To understand just how crazy this has gotten, look at the presumptions that underlie these attitudes, and I'm speaking as a US citizen. When Americans rabidly attack Russia for invading Ukraine, and are told that the US has invaded a number of countries just in the last few decades, they respond with the typical 'whataboutism' accusation. The fact that the US has zero moral credibility to even criticize Russia is something which must be gagged and beaten to silence. But claiming that risking a nuclear war is worth it because Russia is so criminal takes the fantasy to a whole new level. They presume that not only is Russia pure evil, but that the US is some sort of benevolent power, intent on righting the wrongs of the world, always concerned about the welfare and sovereignty of other countries and the rights of the world's people, blah, blah, blah. As champion of the world's underdogs, it simply must do something, even if it risks WW3. Anyone with a few functioning brain cells and an ability to process information knows that this is pure insanity, that US behavior in the world is basically criminal, yet a good many people in my country engage in this delusional thinking, and apparently in much of the West. That hardly anyone in a position of power in the US is calling out this insanity has me worried. I realize that US is going off the cliff, but does it have to take the rest of the world down with it?
The US reminds me of Japan's "Prosperity Sphere" when it attacked SE Asia, Java, Borneo etc. primarily for the resources it needed to continue its decades long war with China - which also was instigated at the hand of uncontrolled militarism, and the militarists in control of the Japanese government at the time.
Also similar to the British commonwealth - Imperialism always claims it is some kind of "benevolent" power. That whatever it does, including the slaughter of innocents is justified in the name of furthering the Empire's political/militaristic goals.
The US and the militarists now in control of the US governmental apparatus are no different than the same sociopathic Imperial murderers of the past. But what makes it a catastrophe this time round: is human military weapons have now advanced to nuclear capabilities, and these nut jobs will likely not have enough wisdom not to use these weapons.
Japan's mistake was going too far south into China, prime market for the USA. Teddy primed, locked and loaded Japan to go North after the Russian Bear. His cousin was ready to kill two birds with one stone until by originally helping to build up Japan to go after the UK and Dutch Empire in SE Asia until the Japanese showed too much independence in their foreign policy and trade behavior. Domestic politics in Japan combined with USSR's rapid economic/military growth messed up these plans.
Japan's war with China was purely imperialistic. They were also remarkably brutal to the Chinese and the war went on for a very long time - and in the end, didn't accomplish a damn thing except a lot of human life cut short - sometimes quite brutally and cruelly.
Roosevelt knew by continuing sanctions on Japan as he did, that he was putting the militaristic/imperialists running the government of Japan into a corner that they could not get out of - if they continued to insist on their China wars. They of course did insist on the continuing wars and realized they needed to grab the resources of SE Indonesia if they were going to keep the militarism up at the pace they were going. From historical accounts - the US and Roosevelt knew Japan was planning to attack, and were even aware it would be coming around the time it did come - they just didn't know the precise details of the attack and weren't expecting a direct attack against Pearl Harbor. Philippines they were expecting but Macarthur - an awful, egotistical overrated commander - completely bungled the defense of the Philippines - and even abandoned the American soldiers fighting there to save his own life (and family). Philippines was pretty much lost as it was - but the Japan warmongers thought the US would sue for peace after their takeover of Indonesia. Roosevelt never even gave it a second thought - the refrain for the Japanese (and Germans) was always: unconditional surrender.
Appreciated. How to Hide an Empire, by Daniel Immerwahr starts out with how hard a sell FDR actually faced, as even Hawaii was an occupied colony at that time, a colony full of non-white, non-citizens. Just how many redrafts of his speach to Congress it took to sell the nearly unsellable, white men dying defending Wall Street's concessions using brown slaves.
The Japanese were cognizant of this, but they failed for two reasons, one is Hitler promptly declared war on the USA to support Japan, thus linking an existential threat to a pittance that most people found both embarrassing and (racist) repugnant. Two, the Japanese could offer nothing to the USA in return for peace and were never a serious threat. They could not "stop" threatening a mainland they could not possibly threaten, they could not offer up lands or resources the USA could not already take by itself. If they had at least been warring on the Russia/USSR as Teddy/FDR admins desired, then they could have threatened to stop the war and even ally with USSR against the USA/UK proxies in Berlin. Total miscalculation, but the principle was correct, FDR was for sale. Then there is the bonus stupidity of Tokyo, the Japanese were offering the wrong goods, reduction in American deaths, when a bloodletting and export of potential communist sympathizers among the working class was desired.
Absolutely right. As Brit I just cannot believe that Americans fall for this. A fair few of us here in Britain do too, but it seems to me that in the main it's the goverment and the security elites that are pushing this narrative here. Maybe it's the same in the US.
There’s a demographic factor in play here, in the U.S. Today, retired, retiring, and soon to retire baby boomers are the majority whose hearts and minds have to open. They have been deeply addicted to a consumer-driven economy that has worked so well that most of them believed that being apolitical was a sign of good character. The have their vices and their religion to forgive their indigent forays. They have sports, and they think it’s healthy to have tribal rants against their neighbors who don’t have their same tribal loyalties. The idea that they need to digest the details of policies is something most of them will reject out of hand. They are corporate constructions who want nothing to do with the work that democracy requires.
Boomers are the last truly educated generation. they have been marginalized by the oligarchy and most of them are just scrambling just to make ends meet. Their talents vis-à-vis Viet Nam war protest ( and other protests) are significant. Should this potential be organized, it scares the Oligarchs.
Getting a couple of million protesters on the streets of DC would send a proper message.
Its happening in Europe ( being censored here by MSM) it isn't happening here. Why?
They’re the first generation to be heavily propagandized from birth. And if you think they are the last truly educated generation, what were they doing to keep public schools up to snuff? Absolutely nothing. Those hippies and Vietnam protestors are now corporate tools. The only truly educated Americans were from families that encouraged asking questions, intellectual development, and those were few and far between, as the wide majority of parents worked - both of them, which resulted in loads of children with lots of time and precious little direction or inspiration.
Or like Biden's earlier comment, which went something like, "I promise you we can do it." Spoken at barely above a whisper, like Brando giving orders in "The Godfather." But instead of a horse's head in the bed, he blew up the pipeline. Biden/Blinken/Nuland - much bigger criminals, and with fewer scruples, than any Mafia Godfather.
Everyone knows that the US did it, but nobody of influence and authority is brave enough to say so, now that Radek Sikorski was shushed for saying the quiet part out loud.
I agree with everything you say, which resonates with my life work. We used to talk about 'raising consciousness' and in my Jungian training, "making the unconscious conscious." I have spent much of my adult life on psychology and nukes. There is also a gender dimension of bravado and denial of vulnerability to threatening the use of nukes. A few hours ago I published this on the NPT conference - https://coronawise.substack.com/p/a-guided-tour-of-the-nuclear-nonproliferation
Much of my work has been on image of the enemy, manipulation of fear, etc - not addressed in this piece. I am grateful for your work.
I think Caitlin is saying that we must not fry ourselves in a nuclear holocaust! And I completely agree with her about that!
I think she also points out that "win" and "lose" are constructs of the ego. Winning and losing is illusory. (All intellectualising is ultimately illusion.)
"Oligarchy". It's just a word. A label. We use these labels to divide our world into "good" people and "bad" people.
How would you classify "oligarchs"? What does the word really mean? Ultimately it's just a "clever" way of classifying "bad" people.
This is the problem. We tend to divide our world into "good" and "bad" when in reality no division exists. It is an illusion!
It's not a matter of sumitting to anything. It is a matter of realising that it is not real!
Because speech is a very important mode of communication for humans we use these labels. I use these labels. But I do so with at least some degree of an awareness of the reality.
It's very hard to get people to realise that what goes on in their heads is mostly illusion!
Your though processes are just an internalisation of your voice. And speech is just a communication medium peculiar to humans. It doesn't really make us that special.
If people, according to you, are misunderstanding you, then you better work on getting your mouth congruent with your brain. Just maybe the problem is with your presentation.
What are you talking about now? I am admitting that I am not perfect. That I don't know everything. I think it would help (the world) if others did the same.
I am just commenting on a comment thread. That's all. I'm not writing a dissertation!
Take this: I am not here to undermine anyone. I am not here to fight with people. Including you.
No, you do not see. You most certainly have not "got it".
You (predictably) misunderstand. And you insult me - I don't appreciate your tone. I am trying to teach you something. And if you can stop being so conceited for a second you might learn something. I am not your enemy. I am not trying to undermine you.
As I said, it is very difficult to get people to understand what I'm trying to say.
I agree with you about Yemen. But that is because I believe what I have been told about it. Because I trust what I have been told. I have no direct experience of it. It is not my personal reality.
What is happening in Yemen (etc) may be real for those impacted by it. Those who are actually experiencing it. But is not real for me and it is most probably not real for you either (not unless you have been there).
You must understand that probably 95% of what you understand about the world has come to you from other people, other people who you have decided to trust are telling you the truth!!
Not everything you are told is true. You really do need to extend some scepticism about EVERYTHING you are told. Not just towards people who you consider to be your political opponents.
This is why some people believe that the moon landings did not happen. Because they have not grasped that almost all that they understand about world events is secondhand.
I believe the moon landings did happen. But that is because I have decided to trust what I have been told about them. Not because I have any direct personal experience of them.
Let's say, John, after all these years you finally decided to visit Cornwall and while enjoying the scenery had an unfortunate accident. Namely, fell off the cliff. Luckily you survived but broke your legs and have to use crutches.
Now, someone walking past Bodmin hospital sees you struggling with your physical therapy exercises. What is real for them? Not the fact you fell off the cliff - they weren't there to witness it. What's real for them is that you had an accident and are suffering.
Now the question - does it matter, those details? Sure, re current events nothing can be believed. But once time passes and the documents are declassified and become available, research has been conducted, visits, interviews, investigations, etc have been concluded - can you seriously claim the stuff presented did not happen?
Of course, there might be different interpretations. Those you can dismiss as unreal since they might be serving someone's agenda. But surely, when all those resources are made available to you you can go ahead with studying and arriving at your own conclusions effectively making those events real to you. Just like a person in Bodmin can imagine all kinds of things that might have happened to you - details may not matter, but the effects are there and that's what makes whatever happened reality.
Is that your point, John? That if you personally did not study some issue and "realize" it for yourself you cannot talk about it? Or that you have to qualify every point as "I know" or "I believe" or "I studied"?
Yes, if somebody sees me then that is their reality!!
But unless I go to where there is conflict happening in the world I am taking on trust what I am told about it!
And by the way, my great grandfather did fall off a cliff in Cornwall in 1950! And he did spend a long time in hospital. No, that was not my personal reality, I was not born then. However, I believe my family when they told me about it. (I've no reason to doubt them).
I understand your position and reiterate my comment. You are a relativist who refuses to see the truth before you because it makes you uncomfortable. You'll sacrifice everything to avoid facing the reality of Nuclear War that is coming because you are incapable of identifying the evil being perpetrated by the Oligarchy and you excuse it, letting them have their way.
