Why Trump now wants talks with Iran

June 05, 2019

Why Trump now wants talks with Iran

By Pepe Escobar – posted with permission

 

If Tehran blocks the Strait of Hormuz it could send the price of oil soaring and cause a global recession

Iranian soldiers take part in National Persian Gulf Day in the Strait of Hormuz on April 30, 2019. There is concern about a blockade of the Strait and the disastrous impact that could have on the price of oil and world financial markets. Photo: AFP / Atta Kenare

Unlike Deep Purple’s legendary ‘Smoke on the Water’ – “We all came out to Montreux, on the Lake Geneva shoreline”, the 67th Bilderberg group meetings produced no fire and no smoke at the luxurious Fairmont Le Montreux Palace Hotel.

The 130 elite guests had a jolly good – and theoretically quiet – time at the self-billed “informal discussion forum concerning major issues”. As usual, at least two-thirds were European decision-makers, with the rest coming from North America.

The fact that a few major players in this Atlanticist Valhalla are closely associated with or directly interfering with the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel – the central bank of central banks – is of course just a minor detail.

The major issue discussed this year was “A Stable Strategic Order”, a lofty endeavor that can be interpreted either as the making of a New World Order or just a benign effort by selfless elites to guide mankind to enlightenment.

Other items of discussion were way more pragmatic – from “The Future of Capitalism”, to “Russia”, “China”, “Weaponizing Social Media”, “Brexit”, “What’s Next for Europe”, “Ethics of Artificial Intelligence” and last but not least, “Climate Change”.

Disciples of Antisthenes would argue that these items constitute precisely the nuts and bolts of the New World Order.

The chairman of Bilderberg’s steering committee, since 2012, is Henri de Castries, former CEO of AXA and the director of the Institut Montaigne, a top French think tank.

One of the key guests this year was Clement Beaune, the European and G20 counselor to French President Emmanuel Macron.

Bilderberg prides itself for enforcing the Chatham House Rule, according to which participants are free to use all the precious information they wish because those who attend these meetings are bound to not disclose the source of any sensitive information or what exactly was said.

That helps ensure Bilderberg’s legendary secrecy – the reason for myriad conspiracy theories. But that does not mean that the odd secret may not be revealed.

The Castries/Beaune axis provides us with the first open secret of 2019. It was Castries at the Institut Montaigne who “invented” Macron – that perfect lab experiment of a mergers and acquisitions banker serving the establishment by posing as a progressive.

A Bilderberg source discreetly let it be known that the result of the recent European parliamentary elections was interpreted as a victory. After all, the final choice was between a neoliberal/Green alliance and Right populism; nothing to do with progressive values.

The Greens who won in Europe – contrary to the US Greens – are all humanitarian imperialists, to quote the splendid neologism coined by Belgian physicist Jean Bricmont. And they all pray on the politically correct altar. What matters, from Bilderberg’s perspective, is that the European Parliament will continue to be run by a pseudo-Left that keeps defending the destruction of the nation-state.

Just like Castries and his pupil Macron.

The derivatives clock is ticking

Image: Wikipedia

The great Bilderberg secret of 2019 had to do with why, suddenly, the Trump administration has decided that it wants to talk to Iran “with no preconditions”.

It all has to do with the Strait of Hormuz. Blocking the Strait could cut off oil and gas from Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Iran – 20% of the world’s oil. There has been some debate on whether this could occur – whether the US Fifth Fleet, which is stationed nearby, could stop Tehran doing this and if Iran, which has anti-ship missiles on its territory along the northern border of the Persian Gulf, would go that far.

An American source said a series of studies hit President Trump’s desk and caused panic in Washington. These showed that in the case of the Strait of Hormuz being shut down, whatever the reason, Iran has the power to hammer the world financial system, by causing global trade in derivatives to be blown apart.

The Bank for International Settlements said last year that the “notional amount outstanding for derivatives contracts” was $542 trillion, although the gross market value was put at just $12.7 trillion. Others suggest it is $1.2 quadrillion or more.

 

An Iranian Navy warship is seen in the Strait of Hormuz on April 30, amid talk that Tehran may block the Strait if relations with the US plunge further. Photo: AFP / Atta Kenare

Tehran has not voiced this “nuclear option” openly. And yet General Qasem Soleimani, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps’ Quds Force and a Pentagon bête noire, evoked it in internal Iranian discussions. The information was duly circulated to France, Britain and Germany, the EU-3 members of the Iran nuclear deal (or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), also causing a panic.

Oil derivative specialists know well that if the flow of energy in the Gulf is blocked it could lead to the price of oil reaching $200 a barrel, or much higher over an extended period. Crashing the derivatives market would create an unprecedented global depression. Trump’s former Goldman Sachs Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin should know as much.

And Trump himself seems to have given the game away. He’s now on the record essentially saying that Iran has no strategic value to the US. According to the American source: “He really wants a face-saving way to get out of the problem his advisers Bolton and Pompeo got him into. Washington now needs a face-saving way out. Iran is not asking for meetings. The US is.”

And that brings us to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s long, non-scheduled stop in Switzerland, on the Bilderberg’s fringes, just because he’s a “big cheese and chocolate fan”, in his own words.

Yet any well-informed cuckoo clock would register he badly needed to assuage the fears of the trans-Atlantic elites, apart from his behind-closed-doors meetings with the Swiss, who are representing Iran in communications with Washington. After weeks of ominous threats to Iran, the US said “no preconditions” would be set on talks with Tehran, and this was issued from Swiss soil.

China draws its lines in the sand

Bilderberg could not escape discussing China. Geo-poetic justice rules that virtually at the same time, China was delivering a powerful message – to East and West – at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.

The Shangri-La dialogue is Asia’s top annual security forum, and unlike Bilderberg, held like clockwork at the same hotel in Singapore’s Orchard Road. As much as Bilderberg, Shangri-La discusses “relevant security issues”.

A case can be made that Bilderberg frames the discussions as in the recent cover story of a French weekly, owned by a Macron-friendly oligarch, titled “When Europe Ruled the World”. Shangri-La instead discusses the near future – when China may be actually ruling the world.

Beijing sent a top-of-the-line delegation to this year’s forum, led by Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe. And on Sunday, General Wei laid down China’s unmistakable red lines; a stern warning to “external forces” dreaming of independence for Taiwan, and the “legitimate right” for Beijing to expand man-made islands in the South China Sea.

By then everyone had forgotten what Acting US Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan had said the day before, accusing Huawei to be too close to Beijing and posing a security risk to the “international community”.

General Wei also found time to rip Shanahan to shreds. “Huawei is a private company, not a military company… Just because the head of Huawei used to serve in the army, does not mean his company is a part of the military. That doesn’t make sense.”

Shangri-La is at least transparent. As for Bilderberg, there won’t be any leaks on what the Masters of the Universe told Western elites about the profitability of pursuing the war on terror; the drive toward total digitalization of cash; total rule of genetically modified organisms; and how climate change will be weaponized.

At least the Pentagon has made no secret, even before Shangri-La, that Russia and China must be contained at all costs – and the European vassals must toe the line.

Henry Kissinger was a 2019 Bilderberg participant. Rumors that he spent all his time breathlessly plugging his “reverse Nixon” – seduce Russia to contain China – may be vastly overstated.

Advertisements

How the socioeconomic gains of China’s Cultural Revolution fueled their 1980s boom (6/8)

by Ramin Mazaheri for The Saker Blog

How the socioeconomic gains of China’s Cultural Revolution fueled their 1980s boom (6/8)

There are almost too many socioeconomic gains for me to list… and yet the idea that China’s Cultural Revolution (CR) represented not gains but regression is dominant in the West.

The Chinese know better, and that’s why I’m discussing Dongping Han’s indispensable academic and investigative book: The Unknown Cultural Revolution: Life and Change in a Chinese Village. Han intensely examined rural Jimo County, where he grew up, interviewing hundreds of locals about the CR and poring over local historical records. Han was kind enough to write the forward to my brand-new bookI’ll Ruin Everything you Are: Ending Western Propaganda in Red China. I hope you can buy a copy for yourself and your 300 closest friends.

