, in person, anywhere, I get it. It’s completely transparent what’s going on psychologically. People are trained to view it like getting a full tank of gas and new tires on the car. And new wiper blades, and an oil change.
They really believe it’s like that. You can see their psyche. They want that to be true, and they make it true in their minds, wittingly or unwittingly.
It’s also enchanting; there is the use of incantation, evoked by the chant word “vaccine” or “vaccination”.
You can see, hear, and feel they enter a trance state when they say it, invoke it.
It massages them.
Well, you know, it goes back to those old legends:
“the spell must be broken”
The chant and the trance must be made to lose their power over them.
It really is that.
And the ritual of counter-spell IS called for.
But you can’t participate in anything with him unless you have it.
Yeah, well, decisions, and positions to take.
The spell must be broken. Really. What alternative is there?
And, painful as it is, what’s worse?
Secondly, HOW to break it. That is another question.
We have no ritual of breaking spells.
Those rituals need resurrection. Or, we need, their rehabilitation.
Watch this:
https://x.com/draseemmalhotra/status/1779770434654740748
Don’t skip it. Watch it.
A spell breaker for some. Should be effective. But can it overcome the soothing trance, the beautiful enchantment? Is it quite enough?
Unlikely, for many.
Some people just don’t know anything and therefore can’t see anything.
What could not have been more transparently obvious, even from the very first moments, that the ONLY POSSIBLE explanation was/is overwhelmingly massive institutional corruption, racketeering, organized crime, profiteering. It was in the words spoken, the sum of them and each word individually. It was obvious fraud, organized, and buttressed by enchantment, by trance-inducing word play.
If you’ve never seen that before, or never knew you saw it, then you don’t see it. You can’t see it. So you can’t think about it. You can ONLY be seduced by it. Entranced. Massaged. Used. Victimized.
Precisely the same is true everywhere you look:
Dmitry Medvedev's Speech On Russia's Strategic Borders
One may not like Russia or even feel hostile towards its current policies and leadership.
But that should not hinder one to recognize and acknowledge how Russia is seeing itself and it defines its own role in the wider world.
The former Russian president Dimitry Medvedev is currently the deputy chairman of the Security Council of Russia recently spoke about multiple definitions of borders.
Medvedev has lately become a bit of the bad guy who spits the harsh truth with the good guy being Russia's President Vladimir Putin who is using less vitriolic language. But if one removes the rhetoric chaff the concepts espoused by both in various speeches are quite similar and should be seen as the basis of Russia's policies.
The Russian magazine Expert reproduced an edited version (in Russian) of Medvedev's speech (machine translation):
Dmitry Medvedev: "Russia, like any great power, has strategic borders far beyond geographical ones"
The speech presents a Russian view on the border concept along six theses.
Below are some excerpts which I believe deserve a further discussion:
First. We don't need someone else's land. We will never give up on our own. So it was and so it will be. This is the principle that governs our state border policy.
...The authors of various geopolitical theories of various countries (from China to Europe and America) proceed from one obvious thesis. Any state as a sovereign subject of international relations has two types of borders — geographical and strategic.
The former are stable and officially recognized in accordance with international law demarcation and delimitation lines that fix the geographical limits of the State. This is one of the main elements of its political and territorial framework.
...
[The later] borders are not limited to the physical size of countries, their airspace and territorial waters. They are not directly related to State sovereignty. The strategic boundaries of a state directly depend on how far its political power extends. The more powerful a state is, the further its strategic frontiers are located outside its state borders. And all the more extensive is the strategic space that such a country exerts economic, political, socio-cultural influence on. This is the zone of the so-called national interests of the state. Although strategic borders and national interests are not the same concepts.In return, the powerful powers that set the tone in world relations offered their wards military and political protection. Weak states or, even worse, those that reached the end of their glory and power became puppet or vassal states for their patrons, or, as they later began to say, "friendly" nations (the same thing, but less offensive).
The strategic borders of states, or spheres of influence, do not create a reason for physical extension. They come at several levels:
Second. The presence of strategic borders outside their own territory today does not mean that strong and responsible countries intend to go to war with their neighbors and redraw the political map. This is the difference between our time and previous centuries, when borders were subject to constant fluctuations and could be challenged at any time.
...
In general, Russia, like any great Power, has strategic borders far beyond geographical ones. And they are based not on military force or financial injections, but on a much more solid, almost unshakable basis.The third. There are several levels of Russian strategic borders.
The first level is limited to the natural landscape (the Carpathians, the Iranian Highlands, the Caucasus Mountains, the Pamirs). And civilizational frontiers-it is clear that a number of our neighbors, for historical reasons, are illogical to include in the Russian ecumene.
...
The key point is that we have no territorial disputes with the countries included in this belt. In the years that have passed since the collapse of the USSR, we have maintained profitable trade cooperation and comfortable interpersonal communication.
...
If we talk about our second-level strategic borders, they cover the space that is commonly called Greater Eurasia. That is why Russian President Vladimir Putin put forward the initiative to create a Large Eurasian Partnership. This is the key integration path on our continent. Its essence is to unite the potentials of all states and regional organizations of Eurasia as widely as possible.