I believe that the moon landings did happen. But as they happened fifty years ago there now exists relatively little proof of it, other than perhaps in a NASA museum.
As I've tried to say, pretty much everything that we understand about the world has come to us secondhand.
The link you are giving is narrative. It's just words. It may be well written, you may be convinced about it. But that doesn't make it true.
Unless you are part of a world event your understanding of it is largely based on your (unconscious) decision to trust what you are being told about it.
Now I have decided to trust what I have been told about the moon landings. I believe that they did happen. But that is just a belief. I probably couldn't prove it to you.
All things considered I think that they did happen. Similarly I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy and I believe that fifteen M/E terrorists were responsible for 9/11.
Amazing how after all these years no other country or the USA has gone to the moon. Too bad NASA lost those 700 crates full of the technical documentation and footage. Really enjoyed those amazing live TV shots from the moon with miraculous 60s technology!
Much as I would like to oblige, Tim WW, it sickens me to go into the details except to give you a brief summary, in my words, of its impact on me, an elderly Australian. In the meantime, look at the map in Caitlin's article and imagine that same geography when the US really threaten China. It won't be a friendly little gathering in the Pacific of all the little island people signing something put in front of them by a bloke called Blinken to ensure their subservience to the US, but an occupation of so many new US establishments to suit their purposes. It is called WAR or WORLD DOMINATION. Look at the 800 bases all around the world.
They are anything but social clubs. All there for one purpose
Back in the days of "you are a British Colony, Australia, and don't forget it" (1788 to perhaps 1963. …..British atomic tests (not in Britain but on Australian soil) off the coast of Western Australia) , we bowed to a Queen in Great Britain, grovelled to anything that looked like royalty, accepted that our money was imprinted with images of some people in London and even accepted Knighthoods when they dished them out for services rendered (to the Crown, that is). Still a lot of grovelling going around today with half the population thinking we now have a King called Charles III while the other half see that whole scene as decadent and serving little no purpose whatsoever.
About that time as discussed by others, we elected a Prime Minister worthy of respect and with imagination and the first thing he did was remove our soldiers from the US war in Viietnam. Now the US had been sneaking their way into various areas of influence with an Embassy in Canberra the size of the Taj Mahal and they didn’t like this. No sir. Stay there Aussie and do what you’re told or we’ll get rid of the government. Well, to cut a long story to the bones, the CIA, the uncontrolled secret army available to anyone (if the price is right) did just that and we then became a compliant little bag carrier for everything that the USA demanded. More wars, US bases all over, military weapons contracts signed, one after the other, and the message was clear then and still is now. "You’re either with us or you’re against us”. As a gesture of some kind, most US presidents have made a flight to Australia during their tenure just to see if we are subservient enough to be able to share military exercises, be given intelligence data that is not too revealing of what the US gets up to, while at the same time, confirming to all and sundry that this is their controlled domain,. So it has now become ....….'buzz off China. Go and buy your wheat, coal, wine, iron ore, meat, milk products and on….and on again…. from someone else. Australia doesn’t need you or your Yuan (money).
If we have our way, they will buy from us.’
It is working well in Europe with gas and petrol, isn't it. Cunning, those Americans.
And of course, we do. buy from the US. Wth an Australian dollar at $0.64 cents when compared to the US $, what a great benefit that is to the Vanguards and BlackRocks and what a long term burden for Australia. New Zealand 's situation is even worse than that.
So now we have AUKUS, a clear indication that Australia is now dancing to another entrenched colonialist bent on world domination with a possible debt to someone (bound to be the US) of $150 billion dollars for unwanted submarines and a wait of perhaps 20 years to see if they even float.
Australia has becomes accustomed to 'tipping their hats' to anyone these days. It is now an undisputed fact. It's just the way we have become.
I don't think Australia really existed in the way you think of it in 1788. As an innocent middle aged Brit I really wish you (and others) would stop blaming us for all of your ills.
The Queen was a constitutional monarch. We have had in effect a constitutional monarchy in Britain since 1689. Since that time, despite the ceremonial theatre, it is Parliament who have been in charge.
There was no blame intended, John. The point being made, probably not clearly enough, was that over the best part of 234 years Australia has made no effort to become its own country; no effort to be independent in the management of the country and its foreign policy and no effort to stand on its own two feet, as they say.
This is hardly the fault of your country.
Australia inherited nothing from the indigenous peoples , representing just 2.4% of our current population in 1788. Nor did the English occupants, as it really was a British fleet that sailed into the harbour on that day. Remained that way until 1901.
So Australia, as it was then, was in no way any different to all the other conquered countries of the British Empire as it was, which after some time has become one member of The Commonwealth of Nations, simply referred to as the Commonwealth, a political association of 56 member states, the vast majority of which are former conquered territories of the British Empire.
We have controlled out own foreign policy since 1901. That is the point I am making, but we are not independent and never have been, our new controllers are not the British but the greatest criminal country in history. Britain during its growth as a colonial power was ruthless in its approach to expanding the "Empire" but an absolute amateur compared the the USA.
And still in there, pitching for total world control.
How do you bring clear vision to those who profit by not having it? They have what they consider clear vision, and it's no use telling them it's an ugly distortion: they cannot and will not believe it. They are trying right now to put a good slant on austerity for ordinary people, with more wealth and lavish living for elites: they call it Degrowth -as in an environmental plus, and they will get away with it if we are dumb enough to permit it. We, the majority, have to keep working on the majority who do not profit from evil, but rather suffer from it, sometimes terribly. We have a mission, a definite purpose right now: we are being robbed of our birthright, the right to fully enjoy life in reasonable and non-destructive ways. Complaining is our only strategy. Constant and unrelenting opposition to the greedy and brutal, and the structures in society - laws, organizations, institutions, that cater to them with false accusations and phoney wars - as in the West's proxy war in Ukraine and many before that bring us ever closer to annihilation: a big NO to them, and YES to life.
When I was a kid in the shadow of WWII, we had "duck and cover" drills in school, as if that would save us when The Bomb hit. There were also great movies depicting the results of nuclear war. "On the Beach" and Fail Safe" come to mind. Then, for comic relief, there was "Dr. Strangelove." We knew about the possibility of nuclear war when JFK and Khrushchev worked together to prevent it. Now, Biden won't even talk to Putin.
I'm not sure if younger people today have any understanding of what's really goin' down. Do they think it's just a video game? A game of Risk? All that they think they know of WWII is that "we" nuked two Japanese cities in order to save American lives.
So, nuclear war is no big deal as long as OUR side kills more people and wipes our more cities than the OTHER side. Look how far down the rabbit hole this godforsaken country has gone since JFK. Now we have an obviously senile, degenerate octogenarian attempting to give orders, while he yells that White Supremacists are the biggest threat to our survival.
And, unlike in Britain where it is rumored that new PM Liz Truss is already on her way out, this country can't get rid of Biden until the next election. It's in the Constitution, after all. It seems that sticking to the 4-year presidential election cycle is more important that preventing WWIII.
I love you Caitlin. Your first piece I read was about the NYT article on Ukrainian "draft dodgers". Could you consider writing and tweeting about the Defuse Nuclear War campaign? We need your readers to know about the chances to take strong action Oct 14 - 16. Thank you. https://defusenuclearwar.org/
If I weren't on an indefinite Twitter hiatus and some shitlib responded to a tweet of mine about nuclear war with "Some things are worth dying for", I'd probably say "You have the right to make that decision for yourself, but you don't have the right to sacrifice anyone else. The Biden administration is willing to risk sacrificing everyone, in addition to sacrificing Ukrainians, and they have no more right to do so than you do."
If nuclear war were the sort of thing that would kill, say, 20% of the world's population but save the remaining 80% somehow then *maybe* these people could try to make a "needs of the few are outweighed by the needs of the many" argument. But it won't be 20%, or 50%....it'll be EVERYONE, or damn close to everyone. So I'd love to know how they respond to the question "What, precisely, does the death of the entire population of the world accomplish that makes it 'worth it'?"
My Bad Hobbit of Repetition-Notes from the Shire(r)
Otra vez: from the introduction of Bill(bo) Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”
“I have often felt a bitter sorrow at the thought of the German people, which is so estimable in the individual, and so wretched in the generality.” Goethe
“In our new age of terrifying, lethal gadgets, which supplanted so swiftly the old one; the first great aggressive war, if it should come, will be launched by suicidal little men and pressing an electronic button. Such a war will not last long, and none will ever follow. There will be no conquerors and no conquests, but only the charred bones of the dead on an uninhabited planet.”
“Those who don’t remember the past, are condemned to relive it.” Santayana
i’m very fearful that the collective memory loss evinced by our leaders over the last quarter century, and on display most prominently now-will lead simply to the condemnation to death of all us, without any “reliving.”
There’s no hobbit hole that will protect against nuclear holocaust, and space ISS no protection.
There isn’t a single journo who writes like you do. Most report on current events yet fail to contextualize the human experience. I share your posts to my lib friends because they say they are into expanding consciousness and I hope any of this resonates with them.
Surely you’re right...but I have to pause, because the current bio weapon deployment against civilians en masse continues unabated; and increased funding for more bio weapon development bodes uber darkly. What will it mean when the colossal wave of immune system suppression/reprogramming, crippling of DNA repair mechanisms, and gradual micro vascular damage breaks and comes crashing down? It might be on par with the toll of a nuclear exchange...
Asking to imagine the destruction of everything on earth is pointless. Its like asking to imagine eternity - the 3D mind cant do it. Imagine the destruction of New York City - remember 9/11, that was one major block with x000 deaths. That ‘disaster’ would pale in comparison. Imagine that!
The self is a very real construct, and not an illusion at all. You cannot truly conquer selfishness by believing in a new lie. True selflessness comes from choosing to love other people, and to act out on that self-sacrificial love, to not serve yourself but to seek what is best for others.
Regarding your first sentence here. I would say that's very much open to question. "Real" and "construct" are contradictory.
I would say really it's a matter of semantics - words are just labels at the end of the day. It maybe depends on what you mean by the "self".
Intellectual constructs are not real. What is real for you as an individual is what your senses tell you. Everything else is a matter of your personal beliefs and your value system.
To understand just how crazy this has gotten, look at the presumptions that underlie these attitudes, and I'm speaking as a US citizen. When Americans rabidly attack Russia for invading Ukraine, and are told that the US has invaded a number of countries just in the last few decades, they respond with the typical 'whataboutism' accusation. The fact that the US has zero moral credibility to even criticize Russia is something which must be gagged and beaten to silence. But claiming that risking a nuclear war is worth it because Russia is so criminal takes the fantasy to a whole new level. They presume that not only is Russia pure evil, but that the US is some sort of benevolent power, intent on righting the wrongs of the world, always concerned about the welfare and sovereignty of other countries and the rights of the world's people, blah, blah, blah. As champion of the world's underdogs, it simply must do something, even if it risks WW3. Anyone with a few functioning brain cells and an ability to process information knows that this is pure insanity, that US behavior in the world is basically criminal, yet a good many people in my country engage in this delusional thinking, and apparently in much of the West. That hardly anyone in a position of power in the US is calling out this insanity has me worried. I realize that US is going off the cliff, but does it have to take the rest of the world down with it?
The US reminds me of Japan's "Prosperity Sphere" when it attacked SE Asia, Java, Borneo etc. primarily for the resources it needed to continue its decades long war with China - which also was instigated at the hand of uncontrolled militarism, and the militarists in control of the Japanese government at the time.
Also similar to the British commonwealth - Imperialism always claims it is some kind of "benevolent" power. That whatever it does, including the slaughter of innocents is justified in the name of furthering the Empire's political/militaristic goals.
The US and the militarists now in control of the US governmental apparatus are no different than the same sociopathic Imperial murderers of the past. But what makes it a catastrophe this time round: is human military weapons have now advanced to nuclear capabilities, and these nut jobs will likely not have enough wisdom not to use these weapons.
Great comparison. US government captured by oligarchy.
Japan's mistake was going too far south into China, prime market for the USA. Teddy primed, locked and loaded Japan to go North after the Russian Bear. His cousin was ready to kill two birds with one stone until by originally helping to build up Japan to go after the UK and Dutch Empire in SE Asia until the Japanese showed too much independence in their foreign policy and trade behavior. Domestic politics in Japan combined with USSR's rapid economic/military growth messed up these plans.
Japan's war with China was purely imperialistic. They were also remarkably brutal to the Chinese and the war went on for a very long time - and in the end, didn't accomplish a damn thing except a lot of human life cut short - sometimes quite brutally and cruelly.
Roosevelt knew by continuing sanctions on Japan as he did, that he was putting the militaristic/imperialists running the government of Japan into a corner that they could not get out of - if they continued to insist on their China wars. They of course did insist on the continuing wars and realized they needed to grab the resources of SE Indonesia if they were going to keep the militarism up at the pace they were going. From historical accounts - the US and Roosevelt knew Japan was planning to attack, and were even aware it would be coming around the time it did come - they just didn't know the precise details of the attack and weren't expecting a direct attack against Pearl Harbor. Philippines they were expecting but Macarthur - an awful, egotistical overrated commander - completely bungled the defense of the Philippines - and even abandoned the American soldiers fighting there to save his own life (and family). Philippines was pretty much lost as it was - but the Japan warmongers thought the US would sue for peace after their takeover of Indonesia. Roosevelt never even gave it a second thought - the refrain for the Japanese (and Germans) was always: unconditional surrender.
Of course, all of this is my own take on the situation leading up to the war with the Japanese. Views and other theories will differ from mine.
Appreciated. How to Hide an Empire, by Daniel Immerwahr starts out with how hard a sell FDR actually faced, as even Hawaii was an occupied colony at that time, a colony full of non-white, non-citizens. Just how many redrafts of his speach to Congress it took to sell the nearly unsellable, white men dying defending Wall Street's concessions using brown slaves.
The Japanese were cognizant of this, but they failed for two reasons, one is Hitler promptly declared war on the USA to support Japan, thus linking an existential threat to a pittance that most people found both embarrassing and (racist) repugnant. Two, the Japanese could offer nothing to the USA in return for peace and were never a serious threat. They could not "stop" threatening a mainland they could not possibly threaten, they could not offer up lands or resources the USA could not already take by itself. If they had at least been warring on the Russia/USSR as Teddy/FDR admins desired, then they could have threatened to stop the war and even ally with USSR against the USA/UK proxies in Berlin. Total miscalculation, but the principle was correct, FDR was for sale. Then there is the bonus stupidity of Tokyo, the Japanese were offering the wrong goods, reduction in American deaths, when a bloodletting and export of potential communist sympathizers among the working class was desired.
Absolutely right. As Brit I just cannot believe that Americans fall for this. A fair few of us here in Britain do too, but it seems to me that in the main it's the goverment and the security elites that are pushing this narrative here. Maybe it's the same in the US.
There’s a demographic factor in play here, in the U.S. Today, retired, retiring, and soon to retire baby boomers are the majority whose hearts and minds have to open. They have been deeply addicted to a consumer-driven economy that has worked so well that most of them believed that being apolitical was a sign of good character. The have their vices and their religion to forgive their indigent forays. They have sports, and they think it’s healthy to have tribal rants against their neighbors who don’t have their same tribal loyalties. The idea that they need to digest the details of policies is something most of them will reject out of hand. They are corporate constructions who want nothing to do with the work that democracy requires.
Not boomers...you speak of their children.
Not one or the other, both.
Boomers are the last truly educated generation. they have been marginalized by the oligarchy and most of them are just scrambling just to make ends meet. Their talents vis-à-vis Viet Nam war protest ( and other protests) are significant. Should this potential be organized, it scares the Oligarchs.
Getting a couple of million protesters on the streets of DC would send a proper message.
Its happening in Europe ( being censored here by MSM) it isn't happening here. Why?
They’re the first generation to be heavily propagandized from birth. And if you think they are the last truly educated generation, what were they doing to keep public schools up to snuff? Absolutely nothing. Those hippies and Vietnam protestors are now corporate tools. The only truly educated Americans were from families that encouraged asking questions, intellectual development, and those were few and far between, as the wide majority of parents worked - both of them, which resulted in loads of children with lots of time and precious little direction or inspiration.
Well said.
Today, Blinken was essentially trolling.
https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1576326018893492225?s=20&t=OzaWW06cQFhB_a-rK2DUkQ
The thinly veiled subtext is "Of course we blew NS1 and NS2. What you gonna do about it?"
Or like Biden's earlier comment, which went something like, "I promise you we can do it." Spoken at barely above a whisper, like Brando giving orders in "The Godfather." But instead of a horse's head in the bed, he blew up the pipeline. Biden/Blinken/Nuland - much bigger criminals, and with fewer scruples, than any Mafia Godfather.
Everyone knows that the US did it, but nobody of influence and authority is brave enough to say so, now that Radek Sikorski was shushed for saying the quiet part out loud.
I agree with everything you say, which resonates with my life work. We used to talk about 'raising consciousness' and in my Jungian training, "making the unconscious conscious." I have spent much of my adult life on psychology and nukes. There is also a gender dimension of bravado and denial of vulnerability to threatening the use of nukes. A few hours ago I published this on the NPT conference - https://coronawise.substack.com/p/a-guided-tour-of-the-nuclear-nonproliferation
Much of my work has been on image of the enemy, manipulation of fear, etc - not addressed in this piece. I am grateful for your work.
I really like your philosophy which I'll just summarize (perhaps incorrectly) as letting go of the ego.
But that totally conflicts with your opening:
"Avoiding nuclear war is the single most important agenda in the world."
Why? Are you saying we should allow the Oligarchy to win? In what world does their win support anything else you've written here?
You've identified the Empire.
You've made it clear who they are.
Yet, you seem to open with a plea to the empire that sounds as if you are willing to submit so long as you can remain alive.
I dunno, what is worth dying for?
I agree, "victory over Russia" isn't worth spit.
But victory over the Oligarchy? Freedom from the Empire? That seems to be a different equation.
I think Caitlin is saying that we must not fry ourselves in a nuclear holocaust! And I completely agree with her about that!
I think she also points out that "win" and "lose" are constructs of the ego. Winning and losing is illusory. (All intellectualising is ultimately illusion.)
"Oligarchy". It's just a word. A label. We use these labels to divide our world into "good" people and "bad" people.
How would you classify "oligarchs"? What does the word really mean? Ultimately it's just a "clever" way of classifying "bad" people.
This is the problem. We tend to divide our world into "good" and "bad" when in reality no division exists. It is an illusion!
It's not a matter of sumitting to anything. It is a matter of realising that it is not real!
Because speech is a very important mode of communication for humans we use these labels. I use these labels. But I do so with at least some degree of an awareness of the reality.
It's very hard to get people to realise that what goes on in their heads is mostly illusion!
Your though processes are just an internalisation of your voice. And speech is just a communication medium peculiar to humans. It doesn't really make us that special.
I see.
The children starving to death in Yemen because of the American Oligarchy is an illusion.
The people being slaughtered in Ukraine because of the American Oligarchy is an illusion.
The slaves being sold in Libya because of the American Oligarchy is an illusion.
Got it. /s
This is a completely separate issue from the one I was responding to.
If people, according to you, are misunderstanding you, then you better work on getting your mouth congruent with your brain. Just maybe the problem is with your presentation.
What are you talking about now? I am admitting that I am not perfect. That I don't know everything. I think it would help (the world) if others did the same.
I am just commenting on a comment thread. That's all. I'm not writing a dissertation!
Take this: I am not here to undermine anyone. I am not here to fight with people. Including you.
No, you do not see. You most certainly have not "got it".
You (predictably) misunderstand. And you insult me - I don't appreciate your tone. I am trying to teach you something. And if you can stop being so conceited for a second you might learn something. I am not your enemy. I am not trying to undermine you.
As I said, it is very difficult to get people to understand what I'm trying to say.
I agree with you about Yemen. But that is because I believe what I have been told about it. Because I trust what I have been told. I have no direct experience of it. It is not my personal reality.
What is happening in Yemen (etc) may be real for those impacted by it. Those who are actually experiencing it. But is not real for me and it is most probably not real for you either (not unless you have been there).
You must understand that probably 95% of what you understand about the world has come to you from other people, other people who you have decided to trust are telling you the truth!!
Not everything you are told is true. You really do need to extend some scepticism about EVERYTHING you are told. Not just towards people who you consider to be your political opponents.
This is why some people believe that the moon landings did not happen. Because they have not grasped that almost all that they understand about world events is secondhand.
I believe the moon landings did happen. But that is because I have decided to trust what I have been told about them. Not because I have any direct personal experience of them.
Let's say, John, after all these years you finally decided to visit Cornwall and while enjoying the scenery had an unfortunate accident. Namely, fell off the cliff. Luckily you survived but broke your legs and have to use crutches.
Now, someone walking past Bodmin hospital sees you struggling with your physical therapy exercises. What is real for them? Not the fact you fell off the cliff - they weren't there to witness it. What's real for them is that you had an accident and are suffering.
Now the question - does it matter, those details? Sure, re current events nothing can be believed. But once time passes and the documents are declassified and become available, research has been conducted, visits, interviews, investigations, etc have been concluded - can you seriously claim the stuff presented did not happen?
Of course, there might be different interpretations. Those you can dismiss as unreal since they might be serving someone's agenda. But surely, when all those resources are made available to you you can go ahead with studying and arriving at your own conclusions effectively making those events real to you. Just like a person in Bodmin can imagine all kinds of things that might have happened to you - details may not matter, but the effects are there and that's what makes whatever happened reality.
Is that your point, John? That if you personally did not study some issue and "realize" it for yourself you cannot talk about it? Or that you have to qualify every point as "I know" or "I believe" or "I studied"?
Basically, imagine my and maybe a few people here asking this question: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yGVY-xVaSQ
Yes, if somebody sees me then that is their reality!!
But unless I go to where there is conflict happening in the world I am taking on trust what I am told about it!
And by the way, my great grandfather did fall off a cliff in Cornwall in 1950! And he did spend a long time in hospital. No, that was not my personal reality, I was not born then. However, I believe my family when they told me about it. (I've no reason to doubt them).
