Thursday, June 30, 2022

The War for the Future of Man - Vox Popoli

An extremely important interview about WWIII with the man who could not unreasonably be considered Russia’s Wang Hunin, who forecast the current conflict after 2008. Definitely read the whole thing.

RUSSTRAT Institute presents a transcript of the speech of Sergey Glazyev, Member of the Board (Minister) for Integration and Macroeconomics of the EEC, at the round table “Russia” held on June 1, 2022 in IA REGNUM: what image of the future meets the goals of national development?”, organized by the RUSSTRAT Institute and REGNUM News Agency.

We are now addressing the fundamental questions of our existence. And a special military operation is a catalyst for this process of understanding our place in the world, and of course, we need an image of the future. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the special military operation, which was initially announced as denazification, demilitarization – we understand what this means for Ukraine – is now gradually raising the stakes on this front.

Everyone is already saying that this is a global hybrid war, although it was clear from the beginning that the special operation should be considered in a much broader context. Now many people believe that this is a civilizational war, where different worldview systems are opposed. It is clear that this is a war of good and evil and a war for the survival of humanity in the end.

Before we talk about the image of our future, I would like to draw your attention to the patterns of long-term socio-economic and political development. We – I mean a group of scientists from the Academy of Sciences who work in long cycles of economic and social development-first of all, we managed to foresee this particular war in 2022. Back in the 14th year, it was clear that the challenge that we faced and the result of which was reunification with the Crimea, will necessarily affect the entire Russian world, including the territory of Ukraine. I even published a book, The Last World War.

Somewhere, what we see today was absolutely and almost precisely formulated, including the number of Ukrainian Armed Forces and the role of the Americans and the British in this occupation of Ukraine, as well as the cultivation of Ukrainian Nazism. All this was predicted almost to the last detail. We are continuing our research. According to which the peak of the confrontation falls on 2024. This is the forecast that my colleague gave 10 years ago, even before the current military operation and even before 2014. And then there were no new political seven-year cycles.

Why 2024 and why are we in such a situation of hybrid warfare? The fact is that the modern period is characterized by two simultaneous revolutionary events. The first is the technological revolution, which used to be talked about a lot. It is called differently, we say that it is a change of technological structures. And always this change in technological patterns occurs through the economic depression, which in this cycle began in the world in 2008 – with the beginning of the global financial crisis.

And during this transition phase, a new technological order has already been formed, a well-known complex of nano-engineering information and communication technologies, which is evolving not only into the economy. But also in the ways of conducting military operations, too. We actually see that we are facing more than just an enemy based in the Pentagon and Mi6. Our troops are facing artificial intelligence. This is already a war of a new technological order.

But a more important point is the change in world economic patterns in the context of our current topic. The change of national economic structures is a process that occurs once a century and during which the management system changes. Previously, we would call this the process of socio-political revolution, but, speaking in a modern way, this is a radical change in the institutions of world economic relations, industrial relations and the entire system of managing socio-economic development, which is also accompanied by a change in the centers of the world economy.

The global economy is rapidly shifting to Southeast Asia, which already accounts for more than half of gross domestic product growth. And in this new center of the world economy, a completely different management system has been formed compared to the one in which we live today. I must say that the change in world economic patterns, as you can see in this picture at the top. These are world economic patterns with a once-in-a-century shift cycle. And at the bottom are technological ones, the change of technological structures, which have a cycle of change phases of about 50 years.

Technological patterns are well known in the literature as long Kondratiev waves, more precisely, the life cycles of technological patterns and their growth phase are a long “Kondratiev wave”. The growth phase of the world economy is a century-long cycle of capital accumulation.

Once a century, there is a dangerous resonance when we simultaneously face a technological revolution, a socio-economic revolution, and a socio-political revolution. In the course of this process, not only the technology changes, but also the mindset changes. The ideology is changing, if you will. As an example, we will cite the previous phase of changing world economic patterns. 

This is a process that always, unfortunately, occurs through world wars. World wars in this case are caused by the fact that the ruling elite of the previous center of the world economy does not want to part with its hegemony and tries with all its might to keep it, up to the outbreak of a world war


100 years ago, when the colonial world economic system was replaced by an imperial one, the world went through two wars, the First and Second World Wars, with the Great Depression between them.

The colonial world economic system is a system of industrial relations based on a private family firm. In political terms, the greatest extent of this world economic structure was obtained by the British Empire. Where the combination of public administration institutions, the core of which was the monarchical rule of Great Britain, with private capitalist entrepreneurship, gave rise to the English bourgeois oligarchy, which managed to organize large monopolies of the trade and manufacturing type, which ensured Britain’s dominance on the seas and oceans.

This is the world economic structure of the colonies, where the Russian Empire also played a significant role. This way of life had exhausted its possibilities of development by the end of the nineteenth century. This was due to the fact that the possibilities of using slave labor were exhausted. The model is well described by Marx. When people were trafficked as human goods, on a huge scale-not only in the colonies, but also in the metropolises. People were exploited for 12 hours a day, seven days a week. Private capital used such labor as the main source of enrichment. There was no labor law, no trade unions, no welfare state. All this appeared with the imperial world economic structure.

But here it is important to understand that the UK has reached the limits of development and countries with more advanced management systems have begun to step on its heels. Including the Russian Empire, Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the United States. The British secret services instigated the First World War, as a result of which Britain became a world leader. It would seem that it has increased as much as possible, but only 20 years have passed – and the Great Depression has been dragged in. No measures to save the British Empire helped. They then – as today the United States is against China-waged a trade war against the United States, imposed an embargo on the import of American goods.

In the end, although the British Empire remained among the winners during the Second World War, it could not take advantage of the victory due to the archaic nature of its management system. No one wanted her anymore. It no longer provided any economic progress. Economic growth based on the exploitation of slave labor has ceased to produce surplus product. The British Empire collapsed just 2 years after the Second World War. This is important for us now from the point of view of historical analogy.

A new world economic order. We called it Imperial, because for the first time in the world, it covered almost the entire planet. Two-thirds of the world. The other third was the Soviet Union. Its world economic structure was based on a social state, on vertically integrated large-scale production structures. It focuses on the issue of money and the use of money not so much as capital, but as a tool for financing economic growth.

In general, the world economic order was in three ideological varieties. The first two are well known to us. The Soviet system with scientific and industrial associations led by the Communist Party, which built socialism with a claim to communism. The American system, which was based on multinational corporations and the boundless issue of the dollar, which allowed them to lead world expansion.

And the third system, which sank into oblivion thanks to the feat of the Soviet people – the system of European fascism, in which German national socialism, together with the Italian corporate state and with Nazis of all stripes from various other European countries, tried to impose their Nazi version of this world economic system on the world.

I note that the colonial world economic system actually turned out to be absolutely uncompetitive. Britain lost the war in Europe to German fascism in just two years, and only the power of the Soviet Union and the help of the United States, a country that already had a new system of governance, managed to crush this fascist scenario. And then the colonial system of Britain ordered to live for a long time.

In other words, this historical experience shows that the change in world economic patterns passes through the public consciousness, of course. And the emergence of a new management system, and this is primarily relations between people, cannot but be combined with a new system of ideas, views and principles.

Now we have a similar process going on. We are moving away from the imperial world economy, where only the United States remains. There, this transition began with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Just like 100 years ago, it has been going on for 30 years. Just like the previous transition lasted almost from 14 to 1947. So the current transition has been going on for a third of a century.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, which was the first to fail to meet the demands of scientific and technological progress, we now see the collapse of the United States. The United States is no longer a world leader. In an attempt to overcome the global financial crisis by pumping money, the United States eventually led the situation to the breakdown of the entire financial system and increasing inflation, which is already reaching 30% at enterprise prices.

We saw the self-discrediting of the American system in the last presidential election, which was virtually rigged. America is not a more attractive image. In addition, compared to China and India, which have been doing brilliantly over the past 15 years, both the US and the EU, despite a fourfold increase in the monetary base, have not been able to embark on sustainable economic development. The efficiency of the Western management system — here, if we take the efficiency – the money issue is 20-25%. Only every 4th or 5th euro that is issued gets into the manufacturing sector.

China and India have developed a fundamentally different management system that combines strategic central planning with market competition, where the state plays a dominant role in organizing money circulation and provides private businesses with unlimited access to money if this leads to an increase in public welfare.

All forecasts show that by the end of this decade, the old world economic structure will be reduced by more than half by now, and the core of the Asian accumulation cycle – China, India, Indochina, Japan, and Korea – will already be absolutely dominant in all macroeconomic indicators.

This process is irreversible, but the closer this obvious transition is, the less forces remain in the core of the old world economic system, the more aggressive they become. This is where the same hybrid warfare mechanism that the British used in both World War I and World War II works. We called them hybrid wars because they were fought over territory.

As part of the new world economic order, wars are now being waged for the consciousness and minds of citizens of different countries, and, unlike the war of the last century, the current war is primarily a war for dominance in the public consciousness. Therefore, the main front is the information and cognitive front. Here questions of ideology are the main ones.

The second most important front is the monetary and financial one, where the United States and the European Union still dominate. And only in the third turn are tanks, missiles and planes used, which are actually designed to punish the defeated within the framework of this hybrid-world war. That is, to frighten, destroy any desire for resistance, and so on.

Just as Great Britain unleashed the First World War, when it already understood that the combined power of Germany, Russia, and Austria-Hungary exceeded that of Britain and only a few years remained for a turning point in world leadership, so the American ruling elite started a world hybrid war. At the same time, as we can see, the US trade war against China is unfolding. The sanctions war against us has already been going on for more than 8 years – and this aggravation of geopolitical tensions today results in dramatic events, in which we are fully involved today.

What is the difference between the new world economic system and the previous one, the imperial one? Please note that the state that is now formed in China and India, it takes into itself all the achievements of state-building in previous eras. This is a social state. It is a democratic State governed by the rule of law, but it is also sovereign. That is, the peculiarity of the new world economic order is that the leading state does not try to impose its own models on all other countries.

If in the imperial world economic order there were three models, two of which took place – Soviet and American, and the third, which did not take place – German-Fascist. They tried to remake the whole world in their own image. Create the same fractals everywhere as in the center.

In the new world economic order, world economic sovereignty is being restored. This is a crucial point. In this new world economic order, the state is restoring moral valuesIt is a humane state, fair, intellectual, responsible and, in short, ideologically speaking, it is a socialist state.

But in China, we see a familiar image of the Communist Party at the head of this state. India has the largest democracy in the world, but let’s not discount Gandhian socialism. All these traditions are alive and the management models-I would like to draw your attention – in China and India are quite close. State control over the banking system, unlimited lending to the growth of production, the use of the market for the purposes of economic efficiency of market competition.

The state encourages private entrepreneurship, and it gives unlimited incentives if it generates income. Hence the growth of the welfare of the people. If private entrepreneurship is conducted destructively, speculates, or tries to profit from the destabilization of the economy, such entrepreneurship is strictly blocked. Both China and India have strict currency controls and capital transfers are not allowed. Money is provided from 0% to 4-6%, depending on the priority of loans. Targeted credit issuance is widely used as a strategic planning tool.

We called it integral, because the state gathers society here. It gathers different social groups around the main criterion-the rise of social welfare. Accordingly, the entire economic policy is built under this criterion. Let us compare the essence of the economic policy pursued in the new world economic order.

Here, comparing the existing models of the Washington consensus, I will draw attention to the main difference. First, the goal of the economy is not to make money in any way. The goal of the economy is to raise public welfare.

Therefore, hence-strategic planning, hence-the use of money as a tool. Hence progressive taxation and practical measures to ensure social justice. All the requirements of the welfare state are in education and healthcare. Which should be free of charge and ensure the reproduction of human capital in the fullest possible way. The tax system of the tax budget is focused on development, and not just on the so-called “functions of a police bureaucratic state”. Prices are regulated based on the desired proportions of economic reproduction.

