Alastair Crooke in today’s SCF essay looks at the use of narratives in diplomacy as a way to cover dishonesty of the sort long experienced by Russia and the wider world.
"I was boarding the flight. Three [police] officers pulled me aside. They took my passport. When asked why, they said ‘orders of the State Department’. They had no further information for me,” Ritter told RT. “They pulled my bags off the plane, then escorted me out of the airport. They kept my passport.”
Honesty is the best policy is a longstanding multicultural maxim. Too few in the West understand that Western politicos are deemed agreement incapable because of their dishonesty. Lying constantly/consistently isn't going to gain much of anything except opprobrium. Why pathological liars continue to lie is due to their not having to suffer any meaningful consequences to their behavior. I don't know when the West will cease that behavior. Will there be a Lie Too Far?
Coming from the Shangri-La Security Conference in Singapore:
"The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) is ready to strengthen strategic ties with the Russian Armed Forces and work together to defend the international justice." - the official representative of the Ministry of Defense of the People's Republic of China, Wu Qian.
🔶️ "China's Armed Forces are willing to work together with the Russian Armed Forces to fully implement the important consensus reached by the heads of the two countries to further strengthen strategic communications and coordination, deepen mutual trust in the military field and jointly implement the Global Security Initiative," he said.
🔶️ According to the representative of the Chinese military department, PLA military personnel are ready, together with their Russian colleagues, to "defend international justice and impartiality", and also make every effort to ensure world and regional security.
Those were very big words while others were aimed at the Filipino Marcos:
"China will not allow inviting wolves into the house"--the wolves being NATO.
It certainly transcends that here in the UK. How can politicians be accused of 'dishonesty' when the very system itself is founded openly on dishonesty? To illustrate - post-election discussion among politicians of the mainstream parties amounts to: 'How can we tweak our 'message' to persuade the public to vote for us?' In other words, 'what can we tell people next time to persuade them to vote for us?' There is never any reference to morality or what is actually good for the country - the discussion is centred on the next batch of lies they will tell us.
Diana is right - honesty should be the gold standard.
WELCOME TO THE MOSCOW SPRING: WHY RUSSIA IS ACTUALLY CHILLIN’
Russia has the best air defense systems on the planet; the Exceptionalists can’t even dream about them.
Moreover, nothing can protect the NATOstan sphere in case Mr. Sarmat decides to deliver his hypersonic business card.
A fully loaded Sarmat can erase the UK - with everything inside.
A collection of Sarmats can erase the US - with everything inside.
Short to medium range hypersonics can be launched at will from Russian ships 400 km off the US littoral.
The Poseidon - essentially a nuclear torpedo - can provoke a tsunami capable of vanishing with an entire megalopolis.
And still we’re subjected to the spectacle of a gaggle of imbecile chihuahuas threatening a nuclear superpower.
Here in Moscow it’s clear that no one knows how the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense will counterpunch an attack against the Russian Federation delivered by “Kiev” but in facto NATO-orchestrated.
The blabbering imbeciles won’t even know that hit them.
That was a great observation that the more they talk about democracy, the less 'democracy' there actually is, i.e. the less the government policies are aligned with the interests of the masses. After all, electing your rulers is just a way to legitimize their rule, and once elected the rulers do whatever they want, not what their voters want. There's no decrease in 'democracy' in the sense of putting a ballot in a box in America. There's less 'democracy' in the sense of the government not doing what's best in the interests of the people. A good dictator would result in more democracy than the continuation of this unending streak of bad elected politicians.
I've provided many examples of Russia's participatory democracy where the masses do get listened to. Putin is setting an example of how to properly govern and is trying very hard to inculcate that into those of the next generation that will become the governors once Team Putin exits the stage @2040.
As you highlighted, Karl, in the second article: “Democracy has been imbued with a primitive metaphysical potency that almost seems a stand-in for religious faith.”
Today's opacity makes the old ‘smoke-filled room’ look high noon on a cloudless day outside.
We were much more democratic than we are now, before the of intense centralization of policy making, the centralization of the information ecosystem, the transition of the two parties from mass member parties to managed parties, etc.