Maybe you are psychic botty, but I doubt it! :)
LOL!
Now you can also believe in the power of Russian bots and that Trump was elected by Putin.
Read your further replies.
I understand your position and reiterate my comment. You are a relativist who refuses to see the truth before you because it makes you uncomfortable. You'll sacrifice everything to avoid facing the reality of Nuclear War that is coming because you are incapable of identifying the evil being perpetrated by the Oligarchy and you excuse it, letting them have their way.
I recently changed my mind about those wondrous USA moon landings. https://centerforaninformedamerica.com/moondoggie-1/
I believe that the moon landings did happen. But as they happened fifty years ago there now exists relatively little proof of it, other than perhaps in a NASA museum.
As I've tried to say, pretty much everything that we understand about the world has come to us secondhand.
The link you are giving is narrative. It's just words. It may be well written, you may be convinced about it. But that doesn't make it true.
Unless you are part of a world event your understanding of it is largely based on your (unconscious) decision to trust what you are being told about it.
Now I have decided to trust what I have been told about the moon landings. I believe that they did happen. But that is just a belief. I probably couldn't prove it to you.
All things considered I think that they did happen. Similarly I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy and I believe that fifteen M/E terrorists were responsible for 9/11.
Strong finish there - had me worried lol.
Amazing how after all these years no other country or the USA has gone to the moon. Too bad NASA lost those 700 crates full of the technical documentation and footage. Really enjoyed those amazing live TV shots from the moon with miraculous 60s technology!
I'd like to hear more about the coups in Australia.
Much as I would like to oblige, Tim WW, it sickens me to go into the details except to give you a brief summary, in my words, of its impact on me, an elderly Australian. In the meantime, look at the map in Caitlin's article and imagine that same geography when the US really threaten China. It won't be a friendly little gathering in the Pacific of all the little island people signing something put in front of them by a bloke called Blinken to ensure their subservience to the US, but an occupation of so many new US establishments to suit their purposes. It is called WAR or WORLD DOMINATION. Look at the 800 bases all around the world.
They are anything but social clubs. All there for one purpose
Back in the days of "you are a British Colony, Australia, and don't forget it" (1788 to perhaps 1963. …..British atomic tests (not in Britain but on Australian soil) off the coast of Western Australia) , we bowed to a Queen in Great Britain, grovelled to anything that looked like royalty, accepted that our money was imprinted with images of some people in London and even accepted Knighthoods when they dished them out for services rendered (to the Crown, that is). Still a lot of grovelling going around today with half the population thinking we now have a King called Charles III while the other half see that whole scene as decadent and serving little no purpose whatsoever.
About that time as discussed by others, we elected a Prime Minister worthy of respect and with imagination and the first thing he did was remove our soldiers from the US war in Viietnam. Now the US had been sneaking their way into various areas of influence with an Embassy in Canberra the size of the Taj Mahal and they didn’t like this. No sir. Stay there Aussie and do what you’re told or we’ll get rid of the government. Well, to cut a long story to the bones, the CIA, the uncontrolled secret army available to anyone (if the price is right) did just that and we then became a compliant little bag carrier for everything that the USA demanded. More wars, US bases all over, military weapons contracts signed, one after the other, and the message was clear then and still is now. "You’re either with us or you’re against us”. As a gesture of some kind, most US presidents have made a flight to Australia during their tenure just to see if we are subservient enough to be able to share military exercises, be given intelligence data that is not too revealing of what the US gets up to, while at the same time, confirming to all and sundry that this is their controlled domain,. So it has now become ....….'buzz off China. Go and buy your wheat, coal, wine, iron ore, meat, milk products and on….and on again…. from someone else. Australia doesn’t need you or your Yuan (money).
If we have our way, they will buy from us.’
It is working well in Europe with gas and petrol, isn't it. Cunning, those Americans.
And of course, we do. buy from the US. Wth an Australian dollar at $0.64 cents when compared to the US $, what a great benefit that is to the Vanguards and BlackRocks and what a long term burden for Australia. New Zealand 's situation is even worse than that.
So now we have AUKUS, a clear indication that Australia is now dancing to another entrenched colonialist bent on world domination with a possible debt to someone (bound to be the US) of $150 billion dollars for unwanted submarines and a wait of perhaps 20 years to see if they even float.
Australia has becomes accustomed to 'tipping their hats' to anyone these days. It is now an undisputed fact. It's just the way we have become.
Hope that helps, Tim.
I don't think Australia really existed in the way you think of it in 1788. As an innocent middle aged Brit I really wish you (and others) would stop blaming us for all of your ills.
The Queen was a constitutional monarch. We have had in effect a constitutional monarchy in Britain since 1689. Since that time, despite the ceremonial theatre, it is Parliament who have been in charge.
There was no blame intended, John. The point being made, probably not clearly enough, was that over the best part of 234 years Australia has made no effort to become its own country; no effort to be independent in the management of the country and its foreign policy and no effort to stand on its own two feet, as they say.
This is hardly the fault of your country.
Australia inherited nothing from the indigenous peoples , representing just 2.4% of our current population in 1788. Nor did the English occupants, as it really was a British fleet that sailed into the harbour on that day. Remained that way until 1901.
So Australia, as it was then, was in no way any different to all the other conquered countries of the British Empire as it was, which after some time has become one member of The Commonwealth of Nations, simply referred to as the Commonwealth, a political association of 56 member states, the vast majority of which are former conquered territories of the British Empire.
