I did not say that global wars emanate from Russia. I did say that Vladimir Putin is a globalist, and I plan to make a case for that on my own Substack. You don’t know anything about my opinions. If you want to, you can read my Substack. Everything you say is stuff I know and have heard ad nauseum. Putin’s goals in Ukraine are not being met because he does not pursue his stated goals. He is causing European militarization while killing fellow Slavs, most of whom are Russian speakers who don’t want to fight. He is not denazifying either or he would have taken out the Kiev regime long ago. What he did in Syria was a disgrace, and I hope Iran and China took note. If the west gave Vladimir Putin a nod, he would sell out both in an instant just as he did Syria. And Jolani in the Kremlin. Disgusting.
Interesting. I never thought of sovereignty as the right to declare war, but this essay, if correct, contributes to a point I will make in an upcoming essay of my own. Vladimir Putin is a liberal and a globalist. It has become so obvious that I don't know why so many missed the signs. To be fair, I did not get it until Russia's backing of Israel rather than Syria became obvious, of course, crowned by the welcome given Jolani in the Kremlin, which by the way, brought great shame to Russia. Bowing before terrorist Israel is a sure sign of the erosion of sovereignty. But there are other signs. In 2014, Russian financier Kirill Dmetriev, another aligned with the west globalist, educated at Stanford and Harvard, was noted as a rising young leader and welcomed at the annual WEF meeting in Davos. Same year as the Maidan coup. Now do you think for a minute, or a split second or a second divided an infinite number of times that Putin was going to help the Russians in Ukraine with his chosen boy sitting pretty in Davos? Putin has wet dreams of being accepted by the west - probably several times a day and all night long. He fails to face the reality he should have seen with Bucha after that foolish display of a tank parade to Kiev. Vladimir Putin should be removed from power three years ago. He has made a fool out of himself and Russia and should be stopped. Likewise, Sergei Lavrov should have retired long ago. Stop these "leaders," it may not be too late- yet. Dugin is a smart man. Kudos to him.
Your assessment is very superficial, you should take a closer look at details.
And BTW, global wars do not emanate from Russia, but from the West! Take a closer look at City of London - western financial oligarchy is causing wars, they wanted to impose the "great reset", destroy sovereign sates and introduce global neo-feudal system with "one world government". Countries such as Russia, China, Iran, etc., are fighting against this absolute globalization and centralization of power in hands of western financial oligarchy.
Other than W democrats start most wars for America. Most warhawks are tight with the banker class. 2 qualities needed to be a banker, too lazy to work, too nervous to steal. Except for the Federal Reserve Banker's, they have a right to steal.
RE: "It follows that, to prevent war, one must begin a war." -- This type of thinking is illogical. In 2025, aggression should be deterred by "de-escalating" tensions between NATO and Russia, due to the lethality of modern weapons systems.
I believe NATO began moving eastwards only a few years after committing to "not one inch". And it's my understanding they welcomed every Russian president who was not inclined to object. Analysts weren't silent the entire time but were never attended to. I don't know what de-escalation could have been tried?
Say 2013 is the inflection point: removing Nulan and her crew, and everyone selecting them, from power in one fell swoop might have fired too many be practical.
'In essence, liberal theory considers the use of violence against a sovereign state legitimate — from the outside and from within. It follows that, to prevent war, one must begin a war. Liberalism at some point becomes uncannily reminiscent of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.'
Definitely, it does. The globalists and megaloliberals are absolutists till the end, and simply cannot accept that any new basis for world order will have to contain some form of moral compromise at its core.
Megaloliberalism is a particularist order purporting to represent the universal good, but doing nothing of the kind. It holds this core deceit at its heart.
For you: No rules can be broken and all always apply.
For us: All rules can be broken and none ever apply.
Thus all war by liberal states is justified; all war by everyone else is unjustified a priori.
This cannot be a principle that sustains any concept of world order. If there can be said to be any moral imperative in world politics and IR, it is surely to prevent world wars and global conflicts. Megaloliberalism/liberal hegemony stands in diametric opposition to this.
Thank you Alexander for your continued insights in this area.