When I ended Part 5 the Rebel Faction Red Guards (who wanted a People’s dictatorship) had, over the course of three years, democratically bested the Loyalist Faction Red Guards (who wanted to maintain a Party dictatorship) – a new generation of revolutionaries had been fostered and were now taking over. What did their time in power produce?

“Since the beginning of the Great Leap Forward, the Chinese Government had been talking about eliminating the three gaps: between urban and rural areas, between mental and manual labor, and between workers and farmers. … It was only during the Cultural Revolution that some students took it so seriously that they adopted it as a concrete goal of the struggle.”

What’s certain is that it’s very hard to have a revolution in power and culture in just one generation; Iran tried to speed up their revolutionary timeline by implementing the world’s second and only other Cultural Revolution just one year after ousting the Shah, whereas China waited 15 years.

The 1949 Revolution installed the collectives, which earned total Western capitalist-imperialist enmity for promising the “five guarantees (wu bao)” – food, clothes, fuel, education for children and a funeral upon death. This was a revolutionary and unprecedented social security system for rural Chinese. However, the social safety net for urbanites was much, much better, which inspired justified resentment.

However, we cannot only discuss the first pillar of socialism – redistribution of wealth; the second pillar – redistribution of power – was almost totally absent in Chinese village life 15+ years after their revolution. This is made apparent by the fact, related by Han, that it was not until spring 1967 that a mass meeting was held in Jimo to discuss the collective local planning and goals for the farm year. “This simple act turned villagers from passive followers into active participants.”

I refer back to my mathematical summary of the CR decade’s gains from Part 1: “You just read about 2 times more food and 2 times more money for the average Chinese person, 14 times more horsepower (which equates to 140 times manpower), 50 times more industrial jobs, 30 times more schools and 10 times more teachers during the CR decade in rural areas.

We can only understand these massive, unprecedented gains in rural areas when we accept that the CR was only able to create it only via local empowerment of worker/citizens. After grasping that, it becomes easier to accept Han’s primary, and revolutionary, assertion: that China’s post-1980s boom rested on this explosion of economic and human capital in the rural areas, which represented 80% of the country in 1980.

Revolutionary gains in education for rural areas

The idea that the CR persecuted intellectuals is totally false – the CR created them, via 30 times more schools and 10 times more teachers. An “intellectual” does not only mean someone with 2 PhDs – an everyday person’s standards are much lower, and they were certainly much more sensibly lower in 1960s rural China. Han’s research thus describes a stunning great leap forward in rural education which occurred across the entire continent of China, a total inversion of the usual Western propaganda.

Why was China so backwards in 1966 that children were not going to school? Was it because of 17 years of CCP rule? This is what the Mainstream Media would have you believe… as if in the pre-socialist era the same widespread lack of education didn’t exist. No, the backwardness should be attributed to their “Century of Humiliation” as colonial victims. Beyond colonialism, why did this not happen in 1600, 1700 or 1800? The answer is – the advent of socialism. The basic building materials were all available locally – the communes built all the high schools collectively – what was needed was to cut out the capitalist view of economics and to institute the local empowerment of socialist democracy. The resources for building schools did not come from heaven, nor foreign banks – villages collectively pooled their resources and worked together, i.e. socialism.

Where did they get the teachers? There were huge advertising efforts to get educated teachers to return to their hometown – i.e, socialist culture, as opposed to individualist culture. “This policy, unpopular among many government schoolteachers, turned out to be a windfall for Jimo’s joint village middle schools.” Something like this is anathema to the West. It is a denial of absolute freedom, I agree, but it is also the promotion of equality. Socialism insists that one MUST give back; the West says “give back… if you feel like it”, and then their culture encourages them to not feel like it.

The schools also ended the absurd, elitist, anti-intellectual emphasis on passing tests – this policy was only necessary when spaces were so very few. But in the CR era,“All primary school graduates from the seven villages would automatically enter the middle school without any examination.” The capitalist celebration of “academic competition” exists only to cover the fact that their state refuses to create enough schools for all the applicants.

In 1968 Mao did something which in 2019 remains incredibly radical: he proposed that workers and farmers get involved with education, i.e., he fought against technocratic elitism in education. This necessarily creates a revolution in the curriculum, and it is an undeniably democratic one.

From the standpoint of traditional Chinese beliefs, allowing these less-educated farmers and workers to lead the educational reforms was outrageous. How could the less-educated lead the better educated? Fundamentally, this was a philosophical question. The criticism reflected the arrogance of the Chinese educated elite, and their narrow mindset towards knowledge. While these workers and peasants had no formal education, what they did have was practical knowledge and a different perspective on education. They braved the traditional bias and prejudice in Chinese schools and society because they felt they had a mission in education reforms. … In the face of jesting and ridicule, they did not back down. They continued to work with students and teachers.”

As Han relates, peasants won respect by working with the students. That’s revolutionary, and that’s how you decrease the cultural urban-rural divide – sustained contact (even if forced).

Gone were the textbooks made by a few educational elite in Beijing – locals created new curricula and textbooks, in proof that socialism is “central planning” but “local control and local implementation”.

How did the curriculum change? Practical math such as bookkeeping and accounting was introduced; students learned agricultural science by working with farmers; applied science was advanced by studying small-scale machines and engines like those found in rural industries and farms. Instead of physics, machines and pumps were studied; practical over analytical. Given their poverty, this practical knowledge would have huge and immediate effects in nascent rural industries and post-Great Leap Forward re-collectivised farms. This is really the socialism-isation of science – bringing science to the masses. It is the opposite of the capitalist demand for breakthroughs and growthBecause China was full of socialist revolutionaries, the popular changes in education were not as we would expect in a Western version – which would wind up being a curriculum of something akin to “Business MBAs for everyone” – but were obviously geared towards promoting thoughts and actions which were collectively useful, and not just individually profitable.

Absolutely crucially, this is how the Cultural Revolution created the human capital on which the 1980s boom was based: how could the post-1980s boom occur without literate workers? Creating this human capital – via a decided emphasis on elevating the rural citizen – is the ignored or denied central achievement of the CR. No more would “rural” equal “wasteland of human potential”, and the West – still wracked by an urban-rural divide in 2019 – has much to learn here.

“There was a tendency during the Cultural Revolution to elevate physical labor above academic learning, and as a result many students were assigned too much physical labor. The mix of academic and physical labor, however, varied greatly from place to place and from time to time. … The goals of these activities were to increase the school’s annual income and to develop a love for physical labor in the students.” Yes, Chinese schools engaged their students in money-making activities in order to help raise school funds.

If there’s one thing which separates men from boys and women from girls it is the capacity for hard work – if you cannot work hard and learn to enjoy it… be prepared for an unsatisfying life, because decadence is always ultimately unsatisfying to humans. The idea that Western schools would not teach this seems insane, but it is not taught. Furthermore, this work-instead-of-more-sitting is something which boys would love – to get out of the strict classroom confines and get moving. Anyways, Han relates that in the first half of the 1970s at high schools we are talking about just 6 hours per week of non-academic time, or about 1/7th of overall school time. Personally, I have absolutely no idea how leaders will create policies which are sympathetic and respectful to the working class unless they have spent ample time working alongside them….

Again, these well-rounded high schoolers would be the human capital that created the explosion in rural development, up to and including today, and that should be obvious to all.

Han cites a former teacher: “He cited three major achievements of the educational reforms in Jimo. First, rural schools built during the educational reforms trained large numbers of local youth in practical industrial and agricultural skills and knowledge, which has long-term impacts on the development of rural areas. Economic development in Jimo relied on this practical knowledge. Second, the educational reform began to alter the views of teachers who had previously looked down upon farmers. When they were obliged to participate in some forms of manual labor, they learned to respect villagers and other working people. Third, it empowered villagers. Farmers no longer viewed the educated elite with mystic feelings because they knew the educated teachers better after working with them.” These are all universal issues, I am sure: it was the CR’s aim to fix them, and that is incredibly revolutionary and democratic.

Han on the suspension of university in 1966, which Western urban, elitist, technocratic reporting loves to focus on: “From the perspectives of the individuals whose dreams of going to college were shattered, this reform of the college entrance examination system was deeply disappointing. But from the perspective of rural development, this reform measure, not unlike a blood transfusion for a sick patient, brought knowledge and skills that revived rural areas. … Every student had to work in rural areas or in a factory for at least two years before becoming for eligible. Academic performance was not a sole criterion in the selection of candidates for college. Students also had to prove themselves as good farmers or workers before going to college. Starting in 1976, college students from rural areas were required to go back to their original villages after graduation to serve the villagers who sent them to college.”