We have controlled out own foreign policy since 1901. That is the point I am making, but we are not independent and never have been, our new controllers are not the British but the greatest criminal country in history. Britain during its growth as a colonial power was ruthless in its approach to expanding the "Empire" but an absolute amateur compared the the USA.
And still in there, pitching for total world control.
How do you bring clear vision to those who profit by not having it? They have what they consider clear vision, and it's no use telling them it's an ugly distortion: they cannot and will not believe it. They are trying right now to put a good slant on austerity for ordinary people, with more wealth and lavish living for elites: they call it Degrowth -as in an environmental plus, and they will get away with it if we are dumb enough to permit it. We, the majority, have to keep working on the majority who do not profit from evil, but rather suffer from it, sometimes terribly. We have a mission, a definite purpose right now: we are being robbed of our birthright, the right to fully enjoy life in reasonable and non-destructive ways. Complaining is our only strategy. Constant and unrelenting opposition to the greedy and brutal, and the structures in society - laws, organizations, institutions, that cater to them with false accusations and phoney wars - as in the West's proxy war in Ukraine and many before that bring us ever closer to annihilation: a big NO to them, and YES to life.
Thank you, Caitlin. Well said. You've given us a lot to think about this autumn evening...
When I was a kid in the shadow of WWII, we had "duck and cover" drills in school, as if that would save us when The Bomb hit. There were also great movies depicting the results of nuclear war. "On the Beach" and Fail Safe" come to mind. Then, for comic relief, there was "Dr. Strangelove." We knew about the possibility of nuclear war when JFK and Khrushchev worked together to prevent it. Now, Biden won't even talk to Putin.
I'm not sure if younger people today have any understanding of what's really goin' down. Do they think it's just a video game? A game of Risk? All that they think they know of WWII is that "we" nuked two Japanese cities in order to save American lives.
So, nuclear war is no big deal as long as OUR side kills more people and wipes our more cities than the OTHER side. Look how far down the rabbit hole this godforsaken country has gone since JFK. Now we have an obviously senile, degenerate octogenarian attempting to give orders, while he yells that White Supremacists are the biggest threat to our survival.
And, unlike in Britain where it is rumored that new PM Liz Truss is already on her way out, this country can't get rid of Biden until the next election. It's in the Constitution, after all. It seems that sticking to the 4-year presidential election cycle is more important that preventing WWIII.
I love you Caitlin. Your first piece I read was about the NYT article on Ukrainian "draft dodgers". Could you consider writing and tweeting about the Defuse Nuclear War campaign? We need your readers to know about the chances to take strong action Oct 14 - 16. Thank you. https://defusenuclearwar.org/
The ghost of "Red Scare" Sen. McCarthy is wishing he'd had half this amount of propaganda support in the early 1950s.
If I weren't on an indefinite Twitter hiatus and some shitlib responded to a tweet of mine about nuclear war with "Some things are worth dying for", I'd probably say "You have the right to make that decision for yourself, but you don't have the right to sacrifice anyone else. The Biden administration is willing to risk sacrificing everyone, in addition to sacrificing Ukrainians, and they have no more right to do so than you do."
If nuclear war were the sort of thing that would kill, say, 20% of the world's population but save the remaining 80% somehow then *maybe* these people could try to make a "needs of the few are outweighed by the needs of the many" argument. But it won't be 20%, or 50%....it'll be EVERYONE, or damn close to everyone. So I'd love to know how they respond to the question "What, precisely, does the death of the entire population of the world accomplish that makes it 'worth it'?"
My Bad Hobbit of Repetition-Notes from the Shire(r)
Otra vez: from the introduction of Bill(bo) Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”
“I have often felt a bitter sorrow at the thought of the German people, which is so estimable in the individual, and so wretched in the generality.” Goethe
“In our new age of terrifying, lethal gadgets, which supplanted so swiftly the old one; the first great aggressive war, if it should come, will be launched by suicidal little men and pressing an electronic button. Such a war will not last long, and none will ever follow. There will be no conquerors and no conquests, but only the charred bones of the dead on an uninhabited planet.”
“Those who don’t remember the past, are condemned to relive it.” Santayana
i’m very fearful that the collective memory loss evinced by our leaders over the last quarter century, and on display most prominently now-will lead simply to the condemnation to death of all us, without any “reliving.”
There’s no hobbit hole that will protect against nuclear holocaust, and space ISS no protection.
paz
There isn’t a single journo who writes like you do. Most report on current events yet fail to contextualize the human experience. I share your posts to my lib friends because they say they are into expanding consciousness and I hope any of this resonates with them.
Surely you’re right...but I have to pause, because the current bio weapon deployment against civilians en masse continues unabated; and increased funding for more bio weapon development bodes uber darkly. What will it mean when the colossal wave of immune system suppression/reprogramming, crippling of DNA repair mechanisms, and gradual micro vascular damage breaks and comes crashing down? It might be on par with the toll of a nuclear exchange...
Asking to imagine the destruction of everything on earth is pointless. Its like asking to imagine eternity - the 3D mind cant do it. Imagine the destruction of New York City - remember 9/11, that was one major block with x000 deaths. That ‘disaster’ would pale in comparison. Imagine that!
The self is a very real construct, and not an illusion at all. You cannot truly conquer selfishness by believing in a new lie. True selflessness comes from choosing to love other people, and to act out on that self-sacrificial love, to not serve yourself but to seek what is best for others.
Regarding your first sentence here. I would say that's very much open to question. "Real" and "construct" are contradictory.
I would say really it's a matter of semantics - words are just labels at the end of the day. It maybe depends on what you mean by the "self".
Intellectual constructs are not real. What is real for you as an individual is what your senses tell you. Everything else is a matter of your personal beliefs and your value system.