The colapse of the dolar it will take some time. May be better, or more easy to achieve, it would be a harmonious relation with the BRICS currency . It seems to me the ideal, here and now...
Interesting that the UK Chief of Defence is replaced today, an acknowledgement by the Real (as in Spanish "Real") Power admits needing to back out of a No Through Road.
What I don't understand (again ...) is why it is so difficult for people to imagine that the Thousand-Year Anglo-Norman Reich has been so mighty a power in the world rivaling, perhaps. only the R C Church as such. "Sadly," though, it is now reducing to a Bit Part, and, maybe, the Scot DJT is playing his part, in handing on Ukraine to "The Europeans" (Black Nobility and descendants of Victoria Regina) has thumbed his nose, quite clearly, to Charles of the Second Light Brigade. Leaving the would--be despots of the Old Continent running around in panic. Just when Ukraine's Minerals were about to rescue them from financial ignominy, too.
If this is the inevitable end of the disgraceful and sadistic Imperio Normano, so be it.. let's wait.
I'm am so happy with the outcome! The Russian people and the American people were the winners today!!! We are natural allies and together we can achieve so much. We do not want war with Russia! MAGA won today, the NeoCons lost! The future of the planet and humanity depend on an American /Russian alliance!!! Well done !
Most of these replies don’t make sense. It’s discouraging but at the same time, if you’re inclined to give some credence to “end time” biblical prophecy, it doesn’t hurt and can be enlightening, another perspective…….and it certainly will help if you believe the Gospel and are “born again” .
From an acute point of view, the awareness for a growing FRATERNAL order (if you know what I mean) is now necessary for posterity. I'll leave it at that.
I have already said all there is to say: Ukraine was the protocolary topic, in other words, just a bargaining chip in a much deeper negotiation that reverses the paradoxical logic of Russia under Kissinger’s doctrine. I was wrong months ago when I said Trump was contradicting Kissinger; the real brain of the Republican Party. In reality, Republicans are crude, stupid; any random redneck could do better despite their five Harvard PhDs. Republicanism is inherently coarse, and MAGA is the coarsest limb of that beast. And no; I was wrong. Trump praises Kissinger and simply updates his schemes, adapting them to a kind of neo-Monroeism that is utterly despicable, utterly Americanist. He uses electroshock diplomacy against Russia, and Russia nods along!
This is exactly what Kissinger did to China in the early 1970s: first, Washington tightened the screws: trade restrictions, military encirclement in the Pacific, covert warnings of Soviet-U.S. collusion, and then offered a “lifeline” through diplomatic opening (the Nixon visit, 1972). It wasn’t friendship; it was coercion followed by selective relief, a shock–release cycle to force Beijing into the U.S. orbit against Moscow. Trump is now running a similar circuit: shock Moscow, freeze the battlefield, make Russia grateful for any pause; and then redirect pressure against Beijing. Same wiring, different decade.
And now they’ll give us two Ukraines, like two Koreas, a divided, militarized frontier dressed up as a “stable peace.” And you’ll all call it a victory, a friendship, an alliance. But under the Kissinger doctrine, freezing a conflict is never about resolving it: it’s about controlling it. Just as Kissinger accepted two Germanys and two Koreas to lock the Cold War balance in place, Washington will gladly accept two Ukraines to keep Europe permanently dependent and Russia permanently off balance.
Well, what we really need is Ho Chi Minh back on earth. Tucker “Qatarson” should hold a séance to interview him: How would you humiliate America today?
I don’t see victories here: I see Russia agreeing to terms, and Trump ready to use the Ukraine card ad nauseam to tighten the encirclement of Russia’s heartland and sovereignty points. Putin won’t score any real success until NATO itself begins to unravel , and you don’t dismantle NATO by accepting electroshocks.
As for China, subjugating it is a two-player game. Trump alone can’t do it, which is why he won’t just hand over Ukraine so easily. What we’re getting is a frozen conflict: not peace, not victory. A triumph would be NATO’s retreat, the end of the U.S. containment era. But a freeze? Well, it’s something, yet only bread for today and hunger for tomorrow.