In labor relations, cooperation dominates, and the antagonism between labor and capital disappears completely. In our understanding, the national enterprise is the dominant form of private ownership. An enterprise in which workers are also owners.

This is how Huawei, Xiaomi and others grow up, which grow out of cooperatives. That is, it is an economy of social partnership, where money is profit and everything that torments our economy with the export of capital, all this is limited in the system of economic regulation so that people’s income grows. And the entrepreneur grew in proportion to his contribution to the rise of public welfare.

And there are no questions about whether an industrial, agricultural, scientific and technical policy is needed. These are all obvious key areas of government policy that manage the market mechanism in the way that is necessary to raise public welfare.

Turning now to the ideological versions of this new world economic order. The construction of socialism continues in China. Although with Chinese characteristics, but it should be understood in this way. If Soviet socialism sought to make the whole world happy, we wanted to achieve a socialist system all over the world, spending a lot of money on it, then socialism with Chinese characteristics means that the socialist idea and the national idea go together.

And in China, we see the following slogans: this is a society of universal prosperity, this is the great revival of the Chinese nation. That is, here the idea of socialism and positive nationalism, which does not pretend to national exclusivity, but puts the welfare of its own country at the forefront, is a key characteristic.

This is what we see in India. A combination of socialism, market economy and national idea. The national idea, although it is applied in terms of increasing welfare. This is understandable for a country with a huge population that has lived in poverty for centuries. For them, the rise of prosperity is a key moment, no national idea. Moreover, unlike Soviet socialism, which grew up in an environment of a “besieged fortress” and at the same time inevitably had mobilization features and suppression of personal freedom in order to save society and the state, there are no such risks here. Not in China, not in India.

But it is clear that the future development of the world in the foreseeable future will take place in the same way as in the 20th century, where there was competition between the communist Soviet Union and democratic America. Now the confrontation will unfold between the “democratic West”, communist China and democratic India. The question is where we will be located.

There is a third version of this ideology of a new world economic order. It is, in fact, a continuation of the Nazi Western, so to speak, ideological vector. Racism dominated the British Empire in the 19th century, and Nazism dominated Europe for a long time during the Second World War.

And now the receivers of this misanthropic form fill it with the content of posthumanism. An electronic concentration camp, everyone must march in formation and comply with the requirements of the World Health Organization or other analogues of the world government.

In other words, this is the idea of moving to a posthumanistic, posthuman state, when people are considered as a tool of manipulation. More precisely, the object of manipulation – and the ideology is built under the atomization of society.

That is, the main ideological vector is the deprivation of people of any collective identity. National identity, gender identity. In general, the human identity even. People begin to perceive themselves as anything-cyborgs, animals, plants. Dehumanization is underway, and this kind of posthuman material is embedded in easily manipulated and artificial intelligence, replacing ideologues, in general, imposing their own behavior models on this posthuman world and forcing people to behave as the world’s artificial oligarchic management needs.

At the same time, we see the development of methods that allow us to bring this posthuman society to any state. Up to collective self-destruction. I am sure that if they start injecting a vaccine with some kind of poison, there are already mechanisms, most will build up and take this vaccine.

We are in this transitional world state on the periphery, to put it bluntly. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, we found ourselves on the economic periphery of the United States. Our country was used as a typical peripheral country, from which resources were pumped by billions of tons, capital was pumped out. The brain drain from us there is what the Bologna system was for.

Those who pushed the Bologna system were all too shy to put it bluntly – the Bologna system is needed in order to ease the brain drain. That we trained qualified personnel here for free, so that they could easily and naturally move around, get a master’s degree abroad and stay there. We were turned into a peripheral country with all its characteristics.

Now, after the West went to war with us and erected barriers in almost all directions, we are talking about a change in the management paradigm. But we must understand that so far this change in our management system has not even affected us at all. It is on the other side that barriers have been erected that have cut off our control system. That is, they have made it difficult to export capital, but I note that as soon as the situation has stabilized a little, our monetary authorities are starting to export capital again.

They are starting to encourage the export of capital again! At least take it in rubles, even if you take the money from us! That is, our “money power” works the same way as before. They are not given the opportunity to create conditions for capital outflows, they have, in fact, abolished the possibility of applying the budget rule, but all this still remains and the budget rule has not yet disappeared. It simply cannot be used in the context of the seizure of foreign exchange reserves.

They introduced a mandatory sale of foreign currency earnings in order to stabilize the exchange rate. Now they want to keep their foreign currency earnings abroad, and they will probably confiscate them in the same way as the state foreign exchange reserves. In other words, our monetary policy remains deeply peripheral, and it still follows the rules of the IMF and the Washington Consensus.

Because of the sanctions, the public suddenly realized that we are a very rich country, that we could live twice as well as we do, because the outflow of capital has stopped. As soon as the outflow of capital stopped, the ruble immediately rose, purchasing power increased by 1.5 times, and the ruble strengthened further. That is, until now, the main objective function of the “monetary authorities” was to enrich currency speculators.

This is exactly what the Central Bank worked for. Targeting inflation is ridiculous, because the main factor of inflation is the devaluation of the ruble exchange rate in a situation where the ruble exchange rate is formed by speculators, primarily international speculators. And only 5% of transactions on the Moscow Exchange are transactions for exporters and importers.

It is obvious that the ruble exchange rate has been manipulated for all these 8 years. On this basis, tens of billions of dollars were exported from Russia. It was currency speculators, where the main role was played by American speculators, who were the main beneficiaries of the current monetary policy. Now, due to political sanctions, this has become impossible. We are being forced, forced to switch to a new management system.

What should be the management system? There is no need to guess here. We see examples of this new management system in China and India. This is, of course, a mixed management system, where the main setting works for the purpose of improving public welfare. The State is engaged in strategic planning.

Here is Elena Vladimirovna Panina , one of the authors of the law on strategic planning, who put a lot of effort into its promotion. We have had the law for many years. But at first its implementation was postponed, now it ends up writing tens of thousands of documents on strategic planning, but there are no mechanisms for its implementation.

