I see you copied that from someone else’s forum.
I didn’t think you actually spent any time understanding it, or that you have a shred of evidence or understanding of it to back it up.
Realpolitik of European citizens realising the dramatic drop in their living stds with huge wins to Orban and Vucic in Hungary, Serbia who don’t oppose Russia and their energy supply and the tightening of poll in France with the rise of Le Pen
That would depend on the definition of Win and Lose.
If Putin keeps redefining it, yes he will win.
But a gain somewhere is always at a cost somewhere else.
Reputation, economy …?
milkthecow , among what you say, there are truth, half-truths and mistakes
Thanks Morgan. I think it’s very simple and the fact that it hasn’t occurred tells us something very sinister about both European and, to a lesser extent, US society.
- The central reality in all our lives is that the Permanent Arms economy, with its concomitant permanent security/secret police state, lowers living standards everywhere in a dramatic fashion.
Yes and no. I will explain later.
- There are good and easily made arguments for our states to enter into security guarantees which will save us the costs of disfiguring our societies by endlessly preparing for war.
Yes
- After 1945 most of Europe was eager for peace with the Soviet Union, the great majority of the electorates of France, Italy, Scandinavia, Greece, Yugoslavia and the United Kingdom not only wanted but expected peace and a new era of development in which Unemployment and Depression, poverty, disease, inequality, injustice and profiteering be put behind them. And the enormous problems caused by colonialism and imperialism, everyone saw was outmoded and immoral would also be tackled.
That was what common people the world over expected from the United Nations.
Yes
- What happened instead, and almost entirely because of the United States’ ruling class, was the Cold War, which took the form of dozens of hot wars- almost every country in the Far East from Malaya and Indonesia, to Indo-China, Korea, the Philippines and China itself were embroiled in wars in which the former colonial powers-invariably at the behest of the US, which dominated the economy- sought to preserve imperial rule, either directly or through neo-colonialist regimes.
Yes, but West is not the only guilty one!
In 1945/1947 Stalin imposed communism and URSS domination by strength in the whole east; military occupied, especially in Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia. Stalinian courts expunged the communist parties of these countries.
And URSS army did not hesitate to suppress revolts, East Germany 1953, Hungary 1956, Poland 1956, Czechoslovakia 1968 among others.
Russia wanted to expand and subvert. Since the fall of USSR, files have been open and have shown the extension of Russia spy and influence network.
Whatever the wrongs of West, the other side has more than some.
And, whatever the wrongs of West, I prefer to live in a state where I can shout rather than in a state where I am killed when I shout!!!
- This vast complex of conflicts, almost all of which was given a racial (Divide and Conquer) veneer whilst in reality being naked class war to prevent popular power, spread throughout the entire world. It tore apart swathes of South America, it was the history of Africa for decades and it was the central fact in every region of the world.
Cold war was a war between 2 systems, between capitalist dominant class and Soviet system. Racial veneer came very late.
You are right about the efforts of USA to prevent any popular movement, social and political progress, especially in south America.
Cuba is a very good example of USA attitude. Cuba was led by Battista, a dictator supported by the mafia. When Castro took the power, he sent away the mafia and appropriated its goods. Mafia acted. Cuba revolution was not accepted by US government and Cuban leaders turned to USSR with no choice lest.
In ex-French Africa France never hesitated to protect its interests by guile, subversion and strength.
- and 7) In the metropole, north America, Europe and the ‘lucky’ outposts of imperialism like Australia and New Zealand the war took a different form- that of McCarthyism. A long series of assaults on working class institutions, the expulsion of communists and other radical activists from the Trade Unions and the transformation of the socialist mass parties, which in terms of numbers and organization were the most powerful political forces everywhere except in north America, although they were very powerful in Canada and locally in industrial US states too.
And after that, you attribute the failures of the left and anti-capitalist movements to US domination. (I sum up)
Well, you mix the times and the causes.
McCarthyism was very specific to USA. Yes, communist parties were fought legally and illegally in many west countries, but remained very powerful up to the beginning of the eighties. Social democrat parties also, with a big difference, they were in the system and accepted as such.
I don’t deny the repression of the left movements, but it does not explain fully what happened.
And now, I come back to 1).
The fight between Capitalism and Sovietism was not only by weapons.
The matter was that each system had to give proof that it could better provide to the needs of ordinary people. And West lived with the memory of the 1929 crisis.
What it set in place was the Fordian or Keynesian compromise. The capitalist got their share of the added value but gave something to the working class, and the welfare state. And the standard of life was much higher in West than in East.
I remember a baby sitter in the seventies coming in France, from east, and thinking that the cities of the suburbs, built for the working classes and the poor were district for the managers.
The revolutionary movement was very strong and culminated in 1968.
CIA was so afraid of the Italian situation that in link with ultra-right, it staged a bomb attentat in Milano. The red brigades were founded in Italy, the red armed fraction in Germany and, later, “Action directe” in France.
It was the time of the hippies, of the flower power, when the big questions were the post industrial society and the end of the work, just forgetting that West lived in a competition world.
2 sets of events provoked the downfall of the communist movement, after the crash of URSS.
First the crimes of Stalin became known and discredited communism for many people. Second the crash of the soviet system showed that capitalism had better success in giving the working classes what they needed.
Further the dependency of the communist parties in west and their inability to take some distance disgusted many people. The were unable to change their analysis.
I remember in 1972, when the French socialist party signed the “ program commun” a common government program, I was a student. The French communist students were laughing, thinking that they would pluck the socialist poultry as a reference to a saying of Stalin.
The crash of USSR had another effect. The capitalist system had no more enemy and no need to prove anything. The Thatcher/Reagan years began with the setting of the unbridled capitalist system we know.
- About US domination
It exists. But don’t mix causes and means. US domination is a way to impose capitalist domination.
And if capitalist domination is strong, US domination is weak nowadays. First of all, USA are losing the leadership in economy and king dollar is threatened.
Now, the main rival of USA is China.
And you should beware. The enemies of your enemies are not your friends.
West capitalists need a liberal state, founded on a legal and judicial system, fair and independent. China has chosen another system and is becoming a totalitarian state, worth of 1984’s Orwellian nightmare.
And Putin, who objectively is weak, in term of strength, is neither a democrat, neither a social leader. He is the greatest oligarch in Russia.
- Last, in Europe, the fight is not only for a standard of living but also for ideology.
Orban, Le Pen and so are, are friends of Putin.
They are ultra-right politicians and love him because they share the same values as him.
And the tool they use is the fear of migrants and strangers.
Putin is the modern equivalent of Atilla the Hun. A psychopath with dreams of world domination.
The question is if he is mad enough to resort to mutual destruction when he feels he is losing or if he will stop and subject himself to criminal prosecution for war crimes.
1 Like
That was a nice explication.
Worth the reading, I hope milk gives it a serious read and some thought.
Hope. Okay. Let’s go with that
Everyone may comment and disagree. Lacking time, i used mostly my memory and made some shortcuts.
1 Like
I grew up watching those changes, a shift from glorifying war to recognizing the horrors, from loyalty for your boss to suspicion of capitalism. By time I was old enough to participate, it was fading away. I’ve met people 10 years or so older than me that say it wasn’t really what media made it out to be.
Some lessons were learned, like don’t blame the soldier for the war. Problem is, the war mongers learned more. So we ended the draft, but we still have plenty of people for whom it is their best career option. The long attack on education has helped reduce their ability to even make good choices.
After the hippies became a trope, the nerds took over as the bringers of change. I was smarter by then and could see their vision of an interconnected world was no better of a savior than the mind expanding drugs and poetry of the previous generation. But, there wasn’t much I could do to stop it.
I’m not great at predicting things, but really, we could all be better at noticing how things stay the same. The world has changed in many ways, but evil still exists. There are still people who think the mono-leader systems of the past are the best and are willing to destroy a lot of stuff to prove it.
A minor observation.
Now that China has declared their support for Russia’s plight, because the US has waged economic war on Russia, even as no American has ever killed a Russian and fought against NAZIs just like Russia and it is Russia that is killing thousands of innocent people, because their president is a NAZI Jew!!!@!!!@???
Apparently, China has become a full-fledged Capitalist country, valuing economics over human lives, even more so than the US! At least we still have a “Free Press”!
Is this world screwed up or what? Perhaps the internet as a propaganda tool may be the end of civilization.
I think that was discussed in the Making Sense podcast i linked. Russia and China have a mere facade of communism. They have central control, and claim to be for the workers, but they are just running a business.
1 Like
Russia has given up any façade of communism, years ago. Russia is a plutocracy. When USSR fell, men in power took the common properties and have built fortunes, Putin being the boss of a sort of a state mafia and a dictator.
China has kept its façade of communism, ye, and the party is building a totalitarian state. The difference with Russia is that the party leads and decides, not the Moguls.
Chinese PC has been traumatized by the way USSR fell and does not want a repeat.
N either are capitalist as capitalism needs concurrence and a state of law with independent courts judging according to fixed, know and impartial laws.
Here’s a much better look at history. Democrats have a lot to answer for, but not for conspiring to control the world
I don’t know about Le Pen but Orban is absolutely not similar to Putin in any way. It is possible to be wary of liberalism and not be Putin or Hitler. This fact bothers many people for some reason.
Liberalism has three fields, economical, moral and political.
Liberal economists give priority to the not existing laws of market
Liberal in moral feel that as long as you respect law and others, you are free to live your life as you wish.
Political liberals believe in democracy and human rights.
Orban is a liberal about economy, and anti-liberal about moral and politics.
In fact he is authoritarian. It is his right to be a conservative about morality, not to suppress any idea not agreeing with ones, hunting homosexuals and so.
among many links
It is not his right as government head to suppress opposition rights and prevent it to speak.
[Opposition PM Candidate Márki-Zay Allowed at State Television for First Time - Hungary Today]
Morgan. More agreement here than disagreement. Putin is no communist. In fact he repudiates the Bolshevik revolution and rejects the theory of permanent revolution and an internationale workers party. He is a right wing white christian nationalist capitalist who is willing to work with the West but not dominated by it. Orban and Le Pen are right wing reactionaries but they do not fully follow the wests neoliberal script and unlike current so called leaders, hold a level of class consciousness to understand that fully complying with western sanctions on Russia is a rubicon for workers uprising and an overthrow of govt.
You equate the West’s postwar agreement with the USSR to the wars of imperialist allies to satisfy capitalism’s need for new markets/new resources. The West’s postwar recognition of USSR sphere of influence in Eastern Europe was in exchange to capitalist rule in Western Europe.
The Soviet foreign policy was centred on the defense of these post war arrangements. evidenced by the Stalinist’s opposition in any attempt by the working class to take power pre and post WW2. The defeat of the Spanish Revolution to the suppression the working class initiatives in Poland East Germany Czechoslovakia and Hungry ( do you know what the workers actually demanded???) to the civil war in 1960’s Greece that the USSR stood aside and allowed Anglo-American imperialists to crush the working class
This is not a vis a vis for the capitalist allies expanding of empire through the pillaging and raping of sovereign nations around the globe and the extermination of all movements towards an independent economic and foreign policy from the USA.
Macathyism was and still is insidious throughout the western world ( just look here in this forum) as a tool for the reversal of the blood sweat and tears gains of workers post Ww2 in particular in the 1970 onwards with death of the Bretton Woods system of global financial arrangements and the birth of neoliberal capitalism
1 Like
There is a fundamental problem with what is written here, a lack of understanding of economic theory.
capitalism
cap·i·tal·ism | \ ˈka-pə-tə-ˌliz-əm , ˈkap-tə- \
Definition of capitalism
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market
No where does the definition demand for democracy or an independent judiciary. In fact fascism is the capitalists response to the defeat of a workers revolution crushing all workers and democratic rights.
1 Like
IMHO, Capitalism is crushing and is used as a form of government to run the U.S. Greedy corporations pay members of congress to create laws in their favour, which means Capitalism is used to run the government.
How can you have a free market if you don’t have a rule of law? If people are not free to act in a just manner?
I haven’t heard anyone calling anyone else a commie.
I get it that you think the West is rolling over nations and suppressing people everywhere. It would be nice if you would at least acknowledge the human rights gains of the last few decades. They are too slow coming and the rich are still exploitong people, i get it. But your failure to see things that are happening makes discussion difficult