Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
December 12, 2019

Open Thread 2019-73

News & views ...

How, btw, did Corbyn do it?

Posted by b on December 12, 2019 at 19:51 UTC | Permalink

Comments
« previous page | next page »

Posted by: vk | Dec 13 2019 20:34 utc | 99

>China already is at first place in new patents.

Quality of its patents is low, on average. Anyway, if the US is making a fuss about it, then there is a reason for that.

>if you don't have the military power to back it up, it means nothing. And the USA is getting weaker, not stronger.

Yes, it is. But the naval gap is huge. According to Martyanov, a military expert i follow, the chinese navy is far weaker than the US navy. He says that the US can effectively block chinese SLOCs across the Pacific and the Indian Ocean. Does not see China having an equal navy until 2040s.

============

The Chinese will move away from dependence on the US with time. In 2030, China will be in good position to do that. But right now, China is weaker than the US, or even Russia, in some ways (in the military and the self-sufficiency department).

They are highly dependent on external food and fuel supplies, far more than the US and Russia.

The truth is, the US will benefit from that deal and it will slow down its decline for some time. It did manage to bully China to give it something. But in the long run, this will lead to more self-sufficient China, especially in semi conductors production. And with lower export dependence on the US due to BRI. But as i said many times, i do not see the US collapsing today or during the next few years. It is a powerful country with lots of natural resources, the best geopolitical position (protected by 2 oceans and being able to interfere in the world easily as its opponents in Eurasia have to deal with competitors near them), having the world reserve currency (yuan is still less popular even than the yen or the pound, as China does not allow it to float) and it has the best strategic depth (and having many countries as semi-colonies that are propping it up). Just Canada and Australia are huge semi-colonies and could supply it with huge natural resources and military depth. So i do not underestimate that country at all. There will be a big fight until it declines and settles for regional status.

According to some studies that i have seen, the power transition period between China and the US will be between 2024 and 2032. That period has not yet begun and the US is clearly stronger than China, in my eyes.

Posted by: Passer by | Dec 13 2019 21:14 utc | 101

Galloway's last line

"There is no word yet of the number of casualties but there will clearly be many. The Labour Party itself is merely the first of them."

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/475846-labour-culture-war-voters/

Posted by: arby | Dec 13 2019 21:18 utc | 102

@100 laguerre.. i am sure there are some real plus's for the eu such as travel and exchange and etc... however, it seems to me to be mostly about giving corporations more free reign.. it is not so great for people in general and the idea of national sovereignty is being washed away and replaced with corporations and neoliberalism calling all the shots.. i think this is the part that many observers have a very difficult time with.. no accountability with these corporations and the agenda of the eu leaders who make the decisions - all for the supposed good of eu... maybe uk existing from the eu will help clarity the pros and cons more clearly.. i think there are many negatives that you are not factoring into the equation here..

@101 passer by... the change is coming.. it might not be for a while, or between 2024- 2032 as you state, but it is coming.. china is in the ascendancy and the usa will be like the uk - former imperialist power... the usa can't continue to think it can dictate the terms on the planet by spreading itself out as it has done.. at some point, that is going to come to an end.. the sooner the better..

Posted by: james | Dec 13 2019 21:22 utc | 103

Posted by: Laguerre | Dec 13 2019 20:07 utc | 97

I doubt if business interests would agree with you, but if you can convince your compatriots, why not? But if your country wants to continue its access to the Single Market, then you have to pay.

Business interests don't get to vote for obvious reasons.

Norway had a people's referendum in 1972 and another one in 1994 about membership in EEC/EU. Both of the times the people said NO. After the second vote our then prime minister Gro Harlem Brundtland declared "We have other methods" and got us in the EEA back door after the people had said no. So it is not about me convincing my compatriots, it is about politicians betraying a people's referendum, much like in the UK after 2016.

Posted by: Norwegian | Dec 13 2019 21:26 utc | 104

craig murrays latest - Resolution

"I have no doubt that the Johnson government will very quickly become the most unpopular in UK political history. The ultra-hard Brexit he is pushing will not be the panacea which the deluded anticipate. It will have a negative economic impact felt most keenly in the remaining industry of the Midlands and North East of England. Deregulation will worsen conditions for those fortunate enough to have employment, as will further benefits squeezes. Immigration will not in practice reduce; what will reduce are the rights and conditions for the immigrants.

Decaying, left-behind towns will moulder further. The fishing industry will very quickly be sold down the river in trade negotiations with the EU – access to fishing (and most of the UK fishing grounds are Scottish) is one of the few decent offers Boris has to make to the EU in seeking market access. His Brexit deal will take years and be overwhelmingly fashioned to benefit the City of London." and etc...

Posted by: james | Dec 13 2019 21:27 utc | 105

@104 norwegian... the 2016 brexit vote was inconclusive, or very divisive as i see it...

Leave 17,410,742 51.89%
Remain 16,141,241 48.11%

these are very divisive results.. that is all we have seen since june 2016... i expect this divisiveness will indeed continue.. when the people are so evenly divided, i think anyone who believes 52 to 48 is a good set up, need to rethink it..

Posted by: james | Dec 13 2019 21:30 utc | 106

@ Posted by: Passer by | Dec 13 2019 21:14 utc | 101

I disagree with your observations, but not on principle. It's just that the facts on the field don't confirm them:

1) If China's patents were low quality, then Huawei wouldn't be a problem. But the USA went so far as to arrest the daughter of the owner to try to have some leverage. Not an act of a nation who thinks has the upper hand;

2) If the differences between navies is so big, then why did China conquered the entire South China Sea unopposed? If said abyss really existed, China's instrusion would end like Suez 1956: Eisenhower raised his voice a little bit and the UK was over (they even lost their Prime Minister for that). That obviously didn't happen against China. Besides, the USN has to patrol the entire globe at the same time (this is the precondition of being a world superpower), so it will be naturally more scattered than the Chinese Navy. But if you claim to be the world's "lonely superpower", then you should be able to subjugate every country at the same time, whatever the scenario -- if you can't do that, you're not the sole superpower by definition.

3) China's economy is declining and the trade war has a part on this. But the rest of the world is also declining. More importantly, it is declining at a faster and higher rate than China. The USSR declined after the oil crisis of 1975, but it never had a recession (except for the year following the Perestroika and its final year of 1991): the problem with the USSR was that it declined faster and more severely than the capitalist world. China got luckier: it rose to its apex in a time when the capitalist world was already in decline, and when it begun to decline it declined with less severity than the capitalists. The growth rates don't matter without the proper historical contexts -- that's why China's 6% GDP growth in 2019 is stronger than the USSR's 15% GDP growth somewhere in the 1950s: in the 1950s, eveybody was growing 10-12%; but in 2019, nobody else is growing more than 3% (see my comments on India's book cooking practices on its GDP figures).

Posted by: vk | Dec 13 2019 21:59 utc | 107

This man was way before his time

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMewtlmkV6c

But very apt and very relevant to this U.K. election, catches my present mood perfectly
The lyrics would make a perfect ‘comment’ right here.
Good night all stay safe and stay sane.

Posted by: Mark2 | Dec 13 2019 22:09 utc | 108

Posted by: vk | Dec 13 2019 21:59 utc | 107

>>1) If China's patents were low quality, then Huawei wouldn't be a problem. But the USA went so far as to arrest the daughter of the owner to try to have some leverage. Not an act of a nation who thinks has the upper hand;

They are on average, you can research that if you wish, which does not mean that there are no quality patents at all (see Huawei for example). This is quite simple to get.

Currently China lags the US in high quality peer reviewed science papers. It produces 50 % less, this gives a better picture of the overall situation. But it is catching up fast and according to some estimates it will ultimately produce 30 - 40 % more high quality science than the US in some point in the future.

As for arresting the daughter of the owner, war is continuation of politics, and hybrid war (including acts like this) is popular today. Not much different than 19th century bullying acts. Nothing new in that. But i obviously agree that Huawei poses a big threat to the US, this is why the US is so triggered by it. Still, as i mentioned above, Huawei is not fully representative of the overall picture in sino-american science differences.

>>2) If the differences between navies is so big, then why did China conquered the entire South China Sea unopposed?

China has nuclear weapons plus South China sea is close to the mainland.

If you don't believe me on the issue of the naval difference between China and the US ask Martyanov, he is an expert on this. He says that China currently can not protect its SLOCs. And especially its submarines are of relatively low quality.

>>3) China's economy

China's economy is dropping below 6 % next year, and will struggle to stay above 4 % at 2029.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-gdp/chinas-potential-growth-below-6-over-next-five-years-central-bank-adviser-idUSKBN1YC0AK

https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3039786/china-could-struggle-keep-growth-above-4-cent-over-next

With that said, i agree with your view about China's growth, it is pretty good overall. Just don't expect miracles incoming as the aging demographics will kick in after 2030. From now on, China will be slowing down.

Overall studies by various sources estimate that China will be between 1,7 and 2 times bigger than the US in PPP GDP by 2050 (currently it is 1,27 times bigger), and after that their growth rates will converge.

Posted by: Passer by | Dec 13 2019 22:56 utc | 109

This article
is an attempt at damage control of the Horowitz Report:

"We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced Priestap’s decision to open Crossfire Hurricane. The evidence also showed that FBI officials responsible for and involved in the case opening decisions were unanimous in their belief that, together with the July 2016 release by WikiLeaks of hacked DNC emails, the Papadopoulos statement described in the FFG information reflected the Russian government’s potential next step to interfere with the 2016 U.S. elections. These FBI officials were similarly unanimous in their belief that the FFG information represented a threat to national security that warranted further investigation by the FBI. Witnesses told us that they did not recall observing during these discussions any instances or indications of improper motivations or political bias on the part of the participants, including Strzok."

These assertions are partly falsified by Priestap's own testimony:

"Bill Priestap, the high-ranking FBI official responsible for overseeing both the Clinton email investigation and the agency’s counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, appears to have not really been in control of his own investigations.

In closed-door testimony before congressional lawmakers in June last year, Priestap, who served as the head of the FBI’s counterintelligence division, acknowledged it was mostly FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI analyst Jonathan Moffa who were “driving the train.”

Horowitz's finding of no bias at the FBI in opening Crossfire Hurricane relies
almost completely on his credulity in the FBI agents' beliefs! In other words he believed
in the fbi's beliefs, and this is proof of adequate predication!

Posted by: evilempire | Dec 14 2019 0:20 utc | 110

@ Posted by: Passer by | Dec 13 2019 22:56 utc | 109

1) I won't research more than 5,000 patents just to prove a point. The argument here is that China is ascendent on R&D, while the USA is decaying. In 1972, everybody in the West was laughing at China; today, they are less so. Simple extrapolation determines they will definitely not be laughing in 2030.

2) Well, by that argument, I could state that, if my aunt had wheels, she would be a bicycle. It's not China's fault South China Sea is right on its coast (clue is in the name). It's also self-evident that, when a critical mass of enriched uranium intiates its fission chain reaction, it doesn't differentiate between Americans and non-Americans -- the USA doesn't have a divine right to be the only user of nukes and you can't teach an uranium atom ideology. The pivotal point of my argument is that, if the USA wants to retain its title of world's sole superpower, it has to be able to subjugate any vassal State anywhere, anytime.

3) Those think tank, IMF, World Bank long-term predictions are useless. They always do a simple extrapolation of the present status quo and call it a day. They couldn't predict 2008, they certainly won't be able to predict the next structural crisis. The crucial point is: the Chinese government itself has publicly stated it needs a growth sufficiently large enough to generate at least 1.1 million new urban jobs per year, until at least 2030. That would complete the industrial revolution phase.

3)

Posted by: vk | Dec 14 2019 0:27 utc | 111

re karlof1 | Dec 13 2019 19:19 utc | 93
"...Popular Forces were never able to gain political and thus economic control..."

Thanks your input. And true enough, so I wonder why not.

Until say 200 years ago, universal communication was a barrier, especially ability to read. But that has been overcome with radio with wireless tech and reading is no longer an effective barrier.