...
And about the highest level of our strategic borders. Russia's global interests in the world are quite understandable and natural. They have not changed in recent decades. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, our country is a great world power. And it will continue to show healthy, appropriate care for those who need help. This is evident in the traditionally strong relations with African countries and Latin America.Russia sees Ukraine as being inside of Russia's innermost strategic border:
Fourth. In the case of the so — called "Ukraine" (or rather, with Little Russia), all our opponents need to firmly and forever understand the simple truth. Territories on both banks of the Dnieper River are an integral part of Russia's strategic historical borders. Therefore, all attempts to forcibly change them, to cut them off "alive" — are doomed.
Our enemies constantly insist that the main goal of Russia is to "seize" Ukrainian lands, some "untold treasures of Independence": wheat, steel, gas, coal. But in fact, it turns out that there is nothing so special in Bandera's "Ukraine" in terms of the economy that Russia — unlike the West — would not have itself and in much more serious volumes.
In "Ukraine", the main wealth for us is of a completely different kind. The great value that we will not give up to anyone and for nothing is people. Close to us and relatives. ...
Fifth. There is one contrasting difference between the approaches of Russia and the "collective West" (mainly the United States). America and its satellites are trying to extend their strategic borders to almost all regions of the world. Under the pretext of "spreading democracy", wars are being fomented all over the planet. The goal is quite transparent-money making.
...
Knowing full well where our strategic borders extend, the West spat on the century-old foundations and organized a geopolitical intervention first in Georgia, and then to Ukraine. We observe similar attempts in Moldova and in the countries of Central Asia. Fortunately, the authorities of the Central Asian states show restraint and wisdom. In their desire for prosperity for their peoples, they focus on their neighbors in Greater Eurasia, rather than on an obese and dependent Europe.The conflict comes to a conclusion:
Sixth. For the West, the conflict over Ukraine has now turned into a confrontation between two civilizations. Our, all-Russian or Russian (the core of which is the territory of Russia, Belarus and Ukraine), and western.
Directly, our opponents are afraid to go against us. Although recently Western madmen from politics and the military have been increasing their pressure (just recall the conversation of Bundeswehr officers — and how much of this has not been published), however, Washington-Brussels puppet masters prefer to play the war using their puppets.
...
On the margins of propaganda battles, our enemies deliberately resort to shameless substitution of concepts. The West's seizure of "Ukraine" is called "liberation from the Russian dictatorship." And planting and supporting a bastard neo-Nazi regime created by a comedy series actor is "supporting democracy and freedom." Conversely, our efforts to preserve the common Russian space are described as Russian "intervention" and "occupation."All normal people have long understood that this is a lie. Healthy political forces in the world are also gradually becoming aware of the true state of affairs.
For any reasonable person who is not infected with Russophobia and is not fooled by Anglo-Saxon propaganda, the conclusions are obvious.
There is a harsh reality that Western countries will inevitably have to accept. [...] Time is playing against the so-called "golden billion" today.
The strategic borders of states that do not depend on the Anglo-Saxons will become wider and stronger. [...]
We strive to make the space defined by our strategic borders a zone of mutual understanding and constructive cooperation. [...]
The current neo-Nazi "Ukraine" is a battering ram against Russia, which is used to aggressively push through Western ideological principles in the all-Russian historical space. Another attempt to realize the centuries-old dreams of the West to throw our country into the borders of the Moscow Principality. The goal is obviously unattainable. [...]
We will certainly bring the special military operation to its logical conclusion. Until the final victory. Before the neo-Nazi capitulation. Sad senile people from Washington and Brussels are afraid: if, they say, the Russians gain the upper hand, then after Ukraine they will go further — to Europe and even overseas. You won't know what's more in these delusions: the habit of shameless lies or senile dementia. But in reality, everything is simple: we do not need the territories of Poland, the Baltic States or other European countries. But the people who live there, who are one with us, are not allowed to be harassed by anyone.
Russia's inevitable victory will also create a new architecture of Eurasian and international security. It should be reflected in new interstate documents that will "concretize" these realities. This includes observing international rules of decency with all countries, paying close attention to their history and existing strategic borders. The Western world must finally learn a simple lesson and learn to respect our national interests.
But will the Western world learn the lesson?
Or what can/will it do to avoid learning it?
Posted by b on April 17, 2024 at 8:40 UTC | Permalink
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2024/04/dmitry-medvedevs-speech-on-russias-strategic-borders.html#more
All of this was easily knowable, accessible, identifiable from the first moments, 10 years ago, 2 years ago, 20 years ago, 33 years ago. It was all there right out in the open. You either see reality as it is (more or less, close enough), or you’re enchanted, entranced by incantations, and not the good kind.
Foreign Affairs writes about the "hidden history" of diplomacy that could have ended the war.
It was not "hidden"! The media refused to report on verifiable facts & smeared anyone who discussed it as "Putinists" and "propagandists"
Why did the media fail to report on the following:
- On the first day after Russia invaded, Zelensky confirmed that Moscow contacted them to negotiate peace based on neutrality
- On the third day after the invasion, both Moscow and Kiev confirmed negotiations would start based on restoring Ukrainian neutrality.
- The US spokesperson, Ned Price, argued the US could not support the peace negotiations as this war was much greater than Ukraine
- The Israeli and Turkish mediators at the negotiations confirmed they were close to an agreement as Russia would compromise on everything besides neutrality / end of NATO expansionism, but the US and UK blocked it as they saw an opportunity to weaken Russia by fighting with Ukrainians
- The head of Zelensky's political party confirms there was a deal, and the former advisor of Zelensky also confirms there was a deal but the Americans could get the Russians and Ukrainians to fight each other.
- Ukrainian ambassador Chalyi who participated in the peace negotiations argues Putin "tried everything" to get a peace agreement and they were very close to a deal before it was postponed
- General Harald Kujat, former head of the German Army and Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, argues a deal reached before the US and UK sabotaged it by telling Zelensky they would not support the peace agreement but would give him all the weapons he needed to defeat Russia on the battlefield. According to Kujat, the US and UK saw an opportunity to kill Russians and thus weaken a strategic rival
This has been an amazing propaganda campaign, appealing to the best in humanity to do the worst. They provoked a war and sabotaged all paths to peace to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian, and they sold it to the public as "supporting" and "helping" Ukraine. Almost every "pro-Ukrainian" policy since the coup in 2014 failed to have support from the majority of Ukrainians and always ended in tragedy for their nation.
- The only reason we are now allowed to speak about the negotiations is that NATO has run out of Ukrainians and the war is lost. The public must therefore be prepared for a settlement after two years of claiming that Ukraine is winning while refusing to even sit down and talk with Russia. Absolutely disgusting and shameful!
-Glenn Diesen: https://x.com/glenn_diesen/status/1780479492642750801
Psychopathy:
It’s time to pack George Clooney into a rocket 🚀 and launch it into the sun 🌞
Break the spell.
https://x.com/rnaudbertrand/status/1780954249897378256
https://x.com/realchrisrufo/status/1780597079439446250
I just cannot believe, this really is the crux of the disturbance…
I just cannot believe that there is anyone who supports these people.
This is not what, for example, NPR used to be. Not at all.
Back in 1980 if you’d gotten into a Time Machine to 2024 and saw this, you’d say what the FUCK.
You’d pull a John McEnroe (you can NOT be serious!).
And then you’d pull a John Connors and figure out what you can do to stop that future.
Then a Terminator would be sent back to kill you.
And then you’d go to the future again and reprogram a Terminator to travel back in time to protect you…
I listened to the doctor who warned that obesity would put people at serious health risk from COVID. But this is true of any and all respiratory ailments, which he does not mention but is well known. see: https://breathe.ersjournals.com/content/19/1/220263#:~:text=Obesity%20is%20associated%20with%20reduced,apnoea%20and%20obesity%20hypoventilation%20syndrome.
There was and is no COVID. No new pathogen. Anew pathogen was not needed when regular illnesses were reclassified as COVID and fear drove people to the hospital where they may test positive with a useless PCR test and then experience iatrogenic death, if unlucky, alone and helpless. What the doctor failed to say is that an obese person is always at greater risk of a bad outcome with any respiratory ailment from whatever cause. The pandemic was a planned event, planned long before the "novel virus" was said to be found in China. A novel virus was not needed to launch the pandemic. The pandemic followed a playbook that had been established by Rockefeller's Lock Step scenario followed by numerous virus pandemic tabletop exercises, with Event 201 being the one right before the exercise was taken into a "live" pandemic on a global level, only doable because of the digital technology in place globally for the first time ever in the history of the world. It served to kill many birds with one pandemic narrative. Because of CIA and NHI studies it is also well known that fear of illness alone can cause illness. Then, once you have a test for a genetic sequence very common in many people, and you continue to test every WELL person, it is easy to create the appearance of a pandemic. Add that to the protocols mandated for doctors and hospitals and the bogus test that created a case-dermic of healthy persons declared "sick cases" then add that most hospitals were relegated to skeleton crews, with massive layoffs, closures and furloughs, patients isolated and many murdered alone and at the mercy of fearful doctors, who also bought the narrative coming from high up in the medical cartel. Add that meanwhile, a complete reset of society was in progress while most people were told to cower at home in fear while waiting for their savior, the experimental mRNA vaccines that had never been tested on humans and barely on animals...and when they had been tested on animals, a failure. Until people begin to question the pandemic itself, there will be more mRNA vaccines pushed on people for existing and "new viruses created in silico" but not existing in reality, even though people who got the shots are dying suddenly and developing rare illnesses all over the world while the official narrative is that the "it's not the vaccines because they are safe and effective...or at least somewhat effective, or maybe not effective, but not dangerous, or effective to keep people from dying but not getting sick or...well whatever...just do your duty and get yours." The propaganda used to lock down the world is similar to that being used to get people to wave blue and yellow flags and not stand up against the funding of the war in Ukraine. Until people wake up and question any narrative coming out of the controlled media in service to the medical cartel and the military industrial complex, people will continue to be led by fear and emotions to follow orders and jump when told to jump even at our own detriment.