This is a drastically different perspective than the usual “broken dream” reporting of the West regarding the CR, no?

It is also a drastically different admission standard: good grades AND good working ability, versus the West’s good grades AND tons of money (or influential parents AND tons of money).

It is also a drastically different philosophy: public funds in their small town paid for the schooling of these fortunate Chinese graduates since their childhood, therefore they must return “to serve the villagers who sent them to college”. There is absolutely nothing like this in the capitalist-individualist West, even though “public funds in their small town paid for…”.

Han relates that an average of 85 people returned to each village in Jimo County. “These students became the new teachers, medical personnel, and skilled workers and technicians on which rural development depended. The reform of the college entrance system and the movement of encouraging education urban out to go to rural areas broke the vicious circle in Chinese education.” (emphasis mine)

Han also specifies how these educated urban youth served as a very real cultural and social bridge between the urban and rural areas, which is precisely what is lacking in modern Western countries and a key reason for their huge urban/rural divide. Again, denying someone their individual right (especially the right of a White middle/upper class person, the type most likely to attend college in their nations) is anathema in the West, but we see how very, very socially necessary and productive it was.

I think that Han’s view – which is relating the common villager’s view – should be shattering in terms of perception of these key “radical” reforms of the CR, which is why I am happy to relate them.

The benefits are so obvious and so broad, I’m sure many Westerners will wonder how they can apply it in their non-socialist systems… they likely cannot, because they will be accused of being “socialists”.

A revolution in rural economy, and thus the national economy, and thus the global economy

Let’s not forget that the CR’s open emphasis on the rural over the urban (revolutionary in itself, and unappreciated by the USSR) was also ordered by any conception of democracy: While China was 56% urban in 2015 it was only 20% urban as late as 1980. The USSR’s emphasis on the primacy of a vanguard party over a People’s democratic dictatorship certainly did not keep socialism flag’s flying after 1991.

It is no exaggeration to say that the CR brought the Industrial Revolution to rural China – it was truly that important.

“During the Cultural Revolution agricultural production more than doubled, but just as impressively rural industry went from ‘negligible’ to 36% of Jimo’s economy. The latter is due to the same developments: political culture which changed to empowerment, collective organization and rapid improvement in education which permitted the intelligence required to understand and adopt modern techniques.”

It is not a difficult formula, nor does it absurdly rely on “market magic”….

In the early 1960s Han relates there were just 10 rural industrial enterprises which employed 253 people; by 1976 there were 2,557 enterprises (2.5 per village) which employed 54,771 people. “More importantly, the educational reforms had provided the local industries with educated youth who had acquired technical know-how while in school.”It’s not just a question of technology, but the people who can run them.

I think that readers in developing countries should be amazed and inspired. Foreign investment (and unequal alliances with foreign corporations) is the West’s solution to such problems, but the real solution to building an effective industry which can fuel local development is local education and empowerment.

Han relates how from 1966 to 1976 farmers, often with simple tools, built more reservoirs and other irrigation projects than all those built prior to and after the CR combined. Where would China be in 2019 without all of the CR’s economic development? This also shows that a key catalyst for such changes is socialist-inspired revolutionary cooperation, commitment and selflessness. In the West the only way such collective actions and fervor happens is during defensive wartime, which is proof of capitalism’s quotidian disregard for the lives of their citizens. Han relates how when a business had grown big enough the village took it over – this, too, is anathema in capitalism, of course.

Who did the CR free the most? Women and children, who were liberated from the tedious chore of grinding and mills, because in 1965 rural Jimo still processed their grain in the old –fashioned way. “Most farm work was mechanized by 1976.” The CR decade saw an 1,800% increase in tractors, 3,500% increase in diesel engines, 1,600% increase in electric motors, 700% increase in mills, 5,100% increase in grinders and a 13,200% increase in sprayers – all in just 10 years. These are video game numbers. Let’s compare this to the (still totally underreported) Eurozone “Lost Decade” of 0.6% economic growth from 2008-2017.

For readers in developing countries with significant rural populations – this must seem like an incredible revolution… well, it was. The implications for the CR on India – which is 70% rural – should be obvious, fascinating, well-studied and adopted by them.

The increase came despite the worst and longest drought in Jimo in several decades – 1967-1969 – so in many ways the CR succeeded where the Great Leap Forward failed.

In these 10 years, Jimo suffered no less serious and no fewer natural disasters than in previous decades. There were altogether four serious droughts, four serious floods, four wind disasters, nine hailstorms and three serious insect disasters. Nevertheless, agricultural production steadily and rapidly increased.

The CR also marked a return to grand, collective economic projects – this had not been tried since the Great Leap Forward. The big difference this time was: production decisions were not handed down by high-level authorities. This success was the direct result of the increased socialist democratic empowerment of the CR:

After the baptism of the Cultural Revolution, farmers refused to follow policies from above blindly, unless they were convinced that these policies would advance their living standards.” Han relates how, when it came to Party experts: “But farmers did not have to listen to them. In fact, there were cases of farmers driving away outside cadres.” Such a thing prior to the CR appears to have been impossible.

It should be clear: the CR was the Great Leap Forward 2.0 – China had learned from the mistakes, and improved. We can fairly say that their Belt and Road Initiative is a Great Leap Forward 3.0, and one which is so great it is incorporating most of Eurasia.

We can see the transition from a China where the vanguard party was everything – like industrial workers in 1917 Petrograd – to a better socialism, because it democratically empowered worker/citizens. It should be no surprise that it worked so well – socialism is something which simply must evolve and grow because it is so very new – treating 19th century Marx as though he was a divine apostle is false, absurd and a guarantee of failure. Conversely, capitalism-imperialism has had 300 or 3000 years (depending on your definition) to grow, and it is not surprising that it has culminated into its most heartless, most inequality-producing format – neoliberal capitalism.

Whereas the Great Leap Forward was a hysterical-with-happiness effort to wipe away more than a century of imperial and/or fascist retardation, locals in Jimo calmly and collectively decided what they needed – the fruits are China’s impressive status in 2019.

A revolution in rural medical care, which appeared for the first time

Again, this is the human capital built up during the CR which produced the 1980s boom. Sickness and infirmity – both your own and that of your children, family and friends – is not just personally debilitating but damaging to the economy.

The CR led to the denunciation of the urban-only medical care program, which was an improvement from the pre-1948 days, but clearly not the finished goal of socialist revolution. “Mao denounced the people’s hospitals aschengshi laoye yiyuan (hospitals for urban lords only).”

Thanks to the CR’s refreshing of the collective mentality: “Each villager paid fifty cents annually to the village clinic, which would then provide villagers with rudimentary free medical care for a whole year. By 1970, 910 villages – 93 percent of all villages – had set up their own village clinics and all had rudimentary medical insurance policies for villagers. The rural ‘barefoot doctors’ who staffed village clinics were mostly returned educated rural youth, who had received rudimentary medical training while in high schools.” It doesn’t sound like much, but it’s better than the previous witch doctors – who were often publicly shamed for the tragedies caused by the false claims of voodoo – and Han notes the “barefoot doctors” worked under the supervision of real doctors.

“If a villager fell ill and needed to be hospitalized, the village would try to pay for his or her medical bills. If the village could not pay, the commune would help. If the medical bills became too big for both village and commune, the hospital would waive the charges. … To be sure, the rural cooperative medical system was of low quality. … But it was the best system of medical care villagers in Jimo had ever had and it provided villagers with important services and peace of mind.”

Again, human capital was created and preserved, allowing Chinese humans to flourish in the 21st century.

A revolution in cultural respect, not a revolution of cultural violence

In an anecdote which shows how gender equality is far more advanced under socialism than capitalism (of course, as is ethnic equality), Han relates an anecdote of twin brothers who abused their wives getting shamefully paraded, but also their mother because she was believed to be the instigator of the abuse.