Although if you look at it, we have everything separately exists. The mechanism of private and public partnership, special contracts, multilateral investment agreements, special refinancing tools that the Central Bank could use to bring cheap loans for increasing investment. All of this is available separately, but the system doesn’t work as a whole.

We have been proposing for many years to switch to a system of advanced development, where the emphasis would be on strategy and modernization of economic development based on a new technological order. According to our estimates, we could achieve growth of at least 8% per year by using idle production facilities, saturating the economy with money and enabling enterprises to receive loans at a maximum of 2-3% for the final borrower, for financing investments, for increasing production.

This is the most complete use of our scientific and technical potential, this is an in-depth processing of raw materials. We have no restrictions on economic growth, except for the artificially high cost of credit created by the “monetary authorities”. Businesses can’t take out loans at no more than 18% or 11%, but they need to take out loans at 1-3% per annum, as is done in China and India.

Here we are in the Eurasian Union fighting against the export of roundwood, we have imposed an embargo, but for some reason the wood is being taken to China. Because in China, the state allocated as much money as it needed, at 0.2% per annum for 10 years – in order for businesses to create an infrastructure for processing, packaging and harvesting Siberian forest.

They created the infrastructure, they then began to provide seasonal interest-free loans to our harvesters, and, unable to take a loan from us, our loggers go to China and take loans there. And they bring them wood-voluntarily and without any compulsion. Inside the country, they do not have the opportunity to take loans in order to harvest wood in the season and then, after selling the products, return them back.

That is, we really see the possibility of achieving high growth rates of at least 8% per year, so I cannot agree with the forecasts of our official departments, which draw us (following Washington) minus 8% this year. Where does minus 8% come from? From the world bank and the monetary fund.

Washington is trying to impose on us such a pessimistic forecast that “you will have minus 10, because you started a military operation.” Where does the minus 10% figure come from? The EU cuts off exports to Russia and imports from Russia too. Then, using the econometric model, they hypothesize that Russia’s foreign trade will shrink by 30%. And according to this model, which, in fact, is an extrapolation of the existing relationships in the economy, they say that in this case you will have minus 10% of GDP. Although the president tells us that we need to use the opportunities.

At the last Eurasian Economic Forum, he said that foreign companies are leaving – and maybe it’s better, let them leave, let’s create these industries ourselves. Let’s do import substitution. Let’s fill the outgoing quota of the European Union with our own production. We will develop cooperation in the Eurasian Union and develop relations with our Asian partners.

That is, if we deal with the development of the economy, where money is not an end in itself, but is a tool for crediting production, then we can fully go this year without a downturn. On the contrary, we can turn this crisis and the departure of our European competitors into an economic boom. The boom of entrepreneurship. To do this, you need to give loans.

We need to implement the goals of raising public welfare. And not through simple cash injections to support people’s lives, but through the creation of new industries, new jobs. The President has said this many times, but as a result, what we have today in terms of measures to stimulate economic development is, in fact, a continuation of covid-19 small regulatory eases. Unfortunately, there are no real opportunities to increase import substitution investments and implement long-term development programs in terms of reducing the bureaucratic pressure.

Concluding my speech, I would like to say that the image of the future, I think, is quite obvious. If we understand that before the end of this century, most likely, the American hybrid war will end in collapse for them. They probably don’t realize it yet in their Russophobia, which is located in their subcortex. Therefore, having China as the main enemy, they attacked us, since Russophobia is inherent in Anglo-Saxon geopolitics.

Geopolitics, which teaches American and British politicians, is based on books of the 19th-20th century-from Halford Mackinder to Zbigniew Brzezinski, and they everywhere have the main idea-this is “how to break up Russia”. Geopolitics is a classic pseudoscience on the topic “how to destroy Russia in any of its historical forms”.

They became victims of their genetic Russophobic orientation. They lost to China in the trade war, and now they’re on to us. When Crimea was reunited with us, I repeatedly said that sanctions would have been imposed in any case. If they were reunited with Crimea or, on the contrary, disgraced themselves, there would still be sanctions. And today’s war, we also understand, was inevitable. Just 8 years ago, it was possible to do without war and take the entire south-east of Ukraine without a single shot, people themselves came to us.

Now we have to correct this delay at the cost of great efforts and sacrifices.

But this conflict was inevitable precisely because of the genetic Russophobia of the American-British ruling elite, which is the core of the ideological and economic core of the Western world. And they are trying to erase us, as they say, without any equivocation, I would say.

Don’t underestimate it. When the Polish prime minister says “erase”, it means naturally erase, as it was in 1917, when the Russian Empire was erased. As it was after the Troubles, when the Moscow Kingdom was erased. That is, there were precedents when Russia was erased-ideologically, culturally, even to the point of destroying all monuments as far as they could reach, burning chronicles, and so on.

This is their plan. They think that Russia is the key to world domination. In their delusional minds, this is true. In the basics of their Anglo-Saxon geopolitics, since Mackinder’s time, they teach that in order to control the world, you need to control Eurasia, they call it the big island. In Eurasia, the main one who keeps control, this is Russia.

Therefore, in order to control the world, it is necessary to capture Russia, split it up, and destroy it. Then the next goal is the destruction of Iran, this is absolutely obvious. And then they think that by encircling China from all sides and isolating it from the rest of the world, they will maintain their dominance, maintain their hegemony.

This is an absolutely utopian project, they will lose the war. They are already losing a key advantage right before our eyes. The same notorious sanctions that caused us to lose foreign exchange reserves and our offshore business today does not know how to continue working.

In fact, from the point of view of further prospects for a hybrid war, this is a trump card draw, because they had the main advantage in issuing the world currency. And then they played their trump card. They no longer have a global currency, and no one believes them any more – neither politically, ideologically, or economically. A mass exodus from the dollar has begun.