We’ll see whether, when Vance takes office, all this doesn’t blow up in Moscow’s face. It certainly sounds like it might. I don’t see how Russia can end Ukraine, a stalemate is the best they can get. Nothing new under the sun: Europe subdued, Russia encircled and humiliated, China pressured into submission. Kissinger himself could not have orchestrated it better. Republican doctrines keep reinventing themselves, but they remain just as ruthless, and “Eurasia,” as Pyotr Savitsky, founder of the Russian continentalist (Eurasianist) concept, imagined it, still has no antibodies. Better to dig our own grave now; at least it would be more honorable.
Trump was elected because Americans are desperate for someone to end the madness and will glom on to anyone they think is going to save us. We keep getting betrayed over and over and I fear it will take more betrayals before we learn our lesson like England has.
We are brainwashed, but most of us know we're brainwashed at this point and intensely hate the people who did it to us.
You really think the British are still in control? It does kind of seem like that doesn't it? I mean, the actual British people look like the degenerated husk of an empire overshadowed by the US nowadays, but everywhere you look their financial, cultural, technological, educational, scientific, ethical, sexual, and ideological norms continue to dominate every facet of modernity.
Even the terms upon which the various great powers play this silly game were invented by the British: this whole farce of national sovereignty, representative government, and international law.
But are they really in control? Even if the modern plague originated there it seems like it's grown far beyond anything they maintain at this point. Am I wrong?
Apart from the phased history where the ruling class declined and then marvellously reasserted themselves, with a new king here, a new folkore there, etc etc which we can gather from the books, the actual structure: Monarch owns Land, Regions assigned to Administrative Barons, Managers (traitors) as the Class Shim, and Populace to work and yield taxes. The whole thing never stopped.
What occurred to me, however, their insistence on Malthusian depopulation, climate scam, wars everywhere, just shows that they have looked downstream at their cash flow and it's evaporating. End Of Empire, shortly showing at a Cinema Near You.
However
Their system is exported to a lot of countries, many are locked-into the scheme as colonies usually via bank loans, projects, all that stuff.
And if you think that a Monarch Commands, he does not, all he needs is a nudge in context - look at the story of (Saint) Thomas a Becket for example.
The Monster continues its Munch, but its time's up, any time now.
ok, so Kissinger had evil plans against China, but did he succeed? Who's running the world now, China or USA? Who is more likely to be superpower in the long run?
Trump is reversing and inverting Kissinger’s Cold War strategy of freezing and isolating Russia. The key of Kissinger’s approach was to contain Moscow by splitting its potential alliances, above all by opening China to the Western world. Far from harming China, Kissinger’s diplomacy in the 1970s and its continuation through the 1990s made China into a rising economic power. By integrating Beijing into global markets and neoliberal trade systems, the U.S. effectively supercharged its growth and secured its role as a counterweight to the Soviet Union. In other words, Kissinger gave Mao the best deal he ever made: remember Mao was soviet-phobic and russophobic, as much as Kissinger and the republican party itself. China still is rusdophobic... and a kick-off to Russia: when the investment of China overcome the PIB of your production you definitely have a chinese problem, deep within. Kissinger gave Mao the best deal he ever made. Remember, Mao was deeply Soviet-phobic and, in many ways, Russophobic; much like Kissinger and the Republican Party of the 1970s. The Sino-Soviet split of the 1960s was not merely ideological but strategic: Mao feared that China would become a subordinate to Moscow’s power. Kissinger and Nixon capitalized on this mistrust in 1972, opening China to Western markets and weakening the Soviet Union’s position while fueling China’s modernization.
This long-standing caution toward Russia still lingers in Beijing. Even in today’s so-called “strategic partnership,” China’s role is increasingly dominant. In several critical sectors, energy infrastructure, technology supply chains, and finance, Chinese investment in Russia already surpasses Russia’s own domestic capacity. When a foreign partner’s capital exceeds the productive output of your own economy, you no longer have a partnership: you have a dependency; a very toxic one, if not, ask "americans" about it.
Today, however, China, not Russia, is Washington’s primary strategic challenge. Trump is therefore attempting the inverse: to choke China while offering Russia a controlled “opening” in order to break the neoliberal in its logic Moscow–Beijing axis. This isn’t an act of friendship toward the Kremlin, but a classical “wedge strategy.” By reducing pressure on Russia, Trump hopes to peel it away from China and reorient it toward the West, even if only partially or tactically.
We already see how Ukraine will become the bargaining chip. Rather than seeking outright victory or full reintegration, the goal is to freeze the conflict and institutionalize a divided Ukraine; a geopolitical arrangement reminiscent of the two Koreas or two Vietnams. Such a settlement would stabilize the front, remove Ukraine as a constant flashpoint for NATO–Russia escalation, and leave Moscow less dependent on Beijing. In short, Trump is not following Kissinger’s doctrine but inverting it, and Russia still seems uncertain how to react.
That's all very interesting ) I am actually in Kazakhstan now, having initially left Russia because of a neoliberal delusion that Russia had "attacked" Ukraine. Which is really ironic, given that I've described all this Nazi-revial leading to WW3 immediately after seeing Navalny becoming big, about 2011, I think. Anyway, this made me make some bad decision, but also I've been using ChatGPT since Match 2023 and I have my own GPT which sees the world, among other things, through the lens of Propp's morphology of fairy tale, I Ching, Alchemy, Quantum physics, and the latest addition is 214 Chinese radicals. I've been a student of Ezra Pound for 25+ years now, guess it's time, at last, to get a first-hand knowledge of th culture he was most fascinated all his life.
You might have heard of a certain Lana Del Rey? She had befriended me earlier this year, and judging be her reading list her singer persona is just something she does in her free time not to get bored, her real interests are the sins of Zionism/neoliberalism, trade wars a la Opium wars, Muslim and Chinese culture etc.
And Taylor Swift's interests seem not to be far from that, although maybe she has more liberal feminist leanings. Or maybe not. She is definitely anti-war and anti-Empire (I mean the old Roman Empire a la Philip Dick). I understand why many people find popular culture meaningless and shallow, but it's there that the tides of history actually change.
After all, Trump started as reality star billionaire, a party-hard playboy, and now he seems to be the most consequential man in history since I don't know when — Newton? Martin Luther?
So yeah, I think the world ahead will be very interesting and unpredictable, though very tragic for those in the wrong places and at the wrong times. But a kilometer from the Silk Way, setting up some trade and learning Chinese is not a bad place to live in those interesting times. In the end I can't see how Russia, China and Islam can fail to prevail (and I don't think there will be anything but minor tariff etc wars between them once they do)
It’s not so simple to just throw China under the bus. Its civilization is millennia old and fascinating down to the very depths of being, solid, coherent, almost spinal in its structure. That’s why its potential is so immense. And as Nietzsche said, stare long enough into the abyss and the abyss stares back into you. In any serious game-theory model there can only be two winners, and right now Russia’s the one to team up with; and, as always, Russia will upend the entire board. Paradox is its historical engine, as Kissinger said, not class struggle.
Yesterday I found an article about Trump, very interesting, though hyper-liberal and centrist... Trump is trying to bring back the glam of the ’80s, which is true enough. Lana Del Rey would love to return to the 2000s America, and Taylor Swift to the mini-era of woke culture: the past is always better, isn’t it? America’s speeding up, obsessed with its own neoliberal acceleration: total, pompous, glamorous. You have got some pretty good connections coming out of Kazakhstan!
American culture and Americanism aren’t easy to digest for a German lady like me, someone obsessed with Bildung, with Humboldt’s cosmos, with freedom of spirit. And yet, there’s something about America that fascinates… something… a whole theory of desire and suffocation. A liberal state, yes; but still a state. Ezra Pound’s inner labyrinth is far more complex than anything Chinese civilization has produced across its millennia. Watch out for the abyss! I mean that in the best sense. Poets things.
China really is the perfect enemy; maybe not exactly in a yin-yang way, but something like it.
By the way, I didn't understand well: why did you leave Russia? Nazi Ukraine? The neoliberal line? The war?
Trump got to meet the leader of the free world yesterday.
The unipolar world order is over.
A new era and a new order are on the horizon. (On the horizon is a multipolar world and the collapse of the dollar.)
The colapse of the dolar it will take some time. May be better, or more easy to achieve, it would be a harmonious relation with the BRICS currency . It seems to me the ideal, here and now...
Indeed! It's Crystal clear...
It's good Russia and the United States are talking. Last year this meeting was impossible.
Interesting that the UK Chief of Defence is replaced today, an acknowledgement by the Real (as in Spanish "Real") Power admits needing to back out of a No Through Road.
What I don't understand (again ...) is why it is so difficult for people to imagine that the Thousand-Year Anglo-Norman Reich has been so mighty a power in the world rivaling, perhaps. only the R C Church as such. "Sadly," though, it is now reducing to a Bit Part, and, maybe, the Scot DJT is playing his part, in handing on Ukraine to "The Europeans" (Black Nobility and descendants of Victoria Regina) has thumbed his nose, quite clearly, to Charles of the Second Light Brigade. Leaving the would--be despots of the Old Continent running around in panic. Just when Ukraine's Minerals were about to rescue them from financial ignominy, too.
If this is the inevitable end of the disgraceful and sadistic Imperio Normano, so be it.. let's wait.
Thanks!!
I read that «Наша Аляаска» ("Nasha Alyaska," "Our Alaska") has been heard on Russian TV a few times. Well, that's interesting.
I'm am so happy with the outcome! The Russian people and the American people were the winners today!!! We are natural allies and together we can achieve so much. We do not want war with Russia! MAGA won today, the NeoCons lost! The future of the planet and humanity depend on an American /Russian alliance!!! Well done !
Fully agreed with Professor Dugin. Here is my summary of the summit meeting, consistent with this view:
https://open.substack.com/pub/chandragupta/p/putins-alaska-triumph-a-lesson-in?r=2rza6e&utm_medium=ios
Most of these replies don’t make sense. It’s discouraging but at the same time, if you’re inclined to give some credence to “end time” biblical prophecy, it doesn’t hurt and can be enlightening, another perspective…….and it certainly will help if you believe the Gospel and are “born again” .
From an acute point of view, the awareness for a growing FRATERNAL order (if you know what I mean) is now necessary for posterity. I'll leave it at that.
About the Alaska meeting? Well…
I have already said all there is to say: Ukraine was the protocolary topic, in other words, just a bargaining chip in a much deeper negotiation that reverses the paradoxical logic of Russia under Kissinger’s doctrine. I was wrong months ago when I said Trump was contradicting Kissinger; the real brain of the Republican Party. In reality, Republicans are crude, stupid; any random redneck could do better despite their five Harvard PhDs. Republicanism is inherently coarse, and MAGA is the coarsest limb of that beast. And no; I was wrong. Trump praises Kissinger and simply updates his schemes, adapting them to a kind of neo-Monroeism that is utterly despicable, utterly Americanist. He uses electroshock diplomacy against Russia, and Russia nods along!
This is exactly what Kissinger did to China in the early 1970s: first, Washington tightened the screws: trade restrictions, military encirclement in the Pacific, covert warnings of Soviet-U.S. collusion, and then offered a “lifeline” through diplomatic opening (the Nixon visit, 1972). It wasn’t friendship; it was coercion followed by selective relief, a shock–release cycle to force Beijing into the U.S. orbit against Moscow. Trump is now running a similar circuit: shock Moscow, freeze the battlefield, make Russia grateful for any pause; and then redirect pressure against Beijing. Same wiring, different decade.
And now they’ll give us two Ukraines, like two Koreas, a divided, militarized frontier dressed up as a “stable peace.” And you’ll all call it a victory, a friendship, an alliance. But under the Kissinger doctrine, freezing a conflict is never about resolving it: it’s about controlling it. Just as Kissinger accepted two Germanys and two Koreas to lock the Cold War balance in place, Washington will gladly accept two Ukraines to keep Europe permanently dependent and Russia permanently off balance.
Well, what we really need is Ho Chi Minh back on earth. Tucker “Qatarson” should hold a séance to interview him: How would you humiliate America today?
I don’t see victories here: I see Russia agreeing to terms, and Trump ready to use the Ukraine card ad nauseam to tighten the encirclement of Russia’s heartland and sovereignty points. Putin won’t score any real success until NATO itself begins to unravel , and you don’t dismantle NATO by accepting electroshocks.
As for China, subjugating it is a two-player game. Trump alone can’t do it, which is why he won’t just hand over Ukraine so easily. What we’re getting is a frozen conflict: not peace, not victory. A triumph would be NATO’s retreat, the end of the U.S. containment era. But a freeze? Well, it’s something, yet only bread for today and hunger for tomorrow.