Trump is an idiot surrounded by idiots.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=we6NrOpyFiM
I did not say that global wars emanate from Russia. I did say that Vladimir Putin is a globalist, and I plan to make a case for that on my own Substack. You don’t know anything about my opinions. If you want to, you can read my Substack. Everything you say is stuff I know and have heard ad nauseum. Putin’s goals in Ukraine are not being met because he does not pursue his stated goals. He is causing European militarization while killing fellow Slavs, most of whom are Russian speakers who don’t want to fight. He is not denazifying either or he would have taken out the Kiev regime long ago. What he did in Syria was a disgrace, and I hope Iran and China took note. If the west gave Vladimir Putin a nod, he would sell out both in an instant just as he did Syria. And Jolani in the Kremlin. Disgusting.
Interesting. I never thought of sovereignty as the right to declare war, but this essay, if correct, contributes to a point I will make in an upcoming essay of my own. Vladimir Putin is a liberal and a globalist. It has become so obvious that I don't know why so many missed the signs. To be fair, I did not get it until Russia's backing of Israel rather than Syria became obvious, of course, crowned by the welcome given Jolani in the Kremlin, which by the way, brought great shame to Russia. Bowing before terrorist Israel is a sure sign of the erosion of sovereignty. But there are other signs. In 2014, Russian financier Kirill Dmetriev, another aligned with the west globalist, educated at Stanford and Harvard, was noted as a rising young leader and welcomed at the annual WEF meeting in Davos. Same year as the Maidan coup. Now do you think for a minute, or a split second or a second divided an infinite number of times that Putin was going to help the Russians in Ukraine with his chosen boy sitting pretty in Davos? Putin has wet dreams of being accepted by the west - probably several times a day and all night long. He fails to face the reality he should have seen with Bucha after that foolish display of a tank parade to Kiev. Vladimir Putin should be removed from power three years ago. He has made a fool out of himself and Russia and should be stopped. Likewise, Sergei Lavrov should have retired long ago. Stop these "leaders," it may not be too late- yet. Dugin is a smart man. Kudos to him.
Your assessment is very superficial, you should take a closer look at details.
And BTW, global wars do not emanate from Russia, but from the West! Take a closer look at City of London - western financial oligarchy is causing wars, they wanted to impose the "great reset", destroy sovereign sates and introduce global neo-feudal system with "one world government". Countries such as Russia, China, Iran, etc., are fighting against this absolute globalization and centralization of power in hands of western financial oligarchy.
Other than W democrats start most wars for America. Most warhawks are tight with the banker class. 2 qualities needed to be a banker, too lazy to work, too nervous to steal. Except for the Federal Reserve Banker's, they have a right to steal.
RE: "It follows that, to prevent war, one must begin a war." -- This type of thinking is illogical. In 2025, aggression should be deterred by "de-escalating" tensions between NATO and Russia, due to the lethality of modern weapons systems.
I believe NATO began moving eastwards only a few years after committing to "not one inch". And it's my understanding they welcomed every Russian president who was not inclined to object. Analysts weren't silent the entire time but were never attended to. I don't know what de-escalation could have been tried?
Say 2013 is the inflection point: removing Nulan and her crew, and everyone selecting them, from power in one fell swoop might have fired too many be practical.
'In essence, liberal theory considers the use of violence against a sovereign state legitimate — from the outside and from within. It follows that, to prevent war, one must begin a war. Liberalism at some point becomes uncannily reminiscent of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four.'
Definitely, it does. The globalists and megaloliberals are absolutists till the end, and simply cannot accept that any new basis for world order will have to contain some form of moral compromise at its core.
Megaloliberalism is a particularist order purporting to represent the universal good, but doing nothing of the kind. It holds this core deceit at its heart.
For you: No rules can be broken and all always apply.
For us: All rules can be broken and none ever apply.
Thus all war by liberal states is justified; all war by everyone else is unjustified a priori.
This cannot be a principle that sustains any concept of world order. If there can be said to be any moral imperative in world politics and IR, it is surely to prevent world wars and global conflicts. Megaloliberalism/liberal hegemony stands in diametric opposition to this.
Thank you Alexander for your continued insights in this area.
Very good analysis in a nutshell of the anti-sovereignty liberal position.