By 1890, the USA was a Continental Empire whose policy was as plutocratic as can be. Law was turned against workers instead of the Trusts the law was made to control. And very few could vote, even if you were a white male. The entities that controlled the logistical routes were the initial source of Industrial/capital control over the federal government. How much has changed politically for the Common Man?
"How much has changed politically for the Common Man?". A lot, its actually gotten much worse, we've been lied to about history, mostly through omission but some times explicitly and sometimes there are even large scale fabrications.
Antitrust at Local and State Levels: While antitrust enforcement is typically seen today in its federal manifestation, notably the Sherman Act of 1890, antitrust measures have a far deeper and more decentralized history at the state and local levels. Early examples of such regs can be traced back to colonial times and the early republic, where various states and municipalities enacted laws to combat the undue influence and monopolistic practices. Example: in the late 18th century, state legislatures took actions against monopolistic practices in industries like flour milling and tobacco processing. Fore examples, the Commonwealth of Virginia in the 1790s, enacted legislation targeting the tobacco inspection industry, which had become controlled by a few powerful people. This legislation broke up their the control, leading to fairer prices and better quality control. Ccities also did antitrust. Example: in the early 1800s, many city governments issued ordinances to regulate and limit the market control exerted by certain merchants and traders over essential goods such as food and coal. These local ordinances prevented price gouging and ensured that monopolistic practices did not harm locals. In the mid-19th century, various states began implementing their own laws to curb the powers of monopolies and trusts, particularly those affecting the state's economic interests directly. For instance, Ohio passed legislation in 1884 aimed at regulating railroad and telegraph companies to prevent anti-competitive practices that could harm local businesses and consumers. Similarly, California and Texas enacted their own antitrust laws in the late 19th century to tackle monopolies within their borders, such as railroad and oil companies, before the federal government took a significant role in antitrust enforcement.
These early actions underline the proactive stance that states took against monopolistic enterprises affecting their economies. This state-level initiative demonstrates a significant aspect of the decentralized governance characteristic of the Old Republic era, where local and state governments exercised considerable autonomy to regulate commerce and protect public interests. The role of state courts and legislatures in addressing these issues was big, demonstrating a level of engagement and intervention that is now overshadowed by the focus on fed level antitrust. he national level.
Mass-Member Political Parties: The characterization of political parties as being exclusive and centrally controlled due to restricted suffrage and party boss systems simplifies the historical reality. While it is accurate that suffrage was more limited than today, and that party bosses played significant roles in candidate selections, this does not negate the fact that political parties operated with massive grassroots organizations. These parties were indeed mass-member compared to today's standards where party interaction is more about media engagement than physical membership. The Democratic and Republican parties had extensive local clubs and organizations that involved a significant portion of the (voting) population in activities, rallies, and local meetings.
Had the trajectory of expanding political participation continued uninterrupted, we might envision a present-day scenario with near-universal engagement in the political process. It's worth considering that if the contemporary political system, which relies heavily on media and less on direct grassroots involvement, had been transplanted back to the 19th century, it would likely have mirrored the exclusivity of its era, potentially sidelining even larger segments of the population. The historical mass-member nature of parties, featuring extensive local clubs and organizations, actively involved a growing proportion of the population in civic activities, rallies, and local meetings. This expansion was pivotal not only for mobilization and visibility but also for fostering a sense of direct involvement in democratic governance. The historical progression there shows the how inclusivity level of the old political system was expanding and inspires us to the potential for a more engaged democratic process today.
Excellent reply! Yes, the need for communication to be far more intimate was a huge factor that almost propelled the People's Party over the top added to the lack of mass media made to hypnotize and control via narrative.
it is better off to not trying fighting a mirage, and by that i mean all the bubblegum chewing about democracy.... when double standards - hypocrisy, and lording it over others with financial sanctions and etc. etc. become the norm, you know that the narrative is one big lie.. and yet - this narrative / mirage cant be addressed as if it is real, because it isn't... the proof is in the usa pudding to date.. deterioration has set in some time ago with no end in sight.. sorry, but those are the facts here, minus the feel good narrative bs that these exceptional politicians in the exceptional host country will be the last to acknowledge.. it's not in their self interests.. neither was democracy or freedom or any of these stupid catch words that have ceased to sucker in people at this late stage..
