Thank you, as always, for your insights and brilliance. I had never known before about the 1902 quote from Churchill. Wow. His racist imperial rants I had heard about should have prepared me for it, but it was a bit surprising. Given the now public plans to ‘balkanize’ Russia, and that 120 year old imperial wet dream of Sir Winston regarding China, it is apparent that the only reason it is called ‘balkanization’ is that it was the first place it was tried. And it worked! Pity the Balkans for their bad fortune.
I think there might be a difference between liberal-capitalist imperializers, who seem to be motivated by the desire for more stuff and power and repute, like most people, and the neocons, who appear to be devil-worshipers purely motivated by evil, a desire for hatred, death, and destruction. The difference suggests different methods of dealing with the respective problems they pose for us.
Wouldn't the overall method of dealing with the two groups (neo-libs and neo-cons) be "balkanization"? Find the divisions and fractures that exist in these two and break them apart in to smaller and smaller entities until they can be prosecuted and jailed.
How does the Oligarchy fit into this question? Nader wrote "Only the Super-Rich Can Save US". Which ones? Ray Dalio may be a "good guy". His youTube on the "Changing World Order" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8, came out a year ago, predicting the events we see today. Is he a billionaire just because he was "along for the ride" or because he actively sought to manipulate the economy?
Warren Buffet once owned much of the Norfolk-Southern Railroad, the one that has make East Palestine, Ohio, an unlivable cesspool. Rather than encourage upgrading the company's infrastructure, he saw the coming problems and dumped his ownership on someone else. Was he just running away from his responsibilities? Should he be held accountable?
George Soros funds dozens of "Open Society Foundations" around the world that claim to seek justice but, in fact, strive to perpetuate institutions that reinforce the existing social order. (Wikipedia) The "existing order" is capitalism.
Capitalism places the Oligarchy in control of the politicians. Every US election since 2000 has shown that it it money which determines the winner, whether it be neo-con or neo-lib money.
Other neo-liberals would include Elon Musk. His motivation is a "free market" best illuminated by his quote about the Bolivian coup that failed. "We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it."
Bill Gates is a neo-liberal. His pursuit of wealth extends to support of the mRNA vaccines to further profit "Big Pharma". He also buys up agricultural land so drive up prices.
Neo-liberals appear to me to be the ones who inflate the economy (causing asset prices to rise) every 4 to 7 years (as Richard Wolff explains) to then burst it to steal the equity of homeowners, so they can resell the assets at a lower price but still increase their wealth.
Is there a common thread here?
Yes, the neo-cons appear to be motivated by hate. Zbigniew Brzezinski is a neo-con even though he worked for Democratic Administrations. Is it important that he was born in Warsaw? Madeleine Albright is a neo-con -- only a neo-con can believe 500,000 dead Iraqi children was "worth it". She too worked for the Democrats. Is it important that she was born in Prague? Victoria Nuland is a neo-con, (anyone who supports the Banderite Nazis in Ukraine is a neocon) who has spent a career in the State Department in alliance with her husband Robert Kagan of the infamous Kagan cabal. While Nuland was born in New York, her parents came from Eastern Europe. Her husband from Athens Greece.
Is there a common thread here?
Neo-cons are afraid of everything. Like the Anti-defamation League and APAC they declare everything to be a threat to their existence. (It isn't anti-Semitic to point out the truth here.) They conspire to create panic and spread their fear, to recruit others to their cause. The "Red Scare" about communism is an example. Neo-cons, live in a kill or be killed world and want to kill before they are killed. They use their wealth to destroy their enemies. Enemies who often have no idea how much the neo-cons hate them.
Neo-libs are selfish, self-important egoists with little morality. They care only for self-aggrandizement and power that can only be attained with money. They are criminals. Aaron Good explains in his excellent YouTube series and podcasts that America was founded by criminals and has always been run by criminals. His most recent episode about Nelson Rockefeller and the destruction caused in the Amazon basin was revealing. The Rockefeller Foundation is a criminal enterprise. It is the Mafia without the Italians.
Neo-libs work with neo-cons as long as they can accumulate more wealth. Neo-cons work with neo-libs as long as they kill the enemy.
Neo-cons are terrified of Russia and China because they are paranoid. They grew up paranoid, they have been infected with a psychotic condition that cannot be healed. They are the Ukraine Nazis who glory in threats to the Russian-speakers of the Donbas. They want to destroy everything.
Neo-libs are willing to be friends with Russia and China because like the Ferengi, they only covet profit. They are willing to destroy only as long as they can make a profit doing it. They went along with the neo-con PNAC-inspired destruction of the Middle-East for "profit". They left Vietnam when there was no more profit, then made friends with Vietnam because -- profit.
How do we turn the neo-cons and the neo-libs against one another? By threatening capitalism. The end of the American Empire threatens capitalism. The fracture between the neo-cons and the neo-libs is growing.
Blackrock is a neo-liberal organization. Witness what the French did to Blackrock.
Unions threaten the neo-libs.
One thing that doesn't threaten neo-libs: trans. This issue is hyped beyond all recognition because it serves the neo-libs to create artificial divides among conservative and liberal Americans. Conservative Americans tend to be more religious which in turn (although not by itself) makes them more afraid of change. Liberal Americans want to free oppressed peoples from their burdens. Both kinds of Americans just "want to get along".
To combat this desire to "just get along" Neo-liberals sell T-shirts at Target for little boys that all have rainbows on them. They sell Budweiser with trans advocate Dylan Mulvaney printed on it. The backlash could not have come as a surprise. This is the same playbook that was used against Blacks during the Civil Rights era.
Yes, Trans is an important issues, just as many other cultural issues. But we need to recognize how it is being used against us.
We should take a page out of Scott Ritter and Caleb Maupin's playbook. A committed Reaganite and an outright Marxist united against the Oligarchy's march to Nuclear Annihilation.
Unfortunately I don't have an answer to my own implied question. It is said that one becomes like one's enemy, and I certainly don't want to become a devil-worshiper. I do think that people need to recognize what they're dealing with -- just for a start.
They balkanised Yugoslavia - a socialist success story. Slobodan Milosevic died at The Hague while being tried by the ICJ on trumped up charges of war crimes.
Thank you, as always, for your insights and brilliance. I had never known before about the 1902 quote from Churchill. Wow. His racist imperial rants I had heard about should have prepared me for it, but it was a bit surprising. Given the now public plans to ‘balkanize’ Russia, and that 120 year old imperial wet dream of Sir Winston regarding China, it is apparent that the only reason it is called ‘balkanization’ is that it was the first place it was tried. And it worked! Pity the Balkans for their bad fortune.
I think there might be a difference between liberal-capitalist imperializers, who seem to be motivated by the desire for more stuff and power and repute, like most people, and the neocons, who appear to be devil-worshipers purely motivated by evil, a desire for hatred, death, and destruction. The difference suggests different methods of dealing with the respective problems they pose for us.
Wouldn't the overall method of dealing with the two groups (neo-libs and neo-cons) be "balkanization"? Find the divisions and fractures that exist in these two and break them apart in to smaller and smaller entities until they can be prosecuted and jailed.
How does the Oligarchy fit into this question? Nader wrote "Only the Super-Rich Can Save US". Which ones? Ray Dalio may be a "good guy". His youTube on the "Changing World Order" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xguam0TKMw8, came out a year ago, predicting the events we see today. Is he a billionaire just because he was "along for the ride" or because he actively sought to manipulate the economy?
Warren Buffet once owned much of the Norfolk-Southern Railroad, the one that has make East Palestine, Ohio, an unlivable cesspool. Rather than encourage upgrading the company's infrastructure, he saw the coming problems and dumped his ownership on someone else. Was he just running away from his responsibilities? Should he be held accountable?
George Soros funds dozens of "Open Society Foundations" around the world that claim to seek justice but, in fact, strive to perpetuate institutions that reinforce the existing social order. (Wikipedia) The "existing order" is capitalism.
Capitalism places the Oligarchy in control of the politicians. Every US election since 2000 has shown that it it money which determines the winner, whether it be neo-con or neo-lib money.
Other neo-liberals would include Elon Musk. His motivation is a "free market" best illuminated by his quote about the Bolivian coup that failed. "We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it."
Bill Gates is a neo-liberal. His pursuit of wealth extends to support of the mRNA vaccines to further profit "Big Pharma". He also buys up agricultural land so drive up prices.
Neo-liberals appear to me to be the ones who inflate the economy (causing asset prices to rise) every 4 to 7 years (as Richard Wolff explains) to then burst it to steal the equity of homeowners, so they can resell the assets at a lower price but still increase their wealth.
Is there a common thread here?
Yes, the neo-cons appear to be motivated by hate. Zbigniew Brzezinski is a neo-con even though he worked for Democratic Administrations. Is it important that he was born in Warsaw? Madeleine Albright is a neo-con -- only a neo-con can believe 500,000 dead Iraqi children was "worth it". She too worked for the Democrats. Is it important that she was born in Prague? Victoria Nuland is a neo-con, (anyone who supports the Banderite Nazis in Ukraine is a neocon) who has spent a career in the State Department in alliance with her husband Robert Kagan of the infamous Kagan cabal. While Nuland was born in New York, her parents came from Eastern Europe. Her husband from Athens Greece.
Is there a common thread here?
Neo-cons are afraid of everything. Like the Anti-defamation League and APAC they declare everything to be a threat to their existence. (It isn't anti-Semitic to point out the truth here.) They conspire to create panic and spread their fear, to recruit others to their cause. The "Red Scare" about communism is an example. Neo-cons, live in a kill or be killed world and want to kill before they are killed. They use their wealth to destroy their enemies. Enemies who often have no idea how much the neo-cons hate them.
Neo-libs are selfish, self-important egoists with little morality. They care only for self-aggrandizement and power that can only be attained with money. They are criminals. Aaron Good explains in his excellent YouTube series and podcasts that America was founded by criminals and has always been run by criminals. His most recent episode about Nelson Rockefeller and the destruction caused in the Amazon basin was revealing. The Rockefeller Foundation is a criminal enterprise. It is the Mafia without the Italians.
Neo-libs work with neo-cons as long as they can accumulate more wealth. Neo-cons work with neo-libs as long as they kill the enemy.
Neo-cons are terrified of Russia and China because they are paranoid. They grew up paranoid, they have been infected with a psychotic condition that cannot be healed. They are the Ukraine Nazis who glory in threats to the Russian-speakers of the Donbas. They want to destroy everything.
Neo-libs are willing to be friends with Russia and China because like the Ferengi, they only covet profit. They are willing to destroy only as long as they can make a profit doing it. They went along with the neo-con PNAC-inspired destruction of the Middle-East for "profit". They left Vietnam when there was no more profit, then made friends with Vietnam because -- profit.
How do we turn the neo-cons and the neo-libs against one another? By threatening capitalism. The end of the American Empire threatens capitalism. The fracture between the neo-cons and the neo-libs is growing.
Blackrock is a neo-liberal organization. Witness what the French did to Blackrock.
Unions threaten the neo-libs.
One thing that doesn't threaten neo-libs: trans. This issue is hyped beyond all recognition because it serves the neo-libs to create artificial divides among conservative and liberal Americans. Conservative Americans tend to be more religious which in turn (although not by itself) makes them more afraid of change. Liberal Americans want to free oppressed peoples from their burdens. Both kinds of Americans just "want to get along".
To combat this desire to "just get along" Neo-liberals sell T-shirts at Target for little boys that all have rainbows on them. They sell Budweiser with trans advocate Dylan Mulvaney printed on it. The backlash could not have come as a surprise. This is the same playbook that was used against Blacks during the Civil Rights era.
Yes, Trans is an important issues, just as many other cultural issues. But we need to recognize how it is being used against us.
We should take a page out of Scott Ritter and Caleb Maupin's playbook. A committed Reaganite and an outright Marxist united against the Oligarchy's march to Nuclear Annihilation.
Unfortunately I don't have an answer to my own implied question. It is said that one becomes like one's enemy, and I certainly don't want to become a devil-worshiper. I do think that people need to recognize what they're dealing with -- just for a start.
They balkanised Yugoslavia - a socialist success story. Slobodan Milosevic died at The Hague while being tried by the ICJ on trumped up charges of war crimes.
Essential reading:
Orwell: Burmese Days
Conrad: Heart of Darkness