.
Russia’s “‘return’ is driving men and woman literally mad–mad enough, even to risk a catastrophic war, rather than to relinquish the myth of America’s Manifest Destiny.…The United States must lead–or more properly, has the duty to coerce–mankind toward that future.”…The Deep State considers “global conflict as the price to pay for maintaining its largesse from the US taxpayer. Continuous warfare is its only business product.”
Aug. 20, 2018, “The Metaphysics to Our Present Global Anguish,” Alastair Crooke, Strategic Culture
“James Jatras, a former US diplomat poses a highly pertinent question in his piece Lenin Updated: Firstly, he says, President Trump meets with President Putin and appears to make some progress in easing bilateral tensions. “Immediately all hell breaks loose: Trump is called a traitor. The ‘sanctions bill from hell’ is introduced in the Senate, and Trump is forced onto the defensive”.
Next, Senator Rand Paul goes to meet with Putin in Moscow, Jatras notes. Paul hands over a letter from the US President proposing moderate steps towards détente. Rand Paul then meets with, and invites Russian Senators to Washington, to continue the dialogue: “Immediately all hell breaks loose. Paul is called a traitor. The state Department ‘finds’ the Russians guilty of using illegal chemical weapons [allegedly on a doorknob] (in UK)…and imposes sanctions. Trump is forced even more on the defensive.”
Clearly, from the very outset, Trump has been “perceived by the globalist neo-liberal order as a mortal danger to the system which has enriched them” Jatras observes. The big question that Jatras poses in the wake of these events, is
how could such collective hysteria have blossomed in to such visceral hostility,
that parts of the ‘Anglo’ establishment are ready to intensify hostilities toward Russia-
even to the point of risking “a catastrophic, uncontainable [nuclear] conflict”.
How is it that the élite’s passion ‘to save globalism’ is so completely overwhelming
that it demands their risking human extinction?…
The Jacobin revolutionaries launched the Terror as a violent retribution for élite repression–inspired by Rousseau’s Enlightenment humanism; the Trotskyite Bolsheviks murdered millions in the name of reforming humanity through Scientific Empiricism; the Nazis did similar, in the name of pursuing ‘Scientific (Darwinian) Racism’….
World redemption from its state of corruption was to be brought into being through Enlightenment
principles of rationality and science.
Peace was expected to ensue, after the End Time….
The American millenarian ‘myth’, then and now, was (and is), rooted in the fervent belief in the Manifest Destiny of the United States, ‘the New Jerusalem’, to represent humanity’s best hope for a utopian future. This belief in a special destiny has been reflected in
a conviction that the United States must lead–or more properly,
has the duty to coerce–mankind toward that future….
[6/2/2007, “The beginning of my own sense of separation from the Bush [#2] administration came in January 2005, when the president declared that it is now the policy of the United States to eradicate tyranny in the world, and that the survival of American liberty is dependent on the liberty of every other nation. This was at once so utopian and so aggressive that it shocked me.” Peggy Noonan, Wall St. Journal, “Too bad.”]
(continuing): “The aim is a global, cosmopolitan society disembarrassed of religion, national culture and community, gender and social class. Processes of
toleration that, formerly, were construed as essential to freedom
have undergone an Orwellian metamorphosis to emerge as their antonyms: as instruments, rather, of repression.
Any national leader standing against this project, any contrary national culture, or national pride displayed in a nation’s achievements,
plainly constitutes an obstacle to this prospective universal realm–
In other words, today’s millenarians
may eschew the guillotine, but they are explicitly coercive–
albeit, in a different manner—
through the progressive ‘capture’ of narrative,
In short, a global space is being sought that would recognise
only an international global humanity–much as the Trotskyites wanted.
So, how is it, precisely, that Russia and Mr Putin has come to constitute the antithesis to the utopian project, and
the trigger to such fear and hysteria amongst the globalist élites?…
Henry Kissinger says the mistake the West (and NATO) is making “is to think
that there is a sort of historic evolution that will march across Eurasia –
and not to understand that somewhere on that march
very different to a Westphalian [western idea of a liberal democratic and market orientated state] entity.”…
But what really riles the globalists is the contemporary trend,
manifested most particularly, by Russia,
towards a pluralism which privileges one’s culture, history, religiosity
and ties of blood, land and language –”…
[7/3/2013, “WSJ Attacks ‘Blood-and-Soil‘ Republicans over Opposition to Immigration Bill,” Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart…
July 4, 2013-If you merely want a US southern border to exist, Wall St. Journal labels you a member of the “blood and soil” wing: “The Wall Street Journal editorial page has attacked opposition to the immigration bill that passed in the Senate last week, urging the Republican-led House to “improve” the bill, “not kill it.” The bill’s border security provisions, the Journal argued, were not weak, as conservatives had charged, but were “wretched excess,” the result of “the Republican party letting its blood-and-soil wing trump its supposedly free-market principles.” It might seem odd to attack “blood-and-soil” conservatives (a phrase of Nazi provenance, evidently) on the eve of July 4th. But one need not wave the American flag or protest the obviously offensive connotations of the insult to defeat the Journal’s arguments for the Senate bill. By arguing that economic growth should drive immigration reform, the Journal actually undermines the “Gang of Eight” legislation it attempts to defend.”…
July 3, 1984, “In praise of huddled masses:” “If Washington still wants to “do something” about immigration, we propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders."…Wall St. Journal Editorial Board]
(continuing): “and which sees in this
re-appropriation of traditional values, the path to the re-sovereigntisation of a particular people.
The Russian ‘Eurasian’ notion is one of different cultures, autonomous, and sovereign, which, at least implicitly, constitutes a rejection of the Latin theology of equality, and reductive universalism (i.e. achieved through Redemption.)
The idea rather, is of a grouping of ‘nations’, each reaching back to its primordial cultures and identities –
i.e. Russia being ‘Russian’ in its own ‘Russian cultural way’ –
and not permitting itself to be coerced into mimicking the westernisation impulse.
What makes a wider grouping of Eurasian nations feasible is that cultural identities are complex and storied: It escapes the prevailing obsession to reduce every nation to a singularity in value, and to a singularity of ‘meaning’. The ground for
collaboration and conversation thus widens beyond ‘the either-or’, to the differing strata of complex identities–and interests.
Why should this seem so ‘diabolical’ to the western global élites? Why all the hysteria?…
What had been imagined as defeated, beyond recovery, is cautiously arising out from our crumbled ruins. The wheel of time turns, and comes around, again. It may all fare badly–the mode of linear
one-track thinking implanted in the West does have an inbuilt
propensity towards totalitarianism. We shall see….
Today, we have a wave of still inchoate ‘otherness’ emerging from the deepest levels of human psyche to hurl itself onto the rocks of Enlightenment self-certainty. The tensions and the hysteria, follow in a similar way.
Its ‘return’ is driving men and woman literally mad–mad enough,
even to risk a catastrophic war, rather than to relinquish
the myth of America’s Manifest Destiny,
or even to acknowledge the flaws to their radically disjunctive way of thinking
about a world that must be brought to some global convergence.”
.................
No comments:
Post a Comment