There was a time when Americans didn't need to be sold on America. Now the narrative is all about getting Americans to buy the story. Yes, it was never perfect before, but what pride that was once there is gone.
Half of this post by Karl is a quotation of Henry Johnson's article in RT.
This is a long comment. I suggest that you first reread this substack to get into the frame of US on a messianic quest with all the religious fervor of a cult. In some ways we always already knew this but the illegal US/Europe actions in Ukraine and Gaza that have put the world in peril have exposed the cult control that seems unable to see straight.
I followed Karl's link to search for Henry Johnson's other pieces in RT. While people around this page closely follow Michael Hudson's work, this is complementary and worthwhile. Here are articles
"3 Apr, 2024 11:12 Death of empires: History tells us what will follow the collapse of US hegemony:
The turn away from expansion, production and trade toward lending and speculation has precipitated decline for centuries"
"1 Mar, 2024 12:19 Schizophrenic world order: The West is willing to destroy its financial system to punish Russia: Today’s Western leaders exhibit a strange mix of self-assuredness and anxiety that’s characteristic of those defending the status quo during times of sweeping change"
Thanks for your additions, Don. Since RT is cancelled by most of the West and it can't be accessed by readers, perhaps I ought to showcase its products more often. In this instance, there was a timing correlation that made the article pairings work.
Brilliant piece but Crooke should have added that the announcement by Biden of a peace plan last Thursday was precisely diplomacy of deception: derail the UNSC Algerian proposal scheduled for vote on Friday that the French had just announced they would support and buy some votes for their allies in the EU elections at the end of this week.
They systematically disrupted the work of the UNSC at each Arab proposal ahead of vetoing it by dragging the delays etc. This time they just went a little further.
A cracking essay and many thanks, got me thinking about all sorts of topics.
One thing that resonates with me is how these belief systems have replaced religions and indeed taken on many of their forms. I think this is reflected in many people's self-image and sense of person and their place in the world. So when you try to challenge them say on their view on Ukraine, Russia or Putin you usually get a huge kick back. This I think is not based on any sort of rational analysis but is instead more emotionally based, more visceral. You are in effect asking them to question not a geo-political narrative but their fundamental belief system. So many otherwise intelligent and savvy people behave like this that it seems to me that this is the explanation. Either that or my own views are so off beam that I need to question myself!!! I don't know if this is a new thing, I expect not. Nevertheless the characteristics described in the article are the new religion and disagreeing with them casts one into the role of heretic. And as such, you deserve the sternest treatment and the congregation will celebrate that.
Yes, you're on the right track. It's clearly the Cult of Democracy. Wilson was mentioned but not his 14 Points which was the basis for the cult that grew up around him prior to his visit to Europe. Ho Chi Minh was an initial Cult member until he discovered the 14 Points didn't apply to Asians or other colonized people, nor African-Americans. And then there's the rejection of the League of Nations and the deeper story behind that revealing another Cult--The Unilateral Imperialist that we now call Neocons. Neoliberals are also a Cult as their adhere to their own belief system that there's no such thing as rent or unearned income.
This one is one great post shared for a full read. However I tend to hew to the “Clash of the 2 Americas” uhhh... now I’m afraid to use the word, ‘narrative’ found in Matt Ehret's series. I think the people that Crooke cites are targeting the already hijacked narratives. It’s only a quibble because the ruling narrative is the target.
Curious. I've known of Ehret's work for five years or so and thus his overall thesis. I've had issues with his credibility and tend to see his wife Cynthia Chung as the better historian--she too has a substack. Poe's an interesting character. I read the initial intro, but have much else to do before devoting more time to it. Thanks for sharing.
Yeah, I’ve had issues with both Cynthia and Matt, but don’t want to discuss it here. Still, as long as the work is well sourced, well cited and rational I don’t let the previous disagreements rule, but not being a researcher or historian, and even if I was, I'd have to be wary of being fed just another narrative. Aside from their 2 substacks there is Canadian Patriot Review and Rising Tide Foundation.
Agreed. Their attachment to Lydon LaRouche is what generates their Narrative. IMO, there's some validity for British influence if not being the point of origin for the reaction against the gains made by the Classic Political-Economists that began in the late 1870s and was imported into the USA about 1890, and formed the basis for today's Neoliberalism, or Financialized Capitalism. The "Special Relationship" developed much earlier and for very different reasons than those described by the narrative.