Even so, what is it that blocks the general population from seeing their predicament, and indeed dismal future, clearly enough to effectively change the system?

It is as though each person carries the subterfuge of his own disability to understand who or what is suppressing him. And that situation has been going on for a very long time. Thus...

Could the lie or missing knowledge be immunized against discovery?

Where to look for an answer? Perhaps the human "mind", whatever that is, needs to be reviewed ...for the hidden lies? for the missing vital data? for [yikes!] even a better definition of "mind" that would suggest a workable answer?

Posted by: chu teh | Dec 14 2019 0:32 utc | 112

Well, it seems V.I.Lenin counter attacks....

Feuerbach very accurately answered those who defend religion, as a source of “consolation” for people, that comforting a slave is an occupation profitable for a slave owner, and a true supporter of slaves teaches them to revolt, rebellion, overthrow the yoke, and does not “console” them at all.

https://twitter.com/Lenin_1917/status/1204788719498223616

The revolutionary proletariat needs victory over the counter-revolution, and not its powerless "condemnation".

https://twitter.com/Lenin_1917/status/1204820358882381824

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 0:41 utc | 113

Below is a link to a PubMed article titled "Current Directions in the Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation I – A Physiological Perspective" dated 2019, Aug 9.

I am currently receiving this therapy for my bicyclist/truck crash by someone who is also teaching this form of therapy in Portland, OR (shout out specifically to Nemesiscalling)

Now if we could just get profit out of the middle of the provision of health care, more could benefit from advances such as this.....

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6697069/

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 0:41 utc | 114

Hey Psycho. I have been meaning to ask you for the name of the acupuncturist that you recommended for me here in Portland. Did you say they were in Sellwood?

Even if they are out of my healthcare network, I would still be interested in trying that treatment route.

I am ready to help myself get better.

Thanks for the heads up!

Posted by: NemesisCalling | Dec 14 2019 0:56 utc | 115

@ psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 0:41 utc | 114

I haven't the vagus idea what you're talking about.*

* Despite Bernhard's disapproval of snappy one-liners, I've been waiting for an opportunity to make this joke for years, and I simply can't pass it up. ;)

Posted by: Ort | Dec 14 2019 1:03 utc | 116

Addendum: it seems to me that Horowitz needed to show
that the fbi's "beliefs" had adequate prediction rather
than merely expressing his belief in the fbi's belief.

Posted by: evilempire | Dec 14 2019 1:04 utc | 117

Here's one to ponder: does Horowitz's belief that the fbi's
belief that it had adequate predication, make it so, i.e. does
it establish that it is actually adequate predication?

Posted by: evilempire | Dec 14 2019 1:17 utc | 118

On rewritting of History..... and recent premiere, so lauded by the Russian official media, of the film "Rzhev"...

They expected that it would be “honest about a secret battle,” and received a bucket of historical slops under the guise of “truth.” And also the fashionable concept that everything in the USSR was “contrary to”, and a set of stamps right up to the hero-criminal.

Why “Rzhev” is a film that is better to forget:

https://twitter.com/aifonline/status/1203931160289656832

The main feature of most modern films telling about the Soviet era is that they are based on the thesis that everything in the USSR happened “contrary to”. Soviet cosmonauts conquered the low Earth orbit in spite of the evil and ruthless generals, basketball players won the Olympics in spite of the stupid and cowardly officials, and, of course, they won the Great Patriotic War in spite of Stalin and the generals.

The film "Rzhev" directed by Igor Kopylov strictly follows this line. “Honestly about a secret battle,” is written on an advertising poster. In reality, there is no honesty in the picture, nor the battle itself. It is impossible to understand what the Battle of Rzhev really was, what was its tragedy and significance, just as it was absolutely impossible to understand from the “Stalingrad” by Fyodor Bondarchuk what the meaning of the battle for Stalingrad was.

But the authors of "Rzhev" seem to have deliberately searched for just such a story, for it best fit into the original plan - to show the war "in spite of".

The film has collected almost all the cliches - here you are the drinking commander who gives cruel orders, and the stupid political instructor who does not have any authority, and the criminal hero, and the cruel special officer, and the enemy of the Soviet regime, who are fighting “not for her, but for Russia”.

What does all this have to do with the truth about the war? Not the slightest.

Many times, with facts in their hands, historians have explained that criminals did not make up any more than a serious percentage of the total number of soldiers of the Red Army. Neither were the penal units the backbone of the Soviet units.

As for the "former" fighting for "Russia," those who, as a rule, went to serve in the German auxiliary police or otherwise cooperated with the invaders, and did not at all act in the ranks of the Red Army. And even if there were such, then they obviously did not conduct political discussions at the forefront, realizing that such revelations for them would turn into a tribunal at best. And this is quite true, because the ferment of minds in units on the front lines is a direct path to a military catastrophe.

Communists banned?

The harsh truth of life lies in the fact that the main burden of the war was borne by generations brought up by the Soviet regime, Komsomol members and communists, and not “thieves” and not former White Guards at all.

In modern cinema, they pray a lot about the war. Suppose this is also the truth of life. But have you ever seen a fighter in a film write an application for admission to the party before the battle? But there were a lot of such examples in reality.

Why are there simple fighters - political officers in modern war movies are either openly hostile to soldiers or politically neutral, like political officer Klochkov in 28 Panfilov’s. Is that true? Didn’t they really really raise people around to attack?

But would the fighters go to the mortal fire of the enemy for a political instructor if he looked like a jerk, similar to what the political worker was shown in Rzhev?
Soviet truth about the war

Modern filmmakers claim to tell a certain truth about the war, which was previously hidden. In fact, the truth about the war has sounded for decades.

Cinema similar to enemy propaganda

One can cite an infinite number of examples of the very truth about the war, which supposedly did not exist in the Soviet years.

There is no truth about the war now. It was replaced by a false and vile concept introduced in the 1990s to please the current moment and still stubbornly promoted by certain forces.

Sometimes they say: young Russians do not understand Soviet films about the war, and they need new, with vivid scenes, "action".

As for misunderstanding, this is a very controversial issue. But even if we accept this point of view, what is the use of paintings in which there is nothing but an "action". Or, worse, how in Rzhev, under the guise of “truth,” are people fed another bucket of historical slops?

Even during the Soviet-Finnish war, enemy propagandists tried to distribute leaflets to the Red Army, which said: "A political instructor is worse than an enemy - he shoots in your back!"

Modern Russian cinema about the war, in fact, is a video reflection of this enemy propaganda postulate. And "Rzhev" just became one more film-star of the same kind.


Here Kiselev praising and promoting "Rzhev"....


Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 1:24 utc | 119

Here Labour's extraofficial explanation for the defeat:

‘Remain has been defeated. The movement needs to move on,’ unions say

I agree Brexit was the main reason for Boris Johnson's victory. But Brexit is just the symptom of the underlying causes that are castigating the UK since 2009.

In my opinion, Brexit was the result of two contradictory forces:

1) the fact that it is still a former empire in a stage of denial; and

2) that, as such, it perceives itself as a capitalist nation. That is, if the UK becomes socialist, it won't be the UK anymore.

The UK wasn't able to bend France and Germany after the crisis of 2009 crushed globalization. This resulted in its will to exit the EU. However, they also needed to keep themselves capitalist in order to be "great again", that is, to revive the UK in its former glory. The endgame was that a Brexit was necessary -- but not the Lexit version of it.

--//--

Thank you, Jeremy Corbyn

This is a touching piece, but that's not why I supported Jeremy Corbyn from the beginning.

The reason I supported him was that he would accelerate the chronogram of collapse of capitalism. For that, he would have to run with a pure-blood social-democrat manifesto and lose.

My hypothesis is that the working classes from the First World made a pact with their respective capitalist classes in the post-war: in exchange for a superior life quality and a sensation of national superiority over the Third World, they would fight to the end for capitalism (thus give up revolution).

As a result, the worker from a First World country will, by instinct, act to protect the status quo or try to "go back in time". Indeed, that's what Corbyn tried to do: go back to the good old days of the 1950s-60s. Boris Johnson will try to go back to the 1850s.

Corbyn's necessary defeat puts an end to the social-democrat illusion. I hope.

For the same reason, I rooted for Trump to win against Hillary. For the same reason, I'm rooting for Trump to be removed by impeachment or lose the 2020 elections by some crazy fraudulent move by the Dems. That's also why I'm rooting for Bernie Sanders to be sabotaged again, and lose the nomination by some fraud.

Those are all inexorable movements that would point to the decline of the capitalist system. If it is to fall, it will have to do so from its center (the First World), not its periphery.

It's all falling in place. The only unknown now is how humanity will behave in the eleventh hour: barbarism or socialism?

Posted by: vk | Dec 14 2019 2:03 utc | 120

@ Ort #166 with the response to my comment
"
I haven't the vagus idea what you're talking about.
"

LOL!!!! Thanks for that. I had to read it twice to see what you had wrote.....grin

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 3:19 utc | 121

@ Posted by: vk | Dec 14 2019 2:03 utc | 120 who wrote the very insightful lines below

"
My hypothesis is that the working classes from the First World made a pact with their respective capitalist classes in the post-war: in exchange for a superior life quality and a sensation of national superiority over the Third World, they would fight to the end for capitalism (thus give up revolution).
"

Damn, that is good. Of course it is not true for all but the meme fits what I think the enculturation process was/is for the US to a large degree. I would add the religion factor shown by the 1950's change of the motto to In God We Trust to fight godless communism I was taught.....big part of the superiority you wrote of perhaps.

And, of course, I agree with the last of your comment
"
The only unknown now is how humanity will behave in the eleventh hour: barbarism or socialism?
"

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 3:34 utc | 122

Ort @ 116:

I haven't the vagus idea what you're talking about.*

* Despite Bernhard's disapproval of snappy one-liners, I've been waiting for an opportunity to make this joke for years, and I simply can't pass it up. ;)

Well, what can I say except ... VIVA LAS VAGUS!!!

Posted by: Jen | Dec 14 2019 4:12 utc | 123

@ Posted by: NemesisCalling | Dec 14 2019 0:56 utc | 115 who is asking about a aVNS provider in Portland OR Yeah, this is an Open Thread so it must be ok

My provider in Corvallis is teaching acupuncturists in Portland currently. I think he is doing it through the local acupuncture school that changed its name from Oregon College of Oriental Medicine OCOM to ?????

I would contact them and ask specifically for aVNS therapy providers as you will learn about at the link I provided back in #114

To all fellow barflies, please read the link provided in #114 of this new therapy. I am only half way through the article and overwhelmed with the potential healing potential of this therapy.

If the world chooses socialism over barbarism then this therapy will become widely used for furthering the evolution of our species away from being products of life's traumas.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 4:27 utc | 124

@LaGuerre #100
The EU has its good and bad points like all large institutions.
Some of the major problems include:
An incrementalism policy towards integration. That’s why there is the common market, the Euro, the Schengen, and a host of other “groupings” which don’t actually consistently overlap.
There’s the ECB, with it’s clear German control. There’s trade policy with its anti-imports in outside EU farm products.
And there’s no EU military: NATO isn’t the same thing at all.
The EU trade and monetary policy has clearly benefited the large nations far more than the small.
Is that something to be happy about?

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 14 2019 5:20 utc | 125

chu teh @112--

Very long essays exploring your excellent questions have been written over the last 100+ years, so providing the gist in a paragraph or two is very difficult but possible if you just look at those 4 nations I cited, see what they did and determine if there's a common denominator. Doing that reveals "revolutionary" education to be the answer. The one major Movement within the Outlaw US Empire--the 19th Century Populists--did a similar thing in teaching their peers, but the substance was different and their philosophy not inclusive and tolerant enough to take power in 1896-1900, although many were elected to Congress and Conservatives knew they had to make changes. In Germany, Bismarck did a lot to co-opt the labor/socialist movement by allowing them to have a stake in the system that provided benefits. All the Classical Economists including Marx aimed at ridding Europe of the vestiges of Feudalism, but Reactionary forces from precisely that sector were able to stop then reverse that trend through their own "education"--propaganda--followed by The Great War and the anti-Russian Crusade.

Of all the historians I've read, Michael Hudson has done the best job of laying out the how and why the trajectory of history didn't occur in the fashion dialectics predicted because the forces that were assumed to be defeated weren't, rose from the ashes, regained their previous dominance, and are now ruining the USA, EU and other nations through their debt-based financialization. Fortunately, there's a core region of the world whose nations have yet to be conquered--the Heartland nations of Eurasia centered on Russia and China. Look at what just happened between China and the Outlaw US Empire; the Empire had to surrender and admit defeat in the Trade War it launched, although you won't read that in any BigLie Media (Global Times did say as much in the editorial I linked above). It's a Long Game whose outcome is far from certain, although a faint outline is beginning to become discernable in the distant haze of the future.

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 5:25 utc | 126

126 Cont'd--

One last major point. It's said whoever controls the past controls the future, and that's the crux of our time. What has actually occurred since @1848 (and in reality, much farther back in time) is being hidden from humanity, except for those students of history that make it their business to find and tell the Truth. There's another adage: The Truth shall set you Free. And discovering how we've been lied to and manipulated into our current situation is paramount for that provides the keys to undoing the falsity and regaining control over the past. And that my fellow barflies is why History Matters.

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 5:34 utc | 127

karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 5:34 utc | 127

Henry Ford said, "History is bunk".
And unfortunately, most of what we have been taught qualifies 99.9%.
I always try and read your posts Karlof1 because you inform...
Since I left the U.S., it has been my mission to search out the genuine history we were never taught in school.
It's been one hell of a ride; and continues unrelentingly...

Posted by: V | Dec 14 2019 5:47 utc | 128

@ Posted by: V | Dec 14 2019 5:47 utc | 128 who wrote
"
Since I left the U.S., it has been my mission to search out the genuine history we were never taught in school.
"
IMO, reading Ellen Brown's Web of Debt will further your mission immensely....its all about the money....and its a good read.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 6:09 utc | 129

V @128--

Thanks so very much for your compliment! I second psychohistorian's suggestion. It can be freely downloaded here. Once you're informed, pass it on to others so they can also learn!

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 6:20 utc | 130

karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 6:20 utc | 130
psychohistorian | Dec 14 2019 6:09 utc | 129

Thanks guys; will definitely do so. Thanks for the dl of Ellen Brown's book Karlof1.
I'm likewise a huge Michael Hudson fan.

Posted by: V | Dec 14 2019 6:30 utc | 131

karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 5:34 utc | 127

Thanks your #126/7. Glad I checked back. Digesting it.

And a quick note re "whoever controls the past controls the future, and that's the crux of our time."

That "mind" thingy again [whatever that is]...All that uninspected/unevaluated content is lurks and is susceptible to recovery, but the inspection tech/know-how is a lightning rod for suppression. Lots of .gov and off-the-book funding were very active back in the day and discouraged competition. [Not to mention in the 1940s and 50s the higher EM frequencies/waveforms were sought but not yet available.]

Posted by: chu teh | Dec 14 2019 6:35 utc | 132

More...

Re M Hudson. Just WOW! how he has recovered historical truth about debt as sin and the practical handling via periodic debt jubilee.

Indeed a forensic approach to history can ondo the deliberate re-writing and overwriting that destroyed truth [vested interests, etc].

Just learned from credible "forensic-wise" scholar that Hillel, the Pharisee high-rabbi "is reputed to have made continuation of these debts possible even past Sabbatical years by a legal device...when they were supposed to be forgiven". {Robert Eisenman writing of James and Dead Sea Scrolls.]

And so to bed.

Posted by: chu teh | Dec 14 2019 6:57 utc | 133

however, it seems to me to be mostly about giving corporations more free reign..

Posted by: james | Dec 13 2019 21:22 utc | 103

Really? Is that what is happening in the EU? You've been reading too many conspiracy theories. The EU is known for its level of control. Indeed for all the anti-EU lot, it's all about the stifling level of control, the complete logical opposite. Johnson made his career out of complaining about it. Personally I find the level of control a good thing. Neoliberalism does nothing for ordinary people.

Posted by: Laguerre | Dec 14 2019 7:03 utc | 134

This is not exactly breaking news but half the Labor Party are Blair toadies, that is to say Tories at heart and sabotaged Corbyn with their anti-Semite tripe. They are the UK version of the Dementedcrats, who are playing to lose by sabotaging (again!) Bernie. The Tories, on the other hand, who have been sabotaging Brexit for the past 3 years have kinda stepped on their own dicks. They will now turn themselves inside out and in a massive case of collective amnesia forget they hated BoJo's guts just a month ago and, like the British twits that they are, slobber all over him now. Parliament is as perverted & nutz as our own Con-gress.

Posted by: mrtmbrnmn | Dec 14 2019 7:35 utc | 135

Posted by: chu teh | Dec 14 2019 6:57 utc | 133

And, don't forget David Graebers seminal work; Debt, the First 5,000 Years.
A free audio book is available at http://www.unwelcomeguests.net/UNWELCOME_GUESTS
Go to Audiobooks; Graeber's book is there.

Posted by: V | Dec 14 2019 7:40 utc | 136

@ Posted by: Passer by | Dec 13 2019 22:56 utc | 109


>> I won't research more than 5,000 patents just to prove a point.

The information about the lower average quality of chinese patents is everywhere, you can easily find it, its not that hard.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322554269_Chinese_patent_quantity_and_patent_quality_and_the_role_of_the_state

https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/economic-synopses/2018/05/04/what-does-chinas-rise-in-patents-mean-a-look-at-quality-vs-quantity

https://tech.newstatesman.com/guest-opinion/china-patent-rates

https://technode.com/2019/11/12/chinese-firms-have-filed-most-patents-globally-but-they-need-to-improve-the-quality-expert/


>>The argument here is that China is ascendent on R&D, while the USA is decaying. In 1972, everybody in the West was laughing at China; today, they are less so. Simple extrapolation determines they will definitely not be laughing in 2030.

Cool, but here you construct a straw man and then you fight it, instead of what i wrote. Where did i said that China was not ascendent on R&D? I wrote the same thing.

>>2) South China sea and China's navy

The point is that South China Sea is close to the mainland, most SLOCs though are not, and China currently (according to a well known military expert) can not protect its SLOCs in the Pacific and the Indian Ocean.

>>3) Those think tank, IMF, World Bank long-term predictions are useless. They always do a simple extrapolation of the present status quo and call it a day. They couldn't predict 2008, they certainly won't be able to predict the next structural crisis.

I agree that they did not predict the 2008 crisis. For me, this is important observation too. So they won't predict a future crisis too. Thet are useful for larger trends though, for example it is pretty clear that developed economies will be growing slower than developing economies. This is a larger trend that could be well established. Economies also generally follow demographic trends so they come in play too.


These forecasts are not only by the IMF and World Bank, but also by the OECD, various financial companies, and a pretty large amount of economic studies by various authors, including chinese.

They do not simply extrapolate current trends, this isn't true. They use more sophisticated methods where they take into account demographics and many other factors, such as capital accumulation. A general finding is that the higher the per capita gdp, the lower the growth rate, in general. There are models that explain that.

Here you can learn about the many different forecasting models

http://www.oecd.org/economy/growth/Long-term-projections-of-the-world-economy-a-review.pdf

In general, i and 100 percent of forecasts that i'm aware of are 100 percent confident that China will slow down significantly after 2030, both due to rising per capita gdp and due to demographic factors. So this thing to me is pretty pretty clear.

Posted by: Passer by | Dec 14 2019 11:07 utc | 137

How did Corbyn do it ?? He led a Party whose membership chose to defy the Referendum result.
See https://imgur.com/W2tOeyv
See also https://revolutionarycouncil.blogspot.com/

Posted by: The Chairman | Dec 14 2019 11:41 utc | 138

vk @120: "The only unknown now is how humanity will behave in the eleventh hour: barbarism or socialism?"

If the poster's supposition "If it is to fall, it will have to do so from its center (the First World), not its periphery" is the case, then barbarism is the order of the day, at least if "fall" involves any deliberate effort by the working class in the imperial center. As the poster noted the working class in the center has been bought off by the capitalists with carbonated sugar water, drugs, and the intellectual/emotional/ideological equivalent of carbonated sugar water piped directly into their subconscious by their Plato's Cave displays.

By the way, "working class" includes everyone who earns a wage or salary, regardless of the size of the paycheck. Indeed, those with the larger paychecks are more bough-off/sold-out. The so-call "Middle Class" in the West is an imaginary construct that allows the house slaves to pretend to themselves that they are different from and superior to the "deplorable" field slaves. The delusions that keep the working class in the imperial center slavishly serving their capitalist overlords is strongest among those who flaunt the label "Middle Class".

But socialism isn't going to come from the populations in the imperial heartlands. Even though the empire is decaying and leaning ever more heavily on their domestic/domesticated working classes, those working classes will not (or perhaps can not) organize themselves sufficiently to take the reins from their masters. This despite them clinging to the fiction of reverence for "democracy" and the fact that public taking direct control over the economy is the ultimate expression of democracy.

What will happen, on the other hand, is that the global capitalist order will continue its decline due to its in-built economic contradictions that no amount of finagling with currencies or removing/adding regulations can solve. The empire's ability to control its vassals will weaken to the point that its "color revolutions" and other "regime change" operations no longer work, and the option of military intervention as a response to those failures will recede as is inevitable along with the economic decline. This will open opportunities for more revolutions like the ones in Venezuela and Iran to mature without the empire attacking them while they are still learning to crawl.

Sadly, China is not going to export revolution, so this is how the rest of the world is going to have to get it. The only question is to what degree the strategists for the empire will decide to use their military capabilities to postpone the empire's demise while the military still retains effectiveness.

Posted by: William Gruff | Dec 14 2019 12:15 utc | 139

Response adressing point by point KL18481917´s arguments was wiped out...

I just do not have neither the time nor the mood to do it again, as I do not hold records of what I write....

Of course, it was falling upon criticism of Putin...

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 12:42 utc | 140

@Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 12:42 utc | 140

I will only repost the illustrating thought by communist peers and V.I Lenin added at the end...May be later I will be adressing those points, in case the comment definitely does not appear...

The Russian people need not the help of an unlimited government and its officials, but liberation from its oppression.

The irresponsibility and arbitrariness of officials and the complete lack of confidence in the population itself create such flagrant abuses of the power of officials and such a violation of the rights of the common people as is hardly possible in any European country.

https://twitter.com/Lenin_1917/status/1205786159181418496

Former communists are people prepared for almost everything. They know and have the analytical arsenal of Marxism and have stripped themselves of shame.

https://twitter.com/sacedator/status/669945004228526081

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 12:48 utc | 141

The EU functions like a casino with a taste for offshore placements.
How else do you explain that it can fund universities all over the non-democratic world, in places where these institutions respect no equality of chance in the possibility to work in them, while allowing its own universities to be entirely open to candidates from the whole planet? How do you explain that associate members get more money for their projects than member states, and that the funds received are not proportional to the money invested in the common EU vault?

Posted by: Mina | Dec 14 2019 13:14 utc | 142

Delors said it best: "The EU is 'Take the money and run!'"
There were months of demonstrations in Bulgaria, Rumania, the Czech republic, against gov corruption. It was found out that some politicians at the gov level at taken EU funds in their pockets.
Do you think the EU will go after them? No, they say that national laws prevail!

Posted by: Mina | Dec 14 2019 13:17 utc | 143

Of course China's growth will slow down eventually. Perpetual growth in a petri dish is bad for the organisms growing in that petri dish. At the same time the growth curve in the West has already gone negative where real economic activity is concerned and will continue that trend... accelerated decay.