The Chinese are selling their dollar reserves. Their satellites are still afraid to do this, but here those who sell dollars faster will lose less. Quite obvious. Let’s not forget that half of the dollars that Americans print on a massive scale are located outside the United States. This wave of dollars is coming back to America today. If earlier it was thought that it was good that capital was being drawn into the country, now the avalanche is clearly acquiring inflationary consequences and the collapse of the giant financial bubbles that make up the Western financial and economic system is not far off.

Today we are thinking about creating a new settlement currency that would be linked to exchange-traded goods. We are building a “One Train, one Way”alliance with China. We are trying to restore international law in the Eurasian integration and strictly adhere to the principles of voluntariness and respect for sovereignty, mutual benefit, and transparency. In other words, we create an attractive image of the new world order. A new world economic order.

The trouble is that without faster economic growth, our image of the future will not be convincing. Please note that our Eurasian ideologues, for example, Trubetskoy, they brilliantly foresaw the collapse of the Soviet Union in the late 20s of the last century, which was then just getting back on its feet.

He said that after the workers ‘and peasants’ state has exhausted itself, a new community, a superclass one, will be formed. The Soviet Union will lose its ideological core and collapse. Then comes the era of nationalism. The fragments of the Soviet Union will be tempted by nationalist ideas in order to bring our great country back together. And then it is necessary to overcome nationalism and get rid of Nazism, of course.

No national or other exclusivity should be allowed! And the basis for a new union can only be an understanding of the commonality of its history. Notice how the Chinese intercept the slogans of the Eurasians. China calls on all nations to unite in a common destiny for humanity. What are the “peoples of one destiny”? These are the peoples of one country. This understanding of the common destiny of humanity is, in fact, the ideological basis of the great Eurasian partnership that our president is talking about.

But in order to be a leader in this partnership, and not a periphery, it is necessary to ensure advanced rates of economic development. This requires the ideology of a common cause, a common good.

In conclusion, I will briefly say that this ideology should absorb the achievements of socialism. It is no coincidence that both China and India are dominated by socialist ideology, and with different political constructs. Socialism as an idea of the common good, where the main meaning of the state is service to society. The state does not serve certain social groups, as we have an oligarchy or bureaucracy or someone else. The state is seriously and truly engaged in improving public welfare.

Therefore, of course, the socialist idea must be present. Without it, a new way of life is impossible, and besides, it has already developed. Socialism should once again return as the dominant ideology, the core of the global economic system of Southeast Asia. If we look at the Japanese model or the Korean one, we will also see the familiar features of the socialist ideology. This is a planning state, a development state.

As for the issue of ethical values. The new technological order really challenges humanity in the sense that it is technologically possible to move to a post-humanoid state. The emergence of cyborgs, mind manipulation, artificial intelligence. These are all signs of a transition to a posthuman civilization, and if we lose our traditional ethical standards, if we allow this new oligarchic world government to dominate, then no good will come of it. In this case, humanity is finished.

And, since we are at the forefront of a hybrid war, we can really assume that the war with the West is going on for the fate of humanity. And the West today has no image of the future. Universal chipization, artificial intelligence and dehumanization, LGBT people, the destruction of the family, the termination of all forms of human identity – this is an image of death, not the future. This is what the West brings us. Since we are in direct confrontation with him, we can assume that we are really fighting for the preservation of humanity.

The question is, what should be the ideology here? Obviously, it should be based on traditional values. In short, this should be the image of Christian socialism that has already been largely vulgarized in Europe. With the understanding that we have not only Christian socialism, but also Islamic socialism, Buddhist socialism. I would call this ideology a socially conservative synthesis. A combination of traditional moral values that grew out of the great religions, with the demands of social justice, the social state and the development state. 

China Holds the USA Accountable - Vox Popoli

 For all that it makes Americans extremely uncomfortable and quick to cite a panoply of irrelevant tangential facts that don’t excuse their ancestors’ actions, the absolute historical fact is that the European colonists – English and Spanish – committed imperialist genocide against the various American Indian tribes. And China is now utilizing these historical facts to great rhetorical effect to undermine the USA’s false claim to the moral high ground; for all the horrific crimes of the Mao era, at least the Chinese only victimized their own people.

CRI: We noticed that a report from the US Department of the Interior last month said a large number of Native American children died at Indian boarding schools. After that, more and more survivors and their descendants have spoken out and accused the US government of genocide against American Indians. Do you have any comment?

Zhao Lijian: We are deeply sympathetic to the tragic experience of the Native American children. Those so-called boarding schools that carried the motto “Kill the Indian, save the man” were in essence crime scenes of the US cultural genocide against Native Americans. What happened at these schools is also important evidence of the racial genocide committed by the US against Native Americans. More and more facts have come to light and shown that the US committed systemic genocide against Native Americans in three dimensions, which has lasted hundreds of years and continues to this day. 

First, the US has committed physical genocide against the Native American population. Statistics show that since its independence in 1776, the US government has launched over 1,500 attacks on Indian tribes to slaughter the Indians. Before the arrival of white settlers in 1492, there were five million Indians, yet the number plummeted to 600,000 by 1800 and only 237,000 in 1900. Among them, more than a dozen tribes, such as the Pequot, Mohegan, and Massachusetts, were completely extinct. The US government also applied forced sterilization to Indians. Between 1930 and 1976, the US Bureau of Indian Affairs forcibly sterilized approximately 70,000 Indian women through the “Indian Health Service program”. In early 1970s, more than 42% of Indian women of childbearing age were sterilized.

Second, the US has committed spiritual and cultural genocide against Native Americans. They have long suffered hostility, discrimination and oblivion. The inter-generational inheritance of indigenous spirits and culture of Native Americans have long been hindered. In the 1870s and ’80s, the US government adopted a policy of “forced assimilation” to obliterate the social fabric and culture of Indian tribes and destroy the ethnic and tribal identity of the Indians. To attain the dual goal of cultural assimilation and taking Indian lands for itself, the US government began with forcing Native American children into the Indian boarding schools, banning them from speaking their native language, wearing their traditional clothes, or carrying out traditional activities. The children also suffered serious abuse and torment. US-based scholar Preston McBride estimates that the total number of deaths could be as high as 40,000, adding that “basically every school had a graveyard.” Even today, the US is still trying to deliberately obliterate the historical memory and information of the indigenous people in education and media reports. According to a report by National Indian Education Association, 87% of state-level US history textbooks do not mention the post-1900 history of indigenous people. 