They do cite LaRouche and some of his writers, I’m thinking of Jeffrey Steinberg but there are others who were with Larouche, Webster Tarpley for instance who has done some great stuff in the past. Another person cited is Anton Chaitkin, Harley Schlanger too who does a daily update. So, I’ve had to revise my opinion on Larouche which was heavily slanted by being fed sloppy innuendo and what I think were political smear operations. Old issues of EIR are quite good today. Pretty much anyone (LaRouche) who freaks out Kissinger deserves another look. LOL
I hear “our democracy” from Biden and the MSM wind tunnel. I see Mao’s red guard trying reluctant peasants in town square to standing audiences and the latest kangaroo court in NYC.
Their universe is free abortion and no challenge to their domination
Scott Ritter was going on a 6 week or so trip to Russia. Passport taken.
"US seizes Scott Ritter’s passport
The RT contributor was stopped from visiting Russia"
https://www.rt.com/news/598711-us-seizes-scott-ritters-passport/
"I was boarding the flight. Three [police] officers pulled me aside. They took my passport. When asked why, they said ‘orders of the State Department’. They had no further information for me,” Ritter told RT. “They pulled my bags off the plane, then escorted me out of the airport. They kept my passport.”
Yeah, Biden democracy in full play. Judge Napolitano was also heading to St. Petersburg for the SPIEF, but his trip was cancelled too.
The theatrics, the virtue signalling and the outright lies by the west aren't just nauseating, but are destroying any credibility they had.
I believe honesty is the new gold standard, and people wasting our time with lies will be held in contempt and, ultimately, ignored.
Honesty is the best policy is a longstanding multicultural maxim. Too few in the West understand that Western politicos are deemed agreement incapable because of their dishonesty. Lying constantly/consistently isn't going to gain much of anything except opprobrium. Why pathological liars continue to lie is due to their not having to suffer any meaningful consequences to their behavior. I don't know when the West will cease that behavior. Will there be a Lie Too Far?
I hope so. There have been many Lies Too Far for me, but others seem to accept them.
Coming from the Shangri-La Security Conference in Singapore:
"The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) is ready to strengthen strategic ties with the Russian Armed Forces and work together to defend the international justice." - the official representative of the Ministry of Defense of the People's Republic of China, Wu Qian.
🔶️ "China's Armed Forces are willing to work together with the Russian Armed Forces to fully implement the important consensus reached by the heads of the two countries to further strengthen strategic communications and coordination, deepen mutual trust in the military field and jointly implement the Global Security Initiative," he said.
🔶️ According to the representative of the Chinese military department, PLA military personnel are ready, together with their Russian colleagues, to "defend international justice and impartiality", and also make every effort to ensure world and regional security.
Those were very big words while others were aimed at the Filipino Marcos:
"China will not allow inviting wolves into the house"--the wolves being NATO.
It certainly transcends that here in the UK. How can politicians be accused of 'dishonesty' when the very system itself is founded openly on dishonesty? To illustrate - post-election discussion among politicians of the mainstream parties amounts to: 'How can we tweak our 'message' to persuade the public to vote for us?' In other words, 'what can we tell people next time to persuade them to vote for us?' There is never any reference to morality or what is actually good for the country - the discussion is centred on the next batch of lies they will tell us.
Diana is right - honesty should be the gold standard.
Twitter from Pepe. Posted his tweet.
Pepe Escobar
@RealPepeEscobar
WELCOME TO THE MOSCOW SPRING: WHY RUSSIA IS ACTUALLY CHILLIN’
Russia has the best air defense systems on the planet; the Exceptionalists can’t even dream about them.
Moreover, nothing can protect the NATOstan sphere in case Mr. Sarmat decides to deliver his hypersonic business card.
A fully loaded Sarmat can erase the UK - with everything inside.
A collection of Sarmats can erase the US - with everything inside.
Short to medium range hypersonics can be launched at will from Russian ships 400 km off the US littoral.
The Poseidon - essentially a nuclear torpedo - can provoke a tsunami capable of vanishing with an entire megalopolis.
And still we’re subjected to the spectacle of a gaggle of imbecile chihuahuas threatening a nuclear superpower.
Here in Moscow it’s clear that no one knows how the Kremlin and the Ministry of Defense will counterpunch an attack against the Russian Federation delivered by “Kiev” but in facto NATO-orchestrated.
The blabbering imbeciles won’t even know that hit them.
3:12 PM · Jun 3, 2024
·
8,185 Views
A Hard Line is rising.
That was a great observation that the more they talk about democracy, the less 'democracy' there actually is, i.e. the less the government policies are aligned with the interests of the masses. After all, electing your rulers is just a way to legitimize their rule, and once elected the rulers do whatever they want, not what their voters want. There's no decrease in 'democracy' in the sense of putting a ballot in a box in America. There's less 'democracy' in the sense of the government not doing what's best in the interests of the people. A good dictator would result in more democracy than the continuation of this unending streak of bad elected politicians.
I've provided many examples of Russia's participatory democracy where the masses do get listened to. Putin is setting an example of how to properly govern and is trying very hard to inculcate that into those of the next generation that will become the governors once Team Putin exits the stage @2040.
Great piece!
As you highlighted, Karl, in the second article: “Democracy has been imbued with a primitive metaphysical potency that almost seems a stand-in for religious faith.”
Yeah, it's being sold as a brand.
Now, this is interesting — I would ask though if the ‘brand’ does provide a sufficient ‘metaphysical’ grounding? 😇
The Market is God don't ya know!
Indeed — Hallelujah!
Today's opacity makes the old ‘smoke-filled room’ look high noon on a cloudless day outside.
We were much more democratic than we are now, before the of intense centralization of policy making, the centralization of the information ecosystem, the transition of the two parties from mass member parties to managed parties, etc.
By 1890, the USA was a Continental Empire whose policy was as plutocratic as can be. Law was turned against workers instead of the Trusts the law was made to control. And very few could vote, even if you were a white male. The entities that controlled the logistical routes were the initial source of Industrial/capital control over the federal government. How much has changed politically for the Common Man?
"How much has changed politically for the Common Man?". A lot, its actually gotten much worse, we've been lied to about history, mostly through omission but some times explicitly and sometimes there are even large scale fabrications.
Antitrust at Local and State Levels: While antitrust enforcement is typically seen today in its federal manifestation, notably the Sherman Act of 1890, antitrust measures have a far deeper and more decentralized history at the state and local levels. Early examples of such regs can be traced back to colonial times and the early republic, where various states and municipalities enacted laws to combat the undue influence and monopolistic practices. Example: in the late 18th century, state legislatures took actions against monopolistic practices in industries like flour milling and tobacco processing. Fore examples, the Commonwealth of Virginia in the 1790s, enacted legislation targeting the tobacco inspection industry, which had become controlled by a few powerful people. This legislation broke up their the control, leading to fairer prices and better quality control. Ccities also did antitrust. Example: in the early 1800s, many city governments issued ordinances to regulate and limit the market control exerted by certain merchants and traders over essential goods such as food and coal. These local ordinances prevented price gouging and ensured that monopolistic practices did not harm locals. In the mid-19th century, various states began implementing their own laws to curb the powers of monopolies and trusts, particularly those affecting the state's economic interests directly. For instance, Ohio passed legislation in 1884 aimed at regulating railroad and telegraph companies to prevent anti-competitive practices that could harm local businesses and consumers. Similarly, California and Texas enacted their own antitrust laws in the late 19th century to tackle monopolies within their borders, such as railroad and oil companies, before the federal government took a significant role in antitrust enforcement.
These early actions underline the proactive stance that states took against monopolistic enterprises affecting their economies. This state-level initiative demonstrates a significant aspect of the decentralized governance characteristic of the Old Republic era, where local and state governments exercised considerable autonomy to regulate commerce and protect public interests. The role of state courts and legislatures in addressing these issues was big, demonstrating a level of engagement and intervention that is now overshadowed by the focus on fed level antitrust. he national level.