As far as America's technological and scientific supremacy is concerned, I urge the reader revisit Boeing's issues and recognize that the problem there is not an isolated one. On the contrary, the incompetence Boeing is displaying has become pervasive in American culture with Boeing actually being one of the last of the big technological powerhouses to be afflicted with it.

To see how advanced the decay is in the imperial heartlands just visit your nearest university and sit in on of some undergraduate engineering or hard science track math courses. Tally up the number of international students in those classes and compare with the count of domestic students. It is possible that you will not even find any domestic students in some of those courses. America's science and technology has become entirely dependent upon imported talent, but another trend to layer on top of all of the other already mentioned is that the international students are increasingly leaving the US after acquiring their knowledge and building their skills.

With countries like Iran graduating more engineers than America does, and many of the engineers that America does graduate leaving the States after graduation, how much longer can America maintain the illusion of tech supremacy? Intel's chip tech has plateaued, and Chinese chip makers will surpass it within a couple years at the most. Microsoft products are already worthless crap engineered by idiots and China's breaking out of that "tech ecosystem" will be like ridding itself of cancer. What other tech does America have to crow about? Google? Facebook? Amazon? The Chinese had already surpassed those years ago.

In reality China has already surpassed the United States in fundamental science and tech capabilities and now just has to allow those capabilities to mature. Trump's efforts to head off China's displacing America in this domain is too little and too late, and it is attacking the problem from the wrong direction anyway. Maintaining tech dominance by holding your competitors down cannot work. You have to be willing to run harder and further than those competitors to win, and work ethics are something that Americans have bred out of their offspring. After all, you want those offspring to have "fulfilling childhoods" don't you? Not "waste their time" grinding their way up the skills and knowledge ladder, right? After a couple generations of that attitude there is now no hope but for America to lose the tech race. There is only so much longer that America can ride on the hard work of the graybeards from the GI Bill era as those people are retiring and dying off with nothing in the workforce development pipeline to replace them.

I am afraid it is a done deal. If America is determined to stay on top then it is time to seriously pursue the military option. But those considering that course of action need to recall Admiral Yamamoto's words about waking sleeping giants. Those words applied to the United States in 1941 only because of America's enormous industrial capacity in that era and not because of some metaphysical superiority that America had and thus might still retain. America has lost its industrial might and cannot get it back anytime soon (as in decades). China now has that industrial might. China is now the sleeping giant. Attack at your own peril.

Posted by: William Gruff | Dec 14 2019 13:22 utc | 144

US Efforts to Bully Countries Out of Buying Russian Arms Could Collapse Own Markets, Analyst Says

This illustrates why Nemesiscalling is wrong about Trump: this is not what the USA is. Trump is asking a cat to go vegetarian.

The USA's strength comes from the fact it is the personificarion of capitalism. It is the globalist empire par excellence. It is no coincidence wokeism was born there: the woke left is a direct descendent from the post-war American Non-Communist Left (NCL), which forms, alongside Neoconservatism (today's Neocons and far-right) the vaunted "Vital Center" - the ideology created in the Cold War that stated the USA was not a country, but an idea that should be spread across the globe with the tool of the Free Markets.

If the USA goes against its globalist ethos, it is doomed to fail in tje long term.

Posted by: vk | Dec 14 2019 15:37 utc | 145

@Posted by: Passer by | Dec 14 2019 11:07 utc | 137

I'm not saying the USA is weaker than China. On the contrary: the Chinese government itself publicly and amply admits we're still living in a unipolar world order.

China is weaker than the USSR was. I don't think China can even be considered a superpower yet (although, it is important to say, USG officially classifies China a superpower since Trump came to power. During the apex of the Cold War, it didn't even cross the USG's mind to try to do some kind of attack (military or economic) on the USSR. The High Cold War was the only moment in American history where its elite abandoned its greed for one moment in order to serve the nation, where billionaires lost their sleep and put their wealth a workforce directly at the service of the government. China doesn't come even close to strike this kind of fear.

China today is more like the Parthia to the USA's Rome: respected and considered a worthy oponent to be eventually conquered.

The only advantage China has that the USSR didn't is the timing: the USSR fought against capitalism at the apex of its strength and beauty, while China peaked at a moment capitalism was already old and declining. That's why China is able to achieve Ssone impressive feats with a much lesser relative GDP and military strength than those of the good ol' USSR.

Posted by: vk | Dec 14 2019 15:49 utc | 146

Consideration should be given to what is now happening in the UK Labour Party.

Corbyn wants to stay in position until' the next Leader is elected and allow a period of sober reflection. This would afford Corbyn the opportunity to leave with a degree of self-respect and allow some rehabilitation of his reputation, as well as being beneficial for the future of the Labour Party. I recall the criticism of Milliband when he left immediately and didn't stay in position until' the new leadership had been determined - the implication was that Milliband was running away, being emotional and selfish, not fulfilling his responsibility to the party, leaving the Party in a difficult position, not really fit to have been Labour Party Leader.

However, it now seems that Labour MP after Labour MP is posting something about blaming Corbyn leadership for the election loss and that Corbyn needs to go immediately.

Corbyn's “immediate” removal as Leader is what Labour MPs (the vast majority of whom are Blairite) are seeking.

I see that John McDonnell has left the shadow cabinet. This is an act of cowardice and betrayal – McDonnell should have stayed by Corbyn's side until' Corbyn decided to go. McDonnell's resignation will increase the pressure on Corbyn.

Why are Labour MPs not prepared to afford Corbyn the compensation of going with self-respect? The reasons are as follows:

1. The blame for the election defeat must be put on Corbyn, not on Brexit. To do otherwise would be to admit that the Brexit position that Labour MPs effectively foisted on Corbyn (and that Corbyn resisted for some considerable time) was at fault. Labour MPs are not prepared to change their position on remaining in Europe, regardless of what happened in the North of England. (As an aside this means that the Labour Party ceases to be, to any degree, the party of ordinary working people that it was founded to be).

2. With Corbyn gone Labour MPs will be better placed to position their own preferred choice as Leader and manipulate, change or ignore the rules accordingly. Labour MPs want Keir Starmer as their new leader - this firmly aligns Labour as the war party and the supporter of US neo-conservative policy and would be very bad news for Assange.

3. Tony Blair and Jack Straw are war criminals but, effectively, so are a 100 or so current Labour MPs who supported Blair when he led the UK into the Iraq War (still on-going) which has resulted, to date, in the deaths of at least 500,000 plus people. To protect Blair, Straw and themselves, these MPs must, by and large, retain their position as MPs and remain in control of the Parliamentary Labour Party and the Leader of their Party. In 2016 Corbyn was reported to be prepared to call for an investigation into Tony Blair for war crimes. Also, it was believed (and likely) that should Corbyn acquire enough power and authority he would support and enable mandatory re-selection of Labour MPs. Both these policies threatened the ability of Blairite Labour MPs to prevent an investigation into Tony Blair’s war crimes.

4. The anti-Semitism smearing of Corbyn has also smeared the Labour Party to what might turn out to be indelible degree. As my elderly mother said, on the day of voting (she never says how she votes) when I raised the anti-Semitic smears, "No one wants to hear that" (dear mum was not even prepared to say the word "anti-Semitism" and had no idea what the smears actually were). The point is that I believe the anti-Semitic smearing of Corbyn will also have the long-lasting effect of smearing Labour as anti-Semitic. To prevent (or, at least, mitigate) this it is obvious that the Labour MPs must load this smear fully on to Corbyn shoulders (and on to those of his hapless supporters who won't join in) and cast him out, not quietly but with a great deal of fanfare – the sin must be seen to be expiated – JC must suffer for the sins of the Labour MPs. Corbyn imagines his pain is over and it is coming to an end but, I believe, the greater pain and humiliation is yet to come. Corbyn should fight back but he is already a broken man and is likely to accept this charade for the good of the party.

Posted by: ADKC | Dec 14 2019 16:08 utc | 147

@vk #99
@Passerby #101
I would caution conflating patents with either productivity, research & development or actual creation of new capabilities.
R & D can lead to new capabilities, which in turn can lead to productivity increases, but the flow outcome is absolutely not fixed.
The US, for example, has had incredibly low productivity growth for decades now even as its patent portfolio grows. That's because a lot of those patents are repackaging of existing capabilities for monopoly purposes - particularly in pharma.
Equally, large amounts of R & D spending don't equate to either discovery or new capabilities. Japan has spent ginormous amounts on R & D, but has relatively little to show for it outside a handful of specialty industries: the blue LED, chemicals and some material science.
Lastly, a lot of major capabilities are never patented.
China hasn't patented any of the technologies underlying the Great Firewall - as a particularly large example. They've developed many unique capabilities (as far as I know), such as the capability to intercept, analyze and block picture and video packets embedded inside a WeChat text message.
They have also developed (and are developing) all manner of AI - even US AI experts acknowledge that China has gone far and fast.
Then there's the quantum communications work - China has a working quantum entanglement comm satellite even as the US is still in laboratory mode.
Is China ascendant over the US intellectually? Likely not, but the gap is likely a lot smaller than most people think.
The US has enormous monetary and intellectual capital which has largely been directed to profit-seeking as opposed to creation/productivity enhancement, but the sheer scale of capability still yields results.
I would also point to Russia as an example against size of budget, size of population or number of patents as being an form of reliable proxy for intellectual capability.
Russian mathematicians are solving hundred year old problems, Russian military scientists and engineers have come up with all manner of unique capabilities ranging from hypersonic missiles to 200+mph torpedos to the S-series missile defense (and associated radar, tracking and communications), Russian civil engineers have been doing some very impressive work with bridges and pipelines, and so forth. If you follow opera, in Russia it is a completely different ecosystem than anywhere in the world: a major theater in St. Petersburg or Moscow will feature literally dozens of uniquely staged and top tier talent cast productions every season whereas the operas in Europe, much less America, will mostly run a bare handful.

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 14 2019 16:15 utc | 148

@Passer by #137
A couple notes:
1) The track record of economic prognosticators - both individually and as a class - is abysmally bad. Did the IMF/World Bank project the size of China economy, within an order of magnitude (10x), in 1985? 1995? 2005? Economists are far better at explaining the past than predicting the future, even in the short term. Admittedly, far future projection is extremely difficult, but the appearance of expertise is the problem here.
2) The paper in question has a very high degree of self reference. In areas where a single scientist or a group of scientists has lapped the field, this is understandable. In an area like economics, this is much less so - since it often means the modeling used is solipsistic.

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 14 2019 16:23 utc | 149

Laguerre @ 100

I notice that a lot of posters here are anti-EU. That's very common among people who have no idea how business and trade work

On the contrary, many here understand exactly how neoliberal, race-to-the-bottom, rentier finance-driven businesses work. Your POV seems not to give a toss about the forty year neoliberal assault on the social safety net.

As the Norwegian posters note, the EU is yet another neoliberal operation. It might pretend its a democracy, but all the real decisions are taken by financiers and billionaires. The victims of the EU in Greece understand exactly how neoliberal business (precarity) and trade (credit traps, privatization, and expropriation) work.

how essential the Single Market is to Just-in-Time strategies.

The EU is a practical affair. It helps businesses work, and individuals live their lives more freely, free to go and work in any country.

Let me fix that for you: "Helps individuals live their lives more PRECARIOUSLY."

You remind me of Anatole France's bon mot:

In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

Posted by: john brewster | Dec 14 2019 16:48 utc | 150

According to my scribbles on the back of the envelope, about .5 million to maybe .7 ? Labour votes
are missing / awol. This is partly reflected in the fact that the 2017 election was kinda ‘blah’
(T. May hoping for more support but not at some critical junction, nothing much would change..)
as compared to Dec. 2019, often called the most important vote of the century..
as it was basically decisionary on Brexit, having a lower turn-out than 2017, though the diff. is small, 1, 2 %.

Did Labour voters stay home in disgust? Some other factor?

Corbyn is not seen as a positive ‘Leader’ as he is not decisive or combative enough (see e.g. accusations of anti-semit.
which he should have denied, blasted *BS* loud and clear, etc. I have critisised him on MoA for similar .. )

Plus, the smear campaign was unprecedented, but then, such campaigns often backfire or don’t work (e.g. Trump)
so what was different with Corbyn? (Heh > possibly ‘left’ instead of right, other discussion..)

The best I can think of is in 2017 Labour (the manifesto) stated they would respect the will of the ppl re. Brexit.

Then, somewhat before the Dec. vote, Corbyn, no doubt under pressure, switched to ‘offering’ a second referendum

- some touted ‘clear’ choice between a Brexit plan and refusing it - which was a mistake, on several counts:

a) contradicted original stance, ‘will of the ppl’,

b) left things hanging, what Brexit plan, prolonging the agony of yet another vote to ‘correct’ an original vote etc. (makes no sense),

c) on another org. level, was imho impossible to achieve *in any case* (with Bojo PM and time constraints etc.)

Horrible move. Plus overall avoiding the Brexit issue with ‘proposals’ for ‘better politics/life’ …yes…but.

The Tories of course did the same, I, Bojo, Will Get Brexit Done, what happens next is left in .. the shade..

(i see the similar point made by Tsar 37, see also bryn 39, others, Petri, that was a good article)

Not claiming vote manipulations/fraud, but for now I’m not getting an overall picture that makes sense to me.

Yes, Corbyn was between a rock and a hard place (Blairites vs. Labour trad. worker base..)

Daily fare if you are a politician. Total mismanagement.

Posted by: Noirette | Dec 14 2019 16:49 utc | 151

To know what the EU has been transformed into, one just have to watch the last Ken Loach movie and try to send or receive a letter: no matter how much you pay, you have no guarantee it won't take more than a week if you live in a small city.Just watch the people who deliver mail and parcels when they are on the streets, you will see how fast they walk and will not wonder anymore why you get papers saying "you were not here" when you were, and usually a couple of days after the date they are supposed to have left them.

Posted by: Mina | Dec 14 2019 16:52 utc | 152

@Noirette #151
Indeed - the next interesting step will be the 2020 US Presidential election.
I was talking to a British VC a couple days ago. He was of the opinion that the swing states Trump won in 2016 would flip back to the Democrats in 2020, because the people there (and elsewhere) have seen just how terrible Trump is, etc etc.
My counter was that "people", particularly the Deplorables in the flyover states, are angry and don't vote the same way as a rich venture capitalist would, and specifically noted that this 2nd Brexit referendum would be an interesting data point.
Brexit is supposed to be so terrible (and this may be true), Boris is a clown (and that is definitely true), but the results speak for themselves: the chance to boot Boris and derail Brexit not only failed, it failed miserably.
Yes, it is true that the media was more focused on putting down Corbyn than BoJo, but how is that going to be different than Sanders vs. Trump?
Are the Blairites in Labour any different than the dollar Democrats dominating the DNC?

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 14 2019 17:05 utc | 153

Would Richard Jewell have been turned into a bug splat?

If the Atlanta bombing had taken place today, in the current environment, would Richard Jewell have had a bag thrown over his
head and been whisked off to Gitmo? Once there he would wait for years, if not forever, for a trial. Exculpating evidence would wind
up on the scales of justice opposite political agendas as well as bureaucratic reputations and careers.

Legal opinion is that moving a US citizen from US soil to Gitmo would be hotly contested. Would the DOJ risk it?
Or would they set up Richard Jewell? If he fled from fear of being bagged-up in the middle of the night or if someone(?) made it look
like he had fled would the last thing Richard Jewell have heard have been the sound of a drone?

Imagine hearing it announced on the nightly news that you are guilty and they are close to arresting you.

From the Boston Globe:


On NBC, Tom Brokaw said, "The speculation is that the FBI is close to 'making the case,' in their language. They probably have enough on him to arrest him right now . . . but you always want to have enough to convict him as well."

...

In October 1996, the FBI cleared Mr. Jewell. In a news conference, he called his 88 days under suspicion a nightmare.

"In its rush to show the world how quickly it could get its man, the FBI trampled on my rights as a citizen," he said. "In its rush for the headline that the hero was the bomber, the media cared nothing for my feelings as a human being. In their mad rush to fulfill their own personal agendas, the FBI and the media almost destroyed me and my mother."

http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/obituaries/articles/2007/08/30/richard_jewell_44_helped_save_lives_in_atlanta_olympics_blast/

Posted by: librul | Dec 14 2019 17:06 utc | 154

vk @ 120

My hypothesis is that the working classes from the First World made a pact with their respective capitalist classes in the post-war: in exchange for a superior life quality and a sensation of national superiority over the Third World, they would fight to the end for capitalism (thus give up revolution).

I agree with that, but let me add something.

The pact went both ways. WW1 was slaughter on an unprecedented scale, and most of those slaughtered were the working class. If the capitalists wanted the workers to fight and die for them, they had to give them something in return. WW1 also showed, via the massive output of armaments, that industrialism was capable of supplying workers with more consumer goods than ever before.

Hence, the deal you discuss was both possible and necessary. And, that deal held through WW2 because the need to have worker support in wartime remained.

But all that changed after the A-bomb, and then the guided missile, and then...right down to the UAV. The change was that technology made it possible to fight wars with tiny numbers of people (unless you are wiling to get down in the mud and fight a guerilla war - of which the US lost several).

As soon as TPTB realized that all they needed were nuke scientists, various highly specialized engineers, and the semiconductor industry, they pulled the plug on the coal/steel working class and sent their jobs to China. Hell, the US military even buys its uniforms from China.

BTW, this is not my theory. I cribbed it from Max Weber, who posited that the degree of democracy allowed is directly proportional to the number of men required to fight in wars.

Posted by: john brewster | Dec 14 2019 17:07 utc | 155

As Clausewitski said "Globalism is the continuation of colonialism by other means."

Posted by: chu teh | Dec 14 2019 17:10 utc | 156

re: Laguerre | Dec 14 2019 7:03 utc @ 134

It's extremely vexing to see such a 1-sided argumentation concerning the nature of the *EU*.
So.
Let me help with a short *History Lesson #101* :

1) "The American Committee on United Europe (ACUE) was an American organization which sought to counter the "Communist threat" in Europe by promoting European political integration. Its first chairman was ex-wartime OSS head, William Joseph Donovan.[1]

The structure of the organisation was outlined in early summer of 1948 by Bill Donovan and Allen Dulles by then also reviewing the organization of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).[2] in response to assistance requests by Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi and Winston Churchill.

A memorandum, later declassified, bearing Donovan's signature and dated dated July 26, 1950 gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. The vice chairman of ACUE was Allen Dulles and the board of ACUE included Walter Bedell Smith.[3] ACUE was an important early funder of both the European Movement and the European Youth Campaign. The ACUE itself received funding from the Rockefeller and Ford foundations.[1]

The U.S. policy was to promote a United States of Europe, and to this end the committee was used to discreetly funnel CIA funds - by the mid 50's ACUE was receiving roughly $1,000,000 USD per year - to European pro-federalists supporting such organizations as the Council of Europe, the European Coal and Steel Community, and the proposed European Defence Community.[4] "
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/American_Committee_on_United_Europe

2)" On September 19, 2000, going on 16 years ago, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the London Telegraph reported:
“Declassified American government documents show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.
“The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen. William J. Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA.”
The documents show that the European Union was a creature of the CIA..."
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2016/05/05/somnolent-europe-russia-and-china-paul-craig-roberts/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1356047/Euro-federalists-financed-by-US-spy-chiefs.html

3)*The European Union Was An AMERICAN Idea*
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-03-03/european-union-was-american-idea

4)* The European Union always was a CIA project, as Brexiteers discover*
by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard - 27 April 2016

"Brexiteers should have been prepared for the shattering intervention of the US. The European Union always was an American project.
It was Washington that drove European integration in the late 1940s, and funded it covertly under the Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations...."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/04/27/the-european-union-always-was-a-cia-project-as-brexiteers-discov/

What about the UK? And Brexit?
Time for *Advanced History Lesson #301*.
As Eric Blair said in *1984*, "Oceania has always been at war with EastAsia...", or was it "EurAsia"?
>>>
"An example of doublethink in George Orwell's novel 1984. The totalitarian government of Oceania is constantly at war with one of the other two totalitarian superpowers that dominate the world: Eurasia and Eastasia. The objective is not to win the war, but to maintain a constant state of war in order to keep its citizens under control. When it is at war with Eastasia, the government declares that it has always been at war with Eastasia, that its people are an eternally hated enemy that must be destroyed. When the sides change, the same thing is said about Eurasia. It is considered every patriotic citizen's duty to believe both statements are true."
"In the book, the line first comes about when Oceania makes peace with Eurasia and declares war on Eastasia midway through the book. The protagonist sees people happily ripping down anti-Eurasia signs and replacing them with anti-Eastasia signs. All the while, the speakers blare, "Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia." No one questions this, even though they surely know it isn't true. After all, you wouldn't want the Thought Police thinking you were remembering history incorrectly, would you?"
https://everything2.com/title/Oceania+has+always+been+at+war+with+Eastasia
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Oceania+has+always+been+at+war+with+EastAsia&t=ffcm&ia=web

The EU is the [E]USSR for Europeans.
A further stratification of the post-industrial slave-state.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratification
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=stratification&t=ffcm&ia=web

Regards X-

Posted by: Veritas X- | Dec 14 2019 17:32 utc | 157

re: V | Dec 14 2019 5:47 utc @ 128

"..Since I left the U.S., it has been my mission to search out the genuine history we were never taught in school.
It's been one hell of a ride; and continues unrelentingly..."

Hi *V*.
Glad to see You are on your way, re-learning your American History.
I left the States over 40 years ago, and, can tell You it's a long process to find/uncover the *facts*.
I recently came across Tim Kelly & Joe Atwill's discussion-series *Powers & Principalities* and consider it a true eye-opener.
Tim & Joe use everyday am.English so most things don't sound to complicated even though the subject matter is very heavy-duty.
You might want to give them a try.
https://www.podomatic.com/podcasts/tkelly6785757
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIKAZwaFnH_QX1ddYDQf-lg

Good Luck.
X-

Posted by: Veritas X- | Dec 14 2019 17:47 utc | 158

Correction & addition to my post @147

I said "I see that John McDonnell has left the shadow cabinet. This is an act of cowardice and betrayal – McDonnell should have stayed by Corbyn's side until' Corbyn decided to go. McDonnell's resignation will increase the pressure on Corbyn."

John McDonnell has now posted a clarification on Twitter: "To avoid any confusion, in response to doorstep I have confirmed that when the new leader is elected I will leave the Shadow Cabinet. Like Jeremy and with his approval I will remain in position until then."

What John McDonnell originally said was: "...we'll all go, now, the new Leader will come in place, appoint the shadow cabinet, I won't be part of that Shadow Cabinet..." and this was reported as if he was immediately quitting the Shadow Cabinet.

In my view, he was trying to resign and get Corbyn to resign. He was certainly speaking out of turn - it could not have been a casual mistake as McDonnell would have been acutely aware of the need to guide the process for the new Leader/next generation (he has been implying as much for weeks), the need to ensure that someone from the left is on the ballot (Blairite Labour MPs will be determined to prevent this), to ensure that processes are correctly followed (it is obvious that Blairite MPs would seek to circumvent the "rules" if it didn't suit them), McDonnell is believed to favour Rebecca Long-Bailey as the next leader (but Blairite MPs want Keir Starmer) - so, why on earth McDonnell was even flirting with the idea of leaving before the New Leader is in place is beyond me! Like everything with McDonnell you can never be sure what he says or means.

Posted by: ADKC | Dec 14 2019 18:32 utc | 159

@john brewster #155
You can destroy someone else's infrastructure with few people (and a lot of very expensive equipment, and assuming they don't have anything close to modern defenses).
You can't, however, take territory/possession or compel obedience with bombs and missiles. Nor has bribery worked terribly well: trillions have been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, of which hundreds of billions were used to directly subsidize "good" locals - yet neither of those nations is either self sustaining or particularly stable so long as the foreigners are around.
So I can't say that Max Weber's theory hold much credence.
Furthermore, having the majority of American people angry and underemployed doesn't make for a very stable nation - something everyone should easily realize.

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 14 2019 19:37 utc | 160

Not much science related info gets posted for the bar to peruse, so I'm motivated to share what I just discovered via this article, "What's Hiding Under the Ice? The Deepest Point on Land Discovered in Breakthrough Antarctica Study," which links to the parent article someone broke down the paywall for us to read/see, "Deep glacial troughs and stabilizing ridges unveiled beneath the margins of the Antarctic ice sheet", in Nature Geoscience. A similar mapping was done of Greenland and published about a year ago which can easily be found online. I find such science a needed break from the usual sort of learning and analysis I do and write about. More fantastic facts about our planet!

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 19:44 utc | 161

Sasha #140
Please post your response to my post, I’d be glad to hear your take on it even if you vehemently disagree with me, unlike many other here (and throughout the rest of the internet), I enjoy herding others opinions and am willing to change my own when I encounter new convincing evidence.

Posted by: KL18481917 | Dec 14 2019 19:44 utc | 162

And the EU, in its great wisdom, made the Bush' Saudi buddies great again...
https://www.counterpunch.org/2019/12/12/when-you-follow-the-gun-trail-you-can-end-up-in-expected-places/

Posted by: Mina | Dec 14 2019 20:34 utc | 163

@ karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 19:44 utc | 161

Moar science for your edification and whatever:

https://sputniknews.com/environment/201912131077565174-russian-astrophysicists-close-to-unraveling-origin-of-the-universe/

There is another way that hasn't been thought of yet, I'll put my bet on it.

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 14 2019 21:04 utc | 164

Sasha #140
Please post your response to my post, I’d be glad to hear your take on it even if you vehemently disagree with me, unlike many other here (and throughout the rest of the internet), I enjoy hearing others opinions and am willing to change my own when I encounter new convincing evidence.

Posted by: 18481917 | Dec 14 2019 22:28 utc | 165

You can destroy someone else's infrastructure with few people (and a lot of very expensive equipment, and assuming they don't have anything close to modern defenses).

You can't, however, take territory/possession or compel obedience with bombs and missiles.

My comment about failed US wars against guerillas was my shorthand for taking possession.

Nor has bribery worked terribly well: trillions have been spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, of which hundreds of billions were used to directly subsidize "good" locals - yet neither of those nations is either self sustaining or particularly stable so long as the foreigners are around.

What you say is true. However, I don't consider bribery to be a technique of war. It is a technique of politics.

So I can't say that Max Weber's theory hold much credence.

Weber postulated a government that actually gave a shit about its nation. Given the fact of neoliberal globalist looting of the US, Weber's theory is moot. The US today is ruled by global capital, which has purchased politics (Citizens United) and the media (six global media corps). To GC, the US is just one more (potential) shithole to be looted; and the complaints of the locals just don't matter.


Posted by: john brewster | Dec 14 2019 22:29 utc | 166

Sorry. That last comment (john brewster @ 165) was in reply to:

c1ue @ 160

Posted by: john brewster | Dec 14 2019 22:30 utc | 167

Direct to the Midle Ages we go...Delirante!

This is the government supported by the US, Israel, and also....Russia...

"Bolivia tiene dueño y se llama Jesucristo"

https://twitter.com/ErnestoSuidry/status/1205526974355165184

Of course, when they say Jesucristo, they mean the oligarchy...and its portfolio-holders...

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 22:58 utc | 168

@Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 22:58 utc | 167

Attention to the guys behind Janine Añez making the nazi salute instead of rising their hand/hands like possesed...

But, there are no nazis in Bolivia....

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 23:02 utc | 169

Anniversaries....

"Anniversaries": The Parliament of Ukraine has adopted resolution Number 2364 to celebrate the anniversary of Volodymyr Kubiovich (pictured), war criminal of the Ukrainian auxiliary police, organizer and participant in the Holocaust in Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1205884439135436802

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 23:06 utc | 170

Veritas X @157--

Greetings! It's good to see you commenting again, and a very good choice for contribution. There's still a very big Gray Area regarding history from 1944-1950 where much was done under the table of those too busy rebuilding and reconnecting after the war--the full story--going back to its prewar roots--about the 1947 National Security Act is one case in point.

On his Facebook page, Pepe Escobar suggests this article by rising geoeconoimics/geopolitics analyst Glenn Diesen provided to the Valdai Discussion Club, "Balancing China with NATO: Repeating the Mistakes of the 1990s," which I'm getting prepared to digest. I should also promote Pepe's second installment of his trip retracing the Silk Road over the Pamirs. His treks make me wish very hard that I had a similar freedom to travel.

Do hope you comment a few more times before the new year!

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 23:24 utc | 171

The Tories achieved the new ammount of vote from the countryside and the working and unemployed classes...one would guess the less inforemd and those who consume tabloids, MSM and TV...This is the seed of fascism...since no Boris Johnson will ever defend the rights of the "deplorables"...as he does not Trump...but those of their class...

Meanwhile porcentages of intention of vote maongst the up`per middle class keeps the same...

Now, ask yourself why all these fascists want to ptivatize everything, but mainly education and health care, apart from making profit out of them...

INFOGRAPHICS. THE DELITIES OF NATIONALISM: In the UK, as in Catalonia, nationalism has shown you that it is the best antidote against the class struggle. The Labor Red Belt has voted to the right and in favor of more privatizations and cuts

https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1205616228032811009

Thanks to nationalism, conservatives have managed to win in the former strongholds of the British left, as happened previously with the red belts of Paris or Barcelona.

https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1205617272028631040

(PDF) "UK is the most geographically divided nation in Europe. The election confirmed this 'geography of discontent', where mortality rates vary more within the UK than in most developed nations."

https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1205773908009504768

COUNTRYSIDE AGAINST CITY: The British Labor Party (RED) wins in urban centers (London, Manchester, Cardiff, Liverpool, Birmingam and Brighton) and some mining area in Wales. Conservatives (BLUE) win in all rural areas without exception.

https://twitter.com/Amor_y_Rabia/status/1205784478167252993

In the United Kingdom, Tories are already more popular among the working class than among the upper classes

https://twitter.com/B0lchevique/status/1197131585864294400

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 14 2019 23:28 utc | 172

karlof1 | Dec 13 2019 18:11 utc | 81

“The NATO rift between Turkey and its other members has escalated with the Evil Outlaw US Empire's Senate voting to recognize the Armenian Genocide…”

Thank for your comment.

25-30 years ago a family member worked in Washington DC for a representative. She worked on a small team to write a bill that clearly placed the blame for the Armenian Genocide on Turkey. For her this was big. She was right into the justice of it. It was a big job down to the wire. Off to the printer for truck loads of copies and having it ready on the hill. She learned that at that time the bill was being used as a tool to manipulate Turkey to do whatever and the bill did not reach the floor as it was not needed. Indeed an eye opener for her.

So it has been since. A tool to squeeze a little more from Turkey. It is a testament to the lack of a moral and ethical backbone of the American people. Of course, those who actively participate in genocide can have no empathy or righteous indignation about what others have done.

It is time for the American people to reclaim their governance. Power wash. Cleaning out all sitting members and elected and starting new. The corruption that prevails now will lead to distruction anyway.


Recognizing the genocide is not enough. There needs to be a law which recognizes the truth of this genocide so that Turkey can be held accountable and a law on the books for history. They must open their books and files so that families can learn as much as possible about their disappeared.

Posted by: thewoodturner | Dec 15 2019 0:20 utc | 173

@john brewster #165
Fair enough.
Taking possession isn't the only way to benefit, I would note.
The US now being a major oil producer as well as desirous of exporting more energy - now has much less positive incentive to keep Middle East oil flowing.
One of the ways by which the US' abysmal record in post World War 2 activities has been explained away is the "spoiling attack" - an attack which isn't intended to win, but instead is intended to just screw the other guy over.
There are definitely cases where this has been true albeit as an unintended consequence. I personally haven't seen any credible evidence of this as an actual American strategy.

Posted by: c1ue | Dec 15 2019 0:32 utc | 174

Veritas X @ 158

For your further delectation regarding the history of the formation of the EU, I recommend Joseph P. Farrell's The Third Way, The Nazi International, European Union and Corporate Fascism.

Farrell traces what he asserts is the influence of the "Madrid Circular," a document circulated in 1950 by the German Geopolitical Center in Madrid which outlines a plan to create what looks remarkably like what was actually created in the following decades: a cartelized EU industrial sector ruled by an unelected bureaucracy accompanied by an elected parliament with no actual power. The legal structures were anticipated by Germans in the 1940s who continued to hold high office after the war and sat at the table drafting the structure underpinning the EU.

In it, he cites these sources as well: T.H.Tetens: The New Germany and the Old Nazis and Germany Plots with the Kremlin; Fritz Fischer: Germany's Aims in the First World War; Christopher Story: The European Union Collective, Enemy of its Member States: A Study in Russian and German Strategy to complete Lenin's World Revolution.

It picks up where his previous work, The Nazi International left off. He interweaves a variety of different facts, documentation and theories to solidify the fact that Nazism 2.0 [modern day Nazis] is not an outgrowth of the preview generation, but a continuance of the Post-WW2 Nazi ideology.


See also: Suddenly Europe Is an Open Question – ‘A Nazi EU?’

A. Crooke

2-11-19

An establishment pillar of the European ‘order’ – the Frankfurter Allgemeiner newspaper – explicitly touches the ‘live rail’, which is to say, it ran an op-ed last month titled ‘A Nazi EU?’, speculating on whether or not the present EU, dominated by Germany, should be understood as a lineal extension of German National Socialism. This has not before been an issue at all touched upon in mainstream German discourse. That it appears at all signals something important: a recognition that the dissidence being experienced by the EU has its roots in something other than just populist grievance tantrums. It is the resurfacing of an ancient struggle for the ‘soul’ of the international political order.

The author, Jasper von Altenbockum, quotes the AfD (Alternative für Deutschland) leader, Alexander Gauland, at its party conference, saying that the:

“Corrupt, inflated, undemocratic and latent totalitarian apparatus” of the EU should have no future. Gauland traced a popular line of reasoning: Because democratic legitimacy deficits can be observed in EU supranational institutions, [one must conclude that the EU] must be a coercive regime. The radical opponents of progressive integration [however] go one step further: They compare the EU … to the European ideology under National Socialism …

Posted by: pogohere | Dec 15 2019 0:46 utc | 175

Formerly T-Bear @163--

Thanks very much for providing that link!! I'm now rather miffed that the Astronomy courses I took in the mid-1970s didn't devote one word to famous Soviet physicist Yakov Zeldovich's theoretical proposals made in 1970 likely because he was Soviet. I see from the linked article that I have lots of catching up to do in the area of Astrophysics, and I can't just ignore it as this deals with the Universe's history. Alas, more investigation, the term I prefer to work!

Happy Solstice!

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 15 2019 1:51 utc | 176

pogohere @174--

Thanks for providing that material! My reading list will never stop growing faster than I can digest the books!

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 15 2019 1:54 utc | 177

Another long elaborated comment wiped out, on the EP resolution equating nazism and communism, and forbidding communist idoelogy.

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 15 2019 2:20 utc | 178

There is always the same person commenting in around when my comments dissapear...curiously...

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 15 2019 2:22 utc | 179

@ Sasha

Don’t fret. In the future, write and save your work in another program. Delete it only after you see it posted.

I enjoy your posts too much. So, please continue.

Posted by: oglalla | Dec 15 2019 2:30 utc | 180

In light of Corbyn’s perceived missteps, do any of you question his goals and sincerity as an opposition leader?

Posted by: oglalla | Dec 15 2019 2:37 utc | 181

Wikileaks does it again, they just released more leaked documents from the OPCW, more than 20 of their own investigators dissented from the final report, it fact it looks increasingly certain that the entire final report was falsified and completely at odds with the evidence their own investigators discovered. This is the death knell for the OPCW, greatly exaggerating or misrepresenting evidence to create a biased report is one thing, but to create an entirely falsified document with fabricated evidence, there's simply no coming back from that, no one will ever take the OPCW seriously again.

The Western, fake news media will, of course, ignore the story (except for Tucker Carlson), but the Russian, Chinese, Indian and yes even the European public will hear the truth and they will treat claims from the OPCW accordingly.

Posted by: Kadath | Dec 15 2019 3:28 utc | 182

The European Union blinks again:

EU looks at extending Brexit transition period beyond 2020

Truth is the EU can't afford to lose the UK. The British are simply a too much valuable asset for the union to simply give up in a peaceful-bureaucratic operation. Without it, the EU essentially becomes a Carolingian Empire revival plus a bankrupt provincial belt in the South and the East.

They dragged expecting Theresa May would implode it from the inside. She failed.

They then dragged it more expecting they would be able to use Corbyn to annul it. It failed.

Now, the USA will have a beach-head in the European Peninsula in the economic front. Merkel fears the UK would become some kind of western Singapore, which could hurt German interests, but her fear is misplaced: the USA doesn't even have the money to rebuild Puerto Rico, let alone revive the UK. The most probable scenario is American capital will simply ransack the British most valuable assets - mainly, the NHS. The UK's economy will continue to decline, a tendency that begun in 2009.

But the most damage Brexit will cause to the EU is financial. With the UK gone, the European financial architecture will get even more unstable than it already is. The UK is not EZ, but it was part of the EU's overall budget, over which the Euro and Eurobonds are leveraged. Without its third biggest partner, the "markets" will have less faith in the EU's capacity to honor its debts.

Germany got very lucky with Greece. The Eurocommunists from Syriza capitulated at the eleventh hour, and Greece was brutally reduced. Had Schäuble's gambit not worked, the Germans would have to cover a USD 300 billlion hole from the fact the Deutsche was Greece's main creditor. They also were lucky the other PIGS didn't crash -- that would mean a USD 750 billion hole to the German purse. It would still be able to pay it, but probably at the cost of its First World status.

Now the attention is on Italy. In relation to the PIGS, Italy is a gigantic economy. If it defaults, that's the end of Germany as we know it.


@ Posted by: Veritas X- | Dec 14 2019 17:47 utc | 158

If that's the case then I recommend you to read Brazilian historian Luiz Alberto de Moniz Bandeira trilogy: Formação do Império Americano, Segunda Guerra Fria and Desordem Mundial. I don't know if any of them were translated in English, but I know at least the first one (and most important, in my opinion) was translated to Chinese.

--//--

@ Posted by: Sasha | Dec 15 2019 2:20 utc | 177

The thesis that communist was equal to nazifascism is called Totalitarianism, and was created at the onset of the Cold War by many Western intellectuals. The term itself has obscure origins, but was definitely popularized in the 1930s-1940s by Menshevik refugees in New York.

Not only I fully disagree with the Totalitarianism thesis, but I think the reality is exactly the opposite: that nazifascism is an evolution of liberalism, and never of socialism/communism. The illusion nazifascism is communism/socialism's sibling comes from the fact that the former always arises as a last immunological response to a potential socialist/communist revolution, so, from the point of view of the liberal observer, there's the impression they always come in pairs, as twins. Nazifascism is, therefore, the counter-revolution Lenin once mentioned.

The facts on the field of the 21st Century gives reason to Lenin: nazifascism is arising in countries where liberalism was the dominant ideology and the most prosperous (USA, UK, Italy, France, Germany), but which suffered recent crises that resulted in their declines. In those prosperous liberal countries which did not suffered that much from 2008, nazifascism has yet to arise (Finland, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Ireland, Scotland, Netherlands, Luxemburg, Sweden, Belgium). In those "developing nations" where nazifascism arose, it can be interpreted easily as reflex from the first groups soft power over their economies and culture (Brazil, Hungary, Poland, Spain, Turkey, Argentina) or where a literal coup had to happen for direct structural reasons (Bolivia, Venezuela - failed attempt, Ukraine). Japan is a special case, since, contrary to Germany, it wasn't forced to give up its fascist ideology in the post-war, so it was always fascist without interruption until the present times.

You don't see the faintest sign of the rise of nazifascism in the socialist countries (China, Vietnam, Cuba, North Korea) of in the core ex-USSR nations (Russia et al). Ukraine is a very peculiar case that is worth explaining another time, another place, since it's a very complex history.

--//--

@ Posted by: pogohere | Dec 15 2019 0:46 utc | 174

The Nazis really had a plan for a Reich with provinces in the east, each one with a "governor", a la Ancient Rome. The plan didn't envision the colonisation of Western Europe, but only of Eastern Europe and European Russia (with the southern part of Central Asia that came with it). When it appeared Germany would win WWII (1941), Hitler even confessed to his generals he was dreaming about reaching the border with India.

However, modern European Union is, undoubtedly (we have documentation on this), the mix of the will of the USA and the Benelux + West German capitalist classes, specially but not only the Dutch elite. There's a reason the infamous summit happened in the now infamous Bilderberg hotel (which is in the Netherlands).

That's why the mechanism of domination of the EU is a financial one, and not a provincial one - as the Nazis wanted. The plan was to unite Western Europe through the free markets and finance, with a prospect of creating a federation. This is so the case that the embryo of the EU was a free trade agreement between the Benelux, West Germany and France on the commerce of coal. It then became the common European market, and then the EU.

As you can see, the EU architecture comes from the liberal tree, not the nazi tree. It definitely didn't come from the communist tree - on the contrary, the CIA aimed to unite Western Europe precisely so it could create an anti-communist bastion at low cost to the American purse.

Posted by: vk | Dec 15 2019 3:34 utc | 183

"Britain's 330,000 Jews (0.006% of the population)...". Chet380 (at 6)has too many zeroes after the decimal point. The true figure must be closer to 0.6%.

Posted by: Coldish | Dec 15 2019 5:01 utc | 184

Brexit is a gimmick invented by Zionists to weaken and even dissolve European economic competiveness with ZUSA, the Empire that Europe was trying to undermine economically. Europe, in its disloyalty to the AngloZionist credo, was starting to evolve a BDS resistance to Zionism, and the Iran deal was opening up economic ties between Europe and Iran, the last strongest bastion of resistance against Zionism and so a scheme needed to be developed to break the emerging threat to the Zionist realm and its expansion. Therefore: enter Trump, Brexit and Boris Johnson to save the farm.

Jeremy Corbyn never stood a chance against the monumental Zionist propaganda onslaught, the Zionist machine that was hammering him every single day online, in the press and televised media smearing him as an anti-Semite and dangerous socialist. This massive smear campaign waged against Jeremy Corbyn should tell us everthing about who's pulling the strings, and the disastrous outcome that the tool, Brexit, represents for any resistance against the AngloZionist Empire.

Brexit represents the strengthening of Anglo and American unity in service of the Zionist Empire. That's all it is. The Founding Fathers are turning in their graves at such an ambitious foreign aberration of the Constitution.

It doesn't take rocket science to see what's going on here. Trump delivered on all promises made to Zionists, the list is long, the latest being an executive order to muzzle anti-Zionist activism on all U.S. campuses and crush BDS activism everywhere. Without American student anti-Zionist activism, and the economic and political resistance Europe was generating against Zionism, the domination of the AngloZionist Empire will be complete.

Trump and Johnson will strengthen the AngloAmerican bond to the detriment of the rest of Zionist-disloyal Europe, as TJ are agents of the Empire, Zionism and Capitalism peddling populist honey that will soon sour.

Johnson has even admitted he's a proud Zionist hence the overwhelming support in the Zionist media and likewise victory. Must we always be subjected to such humiliating capitulation and usurping of democracy???

Netanyahu congratulates passionate Zionist Johnson

Gee, either Zionism is a lucky charm for election victories or it's the fix I know it is.

We are embarking on a dangerous orwellian looking-glass reality where black is white, up is down and people are driven cattle unable to recognize the difference. When Trump squeals his deception the world is bemused, helpless and deluded. Trump represents capitalist, Zionist fascism on steriods. His repetitive squeals that incite and impassion populist fervor are the tools of a skilled demagogue in service of AngloZionist imperialism. He's an expert demagogue and that's why he was chosen and Boris Johnson was chosen to brexit the anglo herd straight into the arms of Zionism and the wider Anglo American fold under its willing domination.

No this is not the beginning of utopia. This is dystopia and everyone's blind.

The pigs are leading us closer and closer to fascism. You are on the wrong side.

So it's comes down to rabid censorship of campus activism, and isolating all resistance. This IS what Trumpism begets: Zionist protectionism and tyranny. Can we no longer call a spade a spade; a pig a pig; fascist oppression what it is now thanks to Trump? Trump is a capitalist Zionist fascist pig. There, I said it! And I'll say it again, everywhere, because it's the TRUTH. Your blind Trumpism won't stop me. That's what you're pushing daily...a Zionist capitalist fascist pig! He's not the Deliverer from neoliberalism. He's the face of AngloZionist fascist domination.

Sanders and Corbyn were the authentic answers to neoliberalism, and you threw them to the wolves with your viral adulation and obsessive distraction with TRUMP and your failure to support them with the passion you squander on Trump, the agent of permanent ruin and obediance to a fake religion, a fake god called Zionism.

Remember this, from this day forward, we are divided into three camps:

1. Trumpism or Zionist capitalist fascism
2. Zionist capitalist neoliberalism
3. Anti-Zionist democratic socialism

I am with 3 and ONLY 3. You cannot be in 3 and be a part of 1 or 2. If you are in 1 or 2 then you are a traitor to 3 and therefore, the enemy of good, evolution and the well-being of all mankind.

I will continue to try to break your delusion, but if you muzzle me, you will remember my cry against your treacherous Trumpism when it is fully revealed.

America, don't do what UK did! They threw away Corbyn at the insistence of the fear-mongering ubiquitous Zionist press.

Don't fall prey as well to the fear-mongering Zionist media that will paint Sanders, if he wins the primaries, as a self-hating Jew who represents the destruction of Israel, and as a dangerous socialist who will destroy America. Sanders will destroy the corrupt, co-opted system for the benefit of the rights of all people. This is the only good path left for the well-being of the planet.

Sanders must win the Democratic primary and, against all odds and in spite of the powerful Zionist enemy of democracy, win the U.S. presidency, to foil the Zionist plan or we are all doomed, and if Trump wins--permanently doomed. Trump is taking over the judiciary. He is a threat to democracy.

It will take a super-human effort to achieve a Sanders Presidency, but there is no other hope or good alternative left; only people everywhere coming to their senses before it's too late can achieve it. It will take a fight for the ages to pry victory from the jaws of defeat.

Trump will have unlimited financial resources at his disposal. Wall Street Zionist billionaires will open their coffers and unload hundreds of millions to support him, because Trump is already implementing irreversible tools of fascism and Zionist expansionism and the prize they covet is within reach. Trump can not succeed in his mission. Trump must not win in 2020.

Posted by: Circe | Dec 15 2019 6:19 utc | 185

I am writing a response here to vk but first let me call out our resident TDS commenter Circe
who is now also a ZDS commenter as well

To vk in #182

It is my understanding from reading the early formation of the City of London Corp (CoLC) that currently
both the UK BOE and the EU ECB are beholden to those that own the CoLC.

It is also my understanding that the US Fed is all or partially owned by the same cult that owns the CoLC.

I see this cult (there is no proof is Zionist) in the process of managing the civilization war against China/Russia, et al
and culling the herd of wannabe rich that don't own global private finance
They are throwing America and the EU under the bus to maintain their private finance control internationally....Whether or not
they will be able to manipulate China into being the new host for their private finance empire ways is not yet clear.