Third, the US has committed deprivation of the rights of Native Americans. The US has systematically deprived Native Americans and other ethnic minorities of a wide range of their rights, leaving them mired in a crisis of survival and scarcity of rights. A report by the Indian Health Service shows that Native Americans born today have a life expectancy that is 5.5 years less than the national average, and they have the highest infant mortality rate. The suicide rate of Native American adolescents is 1.9 times that of the national average. By June 2022, the COVID-19 mortality rate among Native Americans is about 2.1 times that of the White population. From 1969 to 2009, the US government conducted 928 nuclear tests in the Shoshone tribal region, resulting in nuclear fallout of around 620 kilotons. Cancer incidence rate in Native Americans’ reservations is far higher than other areas. High levels of radioactive substance has been detected in the systems of about a quarter of Navajo women and infants. According to 2018 US Census Data, the poverty rate among Native Americans was 25.4%, far higher than 8.1% among the White population.

Genocide against Native Americans is an original sin of the US that can never be erased. The untold tragedies of Native Americans should never be forgotten. The US government has every reason to admit its crimes of genocide against Native Americans, and offer sincere apologies and repentance to the victims and their descendants. The US government should also credibly make up for the trauma Native Americans are suffering, and seriously face up to grave human rights issues and crimes of racism that exist within the US.

Zhao Lijian, Foreign Ministry, 29 June 2022

Before you react like a Pavlovian dog hearing a dinner bell, please remember this, White American: YOU ARE THE INDIAN NOW.

All of the lies and twisted truths you repeated in order to try to rationalize the sins of the past are now being told to justify your dispossession. The only difference is that the replacement peoples are unlikely to treat your great-great-grandchildren quite as kindly as your great-great-great-grandfather treated some of my ancestors. Imagine the lies and twisted truths that will be accepted as historical fact by the Post-Americans once Americans are a statistical minority similar to the American Indian population today.

Contemplate how many of your Asian and African great-grandchildren will be in my position, with most of their Asian and African peers refusing to believe that they have any European ancestors. After all, they won’t LOOK white…

What is happening today is directly traceable to the sins of the founding fathers and their abominable behavior toward “the merciless Indian Savages”, as the Declaration of Independence described them. Note in particular that the very concept of racism, upon which the entire American population has been condemned and crucified, was specifically coined by an American in order to destroy the American Indian. It is, therefore, both ironic and fitting that “racism” has been the primary weapon utilized in the rhetorical demolition of America.

I don’t remind you of these historical wrongs because I want revenge for my Indian ancestors or because I dream of Chung Kuo. What is done is done, and nothing is going to change that. To the contrary, I remind you of them because I do not wish for the American to go the way of the American Indian.

Perhaps, unlike the American Indian tribes, Americans can put all their ideological and individual differences aside in time to unite against the foreign peoples invading their lands and prevent their replacement. But most likely, as Sitting Bull and the Ghost Dancers learned to their dismay, it is already too late. It may be worth noting, in this regard, that while in 1890, the population of the United States, excluding the Indian and Negro minorities, was around 55 million, the post-1965 foreign population resident in the USA is presently about twice that number.


Racism is Pro-Human Diversity - Vox Popoli

 On Gab today, I pointed out the obvious fact that racism is not, and has never been, a sin. In fact, racism is entirely laudable, as racism is nothing more than the attempt by a people whose identity is under assault to preserve their unique status as a people, and the term is used in a pejorative manner by those who are attempting to destroy all independent aspects of identity, language, blood, religion, and culture in that group of people. This is neither theory nor speculation, it is simple historical fact.

While many people believe that the term racist was first coined by the Communist – specifically Trotsky, it was actually coined decades before Trotsky had used the term. Trotsky applied the word ‘racist’ to Slavophiles who opposed Communism and the word he used in his 1930 memoir The History of the Russian Revolution was “racistov” (расистов), which translates to ‘racism.’

However, according to NPR’s Codeswitch, the Oxford English Dictionary‘s first recorded utterance of the word’ racism’ refers to a man named Richard Henry Pratt in 1902. Pratt was railing against the evils of racial segregation, claiming: “Segregating any class or race of people apart from the rest of the people kills the progress of the segregated people or hinders their growth. Association of races and classes is necessary to destroy racism and classism.”

However, Pratt is better remembered as the man who coined the phrase “kill the Indian …save the man,” as a reference to the efforts to educate Native Americans.

“A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one and that high sanction of his destruction has been an enormous factor in promoting Indian massacres. In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is the race which should be dead. Kill the Indian in a person, and save the man.”

In October 1879, Pratt took over the Carlisle Barracks in Cumberland County and opened the Carlisle Indian School. He served as a superintendent of the school for the next 25 years. Pratt believed that the Indians could be assimilated into the mainstream of American life through education. To achieve that goal, he required them to speak English and felt that the Indians should be isolated from their home environment in order to successfully assimilate into American society.

Indians who objected to their tribal identity being destroyed were deemed “racist” by their conquerors and had their children subjected to relentless propaganda intended to brainwash them into believing that they were something they were not. Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

It’s not the racists who are evil. It’s not the racists who serve the cause of the Adversary. It is those who are anti-racist, who believe in equality, and who wish to unite all the diverse peoples of the world under a single satanic government.


Aleksandr Dugin on the Alien, Substantially Jewish Elite in the U.S. and Its War Against Traditional American Individualism - by Kevin MacDonald

 A translated version of an article by Aleksandr Dugin has appeared on KATEHON, an anti-globalist, pro-Russian website. (When I tried to post a link to the article on Twitter, they said that “the link has been identified by Twitter and its partners as harmful” and they blocked it.) Dugin’s article indicates that he has a solid grasp of politics in the U.S., and for the first time that I am aware of, he points to Jewish influence. Since Dugin is reputedly close to Vladimir Putin (“Putin’s brain” and of course, a “fascist,” as the neoliberal Washington Post phrased it) and because he has supported the Ukrainian war, it indicates that the Russian political establishment understands the upheaval going on in the United States.