Mass-Member Political Parties: The characterization of political parties as being exclusive and centrally controlled due to restricted suffrage and party boss systems simplifies the historical reality. While it is accurate that suffrage was more limited than today, and that party bosses played significant roles in candidate selections, this does not negate the fact that political parties operated with massive grassroots organizations. These parties were indeed mass-member compared to today's standards where party interaction is more about media engagement than physical membership. The Democratic and Republican parties had extensive local clubs and organizations that involved a significant portion of the (voting) population in activities, rallies, and local meetings.
Had the trajectory of expanding political participation continued uninterrupted, we might envision a present-day scenario with near-universal engagement in the political process. It's worth considering that if the contemporary political system, which relies heavily on media and less on direct grassroots involvement, had been transplanted back to the 19th century, it would likely have mirrored the exclusivity of its era, potentially sidelining even larger segments of the population. The historical mass-member nature of parties, featuring extensive local clubs and organizations, actively involved a growing proportion of the population in civic activities, rallies, and local meetings. This expansion was pivotal not only for mobilization and visibility but also for fostering a sense of direct involvement in democratic governance. The historical progression there shows the how inclusivity level of the old political system was expanding and inspires us to the potential for a more engaged democratic process today.
Excellent reply! Yes, the need for communication to be far more intimate was a huge factor that almost propelled the People's Party over the top added to the lack of mass media made to hypnotize and control via narrative.
Indeed, and the masses are sold that VdL or Rutte should head NATO as if there was no conflict of interest
it is better off to not trying fighting a mirage, and by that i mean all the bubblegum chewing about democracy.... when double standards - hypocrisy, and lording it over others with financial sanctions and etc. etc. become the norm, you know that the narrative is one big lie.. and yet - this narrative / mirage cant be addressed as if it is real, because it isn't... the proof is in the usa pudding to date.. deterioration has set in some time ago with no end in sight.. sorry, but those are the facts here, minus the feel good narrative bs that these exceptional politicians in the exceptional host country will be the last to acknowledge.. it's not in their self interests.. neither was democracy or freedom or any of these stupid catch words that have ceased to sucker in people at this late stage..
There was a time when Americans didn't need to be sold on America. Now the narrative is all about getting Americans to buy the story. Yes, it was never perfect before, but what pride that was once there is gone.
pride cometh before a fall...
Half of this post by Karl is a quotation of Henry Johnson's article in RT.
This is a long comment. I suggest that you first reread this substack to get into the frame of US on a messianic quest with all the religious fervor of a cult. In some ways we always already knew this but the illegal US/Europe actions in Ukraine and Gaza that have put the world in peril have exposed the cult control that seems unable to see straight.
I followed Karl's link to search for Henry Johnson's other pieces in RT. While people around this page closely follow Michael Hudson's work, this is complementary and worthwhile. Here are articles
"3 Apr, 2024 11:12 Death of empires: History tells us what will follow the collapse of US hegemony:
The turn away from expansion, production and trade toward lending and speculation has precipitated decline for centuries"
https://www.rt.com/business/594432-financialization-death-empires/
"8 May, 2024 13:54 Drowning in debt: The paralysis at the heart of the US fiscal crisis:
Washington is doing nothing about its deteriorating finances because there is nothing it can do without risking major upheaval"
https://www.rt.com/business/596899-us-fiscal-crisis-debt/
"1 Mar, 2024 12:19 Schizophrenic world order: The West is willing to destroy its financial system to punish Russia: Today’s Western leaders exhibit a strange mix of self-assuredness and anxiety that’s characteristic of those defending the status quo during times of sweeping change"
https://www.rt.com/business/593324-russia-frozen-assets-confiscation/
"20 Jan, 2024 16:30 China hints at its asymmetric warfare system aimed at dethroning US dollar:
For Beijing, it’s not so much about replacing the greenback within the current system but creating an entirely separate alternative"
https://www.rt.com/business/590794-yuan-dollar-global-dominance/
Thanks for your additions, Don. Since RT is cancelled by most of the West and it can't be accessed by readers, perhaps I ought to showcase its products more often. In this instance, there was a timing correlation that made the article pairings work.
Brilliant piece but Crooke should have added that the announcement by Biden of a peace plan last Thursday was precisely diplomacy of deception: derail the UNSC Algerian proposal scheduled for vote on Friday that the French had just announced they would support and buy some votes for their allies in the EU elections at the end of this week.
They systematically disrupted the work of the UNSC at each Arab proposal ahead of vetoing it by dragging the delays etc. This time they just went a little further.
Good observation!
A cracking essay and many thanks, got me thinking about all sorts of topics.
One thing that resonates with me is how these belief systems have replaced religions and indeed taken on many of their forms. I think this is reflected in many people's self-image and sense of person and their place in the world. So when you try to challenge them say on their view on Ukraine, Russia or Putin you usually get a huge kick back. This I think is not based on any sort of rational analysis but is instead more emotionally based, more visceral. You are in effect asking them to question not a geo-political narrative but their fundamental belief system. So many otherwise intelligent and savvy people behave like this that it seems to me that this is the explanation. Either that or my own views are so off beam that I need to question myself!!! I don't know if this is a new thing, I expect not. Nevertheless the characteristics described in the article are the new religion and disagreeing with them casts one into the role of heretic. And as such, you deserve the sternest treatment and the congregation will celebrate that.
eg Trump, kangaroo court, conviction, MSM reaction.
Yes, you're on the right track. It's clearly the Cult of Democracy. Wilson was mentioned but not his 14 Points which was the basis for the cult that grew up around him prior to his visit to Europe. Ho Chi Minh was an initial Cult member until he discovered the 14 Points didn't apply to Asians or other colonized people, nor African-Americans. And then there's the rejection of the League of Nations and the deeper story behind that revealing another Cult--The Unilateral Imperialist that we now call Neocons. Neoliberals are also a Cult as their adhere to their own belief system that there's no such thing as rent or unearned income.
This one is one great post shared for a full read. However I tend to hew to the “Clash of the 2 Americas” uhhh... now I’m afraid to use the word, ‘narrative’ found in Matt Ehret's series. I think the people that Crooke cites are targeting the already hijacked narratives. It’s only a quibble because the ruling narrative is the target.
Ok, this is likely misplaced given the trajectory of the topic, but damn, I have to post it somewhere! Perhaps it can be woven in to the "There was a time when Americans didn't need to be sold on America.” https://matthewehret.substack.com/p/edgar-poe-as-cultural-warrior-part?
Curious. I've known of Ehret's work for five years or so and thus his overall thesis. I've had issues with his credibility and tend to see his wife Cynthia Chung as the better historian--she too has a substack. Poe's an interesting character. I read the initial intro, but have much else to do before devoting more time to it. Thanks for sharing.
Yeah, I’ve had issues with both Cynthia and Matt, but don’t want to discuss it here. Still, as long as the work is well sourced, well cited and rational I don’t let the previous disagreements rule, but not being a researcher or historian, and even if I was, I'd have to be wary of being fed just another narrative. Aside from their 2 substacks there is Canadian Patriot Review and Rising Tide Foundation.
https://risingtidefoundation.substack.com
https://canadianpatriotreview.substack.com/
Agreed. Their attachment to Lydon LaRouche is what generates their Narrative. IMO, there's some validity for British influence if not being the point of origin for the reaction against the gains made by the Classic Political-Economists that began in the late 1870s and was imported into the USA about 1890, and formed the basis for today's Neoliberalism, or Financialized Capitalism. The "Special Relationship" developed much earlier and for very different reasons than those described by the narrative.
They do cite LaRouche and some of his writers, I’m thinking of Jeffrey Steinberg but there are others who were with Larouche, Webster Tarpley for instance who has done some great stuff in the past. Another person cited is Anton Chaitkin, Harley Schlanger too who does a daily update. So, I’ve had to revise my opinion on Larouche which was heavily slanted by being fed sloppy innuendo and what I think were political smear operations. Old issues of EIR are quite good today. Pretty much anyone (LaRouche) who freaks out Kissinger deserves another look. LOL
Schlanger: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THYjgKivlHs
If using a search engine I’d give Brave a try.
Good, you've done some DD work!
And thank you very much for your support!!
I hear “our democracy” from Biden and the MSM wind tunnel. I see Mao’s red guard trying reluctant peasants in town square to standing audiences and the latest kangaroo court in NYC.
Their universe is free abortion and no challenge to their domination