When the crash comes, will all countries of the West rise up and smite global private finance or continue their slavery to it?

Too soon to tell but I continue to see lots of finance ignorance which makes me think they could keep
the jackboot going longer...and especially if China allows them to get a foot in the PBOC door.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 15 2019 6:52 utc | 186

Veritas X- | Dec 14 2019 17:47 utc | 158

Thanks for the reply and links. I'll check them out.
Just coming up on 20 years for me.
Yes, discovery is indeed a long, but very rewarding process.

Posted by: V | Dec 15 2019 6:55 utc | 187

@ circe

Yours is a typical pro-status quo statist spiel. All so-called politics has to take place within the framework of the existing state-party system, all dispute within this framework, and therefore all desirable action can only take the form of fake "reform" of this system, and all communication can only take the form of lies on behalf of this system, for example calling it a "democracy", or claiming/implying there's any difference between Trump and Obama, between Republicans and Democrats, etc.

"The Founding Fathers are turning in their graves at such an ambitious foreign aberration of the Constitution."

On the contrary, we're seeing the final fruition of the 1787 counter-revolutionary coup, with its openly proclaimed imperialism (just read the Federalist Papers on that), dovetailing with the final fruition of the Zionist imperial project. Together this malign forces will now make their final attempt to attain permanent global dominion. They'll fail, and the only question is how much destruction they'll wreak in their global 1945.

"Sanders and Corbyn were the authentic answers to neoliberalism"

Yes, with his openly proclaimed dogmatic loyalty to the Democrat Party establishment Sanders certainly was offering an alternative to neoliberalism in 2016. Same as today. Fact is that since you are a fundamentalist of the existing state and support the Democrat Party, you are a fighter for neoliberalism and Zionism, whatever your Trump-Deranged emotions.

"Remember this, from this day forward, we are divided into three camps:

1. Trumpism or Zionist capitalist fascism
2. Zionist capitalist neoliberalism
3. Anti-Zionist democratic socialism

I am with 3 and ONLY 3."

Not even socialism, but "democratic socialism", the most completely refuted and trounced ideology of all. No, you're a regular statist pro-bureaucracy Dembot. I can't say I'm surprised that it turned out to be the Democrats, along with the corporate media and academia, which were first to openly proclaim that unelected, unaccountable, secretive bureaucracies (which also have an unbroken record of lies and evil action) are the rightful designers of policy and wielders of power, while "democracy" is and should be nothing but a farcical facade. Which of course those of us who are sentient have known all along.

"Sanders must win the Democratic primary..."

Then why did you so rabidly support impeachment, which was expressly intended to help prevent any possibility of a Sanders win? As I told you several times, but I should've known the Deranged are impervious to political reason, and anyway you don't really care about Sanders, just A Democrat, Any Democrat. And beyond that, anything which would prop up the existing state-bureaucratic form and the perception of the legitimacy of this system. That's what any and all investment in this system and partisan support for or opposition to any fungible element/personality within this system boils down to.

"...and, against all odds and in spite of the powerful Zionist enemy of democracy, win the U.S. presidency, to foil the Zionist plan or we are all doomed, and if Trump wins--permanently doomed. Trump is taking over the judiciary. He is a threat to democracy."

What democracy? And as I said it's your Democrats which were first to openly proclaim the likes of the CIA are the rightful proprietors of US foreign policy. That's as radically anti-democracy as it's possible to be.

"It will take a super-human effort to achieve a Sanders Presidency"

Don't worry, I'm sure your beloved "presidency" will endure for a while yet, no matter which fungible geek occupies that office. Your status quo statism will remain intact for a few more years.

Posted by: Russ | Dec 15 2019 6:57 utc | 188

karlof1 | Dec 14 2019 23:24 utc | 170
Greetings! It's good to see you commenting again, and a very good choice for contribution. There's still a very big Gray Area regarding history from 1944-1950 where much was done under the table of those too busy rebuilding and reconnecting after the war--the full story--going back to its prewar roots--about the 1947 National Security Act is one case in point.

A very important document from 1948 by George Kennan: PPS No.23
A quick search on Yandex or DuckDuck Go should find the full content.
A genuine eye-opener...

Posted by: V | Dec 15 2019 7:22 utc | 189

@ Sasha | Dec 15 2019 2:20 utc | 177

Chancing getting duded again, you might try copying your finished comment, then refresh the page and paste your comment anew before hitting the post button. If your comment does not show up, it is still there in copy and can be pasted again before you copy something else. Your comments are something to look forward to reading and missing one, well …

Posted by: Formerly T-Bear | Dec 15 2019 8:40 utc | 190

I keep seeing this story how Naftali Bennet threatened Iran with "it's own Vietnam in Syria", and my mind immediately reels drunkenly at the KoolAid drinking involved to think and believe that such a "threat" is a coherent argument/threat/attack on Iran in Syria.

Israel Threatens Iran with ‘Own Vietnam in Syria’

Posted by: Bemildred | Dec 15 2019 12:50 utc | 191

To Sasha First, let me say I always enjoy reading your posts. Thank you for taking the time. Re the disputes - we don't need to agree to appreciate the opportunity to think over new information.
To Sasha again. I have been following the outrage/tragedy which has occurred in Bolivia, just as I have been following the destruction of Ecuador (again). The violence against the Aymara and Quechua peoples is appalling - they are the gentle people (relatively) Sorry, I confess to being an Old Person and I don't know how to safely (!) do links. (To the tech people, please don't try to help me. As old hippie said = it's all magical to me) Concurrent with the coup against Morales, there has been un upheaval in
Chile. The first few days, back in October, did have a coup kind of look, by which I mean that dozens (!) of Metro stations in Santiago were totally destroyed within a very few hours although they were widely separated distance-wise, and the bus services were interrupted by the burning of many buses - and buildings. Effectively, the city was shut down. Quite an achievement for a bunch of lower school and high school students in their cute little school uniforms. After a few days, the APEC was cancelled. This was to have been a meeting including Putin and Xi to sign a number of contracts with Chilean businesses. Surprise surprise. The violence gradually ended, although there continue to be strikes and marches by 100,000s of 1000s of people with legitimate and valid grievances. My question to you: have you been following this at all? What are your thoughts?

Posted by: Miss Lacy | Dec 15 2019 13:23 utc | 192

to Psychohistorian. Re the CoLC, UK BOE, EU ECB, & US FED. The Us Lackey was said to be Morgan who, with all his virtues, skills etc and some very good PR, was also and agent/fixer for the UK Rothsheilds. Morgan, BTW, made some very dirty money during the US Civil War selling defective rifles to - both sides. Ref: Niall Ferguson: the House of Rothschild; G. Edward Griffin: the Creature from Jekyll Island; Eustace Mullins: the Secrets of the Federal Reserve; John Weitz: Hitler's Banker. Forgive me if this is old news.

Posted by: Miss Lacy | Dec 15 2019 13:44 utc | 193

c1ue, Are the Blairites in Labour any different than the dollar Democrats dominating the DNC?
Well, very similar in any case as you intimate. Imho Trump will win, barring extraordinary events.
The Corporate Dems most likely prefer to lose to Trump than try to win.

As you know, Trump is pro-Brexit and has his own version of isolationism/nationalism
(Nafta, trade w China, NATO useless, anti UN, “patriots not globalists”, etc.) while touting future US-UK 'deals'...

Some numbers on Dec. UK election, clearer view.

Labour SHARE of vote in %. (history: best: 1951 -- 48, worst 1983 -- 27)

—-
Brown 2010 ------ 29
Miliband 2015 ------ 30
Corbyn 2017 ------ 40 ......... 12,878K votes (increase largely due > young vote)
Corbyn 2019 ------ 32 ......... 10,292K votes (diff … 2.5 million)

2017->2019: voter turnout down, 1-2 %, number of registered voters down, 1-2% in 2018
(raw data for 2019 looks to be even more down)

More ‘new’ voters registered in 2019 vs. 2018 (link), are more young than old but don’t make up
for disappearance/death

https://eachother.org.uk/young-people-registered-vote/

2016BrexRef. Turn out 72%, 17,412K voted LEAVE.

Estimates of Labour 2017 voters having voted LEAVE in Ref2016:

BES 30%. Ipsos 24%, Lord Ashcroft 25%, Comres 26%, and YouGov at 29%.
These nos. show that no-one really knows, and all claims and calcs. should be taken with plentiful salt
or v. broad error margins. So maybe around 3 million ppl, or a tad more.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-48039984

Estimating… 2.5 million or so? diligent voters (didn’t die, stay home because cold/drunk/fed up
with the pack of them, move to Florida, give in a spoiled ballot, etc.) are staunch Labour who want LEAVE.

They are Labour’s lost voters. It matches up pretty well.

How many switched to Tory in 2019 is another question - but the rough answer is A Lot.

Bojo is thanking Labour voters for “lending me your votes.”

https://news.sky.com/story/general-election-boris-johnson-thanks-new-tory-voters-for-his-stonking-mandate-11886019

Posted by: Noirette | Dec 15 2019 13:58 utc | 194

Below is a ZH link about the trade face of the civilization war we are in

Did China Just Threaten To Kill German Car Exports Over Huawei Decision?

The take away quote
"
See, last year, 28 million cars were sold in China, 7 million of those were German. Can we just declare German cars unsafe, because we can make our own cars? No, that would be pure protectionism," Wu said at Handelsblatt.
"

Posted by: psychohistorian | Dec 15 2019 15:54 utc | 195

This is pure speculation for anyone slightly bored.

Black swan: Trump announces he will not run for a 2nd term.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Dec 15 2019 17:04 utc | 196

Sunny Runny Burger @196--

I floated that balloon here about 4-5 months ago when Trump made his threat to sanction ALL us corporations who refused to repatriate their overseas factories to help MAGA, a threat he backed off from as soon as the reaction was generated. There were some other aspects tied to that which drove the idea to launch the balloon, but it generated zero response, which I though unusual.

Posted by: karlof1 | Dec 15 2019 19:18 utc | 197

Sasha @ 179 says:

There is always the same person commenting in around when my comments dissapear...curiously...

check behind the door.

Posted by: john | Dec 15 2019 21:15 utc | 198

Karlof1 it is an interesting thought and I don't know what to make of it.

That aside I apologize because I'm aware I could very easily have read your comment, then not replied because I didn't have anything meaningful to say or add (often the case, and in this example even now —which has to be funny :D), then forgot all about it before randomly thinking about it today without remembering any of that. Cryptomnesia is kind of scary because it's (seemingly?) both normal and common.

Posted by: Sunny Runny Burger | Dec 15 2019 21:57 utc | 199

Sorry for not having responded to those adressing me, just had not the time to do it, since for this weekend, and without settling a precedent, I attended some familiar meeting and went to the ballet...Fuenteovejuna- Laurencia...performed by Georgia National Ballet....

Beautiful and technically impressive spectacle performing a classic ballet in the USSR since around the XIX century...
It tells the story of a village in Cordoba, Spain, where the villagers unite to assault and finish the despot governor after he and his thugs arbitrarily had tortured and raped some village´s young boys and girls...

While marvelling with main interpreters quality, plasticity, and facial and corporal expressions...could not avoid thinking that these artists are with this performance just bringing in a breath of hope to the despaired and disoriented peoples after the debacle of the traditional left and it´s impersonating by impostors in Europe and the world...

While clapping until my arms hurt, in acknowledgment for the good time, could not avoid thinking it was really curious that this classic Soviet ballet was brought in, precisely, by the Georgian National Ballet, and just in a moment when the powerful of the world just think they have won us by the hand and we will never again rise our heads or offer any resistance...

Wrong deduction!

The play of Fuenteovejuna is taken from historical events, when the left and political parties not even existed,...as a demonstration that the people will always unite against injustice whenever and wherever they feel the drop have filled the glass....

To those celebrating this weekend, especially after the defeat of the left in UK, enjoy while you can...

Posted by: Sasha | Dec 15 2019 23:08 utc | 200

« previous page | next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.