Han also discusses something the West’s art mavens love to decry with far greater fervor than the continued existence of human poverty: how cultural treasures were lost at the start of the CR, which attacked the “four olds”: old thoughts, old culture, old traditions and old habits.

Han relates how it was the superstitious funeral and wedding ceremony shops which were the main victims in Jimo – in many ways the CCP was trying to replace the old polytheism with communism.

But what Han explains is that as the CR progressed, and rural students were given more funds, time and consideration, rural students began to enjoy subsidized travel outside of their village. For many this was the first time poor rural students had ever had an opportunity to widen their vision of the world, and they immediately realised the error of naively destroying genuine cultural artefacts.

“In Jimo County, the Cultural Revolution took a dramatic turn after young people returned from trips to Beijing where they gained new perspectives. The independent mass associations emerged (Rebel Red Guard Faction), and destruction of the si jiu (four olds) stopped after students returned from their travels.”

It seems the lesson was very quickly learned – the “four olds” should be regarded as quaint relics, and even worth protecting as part of China’s cultural heritage, but they should no longer be feared and thus destroyed, because idols have no power (which was the message of Abraham and monotheism). That point of view seems difficult to grasp when the “four olds” are lorded over you your whole life, and you think that they are all-dominating instead of being paper tigers.

This is very reminiscent of the trips sponsored by the Iranian Basij: poor young people are given their first chance to travel outside of their village or town, and the result amazingly broadens their perspective.

Such trips also accentuates class consciousness by revealing disparities between town and country: “They were humbled to some extent, but they also felt indignation over the gap in the living standards between the rural and urban areas.”

Not only were new relationships formed, but genuine political intelligence about China’s current situation was increased among rural minds.

It was during these trips that Lan Chengwu and his comrades learned about the widespread corruption among rural cadres. The outrages of village tuhuangdi (local emperors) who stole collective grain, slept with other people’s wives and suppressed those who dared to challenge them angered Lan and his comrades and fired their determination to sustain the Cultural Revolution. Today, official historical accounts emphasize the disruptive impact of chuanlian on the national transportation system.”

I include that last sentence because it shows how far to the socialist right China’s official line is today when compared with the CR decade, which is the subject of the 7th part in this series. Many Iranians similarly chafe at the subsidized trips for Basiji members, but they, too, miss the many revolutionary benefits for poor members.

The essential economic dialectic of the Cultural Revolution must be revived in 2019

“The Cultural Revolution educational reforms provided the rural areas with a large number of educated youth. While in school they learned what was useful for the rural areas, and when they returned to their home village upon graduation they could make good use of what they had learned. … Without the large number of educated youth arrived from the cities, agricultural experiments and mechanization in rural areas would have been unimaginable. … Unlike their illiterate predecessors, the newly educated young farmers had the conceptual tools to modernize production.”

This is the human capital on which China’s post-1980 economic boom surely must be based on, and that is the essential achievement of the Cultural Revolution. By applying socialism’s elevation of the average person, instead of capitalism’s elevation of the exceptional, China has become a superpower.

Han demonstrates – conclusively, impressively and crucially – that, “The building of rural industry in Jimo County, however, began as a result of the Cultural revolution and was already well under way before the onset of Deng’s rural reforms.”This is why Han’s book is so crucial, and especially for developing countries with high rural populations.

China’s socialist/collective mentality increased education and Socialist Democratic changes, whereas the Western-pushed Liberal Democratic changes have never produced the same kind of spectacular results in neo-imperialised countries.

Finally, the “forced repatriation” of educated rural people and some urbanites clearly provided the most vital catalyst for China’s rural renewal, and thus national renewal; it was the indispensable “blood transfusion”, in Han’s words. This policy will never be pushed by the individualist West, but it should be of great interest to more sensible countries.

China’s Cultural Revolution era was so economically and democratically successful that the West simply must ignore it or distort it. It stands in total contrast to the Western-dominated, neo-imperialist neoliberal model, a model which has proven to only increase inequalities and discontents in their nations.

China’s rural areas did not need Western banker investment or instruction to tap into their human potential – does your nation?

**********************************

This is the 6th article in an 8-part series which examines Dongping Han’s book The Unknown Cultural Revolution: Life and Change in a Chinese Village in order to drastically redefine a decade which has proven to be not just the basis of China’s current success, but also a beacon of hope for developing countries worldwide. Here is the list of articles slated to be published, and I hope you will find them useful in your leftist struggle!

Part 1 – A much-needed revolution in discussing China’s Cultural Revolution: an 8-part series

Part 2 – The story of a martyr FOR, and not BY, China’s Cultural Revolution

Part 3 – Why was a Cultural Revolution needed in already-Red China?

Part 4 – How the Little Red Book created a cult ‘of socialism’ and not ‘of Mao’

Part 5 – Red Guards ain’t all red: Who fought whom in China’s Cultural Revolution?

Part 6 – How the socioeconomic gains of China’s Cultural Revolution fuelled their 1980s boom

Part 7 – Ending a Cultural Revolution can only be counter-revolutionary

Part 8 – What the West can learn: Yellow Vests are demanding a Cultural Revolution

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for Press TV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. He is the author of Ill Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China. His work has appeared in various journals, magazines and websites, as well as on radio and television. He can be reached on Facebook.

Polishing A Fatberg

May 02, 2019

by Denis A. Conroy for The Saker Blog

Polishing A Fatberg

Father time and mother nature must be looking askance at the motherfucking arrogance that has given us Anglo-Zionism and global capitalism. The mere fact that Donald Trump, Mike Pompeo, John Bolton, Hilary Clinton, Benjamin Netanyahu and the AIPAC fifth column have brought a neo-liberal crypto-fascist zeitgeist into the Greco-Roman pantheon attests to the fact that Western culture is being privatised in every conceivable way to serve the needs of an investment-class in pursuit of ever more opportunities to garner wealth from the public domain. In fact, the insidious activity of global capitalism, and the means used to secure its objectives can be observed if we stop a moment to ponder the collaborative institutional strategies that have come into existence to secure…privatise…the public domain.

The Executive Branch of the US Government is comprised of the President, The Cabinet and departments under Cabinet Members. But what is not stated is the fact that all these branches of government are captive to Anglo-Zionist ideology. These forces, some visible, some invisible, work in tandem with shadowy amoral market-oriented protagonists, whose regard for human values is zilch, and interest in achieving social cohesion nil.

Observing how established media and securitization businesses like the IMF, NATO…and now Blackwater etc… and other quasi-military organisations work together, is to discover how insidious the workings of the market are. The activities of the elite suggest they are there to collaborate in consolidating private ownership of all things material. The truth of the matter would appear to be that it is now de rigueur for parasites to recognise how much blood they can suck from the host body without killing it. As corporate pigs gorge themselves on grossly inflated pay packages and helpings of stock options while the average American struggles to make do with their leftovers, there is the growing sense that something big and sticky is fucking up the system.

That the Executive Branch arrogates authority to become the investigator, the prosecutor, the judge, the jury, and finally the executioner in order to retain control of the system, raises the obvious question; will there be anything left for the commoner to call his or her own when the rules and laws that facilitate the concentration of wealth in so few hands, leave anything un-privatised…the air they breathe for instance?

American hegemony, aka the Empire of Fiat Money, has evolved into a morphological nightmare for the rest of the world. It operates in a whore’s paradise; it’s appetites cannot be sated. It possesses over a thousand military bases across the globe, put there for the purpose of securing its right-of-passage. In the process of ‘passaging’ it has destroyed many countries and their economies and continues to act in this vein. That the American public seem untroubled with this arrangement suggests it is comfortable with this form of gross compartmentalisation. Perhaps they consider it work-in-progress…which would suggest that American culture is corrupted by virtue of being exposed to fiat money and the fiat morality of their government?

If a financial system that is literally designed to endlessly create more debt, more money and more inflation, then it means one is living in a “bubble economy”. A “bubble economy” can seem fine so long as the bubble continues expanding and economic activity proceeds on its merry way without things going wrong. But when things start to go ‘bad’ they can really, really go bad very rapidly. This is the perspective that rattles the cages of those who are currently swimming in red ink. The realisation that competitors can emerge with better deals, imposes great pressure on those who imagined that they will indefinitely dictate in matters of trade. Hence the trade war. Hence the demonization of China.

Today, debt levels in the US are exploding on every level of society. Corporate debt has more than doubled since the last financial crisis and US consumers are more than 13 trillion dollars in debt, and state and local governments are piling up dept as if tomorrow will never come. So, if debt is a magic-carpet conveyance that transports America into the future, the can-do people…most of whom are without the security of the off-shore tax haven… should realise it is time to wake up and listen to the alarm bells that are ringing and set about nailing their colours to an alternative mast.

But alas! The American public seem happy with their tally-ho status quo…the perpetual war economy has a drip-down benefit that satisfies enough Joe’s and Jane’s…in a somewhat moronic way…to a ‘why fix it if it’s not broken arrangement that enables the economy to expand. Besides, gainsaying American Foreign Policy would cost them money, so why complain?

For example, to deny the fact that NATO had a right to destroy Libya because it was in the process of jettisoning the fiat dollar would be equivalent to denying a fundamental tenet of American economics. The fact that Iran attempts to do the same and is crippled by the sanctions imposed on them by Washington (Tel Aviv) via The Pentagon and Wall Street, shows how tawdry public opinion has become as a result of media capitulation to the diktats of the upper echelon. American Foreign Policy suggests that all could remain quiet in the Western sphere if resistance to programs that enable big fish to eat smaller fish stay in place…and whistleblowers shut-the-fuck-up.

As Madeleine Albright observed, “There is no point in having a superb military if you can’t use it. And in the long term, we really don’t have $700 billion a year to spare for things that serve no purpose.”

Purpose; too bad about the wars, Korea 1950-53, Vietnam 1955-75, Cuba 1959 to present, Palestine 1967 to present, Afghanistan 1980, Somalia 1993, Nicaragua 1981-90, Yugoslavia 1999-2000, Iraq 2003, Haiti 2004, Libya 2011, Syria 2012, Ukraine 2014, and too bad that America’s empirical ambition were tested on so many million permutations of Father Time and Mother Nature’s innocent progeny who just happened to be in the wrong place and the wrong time to incur the engineering wrath of America’s outrageous arrogance.

It’s hard to imagine what Dwight D. Eisenhower might say if he were alive today and witness the devastation and dysfunctionality that occurred as a result of the Anglo-Zionist wars that produced so many millions of refugees worldwide. The outright cruelty that the Anglo-Zionist ‘experiment’ wrought on the Middle East and much else of the vulnerable world is beyond belief.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower

Meanwhile, we tend to focus on the guys assigned to the task of steering the motorcycle of state through turbulent times…aka permanent wars… while failing to take proper notice of the less than visible passenger riding pillion…the bankers!

Trump, Pompeo, Bolton…Don, Mike and John…fleshy white men adorned in suits, collars, ties and looking ever more like nasty versions of the three stooges…Moe, Larry and Curly, are only some of the up-front-stooges of the Anglo-Zionist ilk. They, the neo-senescent parvenus loyal to the cause of an uncompromising unilateralism spewing fake USA democracy and fake Israeli democracy into a paradigmatic cul-de- sac are devoid of concern for the wellbeing of those they exploit. The bankers riding pillion are greatly keen to perpetuate a puerile form of greatness in an out-of-view sort of way.

Together they hope to consolidate a capitalistic pedigree that will have capital penetration in all regions of the world. To achieve this end, they had to blindside the public in matters of security…hence the war on terrorism. “We are not shoving it to them; it is they who are shoving it to us”, became the mantra.

As capitalism needs to continually grow and concentrate wealth in the hands of the investment class, the war option inevitably took pride of place in the portfolio. So, as capitalism is about coveting resources, not sharing them, the government manufactured a brand of democracy…a sort of gruel…it could spoon-feed to the masses that became known as The Patriot Act.

But capitalist unilateralism doesn’t live up to the claims made about it as being the best of all systems. It’s a propagandist sleigh of hand that suppresses truth pertaining to diversity within language itself. The languages that underpin the constitution (or identity) of Germany, Japan, India, USA, China, Russia, Ireland etc. are…inevitably…uniquely splayed by experiences (and emotionality) resonating within each group that is bound by a common history. In the context of the USA however, identity is defined in ways that suggest that patriotism is the nexus that contextualises the state and its subjects. It is the Bible as manual (old and new) and the second amendment that shape emotions in America. Hollywood, the NRA, FBI and the CIA exist to help catalyse the public imagination.

In the American context, applying this reality to trade or communication favours interdiction over diplomacy as consensual responses invariable respond to hierarchal biases of the local kind…they all envy us…when dealing with competitors. With all of this in mind, one is compelled to reject the fatuous notion of American hegemony as some sort of blessing for others. Americans may believe that they are a medium that brings modern dynamics to the world at large, but that assumption seems too simplistic. For modernity as such is merely a chimera, talent and technique inventing new forms that may, or may not, attain purchase in the drama of historic necessities that exists in cahoots with cerebral and emotional intelligence operating in various ways that produce very diverse human stories in a forever changing world.

That America has produced and used atomic weapons, built the tallest buildings, put its middle class in Ford motor cars, opened Pandora’s porn box, become the world’s sheriff while adopting the notion that their culture deserves ‘a priori’ status because of their peculiar variety of ‘exceptionalism’, merely makes it a one-sided coin. Humanity does not exist in the eye of the beholder, it is force…within and without…that is continuously undergoing reincarnations. At this point we can understand why the idea of socialism has the edge on the idea of capitalism. Capitalism is for the few…a perception held by many…even ‘the drover and his dog’ can attest to this.

However, the other side of the coin shows that America’s inverted culture is incapable of imagining that other societies are capable of ascensions too. It never dawns on them that there are other cultures with imagination to match…or exceed…theirs, possess religious texts that evoke deep emotions, dictionaries and poetic tracts that contain blissful words that banish ignorance, and insightful perspectives that comfort the spirit while developing a greater understanding of the world beyond their own borders.

Instead, we discover that Anglo-Zionism is merely skin-deep, or only as deep as the quasi Judeo-Christian texts of the old and new testaments that coat the walls of Cabinet War Rooms where empires retreat to, to perpetrate the inglorious business of controlling the lives of all those who come within reach of the arterial tentacles of alpha architects ‘doing-it’ for alpha colonists…think Palestine! It is from within these rooms and mindsets that ideological dialysis determines who is sufficiently submissive…or not…and how to dispense with those who resist the will of the new overlords…think Palestine!!

But stranger than strange is the fact that Old Testament diatribes concentrate on taboos relating to miscegenation (unilateral bloodstock), whereas New Testament diatribes function to spiritually assimilate the ‘others’ into a multilateral family arrangement baptised (steeped) in insurances that promote infallibility as the lodestone of choice in otherworldliness. Clearly, these two dynamics appear to represent a union of strange bed-fellowship.

Yet, strangest of all; the tension that arises from this dichotomous alliance that exists at the centre of this US-Zionist (caste system) seems to become less empowering as time goes by. Upon examination, this union which encourages identity chauvinism, appears to lack a fertile intellectual base due to the exclusiveness of its empirical desires. And the desires of this duo translate into programs that would enable this empire to acquire levels of power that could checkmate the desires of all those who value free expression and a free press.

To date, the record shows that the new order is devoid of any testimonial imagination and therefore highly unlikely to stem the flow of information that reveals how barren the West has become under the aegis of the US empire. Sadly, Chelsea Manning and Julian Assange who blew the whistle on the presence of the “fatberg” in the system…evidence of war crimes…have been imprisoned while the people who initiated those odious crimes walk free.

Sadly, the “fatberg” continues to grow, and what is left of our conscionable selves, now swimming in a sewer of propaganda, continues to abate beneath the weight of the effluent that suffocates us. And don’t hold your breath…or maybe do…because we in the West who cling to the money-tree have become inured to the smell of the “fatberg” welling up beneath our noses.

Denis A. Conroy
Freelance Writer
Australia

ABC of Modern Empire

March 25, 2019

by Naresh Jotwani for The Saker Blog

ABC of Modern Empire

This post attempts to dig a little deeper into the dynamics of ‘the empire’ and ‘the resistance’. In particular, we examine the specific psychological drives at work. Surely the Saker community understands these issues very well, but another honest perspective can still add value.