Excerpts from Alexander Dugin: “The United States Court Against the Ideology of Progress.”

The fact is that there is not just one American state, but two countries and two nations with this name and this is becoming more and more evident. It is not even a question of Republicans and Democrats, whose conflict is becoming increasingly bitter. It is the fact that there is a deeper division in American society.

Half of the US population is an advocate of pragmatism. This means that for them there is only one yardstick: it works or it doesn’t work, it works/it doesn’t work. That is all. And no dogma either about the subject or the object. Everyone can see himself as whatever he wants, including Elvis Presley or Father Christmas, and if it works, no one dares to object. It is the same with the outside world: there are no inviolable laws, do what you want with the outside world, but if it responds harshly, that is your problem. There are no entities, only interactions. This is the basis of Native American identity, it is the way Americans themselves have traditionally understood liberalism: as freedom to think what you want, to believe what you want, and to behave as you want. Of course, if it comes to conflict, the freedom of one is limited by the freedom of the other, but without trying you cannot know where the fine line is. Try it, maybe it will work.

That is how American society has been up to a certain point. Here, banning abortion, allowing abortion, sex change, punishing sex change, gay parades or neo-Nazi parades were all possible, nothing was turned away at the door, the decision could be anything, and the courts, relying on a multitude of unpredictable criteria, precedents and considerations, were the last resort to decide, in problematic cases, what worked/didn’t work. This is the mysterious side of the Americans, completely misunderstood by Europeans, and also the key to their success: they have no boundaries, which means they go where they want until someone stops them, and that is exactly what works.

Dugin is describing traditional American political values based on individualism and personal freedom. But traditional American political values have been in conflict with the values of a new, substantially Jewish elite with strong authoritarian tendencies.

But in the American elite, which is made up of people from a wide variety of backgrounds, at some point a critically large number of non-Americans have accumulated. They are predominantly Europeans, often from Russia. Many are ethnically Jewish but imbued with European or Russian-Soviet principles and cultural codes. They brought a different culture and philosophy to the United States. They did not understand or accept American pragmatism at all, seeing it only as a backdrop for their own advancement. That is, they took advantage of American opportunities, but did not intend to adopt a libertarian logic unrelated to any hint of totalitarianism. In reality, it was these alien elites who hijacked the old American democracy. It was they who took the helm of globalist structures and gradually seized power in the United States.

This is exactly what we have emphasized at TOO. There are people with a variety of backgrounds that make up our new elite, but there is a substantial Jewish core with “alien” values, and in general, this elite speaks with one voice and dissent on important issues is not tolerated. This new elite largely emigrated to the United States in late nineteenth and early twentieth century, and the Marxist commitments of many of them were an important aspect of the enactment of the 1924 Immigration Restriction Act in the wake of the Bolshevik Revolution. In subsequent decades Jews became the backbone (p. 68ff) of the American Old Left and New Left. Indeed,  as noted in my review of Amy Weingarten’s Jewish Organizations’ Response to Communism and Senator McCarthy, “a major problem that the organized Jewish community was forced to confront—a problem stemming from the long involvement of the mainstream Jewish community in communism and the far left, at least until the end of World War II, and among a substantial number of Jews even after this period. … Weingarten points to a “hard core of Jews” (p. 6) who continued to support the Communist Party into the 1950s and continued to have a “decisive role” in shaping the policies of the American Communist Party (CPUSA) (p. 9). These leftist Jews were welcomed into the Jewish organizations during the early post-war, particularly the American Jewish Congress, the largest American Jewish organization, but they were gradually made unwelcome due to the anti-communist fervor of the period.

Notice that Dugin emphasizes that the new alien elite has exploited American individualism to advance these alien values—they “took advantage of American opportunities, but did not intend to adopt a libertarian logic unrelated to any hint of totalitarianism.” When they achieved power, they rejected the libertarian ethos in favor of top-down, centralized, authoritarian control that is antithetical to traditional American political culture.

This is precisely the thesis of my 2019 book Individualism and the Western Liberal Tradition: Evolutionary Origins, History, and Prospects for the Future where I document the rise of the substantially Jewish elite (Ch. 6; see also here) and describe how this new elite is shaping attitudes via domination of the media, the educational system, and political culture. Rejecting the libertarian framework, the new elite favors censoring ideas that conflict with these messages (Ch. 8), and it has established a two-tier justice system in which dissidents from the established orthodoxy are treated far more harshly than those favored by the new elite. In Chapter 9 I argue that traditional Western individualism is under dire threat from this assault. I would add that our new elite is not only alien to traditional Western values, it is also a hostile elite—hostile to the traditional people and culture of America, and that their desired multicultural future in which Whites would be a much-hated minority is very dangerous for Whites.

And I agree entirely that Jews “took advantage of American opportunities.” Because of their intelligence, their ethnic networking, and their long experience as merchants and in  financial matters, Jews  have certainly shown that they are quite successful in an individualist economic system (capitalism) and they have taken advantage of the relatively low ethnocentrism that is an integral aspect of individualism. As I noted in Chapter 8 of Individualism,

as emphasized throughout this book, White people tend to be more individualistic than other peoples, implying that they are less likely than other peoples to make invidious distinctions between ingroups and outgroups and they are more likely to be open to strangers and people who don’t look like them. Because Whites are low in ethnocentrism and high in conscientiousness, controlling ethnocentrism is easier for them. Their subcortical mechanisms responsible for ethnocentrism are weaker to start with and hence easier to control [via messages from the media and educational system enabled by top-down inhibitory control over the modular processing typical of the lower brain].

As a result,  this new elite encountered only minimal resistance from the old American elite which was under intense pressure during the 1950s and capitulated entirely in the 1960s and 70s—the era that resulted in Roe v. Wade (1973), civil rights legislation, affirmative action, replacement-level non-White immigration, etc.

Critically relevant is that Dugin notes parallels of the new elite with Bolshevik attitudes of authoritarian control, including “destruction” of those seen as having the wrong attitudes: “If you are not a progressive, you are a Nazi and “must be destroyed.”

These elites, often left-liberal, sometimes openly Trotskyist, have brought with them a position that is deeply alien to the American spirit: the belief in linear progress [as in Marxism]. …

However, the emigrants from the Old World brought with them very different attitudes. For them, progress was a dogma. All history was seen as continuous improvement, as a continuous process of emancipation, improvement, development and accumulation of knowledge [presumably a reference to Marxism]. Progress was a philosophy and a religion. In the name of progress, which included a continuous increase in individual freedoms, technical development and the abolition of traditions and taboos, everything was possible and necessary, and it no longer mattered whether it worked or not. What mattered was progress.

This, however, represented a completely new interpretation of liberalism for the American tradition. The old liberalism argued: no one can ever impose anything on me. The new liberalism responded: a culture of abolition, shaming, total elimination of old habits, sex change, freedom to dispose of the human foetus (pro-choice), equal rights for women and races is not just a possibility, it is a necessity. The old liberalism said: be what you want, as long as it works. The new one replied: you have no right not to be a liberal. If you are not a progressive, you are a Nazi and must be destroyed. Everything must be sacrificed in the name of freedom, LGBT+, transgender and artificial intelligence.

We often hear the phrase “on the right side of history” from progressives, the idea being that history is going in only one direction and change in that direction is inevitable. At this time, being on the right side of history means believing that you believe in a future in which White “racism” is abolished and all peoples will live together in peace and harmony, ethnic conflicts will be abolished, and all groups—freed from the scourge of White racism—will have the same average level of income and achievement. Such a utopian view flies in the face of the long history of ethnic/racial conflict and the reality of biologically based race differences. But believing it is progressive dogma and, as Dugin would say, “If you are not a progressive, you are a Nazi and must be destroyed.”

Dugin is quite aware of the opposition of our hostile elite to Donald Trump:

The conflict between the two societies — the old libertarian, pragmatic one and the new neoliberal, progressive one — has steadily escalated over the past decades and culminated in the Trump presidency. Trump has embodied one America and his globalist democratic opponents the other. The civil war of philosophies has reached a critical point.

As I have written before, Trump made many mistakes and often fumbled the ball on  his appointments (although the pool of mainstream Republicans from which he chose was completely corrupt, and he saddled himself with Jared and Ivanka as central players). However, his campaign pronouncements were clearly anti-globalist—opposing immigration (not just illegal), building the wall, wanting better relations with Russia, removing U.S. troops from the Middle East, complaining about the effects of immigration (“Paris isn’t Paris any more”), etc. These pronouncements engendered an unprecedented uproar from our hostile elite (now being reenacted as a result of the recent SCOTUS rulings—blamed on Trump because of his choices in SCOTUS nominations) and the Washington bureaucracy—the deep state (including the FBI). Media articles during the 2016 campaign were replete with messages that Trump was the reincarnation of Hitler, etc. This hostility continued throughout Trump’s presidency resulting in the prolonged Mueller investigation (based on the Russia collusion hoax) and two impeachments by the Democrat-controlled House (with the help of some Republicans). For the entire four years, there was an atmosphere of crisis surrounding Trump’s presidency, and this has continued now with the January 6 Committee hearings (which are mainly aimed at preventing Trump from running again).

Dugin repeats his emphasis on the totalitarian and violent tendencies of the new elite:

New America … insists that freedom requires violence against those who do not understand it well enough. Which means that freedom must have a normative interpretation and it is up to the neo-liberals themselves to determine how and to whom they use it and how they interpret it. The old liberalism is libertarian. The new is blatantly totalitarian. The Supreme Court is now overturning the totalitarian dictatorial strategy of the neo-liberal globalist elites, who act — a bit like the Bolsheviks in Russia — in the name of the future.

Yes, but I’d say it’s more than “a bit like the Bolsheviks.” Moreover, it’s tempting to think that Dugin is here linking Bolshevik-type authoritarian attitudes to the Jewish overrepresentation in the new American elite, given that he noted the obvious role of Jews in the new globalist elite dominating America, and his likely awareness of the well known outsized Jewish role in the murderous, intensely authoritarian early decades of the USSR with its utopian promises of creating the New Soviet Man. This very large role of Jews in the early decades of the USSR has also been noted by Putin and is presumably common knowledge among Russian intellectuals.

And the almost desperate old Americans, pragmatists and libertarians rejoice [at overturning Roe v. Wade]: the freedom to do what you want, not what the progressives and technocrats say, to go in any direction, not just where the globalists are forcibly sending us, has triumphed again, and Missouri’s brave attorney general has already shown what can be done. Bravo! It is a pragmatic revolution, an American-style conservative revolution.
Of course, all the globalist progressive crap is about to go down the drain. The old America has in a way counter-attacked the new America. “If the kingdom of law is divided in itself, it will surely become desolate”. Matthew 12:25 Better sooner than later…

“Better sooner than later.” I couldn’t agree more. While the White population still has political and demographic clout.

Dugin’s comments on the alien American elite and his strong support for the Ukrainian war make clear the dominant Russian perspective on this conflict. They see it correctly as a conflict between Russian sovereignty and neoliberal globalist elites based in the West that are aiming for a unipolar world with themselves dominating a subservient, relatively powerless Russia. It is the world dreamed of in the 1990s during the Yeltsin administration and abruptly snuffed out by the rise of Putin. Neoconservatives have targeted Russia ever since.

Make no mistake. It is critical for Russia to win this war. But it’s quite clear that the neoconservatives (Blinken, Nuland, Sherman) dominating the Biden administration’s foreign policy also see this as a critically important struggle, and they have continued to increase the U.S. commitment—willing to fight to the last Ukrainian. And, I suspect that ultimately they will be willing to use U.S. troops in the conflict to prevent a Russian victory.