We’ll see whether, when Vance takes office, all this doesn’t blow up in Moscow’s face. It certainly sounds like it might. I don’t see how Russia can end Ukraine, a stalemate is the best they can get. Nothing new under the sun: Europe subdued, Russia encircled and humiliated, China pressured into submission. Kissinger himself could not have orchestrated it better. Republican doctrines keep reinventing themselves, but they remain just as ruthless, and “Eurasia,” as Pyotr Savitsky, founder of the Russian continentalist (Eurasianist) concept, imagined it, still has no antibodies. Better to dig our own grave now; at least it would be more honorable.
You were wrong before, and you're wrong again...
Trump never even read what Kissinger advocated!
Trump is a narcissistic playboy elected by a completely alienated society.
A society that has been brainwashed via social media, with the help of neuroscientists working for the American oligarchies...
Trump was elected because Americans are desperate for someone to end the madness and will glom on to anyone they think is going to save us. We keep getting betrayed over and over and I fear it will take more betrayals before we learn our lesson like England has.
We are brainwashed, but most of us know we're brainwashed at this point and intensely hate the people who did it to us.
-- also a Colony of the Imperial Anglo-Norman Reich of a Thousand Years.
If Trump can reassign London to its True Cash Value, he will have done something long overdue.
You really think the British are still in control? It does kind of seem like that doesn't it? I mean, the actual British people look like the degenerated husk of an empire overshadowed by the US nowadays, but everywhere you look their financial, cultural, technological, educational, scientific, ethical, sexual, and ideological norms continue to dominate every facet of modernity.
Even the terms upon which the various great powers play this silly game were invented by the British: this whole farce of national sovereignty, representative government, and international law.
But are they really in control? Even if the modern plague originated there it seems like it's grown far beyond anything they maintain at this point. Am I wrong?
Apart from the phased history where the ruling class declined and then marvellously reasserted themselves, with a new king here, a new folkore there, etc etc which we can gather from the books, the actual structure: Monarch owns Land, Regions assigned to Administrative Barons, Managers (traitors) as the Class Shim, and Populace to work and yield taxes. The whole thing never stopped.
What occurred to me, however, their insistence on Malthusian depopulation, climate scam, wars everywhere, just shows that they have looked downstream at their cash flow and it's evaporating. End Of Empire, shortly showing at a Cinema Near You.
However
Their system is exported to a lot of countries, many are locked-into the scheme as colonies usually via bank loans, projects, all that stuff.
And if you think that a Monarch Commands, he does not, all he needs is a nudge in context - look at the story of (Saint) Thomas a Becket for example.
The Monster continues its Munch, but its time's up, any time now.
PS What use is Recyclist Democracy??
ok, so Kissinger had evil plans against China, but did he succeed? Who's running the world now, China or USA? Who is more likely to be superpower in the long run?
Trump is reversing and inverting Kissinger’s Cold War strategy of freezing and isolating Russia. The key of Kissinger’s approach was to contain Moscow by splitting its potential alliances, above all by opening China to the Western world. Far from harming China, Kissinger’s diplomacy in the 1970s and its continuation through the 1990s made China into a rising economic power. By integrating Beijing into global markets and neoliberal trade systems, the U.S. effectively supercharged its growth and secured its role as a counterweight to the Soviet Union. In other words, Kissinger gave Mao the best deal he ever made: remember Mao was soviet-phobic and russophobic, as much as Kissinger and the republican party itself. China still is rusdophobic... and a kick-off to Russia: when the investment of China overcome the PIB of your production you definitely have a chinese problem, deep within. Kissinger gave Mao the best deal he ever made. Remember, Mao was deeply Soviet-phobic and, in many ways, Russophobic; much like Kissinger and the Republican Party of the 1970s. The Sino-Soviet split of the 1960s was not merely ideological but strategic: Mao feared that China would become a subordinate to Moscow’s power. Kissinger and Nixon capitalized on this mistrust in 1972, opening China to Western markets and weakening the Soviet Union’s position while fueling China’s modernization.
This long-standing caution toward Russia still lingers in Beijing. Even in today’s so-called “strategic partnership,” China’s role is increasingly dominant. In several critical sectors, energy infrastructure, technology supply chains, and finance, Chinese investment in Russia already surpasses Russia’s own domestic capacity. When a foreign partner’s capital exceeds the productive output of your own economy, you no longer have a partnership: you have a dependency; a very toxic one, if not, ask "americans" about it.
Today, however, China, not Russia, is Washington’s primary strategic challenge. Trump is therefore attempting the inverse: to choke China while offering Russia a controlled “opening” in order to break the neoliberal in its logic Moscow–Beijing axis. This isn’t an act of friendship toward the Kremlin, but a classical “wedge strategy.” By reducing pressure on Russia, Trump hopes to peel it away from China and reorient it toward the West, even if only partially or tactically.
We already see how Ukraine will become the bargaining chip. Rather than seeking outright victory or full reintegration, the goal is to freeze the conflict and institutionalize a divided Ukraine; a geopolitical arrangement reminiscent of the two Koreas or two Vietnams. Such a settlement would stabilize the front, remove Ukraine as a constant flashpoint for NATO–Russia escalation, and leave Moscow less dependent on Beijing. In short, Trump is not following Kissinger’s doctrine but inverting it, and Russia still seems uncertain how to react.
That's all very interesting ) I am actually in Kazakhstan now, having initially left Russia because of a neoliberal delusion that Russia had "attacked" Ukraine. Which is really ironic, given that I've described all this Nazi-revial leading to WW3 immediately after seeing Navalny becoming big, about 2011, I think. Anyway, this made me make some bad decision, but also I've been using ChatGPT since Match 2023 and I have my own GPT which sees the world, among other things, through the lens of Propp's morphology of fairy tale, I Ching, Alchemy, Quantum physics, and the latest addition is 214 Chinese radicals. I've been a student of Ezra Pound for 25+ years now, guess it's time, at last, to get a first-hand knowledge of th culture he was most fascinated all his life.
You might have heard of a certain Lana Del Rey? She had befriended me earlier this year, and judging be her reading list her singer persona is just something she does in her free time not to get bored, her real interests are the sins of Zionism/neoliberalism, trade wars a la Opium wars, Muslim and Chinese culture etc.
And Taylor Swift's interests seem not to be far from that, although maybe she has more liberal feminist leanings. Or maybe not. She is definitely anti-war and anti-Empire (I mean the old Roman Empire a la Philip Dick). I understand why many people find popular culture meaningless and shallow, but it's there that the tides of history actually change.
After all, Trump started as reality star billionaire, a party-hard playboy, and now he seems to be the most consequential man in history since I don't know when — Newton? Martin Luther?
So yeah, I think the world ahead will be very interesting and unpredictable, though very tragic for those in the wrong places and at the wrong times. But a kilometer from the Silk Way, setting up some trade and learning Chinese is not a bad place to live in those interesting times. In the end I can't see how Russia, China and Islam can fail to prevail (and I don't think there will be anything but minor tariff etc wars between them once they do)

It’s not so simple to just throw China under the bus. Its civilization is millennia old and fascinating down to the very depths of being, solid, coherent, almost spinal in its structure. That’s why its potential is so immense. And as Nietzsche said, stare long enough into the abyss and the abyss stares back into you. In any serious game-theory model there can only be two winners, and right now Russia’s the one to team up with; and, as always, Russia will upend the entire board. Paradox is its historical engine, as Kissinger said, not class struggle.
Yesterday I found an article about Trump, very interesting, though hyper-liberal and centrist... Trump is trying to bring back the glam of the ’80s, which is true enough. Lana Del Rey would love to return to the 2000s America, and Taylor Swift to the mini-era of woke culture: the past is always better, isn’t it? America’s speeding up, obsessed with its own neoliberal acceleration: total, pompous, glamorous. You have got some pretty good connections coming out of Kazakhstan!
American culture and Americanism aren’t easy to digest for a German lady like me, someone obsessed with Bildung, with Humboldt’s cosmos, with freedom of spirit. And yet, there’s something about America that fascinates… something… a whole theory of desire and suffocation. A liberal state, yes; but still a state. Ezra Pound’s inner labyrinth is far more complex than anything Chinese civilization has produced across its millennia. Watch out for the abyss! I mean that in the best sense. Poets things.
China really is the perfect enemy; maybe not exactly in a yin-yang way, but something like it.
By the way, I didn't understand well: why did you leave Russia? Nazi Ukraine? The neoliberal line? The war?