Then there is the somewhat distracting effect of naming specific individuals or groups, when our interest is in specific human traits. Suppose someone says to me, ‘My neighbour Bob is a very greedy person’. Then my mind turns naturally to Bob, rather than to greed. Our talk veers to Bob, or to other greedy persons – but not to greed. After all, Bob is the subject of that sentence, not greed.

Our subject here, however, is greed and rapacity – not any specific individual or group. No effort will be wasted to identify specific individuals or groups who are consumed by greed or rapacity. Suffice it to say that, at any given time, there are plenty such among Homo Sapiens. The point is that a mind consumed by greed is diminished, its powers of discrimination being totally enslaved to greed. So it serves no purpose to even attach a name to such a mind!

Also, terms such as ‘capitalism’, ‘free markets’ et cetera usually mean different things to different people. But if we speak in terms of the basic human drives at work, greater clarity may well emerge from the ensuing discussion.

***

War is said to be the continuation of diplomacy by other means. But then what is the deeper goal of diplomacy – behind the publicly traded and often misleading verbiage?

We look for an answer based solely on observed human nature – without any fig-leaf of ‘cover story’ based on ideology, history, economic theory, political theory or other blah blah blah.

History shows that human nature has the potential to be both sublime and ugly almost beyond belief. Sages have said that the two evil genies of greed and lust, once they are ‘out of the bottle’, are inimical to the development of discrimination and wisdom – and therefore to the attainment of durable peace. In recent centuries, it is the first of these two evil genies which seems to have dominated global diplomacy.

[Unlike in the time of Henry VIII, today the second evil genie does not have much direct effect on how ‘the empire’ behaves. ‘Trophy wives’ and other discreet service channels exist for those with the moolah, and awkward matters are easily hushed up. Even then, a mind consumed by the second evil genie is incapable of sound and rational decisions. So this genie must also have a strong indirect effect on how ‘the empire’ behaves – for example, by exposing decision-makers to blackmail. But such shadowy matters are necessarily speculative, and are therefore left out of further discussion here.]

So we narrow our focus to greed, to which we must add rapacity – since historically rapacity has driven many a wannabe ‘world conqueror’. A rapacious person need not be greedy; he or she may well enjoy throwing around or sharing the loot; conversely, a fearful greedy person may not be outwardly rapacious.

***

It is time now to turn our attention to the modern – or ‘high tech’ – instruments of greed and rapacity. Clearly, financial power is the preferred instrument of sophisticated ‘raiders’ today.

So what exactly is financial power? How come person X has it but not person Y?

To get to the answer, we consider an example of financial power at work. Our cast of characters here is: banker B, company C, hedge fund manager M.

M decides to ‘make a hit’ on C, not too different from a mob hit. With money borrowed from B, M short-sells C and hammers down its price, making it difficult for C to raise capital. Perhaps M also arranges some bad publicity for C. Then, again with borrowed money, M executes a hostile takeover of C at its lowered price. Under the new ‘efficient management’, M strips C of its assets, leaving it crippled by debt and on the verge of bankruptcy. M – or another hedge fund manager – then makes more money from C’s bankruptcy.

Huge profits and commissions are made by B and M, with no mercy shown to anyone formerly making a decent living from C. The whole episode is not unlike a pack of wolves attacking a prey.

To create another example of financial power, we only have to make C into a country. B and M now merge into a gang of banks, hedge funds and diplomats; the gang is backed up by threats of military power, and joined by readily available disgruntled elements within the target C.

To raiders and marauders, there is no fundamental difference between a company and a country; they are just two types of prey.

So what do these examples tell us about the make-up of financial power?

We learn that its main elements are: Easy access to finance, sharp eye for juicy and vulnerable prey, contempt for the prey, single-minded focus, skill in financial number-crunching, tight networking, secrecy, shamelessness, and mastery over the legal system.

Sadly, these qualities define the new standard of human excellence and achievement. Self-proclaimed ‘top business schools’ churn out wannabe raiders and marauders by the thousand.

The thrust of ‘the empire’ today comes from such financial raiders and marauders – not the brave and valiant armies we read about in history. Evidently there is no unified command structure among these raiders and marauders; and of course no higher vision either guides them or binds them together.

It should be a no-brainer that a society relying on such unmanly and slimy tactics cannot attain lasting happiness – but of course a brain consumed by greed would not get that.

Physical and political power today is an essential backup to financial marauders, somewhat like lawyers and bouncers employed by casino owners. Taxpayers pay for that backup – in money and in broken lives – while the ultra-rich live behind layers of security.

Bad enough as that sounds, it gets even worse!

Even while availing full protection of law and the armed forces, the ultra-rich do not pay taxes in any country. Instead, they ‘invest’ in government debt. The difference is this: Taxes are paid out to the common pool, whereas a creditor retains legal claim over the principal and interest. Also, sovereign debt instruments are safe and readily marketable; default is highly unlikely, since taxpayers can be forced to pay.

Evidently, the 1% would rather ‘own’ everything around them than be fellow-citizens of the 99%. That they share the planet with the other 99% is a fact they would rather not face up to, while operating without emotional or cultural bonds with any community on the planet.

***

This is how ‘the empire’ is attempting to expand – through financial and legal shenanigans, supplemented by military force against weaker opponents. It is not true to say that ‘All options are on the table’; the option of peaceful coexistence is absent.

But the seemingly headless ‘empire’ does face a dilemma – ‘expand or bust’.

This is a deadly dilemma to face, and the strain has lately been showing. The incredible scale of ‘quantitative easing’ seen recently is a sign of desperation.

Both psychological and financial reasons underlie the ‘expand or bust’ dilemma.

Psychologically, a paranoiac wannabe conqueror – a bully, in simple words – cannot stand any sign of autonomy in potential prey, viewing that as an existential threat. After all is said and done, truth remains an existential threat to untruth. Further, a bully cannot afford to lose face among peers and potential victims; that is bad for future business. So the option of making a wise course correction is necessarily ‘off the table’.

Financially, ‘expand or bust’ arises from the fact that today’s financial shenanigans are Ponzi schemes. With artificial fiat money created in HUGE quantities, and asset bubbles forming as a result, a ‘musical chairs’ game of bad money chasing sound assets is in progress. Everyone wants genuine assets in exchange for phony ones, and is desperate not to be left behind – creating, in effect, a ‘free-for-all in deception’ as a basis for ‘progress’!

Victory achieved through deception is necessarily short-lived. And, after every defeat, the marauders have no choice but to double down. Therefore, in either case, there is no lasting benefit for these ‘one-trick ponies’. Indeed, the only way any individual can justify playing this game on that side is with the aim of bailing out before ‘all hell breaks loose’.

Underneath the greed and the rapacity, therefore, there is insecurity. Indeed there should be, since the model is not sustainable in longer term. The planet will not support ever-growing Ponzi schemes; and in adversity the marauders will turn on one another.

It helps to recall that much of history is driven by delusion.

***

If this is ‘the empire’, then what is ‘the resistance’?

Clearly ‘the resistance’ comprises those who resist the raiders and marauders in one way or another.  There may be several different motives behind the resistance, for example:

(a) Ongoing defense: A society is actively defending itself against ongoing attack.

(b) Proactive defense: A society has the time to implement suitable defenses.

(c) Wisdom: That is, ‘This cannot be in everyone’s overall long-term interest’.

(d) Compassion: That is, ‘We cannot stand by while communities are being destroyed’.

We must remove (a) from this discussion, since an ongoing battle cannot be captured in the abstract language of such a discussion. We can only wish that the righteous defenders have the strength and wisdom to overcome the threat to their way of life.

As for (b), (c) and (d), what are some of the options available?

One powerful option is so-called ‘soft power’ – that is, spreading honest explanations through the internet and other media. This is akin to immunizing minds against deception. People should not think that non-predatory mechanisms of commerce cannot be devised.

Institutional, commercial and legal mechanisms must be designed to resist hostile takeovers and avoid debt-traps. Of course these mechanisms may be criticized as being against ‘free and open trade’. Such self-serving propaganda must be countered firmly, and proper models of fair and beneficial commerce established.

