Showing posts with label Multipolar Geopolitics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Multipolar Geopolitics. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 8, 2024

The US is in Decline and Desperate Need to Modernize | President of Mexico

After a report from the US State Department about the allegedly poor human rights situation in Mexico, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) launched a counterattack. He warned Washington that there was no government in the world that had the right to interfere in the politics of another nation. Only the USA has repeatedly claimed such special rights in the past. AMLO pronounced: "Mexico will not tolerate such interference. Mexico will never be a protectorate or a colony of another country. Mexico is a free, independent and sovereign country."

  » That's just how they are. They are stagnant and ossified in decadence.
They are in decline and desperately need to modernize. 
The US must change their arrogant interventionist foreign policy.  «
 Andrés Manuel López Obrador, President of Mexico - April 24, 2024.

AMLO condemned US funding of so-called NGOs
- such as terrorist groups and drug cartels - that attack Mexico's legitimate government and its courts. It is above all the USA that should not lean too far out of the window when it comes to human rights: "Imagine if we would announce that the USA are violating human rights, political rights and freedoms, that the Statue of Liberty would be an empty symbol just because they have a presidential candidate who is constantly being dragged into court. How they want to talk about human rights when they are pouring billions of dollars into wars that result in the deaths of innocent people around the world? Why don't they release Assange? Where is the freedom? "

"United States governments are meddling in the internal politics of other countries for at least two centuries. And it is not only giving opinions of good conduct as if they were the judge of the world. They are also intervening militarily in countries with governments not subject to the interests of the United States. That's the story. They used to appoint and remove presidents as they pleased. That is the history of the people of Latin America. Well, in our history they invaded us twice. The first time they forced the Mexican government to sign the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty, that is: we lost half of our territory and nine of the fifty US federal states belonged to Mexico. We have not forgotten US Invasions. We have insisted a lot and we will continue to do so: The US must change their arrogant interventionist foreign policy."
 
» Cancel NAFTA/USMCA. Ditch the dollar. Re-issue the Mexican gold peso. Join the BRICS. « 
For now these topics are official diplomatic taboos still. But chained to a sinking ship, the US' 
biggest trading partner becomes increasingly fed up with the inflation-dollar fraud, the drug-war-
pandemic-genocide economy and the insane migration industry of its northern neighbor.

"
How come they allocate so much money to war? Why they do not allocate funds to care for their young people who are suffering from drug use; unfortunately, 100,000 young people die every year from fentanyl use. But that's just how they are. And we shouldn't be surprised. That is how it has been historically. That indicates that they are stagnant, and ossified in decadence. They are in decline and desperately need to modernize."

Quoted from: 

Sunday, December 31, 2023

The Geopolitics of Distributed Heartlands │ Alexander Dugin

The fight to rule Heartland – by Sea Power from without, or in Heartland itself from within – is the main formula of geopolitical history, the very essence of geopolitics. Geopolitics is the battle for Heartland. All schools of geopolitics are founded upon and proceed from this model [...] Just as the multi-polar world arises, so does a contradiction. If we take into consideration only one Sea Power and one Heartland, then when it comes to speaking of a multi-polar world, Russia cannot possibly be the only Heartland. Russia cannot achieve a multi-polar world on its own. In the very least, multipolarity entails four or five of the most important poles in the world. Russia could be the center of this multi-polar world or only one of its poles. But Russia cannot be the only Heartland.
 
 » It is surprising that at the bottom of our politics we always find theology. «
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, Les confessions d'un revolutionnaire, 1849.

[...] Over the course of numerous discussions, conferences, speeches, lectures, and articles, I have come to the conclusion that it is high time to introduce the notion of an apportioned, or “distributed Heartland.” To this end, I think it is important to attentively examine the German geopolitics of the 1920-’30’s, which proclaimed Germany to be the European Heartland. Of interest to us is not so much Germany itself as the very possibility of considering an additional Heartland [...] A Chinese Heartland is an altogether different question. China, after all, is Rimland, a coastal zone. If we recognize China as bearing the status of a Heartland, then we are recognizing China as an independent strategic space. If we qualify China as Heartland, then we are emphasizing the conservative aspect of China – China as Land Power. But if China declares itself to be a Heartland against Russia, just as Hitler’s Germany declared itself to be the heart of Eurasia against Soviet Russia, then conflict will immediately arise.

If Russia retains the status of an independent pole, then this “distributed Heartland” acquires a completely different meaning. Then it is possible to consider such Heartlands as a Russian Heartland, as in all traditional geopolitical maps as the “geographical pivot of history”, and a European Heartland. We also arrive at considering a Chinese Heartland, and this means that we consider China as a traditional, conservative, independent, and sovereign state as it is today – and it will only become more so in the future. In the very least, it is important to reconcile the Chinese Heartland with the Russian Heartland, and partially even the European Heartland. But even this is insufficient to constructing a multi-polar world. We necessarily have to consider an Islamic Heartland (covering the historical spaces of at least 3-4 empires, stretching from Turkey to Pakistan). The concept of a distributed Heartland can further be expanded to India, and projected onto Latin America and Africa as well.

As follows, there should be an American Heartland in the multi-polar system. We have become too accustomed to thinking in the terms of classical geopolitics that the US and Anglo-Saxon world can only be Sea Power. In a multi-polar world, America will not be able to play this role, its global maritime range will naturally be reduced, thereby changing the very nature of America. As follows, an American Heartland should arise which, in a multi-polar system, should not be seen exclusively as in opposition to other Heartlands. The vote for Trump represented the contours of this American Heartland. If we begin to conceive of Heartland as a distributed type of culture associated with the reinforcement of conservative identity, then “Make America Great Again” is the thesis of an American Heartland. Stop being a Sea Power, and you will be great again.

[...] Distributed Heartland is the imperative of the new geopolitical model, of multi-polar geopolitics. I think that this concept deserves very serious cogitation, pondering, and description. There should be a number of conferences, or an even entire volume devoted to this inevitable question. The efficacy of this concept of distributed Heartland is, in my opinion, extremely important, insofar as the construction of a multi-polar world now demands clearer and more precise roadmaps.

 
See also: