Alan Stevens - AWAH - Libertarianism, Freedom.
The West’s Ukrainian Adventure Backfires
Globalist WEF/deep-state elites behind the Covid wrecking ball are also behind the chaos in the Ukraine. Davos must break Russia and China to achieve Global totalitarian control. Instead, it may merely wreck an increasingly desperate West, especially Europe.
In a recent post, I described the historical background to the war in the Ukraine (which apparently and appropriately means ‘borderlands’), as one of persistent Western encroachment. It is possible to get reasonably open-minded people to agree that Russia is akin to a man in a pub who has allowed himself to be pushed back up against a wall by an inebriated and weedy bully. But then they say ‘Ah but Russia still should not have attacked!’
I did not know there were so many pacifists around. They certainly don’t include (most) libertarians, for whom the use of force is permissible, and indeed necessary, in the face of attack or threatened attack.
Nor did I know that there are so many apparently realistic people who are really anything but. If you have your back to a pub wall, is the person pinning you there likely to renew his attack or not? I would say you could reasonably expect another attack – and it seems that a Ukrainian attack was in the works when Russia invaded. In such a situation it makes sense to attack first, and to do so without reserve.
As my boss said, when I worked in the New York commodity markets, ‘Alan, never hit a man, but if you have to, do not stop until he is on the ground’. As current events suggest, commodity markets are a lot more tied in to reality than are our leaders in the West.
WESTERN ELITES ATTEMPT TO DESTROY RUSSIA
The Ukraine should be properly understood as the last opportunity for the neocons (‘Neo-Conservatives’, despite their leftist roots) to decapitate and subjugate Russia. They want to destroy the regime put in place at the end of the 1990s by key non-oligarch establishment factions in Russia including Vladimir Putin’s former employer, the FSB (formerly the KGB).
The neocons are an entrenched, tight-knit controlling faction in the US foreign policy bureaucracy. Often the descendants of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe, many are former Trotskyite communists. They frequently have a family history of suffering at the hands of various Russian regimes. They are divorced from the views of most Americans.
Allied with the US neocons are overseas government agencies, including much of the UK deep state. These people tend to be devotees of the nineteenth century Mackinder heartland theory. Mackinder held that control of the centre of Eurasia – basically Russia – conferred control of the whole ‘Old-World Island’ and therefore of the world itself.
The maritime powers of the anglosphere and western Europe were supposedly bound to play the Great Game to push Russia back in Asia. The result, amongst other things, was abject British failure in Afghanistan on three occasions. I have no time for Mackinder. The Russians’ problem, once they survived the Mongol onslaughts that destroyed the original Kievan Rus, has not been how to dominate the world.
It has been how to protect themselves from invaders. These include Sweden’s Charles XII in the early 18th century, Napoleon in the early nineteenth century, the Kaiser in the early 20th century, Hitler a generation later, and now the WEF Techno-fascists and NATO neocons.
The British establishment has never shown any gratitude for Russia’s destruction of Napoleon’s Grand Army or Hitler’s Wehrmacht. 80% of German military casualties in WWII were inflicted by the Red Army. And 85% of Russian men born in 1923, the worst affected cohort, were dead by the end of 1945, many killed by Stalin, but more by Germany. Britain’s victories in 1815, 1918 and 1945 could not have happened without Russia.
Nevertheless, the Western elites’ goal is the recolonization of Russia back to the situation in the 1990s when local oligarchs and western politicos, including Clinton associates strip-mined the country, picking up resources on the cheap, and stealing public funds.
This culminated in persuading the then Russian president Boris Yeltsin to steal $7bn from an IMF loan and send it to what was meant to be his overseas account. It never arrived. The setup was meant to create leverage over Yeltsin to hand power to a (now dead) Russian oligarch. But instead, Putin was put in power and the regime began rebuilding Russia.
There have been western backed ‘Colour Revolutions’ since the successful Soros/DAVOS WEF/NATO backed coup in the Ukraine in 2014, in particular in Belarus and in Kazakhstan. But they were foiled with Russian help. So now, with the peripheral exception of Georgia, only the Ukraine presents an opportunity to establish a viable NATO bastion abutting Russia.
UKRAINE – THE SET UP
Since the 2014 coup in the Ukraine, elements in the West have been planning a knockout blow against Russia. Meanwhile, the Ukrainian government has suppressed the use of Russian and banned political parties, including the largest, the Party of the Regions.
Crimea and two eastern Donbass oblasts then voted to leave. Russia cautiously declined to accept the Donbass into the Russian Republic. Instead, Putin brokered the Minsk agreement under which the Ukrainians and the West would hold talks to agree a measure of autonomy for the Donbass within the Ukraine. Instead, an eight-year Ukrainian war of attrition resulted in the loss of half of the republics’ territory and more than 15,000 deaths.
By this spring, the Ukraine’s armed forces had been supplied with many billions of dollars of Western arms and trained by Western ‘advisers’. They were becoming effectively a part of the NATO command systems. The country was also playing host to US controlled biolabs.
Russia had explained that NATO membership for the Ukraine was unacceptable ever since it was mooted in 2008. Yet it was evident that it might well simply be folded overnight into NATO. Russia would then face ‘a fait accompli’ (a ‘done deal’) which it would not be able to reverse without triggering a general war with all NATO members. At the same time the Ukrainian Army was being concentrated along the frontline in the Donbass.
The Western plan probably began with a Ukrainian surprise attack on the Donbass. One way to explain why President Biden oddly asserted that there would be an imminent Russian attack is to assume he knew that there would be a massive Ukrainian attack first.
The West would have expected Russia to react in its hitherto cautious and careful manner. Russia would move troops into the Donbass to protect Russian speakers there. Not to do so would be politically unacceptable in Russia.
Once Russia carried out this limited ‘invasion’ of the Donbass, the West would inflict most of the same sanctions that it has in fact introduced. These sanctions were expected to finish the Putin regime. They were always the end goal of the Ukraine neocon plan. Meanwhile Russian and Ukrainian forces would be locked in a bloody frontal meat grinder far from Kiev.
After a suitably intense propaganda campaign, which we have also seen, there would then be the opportunity to fold plucky little Ukraine de facto and then formally into NATO as western military aid poured in from the EU territories. At that point the Putin Regime would be shown to have failed to prevent the Ukraine joining NATO.
Short of threatening a nuclear strike, Russia would have no way to respond. US nuclear missiles could be moved from Poland and Romania right up to the Russian frontier with the Ukraine. Russia would be forced to back down, decapitated and subjugated. The Neocons and the WEF elites could – in their insane dreams – move on to break China.
THE UNEXPECTED RUSSIAN RESPONSE
The Russians, however, have a reputation as chess players and as people who plan moves carefully in advance, unlike members of western elites. Seeing the scenario mapped out above, they could have decided to do something completely different from what Davos and the neocons expected. The current panicky response of our elites strongly suggests this.
Russia decided instead to incorporate (most of) the Ukraine de facto into Russian strategic space by invading the Ukraine itself. The Ukrainian armies massing to attack the Donbass became a strategic weakness for the West. The best part of the Ukrainian forces could now be cut off and destroyed far to the east. They would not be able to intervene to protect the rest of the Ukraine. At the same time the Ukrainian air defenses, command and logistics systems would be destroyed. The Russians would achieve air and missile fire control over the Ukraine. NATO reinforcements and supplies could not be rushed in.
Russia’s ‘facts on the ground’ would force on the West, instead of on Russia, the choice of whether to back down or invade the Ukraine, with a likely resort to nuclear weapons.
RUSSIA IS WINNING IN THE UKRAINE
Russia won its war in the Ukraine in the first day of its attack. It took a little over an hour to destroy the Ukraine’s navy, air force, and command and logistics systems. Russian armies have established occupational or ‘fire’ control over most of the ethnically Russian territories along the Black Sea coast, behind the isolated Ukrainian Donbass armies, and around Kiev and other Ukrainian cities.
They also more or less eliminated a ‘NATO’ battalion strength movement of equipment, mercenaries and (presumably) special forces into unoccupied Western Ukraine with a single but decisive Kinzhal hypersonic missile strike. Subsequent explosions may indicate more interdiction of attempted Western support.
So why is there still this expectation that the Ukraine could win when it has no realistic chance of doing so? In reality it will collapse suddenly and, to western eyes at least, unexpectedly within weeks.
President Zelensky is another WEF acolyte, who, like his peers in New Zealand and elsewhere, has suddenly become very wealthy in Davos’s service. He refuses to end the war. By doing so he ensures more suffering for the Ukrainian population. He also makes it likely, as Putin has explained, that additional regions may be prepped for eventual independence, reducing the area of a future Ukrainian state.
Zelensky’s mission is to keep the war going. In the original plan, NATO reinforcements would be on their way. Time would be on his side. Now it is not. But as long as he keeps the war going the West can justify sanctions, which it sees as decisive against Russia.
The West can also continue to dream of feeding in supplies and volunteer fighters in a rerun of the defeat of Russian forces in (where else?) Afghanistan, though this is clearly impracticable, at least outside of Western Ukraine in which Russia is showing little interest.
If Zelensky made peace, the West would have to abandon this attempt to subjugate Russia, and by extension China. To preserve, as long as possible, the illusion of Ukrainian success they are holding an indefensible 1,000-mile perimeter around central Ukraine. Ukrainian armies are therefore dispersed and unable to make strategically effective counter-attacks.
The Russians have only to wait in most of the Ukraine while they eliminate 60,000 or more Ukrainian soldiers still concentrated in the Donbass. The Russians are making war carefully. They have not deployed superior numbers in the Ukraine. They have followed their military doctrine of bypassing resistance whilst herding their opponents into a doomed encirclement or ‘cauldron’. They are not wrecking ‘enemy’ infrastructure as we did across the Middle East. Nor do they regard the Ukraine as ‘enemy’ territory to be wrecked.
Truth may be the first casualty of war, but it seems reasonable to suppose that the Russians have kept losses to all participants well down below what western military tactics would have achieved. The exception is the treatment meted out to the Azov battalion in Mariupol by the hardened and surprisingly effective Donbass and Chechen ‘militias’.
THE PROPAGANDA WAR
Added to this difference in military practice are the normal cock-ups and failures when any peacetime army goes to war. These have been seized upon by the western mainstream media. They have treated their public to an extraordinary repeat of the hysterical propaganda supporting the Globalist Covid PsyOp (Psychological Operation). The same people who brought us Russia Gate, Trump Derangement Syndrome, COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates have also promoted the current ‘Putin is losing’ narrative. The big danger is that the neocons interpret Russian restraint as weakness.
To veterans of the Covid misinformation campaigns it is all very familiar. We even see the same reuse of pictures of alleged victims in different places and times. Other treats include excerpts from video games and staged scenes of disaster such as maternity units with no signs of medical equipment or indeed victims. The famous Snake Island saga and the heroic ‘Ghost of Kiev’ episode have been similarly busted.
However, a few more serious points deserve to be made about the Information War which Russia is supposed to have lost. Firstly, there is the effect on western populations of the imminent collapse of the ‘Ukraine is Winning’ narrative.
Nazi Germany fought for six years, but suffered half of all war deaths in the last nine months of the war, after the failed attempt on Hitler’s life in the summer of 1944 registered the German Military’s understanding that the war was lost. In these last months, Germans were subjected to an extraordinary propaganda effort to convince them that new weapons, or dissension between Russia and the West, offered a realistic prospect of German success.
When the final collapse occurred, Germans suffered a lasting psychological shock. They realized they had just been lied into making hopeless and useless sacrifices.
Trust in the state is already under increasing strain here after the Covid scam. I attach a link below to a short video by British comedian Russell Brand showing how low the credibility of governments and Big Pharma now is as the truth behind the Covid propaganda surfaces.
Is it too much to suppose that disillusionment after the Ukraine’s collapse will be similar?
The next obvious point is that Russia is not losing the information wars in three crucial areas - dissident western media (censored and persecuted but right about Covid, and now right about the Ukraine too), Russia itself, and the world outside the West.
Let’s just stop to consider what these audiences are seeing. Right now, many media overseas, especially in Russia and in China, are running footage of Ukrainians killing Russian prisoners of war. This is unfortunately highly likely to be genuine. Genuine for certain are stories of Ukrainian atrocities told by Russian (and Greek) refugees from Mariopol. The Ukrainians have resorted to human shield tactics, especially using Russian speakers as shields, and have deliberately located remaining military assets in civilian areas.
Combined with bitterly resented sanctions on international travel for ordinary Russians and systematic discrimination against Russian performers and athletes, these actions have consolidated Russian opinion behind their government and president. Which is exactly what any student of history, especially Russian history, would expect.
The western attempt to demonise Putin as a mad dictator out of touch with the Russian people is so ludicrous as to be counterproductive. Impartial observers should at least understand that Putin is much more restrained and measured than others in the Russian deep state, let alone the frankly unhinged neocon brethren in the West. One of them, Sullivan, said publicly that the US will go on until it has destroyed the Russian government. Unsurprisingly Putin reportedly has an 80% approval rating, while Biden sinks below 30%.
Why isn’t the killing of Russian POWs being discussed by our media, if only to debunk it? Is our MSM narrative pure but brittle propaganda? It seems that way to the rest of the world.
BIO LABS AND THE BIDEN TAPE
Before tackling the failure of the West’s so-called ‘nuclear option’ sanctions, it is worth digressing to consider what other unpleasant consequences may flow from the approaching Ukrainian collapse once the Russians are free to gather information there.
Firstly, there really were over 20 US controlled and operated biolabs in the Ukraine. One of the compensations of recording and discussing such a grim situation is to welcome the accelerating rate at which tin-foil-hat ‘conspiracy theories’ become officially true.
The Russians accused the Americans of developing biological weapons in these biolabs. The western MSM obediently moved to smear these allegations as another ‘conspiracy theory’. But then Victoria Nuland, no less, the US neocon architect of the 2014 coup, wrecked everything by agreeing that the biolabs did exist and did contain dangerous materials. Presumably this was an attempt at damage limitation ahead of Russian proofs.
If, a big if, the Russians find evidence that Ukrainian labs worked on the coronavirus (always a plausible alternative to the Wuhan Lab narrative) or smallpox (remember Bill Gates speculating about a smallpox outbreak last year?), or any bioweapon designed to kill specific ethnic groups – Slavs for example – then the ‘information war’ finally fails.
As part of the set-to over the US biolabs in the Ukraine, Mitt Romney absurdly accused Tulsie Gabbard, the prominent Democrat ‘anti-war’ politician, of treason. Which brings us on to another conspiracy theory that also just turned out to be true.
Just weeks before the US Presidential election in 2020, the New York Post published a story about the Democratic presidential candidate’s son, Hunter Biden, leaving a compromising laptop at a repair shop.
On Hunter’s laptop were enough emails, if genuine, to submerge the Biden campaign in scandal. The laptop allegedly included emails relating to ‘The Big Man’ (Joe Biden) getting a 10% cut of a deal in the Ukraine, to Hunter’s own sinecure at an oil and gas company in the Ukraine profiting by siphoning off Russian gas intended for the Ukraine for resale via Poland, and to sexual and drug related transgressions, if not actual crimes. Indeed, Hunter’s emails even include procuring funding for the US biolabs. Joe Biden had been vice president when the West moved in on the Ukraine in 2014 and so was ideally placed to help himself there.
Not to worry. Big Tech and the other MSM moved to bury the story before it could harm the Democratic campaign. Twitter even suspended the New York Post’s account. Job done, and a presidential election almost certainly stolen.
Now the New York Times has confirmed that the Hunter Biden lap top material is one hundred percent genuine and on the up and up, as the Americans say. Another conspiracy theory turns out to be, er, true. The truth is that Biden, Pelosi, Romney and Kerry all have offspring fishing in the cesspool of Ukrainian corruption, and the rest of the world knows it.
When you see Biden telling soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division that they are going to the Ukraine, or claiming that the Russian Government needs to be overthrown, you are looking at a man who has a lot to hide. Both statements have been categorically disowned and denied by US officials, and then reiterated by Biden, just to add to the prevailing confusion.
THE ROAD TO WWIII?
it is of course quite possible that Joe Biden is just senile. He may simply be repeating discussion points vaguely heard during strategic discussions he can’t actually follow. Meanwhile the neocons are moving thousands of US soldiers and warplanes, munitions etc. into Poland. This is despite the fact that the West has no fundamental interest in the Ukraine, or indeed in war. Polls show no interest at all in America for a war, except amongst aging baby boomers who can’t overcome the cold war imprinting of their youths.
The neocons and the WEF elites are contemplating invading what will soon be Russian-held Ukraine. They are interpreting Russia’s careful and cautious behaviour in the Ukraine as a sign of weakness. So they may think this is an opportunity to finish off Russia. And Poland’s government is going on about seizing the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad (formerly Konigsberg in German East Prussia). If they try to lie us into war, again, it could well be a classic example of a grave miscalculation based on believing one’s own propaganda.
Did the Russians anticipate that Poland would run the risk of becoming a glowing wasteland by allowing itself to be used as a staging post for NATO aggression? Well, it is unsafe to assume they don’t have a plan. The fact that Russia’s Ukrainian operation has relied (successfully) on relatively modest numbers of second-tier and militia units suggests that their first-tier forces are positioned to act in the next phase of war if, heaven forfend, the psychopaths in the State Department and the WEF manage to start their longed for WWIII.
Meanwhile Russia has declared the end of the first phase of its military operation. Phase two will be the destruction of the Ukrainian forces in the Donbass. It will probably be over within weeks, too soon for the West to do much about it. And there we leave the military side of the war for the time being.
THE FAILURE OF WESTERN SANCTIONS
Henry Kissinger, the father of western geopolitical theory, said that he who controls the food supply controls the country, he who controls energy supplies controls the world, but he who controls money controls everything. In here somewhere is the key to explaining why globalist elites thought that Russia and Putin could be brought down by their sanctions.
A related approach to understanding this is to consider the role of long-established old money elites in the West. These have been in a position of largely undisturbed influence and in some degree power for many generations.
With the rise of the WEF, these oligarchic elites – also known as the ‘Davos Crowd’ - have stepped from behind the curtain and taken on a more public role as promoters of the totalitarian Great Reset. It has long been understood that politicians and officials in the West’s corrupt representative democracies follow the wishes of moneyed interests.
But in Russia and China the state has demonstrated that it has its own oligarchs under control. Uppity oligarchs in both countries have been suppressed when expedient. One interpretation is that the West’s elites assumed that inflicting massive losses on Russian oligarchs through sanctions would result in their overthrowing Putin. They assumed Putin must just be another bought-and-paid-for politician just like many in the US and the EU. If so, the West’s elites made an error based on their contempt for, and ignorance of, others.
What has actually happened, and it is not understood here, is that the rest of the world has turned its back on the West and is largely working with Russia. It shows up in the UN vote condemning Russia where countries representing half the world abstained. Basically, the West (including Australasia and Japan (?)) accounts for 1 billion people out of over seven billion people on Earth. The rest are not interested in the ascendancy of western monied interests whose increasingly totalitarian agenda is heavily influenced by a lunatic Malthusian conviction that there should be a lot fewer people in the world in future.
China is backing Russia. Its vast markets and those of the Global South will soak up Russia’s exports of energy and raw materials. It’s pretty obvious that the WEF and the neocons will try to use sanctions against China too, if they can break Russia. The Germans may have fecklessly closed down their nuclear power stations and kept Nordstream II off line, an insane policy, but Power of Siberia II is being built to China in real time. China and India and most other countries are not obeying sanctions. Russia is running very roughly a $20 billion monthly balance of trade surplus even after heavily discounting their oil to get sales.
Russian exports are being paid for in non-western currencies outside the West’s sanctions, including in particular the Chinese yuan, but also Indian rupees and other local currencies. After all, people aren’t allowed to use dollars or euros because of the sanctions. And what central bank will want them? The West just showed that it simply steals countries’ foreign reserves in those currencies. Better to hold other currencies or gold.
THE END OF THE PETRODOLLAR
Of particular note is the collapse of the West in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia was key to Kissinger’s rescue of the dollar as a currency after the US defaulted on its Bretton Woods obligation to back dollars with gold in 1971. Saudi Arabia agreed only to take dollars for their oil. Everybody therefore needed dollars. Volker then saved the domestic value of the petrodollar by putting interest rates up to 20%. Now this is all in doubt.
The Saudis refused to take Biden’s post-Ukraine call, and the rest of the Middle East seems to mainly be following suit. The West used its unipolar moment from the 1990s, and especially after the 9/11 false flag, to attack the infrastructure, stability and population of as many Middle Eastern countries as they could. Our absence will not be mourned there.
The Saudis just announced (apparently) the suspension of hostilities with the Yemen, where the US and UK deep-states have helped to kill far more people than are likely to have died in the Ukraine. All to the indifference of the myopic UK media and populace. That may well mean a deal is being done with Iran, Yemen’s sponsor, undoing decades of US-fomented dissension in the region. The Middle East, and the Global South, may be moving towards a new non-WEF world order headed by China, flanked by Russia and probably India.
GOLD AND THE RUSSIAN RUBLE
Even Europe is breaking sanctions by continuing to import from Russia the resources that it needs to survive, especially gas, but also oil, coal, and many metals and minerals including, for example, neon which is a key ingredient in semiconductor chip manufacture and is 90% produced in Russia and the Ukraine – in Mariupol in fact.
Russia is simply not exporting its fertiliser (produced from hydrocarbon feedstock as our mal-educated political elites probably didn’t even realise). After the WEF/Davos sabotage of international supply chains under cover of the Covid PsyOp - which has not been repaired – we now face food shortages as well as further supply chain disruption as the real new world order collectively isolates the resource-poor formerly-dominant Western countries.
The UK and the EU are on Russia’s Unfriendly Nations list. Within weeks such countries will have to pay for their purchases in rubles or gold. I attach a link to a post discussing the profound implications of this move from Tom Luongo’s Gold Goats n Guns site:
Russia has announced last week that it will buy gold at 5,000 rubles per gram. This was equivalent a week or so ago, at the then exchange rate of roughly 100 rubles to the dollar, to just over $1500 per ounce. This is less than the current market price of just over $1900 per ounce. Obviously, people will prefer to pay in rubles rather than undervalued gold.
And, naturally, European governments, most recently France’s, have refused to pay in rubles. But it is hard to see that attitude persisting as the gas pipelines empty out.
Rubles are not exactly a drug on the market. The Chinese have a lot and some other countries have some, but acquiring them will involve sanctions busting, including making non-Swift payments. When the West imposed its sanctions, the ruble briefly fell from the pre-war exchange rate of around 75 to the dollar to over 120. But it swiftly recovered to around a hundred last week and around 85 this week.
As the ruble approaches its old parity, or even strengthens further, the Russian offer to buy gold at 5000 rubles a gram will move higher than the current market price. Further ruble appreciation, or a higher Russian buying price in subsequent months, will result in Russia hoovering up physical gold. It would drive up the value of its, and China’s, huge gold reserves. It could break the LBMA (London Bullion Market Association) and Comex paper gold markets in London and New York.
Western pre-eminence has been based on manipulating and creating unsound money and foisting it on producers of real things on terms favourable to western bankers, middlemen and corporations at the expense of producers and productive people everywhere. Mountains of debt have been created out of nothing in our financial centres while suppressing real commodities and real money, especially gold. This game may soon be up.
However grim the current situation may be, Russia’s actions could well be the beginning of the end for exploitative FIAT (paper) money systems. Hopefully Davos’s plans to replace them with sinister, controlling Central Bank Digital Currencies will be forestalled. A return to real money creates a much more hopeful future for the ‘99%’ in worldwide populations.
If money is once again based on real things, in this case gold, then Kissinger’s dictum, that the people who control the world’s money and therefore ‘everything’, puts control in the hands of the same people who supply the world with food and fuel. And that is not ‘us’.
A new world is taking shape before our eyes and we are not going to be at the centre of it. Of course, we could wreck it all by forcing WWIII upon Russia. If the war spreads, would Western Ukraine could become a cauldron in which thousands of American and Polish troops became encircled? The neocons would then have nothing left but going nuclear.
Unfortunately, as Neil Oliver points out in his recent piece from GB News, it is easy to foresee a neocon/Davos attempt to wreck a world that the West can no longer dominate.
Malign WEF oligarchs would not mind a heavy death toll, so long as they preserved their power. Nevertheless, Davos has almost certainly already failed in its objective of creating a world-wide technocratic totalitarian state. After a period of suffering, there is a good chance of a massacre of all the woke, climate and globalist narratives stifling the West.
Can I just say, rather than repeat the whole story of the sinister WEF and of Putin’s resistance to it, that readers may want to read www.awah.uk post from last year ‘Putin says No to the WEF’s Great Reset’. It has had far more ‘reads’ than any other post on this site so it must be good!
MUCH BETTER OFF IN A FREE SOCIETY
Our societies are not free. That is because most people wrongly believe officials, politicians and state-connected corporations have a mystical entitlement to rob and bully individuals, without any legal right of self-defense or redress for their victims. This unfair arrangement may have been tenable in the past when Classical Liberal governments were small and affected few people. Now it is just an immoral and destructive blight on human flourishing.
Let me once again remind readers that the whole sorry mess in the Ukraine, which has led to the real threat of nuclear annihilation for the third time in my lifetime, simply could not occur in a world dominated by free, private law societies. (Click here for my www.awah.uk posts ‘Sociopaths and the State of Fear’, ‘War is the Health of the State’ and ‘Defending Freedom against State Aggressors’.)
If the modern state were any use at all, which it is not, it would still be unviable. That is because it enables psychopaths and lunatics to accumulate at the top level of huge over-armed military systems to the point where an inevitable mis-calculation will get us all killed.