A hostile takeover is possible only if the relevant laws make it possible. The model of ‘publicly traded joint-stock company’ seems devised for financial skullduggery. A ‘cooperative society’ works on the basis of ‘one member-one share-one vote’, enabling grassroots control.

Every society needs effective defense mechanisms against hostile raids and debt-traps. For this, it is imperative for it to be economically competitive. That is the challenge of the times.

The so-called ‘finance capitals’ of the world must be exposed clearly for what they are: capitals of phony money and shameless financial skullduggery. These ‘phony money capitals’ have no organic ties even to the society in which they function and flourish.

SWOT analysis is needed within a society, and also on the adversary – so that proper economic strategies can be devised. This is what successful football managers do for every match!

***

It is time now for a simple question. The answer is based on common sense, and as such it should be obvious to anyone without too many university degrees or think-tank experience:

Who protests the most in the village square about his or her impeccable pedigree and character?

Now look around the ‘global village’ and see who is protesting the most.

Related reading:

(1) At Davos recently, the Chairman of a large global bank was interviewed on RT (link). The Chairman put forward a point of view which, presumably, is that of a typical banker. Surprisingly, the interviewer let him off far too lightly on many key points. The response here brings out the points on which the Chairman could legitimately have been pressed for more honest answers.

(2) This post here is a plausible exploration of how debt and money originated, some 5000 years ago.

The Inequitable Spirit of Zionism Grips the Globe

Zara Ali

In spite of how contemporary intellectuals tend to perceive Zionism depending upon their personal affiliations and individual inclinations, irrespective of the various known versions of this rather modern creed, and regardless of the assortment of interpretations presented as an argument by proponents of each, the truth of the matter is mankind has not furnished and history has not witnessed another idea as inherently devious and inhumane in its essence as Zionism – no matter how you sugar-coat it.  And you do not have to be an historian, academic, activist, or carry any other fancy intellectual title to understand this – you just have to be a human being with the most basic common sense and the most elementary concept of common civility.

Formally introduced to the world in 1897, ostensibly as a response to the rise of anti-semitism in Europe, Zionism essentially intended to infuse the world Jewry with the passion of pan-Jewish nationalism in a bid to Return to Zion i.e. to establish a Jewish homeland in the Promised Holy Land – a Jewish state in historic Palestine wherein Jews will no longer face the discrimination extended to their minority existence elsewhere.  This was Theodore Herzl’s (the founding father of the Zionist movement)‘secular’ answer to over 2,000 years of Jewish Diaspora all the while drawing upon Jewish religious connection to Jerusalem and Eretz Yisrael.

Hence migration of European Jews to Palestine and the Jewish purchase of Palestinian land commenced with an aim to ‘create facts on the ground’ despite orthodox Jews’ initial opposition to Zionism.  As had been originally proposed by Zevi Hirsch Kalischeras, as far back as in 1836, the Rothschild embarked on a mission to grab Palestinian land by hook or by crook – employing deceptive tactics that are nowadays peddled as ‘cooperation from treacherous absentee Palestinian Arab landlords’.  The first Kibbutz was established in 1909 by European Jews and from 1922-35 the Jewish population, which had already risen from a meagre 3% in 1880 to 9% in 1922, soared as high as 27%.  During this period, the deep-seated Scriptural belief that Palestine was promised to them by God combined with the anti-Semitic effect of various ‘controlled conflicts’ instigated by Western Imperialism, remained critical in propelling Jews toward their ‘ancestral home’.

Well abetted by the clandestine Sykes-Picot Agreement that in 1916 proposed British and French ‘spheres of influence’ in a colonised South-western Asia in the aftermath of the yet to occur fall of Ottomans (1918-1922), the unstinting patronage extended by the infamous Balfour Declaration in 1917, and the cover of legitimacy provided by the League of Nations’ British Mandate of Palestine in 1923, not to forget Hitler’s rise to power in the run up to WW2, the migration of Jews on one hand and the rather strategic displacement of tens of thousands of Palestinians on the other, continued.  Arabs did raise their voice, and episodes of mob violence against the Jews also occurred, but by and large the Arab opposition to the British designs impelled by the Zionists, was ruthlessly suppressed.  The Arab revolt of 1936-39 was squashed by the British colonists not only by employing Zionist Militia but also by making effective use of the rather self-centred territorial interest of the disingenuous non-Palestinian Arab elite.  Despite the façade of the 1939 White Paper that limited Jewish migration and land purchase, in an alleged attempt to mark an end to the British-Zionist alliance, the clandestine affair between the two never came to an end at any point in time – not to this day.  By 1948 when the British Mandate of Palestine was about to end, the deliberate distribution of Jewish settlements which had progressively spread on the Palestinian lands, came to determine the map of partition proposed by United Nations  – later adopted by the UN General Assembly as Resolution 181.  The UN Plan of Partition awarded 55% of the land to Israel, encompassing many a cities with Palestinian Arab majority and the vital coastline from Haifa to Jaffa, thereby depriving the indigenous Palestinian population of key agricultural lands and seaports.  Arabs rejected the proposed partition, and argued it violated the principle of national self-determination outlined in United Nations’ charter however the Jewish Agency for Palestine accepted the same.  And soon after, the 1948 war broke out.  The British departed at the end of their Mandate (which interestingly coincided with the start of the war) but assisted by shipments of arms from the West, the Zionist paramilitary groups set out on the path of violent genocide – large scale attacks, massacres, destruction of entire villages – all aimed at expulsion of Palestinians from Eretz Yisrael.  The neighbouring Arab states i.e. Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Jordan invaded what was now Israel – they claimed they sought to save Palestine from the Zionists – the armistice agreements signed in 1949 and what ensued however did tend to suggest somewhat otherwise – with around 78% of historic Palestine confiscated by Israel, East Jerusalem and the hill country i.e. the West Bank ended up under Jordan while Egypt assumed control of the coastal plain around the Gaza strip effectually putting an end to the likelihood of a Palestinian state as initially proposed in the UN Partition Plan.  Despite the fact the state of Israel had been recognised by the international community (with the exception of 31 nations) based on its 1948 borders, following the second Arab-Israel war in 1967, Israel came to occupy not only the rest of Palestine i.e. East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, but also the Syrian Golan Heights and the Egyptian Sinai Peninsula.  And in spite of UN resolution 242 adopted in 1967, the Zionist state continues to occupy the aforementioned regions with the exception of Sinai.  Not only that, Israel in fact claims ‘innocence’ on the pretext that the status of these territories was ambiguous and that Israel took control of East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan while the Gaza strip was taken from Egypt’s dominion.  Essentially the pre-emptively dispersed expanse of less arable land, which was meant to constitute the Palestinian state as per the United Nations’ flawed Partition Plan in 1948, was first bestowed upon Jordan and Egypt in exchange of a truce in 1948 and then seized by the Zionist entity in 1967 when the passage of 19 years had efficaciously cooled down the heated uproar against the stealing of Palestine while the intensity of commotion caused by the merciless displacement of well over 700,000 Palestinians had been dampened partly because of the fast evolving Geo-political panorama and to a degree due to the increasingly selfish interests of the nations of the world.

With inordinate impunity furnished by a mute West and a meek East that have been held hostage to the absolute financial power of the Rothschild for at least a century, the Zionist entity has since brazenly persisted in its disdain for anything remotely humane, ethical, or rational.  The story of the colossal injustice perpetrated by it has unfolded progressively, and revealed the most ignoble facets of human existence.  It has not only exposed the unscrupulous spirit sitting at the core of Zionism itself, but also underlined the fact if permitted man’s weakness of flesh renders him rather predisposed to not only endorsing the most unlawful of acts but also glorifying them as the most virtuous.

Fernando Barral, the Spanish psychiatrist who in 1970 interviewed the deceased Zionist puppet, the decorated American War Veteran-Senator John McCain, thus articulated McCain’s psychological constitution:  “From the moral and ideological point of view he showed us he is an insensitive individual without human depth, who does not show the slightest concern, who does not appear to have thought about the criminal acts he committed against a population from the almost absolute impunity of his airplane…  I noted he was hardened, that he spoke of banal things as if he were at a cocktail party.”  Today the images of mockingly gleeful snipers of ‘the most moral army in the world’ defending a stolen territory with live ammunition, callously fired upon unarmed and effectively imprisoned rightful owners of the land, demanding their recognised right to return home (UN Resolution 194), categorically depict a similar psychological make-up – apparently quite naturally bred by Zionism.

Had there been no real time large-scale evidence falling in line with the aforementioned assessment, and had we observed only a few odd instances of behaviour characterised by an absolute lack of intellect and conscience at the individual level, we may not have been able to ascertain the nature of what actually sits at the core of Zionism and rules the Zionist mind-set.   And had not countless shameful tales emerged from the long history of brutality embodied by the actions of the Zionist entity subsequent to its unlawful inception, custodians of Zionism could have still had some weight to their argument.  But in the face of innumerable ignominious real time manifestations of pan-Jewish nationalism, not a hologram of occurrences in a different subset of time and space, and the unceasing exhibition of unscrupulousness on part of Israel and her lobbyists, allies and friends, it sounds ridiculously bizarre to continue contending the innocence and purity of Zionism’s nationalistic character.

In fact the attempt to debate the veracity of Zionism as a purely nationalist notion intended to unite world Jewry in the ‘Promised Holy Land’ and to ‘address threats toEretz Yisrael’ thereafter, only serves to highlight Zionism’s inherent inequity.  After all did not the initiators of the Zionist movement imagine to make ‘home’ for a marginalised people, adherents of Judaism, on a land that essentially belonged to someone else, because the self-proclaimed  ‘chosen race’ held the Scriptural belief this land had been promised to it by God? “Can you think of another historical moment when people ‘returned’ to an imaginary ‘homeland’ after 2,000 years and asked the indigenous population to move out to make room for the former ‘residents?”

The problem is truth is self-evident and it cannot be suppressed forever – you can just not kill the thing.  Unless one does not have qualms about living a deeply delusional existence, with a dysfunctional psyche, and a dead conscience, one may not find it possible to see Zionism as much more than an epitome of intellectual and moral depravity – a classic religio-political conglomerate, which remained in the making for eons before its deliberate conception in the 19th century and has since effectively dominated the globe, in unison with Colonialism and Capitalism – infusing planet earth with a very unwholesome spirit – the spirit of Pre-eminence and Exceptionalism – with the sole objective of world-wide subjugation of the common man to the coldblooded, illogical and decadent core of the Zionist psyche.  In fact it will not be an exaggeration to state the Zionist philosophy has made it permissible for ‘Might is Right’ to emerge as a widely practiced modern day norm – not just at the macro but also at the micro level – and nothing could have been more tragic for mankind than returning to the Law of the Jungle in the 21st century.

Thus today we literally have an ‘Axis of Evil’ that dominates the power centres of the modern world.  It comprises of the serpent-like 1% global elite in control of the treasure of an entire planet – it manipulates the common man only to rob him of his right to life – it wages wars indiscriminately at the drop of the hat wherever and whenever deemed profitable and under whichever pretext it fancies – it tramples upon the life and honour of entire nations leaving behind ardently created quagmires studded with five-star destruction and misery – it lies passionately and deceives unceasingly with outright contempt for human intellect – it infiltrates naïve minds with a plethora of unwholesome notions only to muddle the boundary between truth and falsehood and do away with the very notion of ‘right and wrong’.  And it does it all with the sole objective of transforming the mass population of this globe into a gathering of zombies, intellectually depraved and morally corrupt obedient slaves, who could be effortlessly employed to serve the will and the whim of the ‘chosen few’.

From Palestine to Kashmir injustice reigns – from Libya to Afghanistan discord rules – Iraq and Syria stand in absolute ruins – Yemen writhes under the burden of genocide – black lives in Africa never mattered and they still do not count – multitudes of migrants continue to pour into a Europe made affluent by the stealing of others’ wealth as they escape what now stands distraught by White man’s wars only to encounter hatred from other White men – and all the while the authors of this harrowing tale continue to dismiss ‘the whining yelpings of base-bred mongrel-multitudes’ with utmost arrogance thereby manifesting the rewritten Sermon on the Mount:

“Blessed are the Iron-handed, the unfit shall flee before them. Cursed are the Haters of Battle, subjugation is their portion”

Why the ‘Left’ is Dead in the Water

 

February 28, 2019  /  Gilad Atzmon

left.jpg

By Gilad Atzmon 

It seems that there is not much left of the Left and what remains has nothing to do with ‘Left.’

Contemporary  ‘Left’ politics is detached from its natural constituency, working people. The so called ‘Left’ is basically a symbolic identifier for ‘Guardian readers’  a critical expression attributed to middle class people who, for some reason, claim to know what is good for the working class. How did this happen to the Left? Why was it derailed and by whom?

Hierarchy is one answer. The capitalist and the corporate worlds operate on an intensely hierarchical basis. The path to leadership within a bank, management of a globally trading company or even high command in the military is of an evolutionary nature. Such power is acquired by a challenging climb within an increasingly  demanding system. It is all about the survival of the fittest. Every step entails new challenges. Failure at any step could easily result in a setback or even a career end. In the old good days, the Left also operated on a hierarchical system. There was a long challenging path from the local workers’ union to the national party. But the Left is hierarchical no more.

Left ideology, like working class politics, was initially the byproduct of the industrial revolution. It was born to address the needs and demands of a new emerging class; those who were working day and night to make other people richer.  In the old days, when Left was a meaningful adventure, Left politicians grew out of workers’ unions. Those who were distinguished in representing and improving the conditions of their fellow workers made it to the trade unions and eventually into the national parties. None of that exists anymore.

In a world without manufacturing, the working class have been removed from the consumption chain and demoted into an ‘under class.’ The contemporary Left politician has nothing to do with the workless people let alone the workless class.  The unions are largely defunct.  You won’t find many Labour politicians who have actually worked in factories and mixed with working people for real. No contemporary Left politician including Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders is the product of a struggle through a highly demanding hierarchical system as such a system hasn’t really existed within the Left  for at least four decades.

In most cases, the contemporary Left politician is a middle class university activist groomed through party politics activity. Instead of fighting for manufacturing and jobs, the Left has embraced the highly divisive identitarian battle.  While the old Left tended to unite us by leading the fight against the horrid capitalists rather than worrying about  whether you were a man or a woman, black or white, Jew or Muslim, gay or hetero, our present-day ‘Left’ actually promotes racial differences and divisions as it pushes people to identify with their biology (skin colour, gender, sexual orientation, Jewish maternal gene etc.) If the old Left united us against the capitalists, the contemporary ‘Left’ divides us and uses the funds it collects from capitalist foundations such as George Soros’ Open Society Institute.

The British Labour party is a prime example of this. It is deaf to the cry of the lower classes. It claims to care ‘for the many’ but in practice is only attentive to a few voices within the intrusive Israeli Lobby. As Britain is struggling with the crucial debate over Brexit, British Labour has been focused instead on spurious  allegations of ‘antisemitsm.’  It is hard to see how any Left political body in the West even plans to bring more work to the people. The Left offers nothing in the way of a vision of a better society for all.  It is impossible to find the Left within the contemporary ‘Left.’

Why has this happened to the Left, why has it become irrelevant?  Because by now the Left is a non-hierarchical system. It is an amalgam of uniquely ungifted people who made politics into their ‘career.’ Most Left politicians have never worked at a proper job where money is exchanged for merit, achievements or results. The vast majority of Left politicians have never faced the economic  challenges associated with the experience of being adults. Tragically such people can’t lead a country, a city, a borough or even a village.

The Left had a mostly positive run for about 150 years. But its role has come to an end as the condition of being in the world has been radically transformed. The Left failed to adapt. It removed itself from the universal ethos.

The shift in our human landscape has created a desperate need for a new ethos: a fresh stand point that will reinstate the Western Athenian ethical and universal roots and produce a new canon that aspires for truth and truthfulness as opposed to the current cancerous tyranny of correctness.


My battle for truth and freedom involves  some expensive legal services. I hope that you will consider committing to a monthly donation in whatever amount you can give. Regular contributions will enable me to avoid being pushed against a wall and to stay on top of the endless harassment by Zionist operators attempting to silence me.

Denate

Civil War Coming to America?

February 12, 2019

Related

%d bloggers like this: