Showing posts with label Sovereignty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sovereignty. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 3, 2025

Latin America Facing the Storm: Rallying the Global Majority | Alexander Dugin

Trump is threatening to invade Venezuela, Colombia, and Mexico simultaneously under the pretext of fighting drug cartels. It looks like he is beginning his own “special military operation.” If he had chosen Canada and Greenland as his targets, that would deserve full support. That would be a blow against globalism. As it stands, it is pure imperialism, a direct intervention.

» We must all show what a global majority truly is. «

An attack on countries that clearly lean towards multipolarity is a blow against us—against greater humanity. Israel attacked Gaza, Lebanon, Yemen, Iran, and Syria. And the Islamic world stayed silent, allowing it to happen. 
 
»
Adelante, tú solo: El mundo te va a quitar hasta la última luz. «
Go ahead, all by yourself: The world will beat the last daylight out of you.
Nicolás Maduro, President of Venezuela, December 2, 2025. 

» Invade Canada, not Venezuela. «
 
Now the United States is preparing to invade three countries of Latin American civilization at once. If they follow the principle of each for itself, this will strengthen Western hegemony for a while longer. The countries of Latin America must unite and present an ultimatum to the United States. Right now, we must all—every BRICS country—show what a global majority truly is.

dancing to changa-tronics in Caracas

»
 
Suspend Sec. Hegseth and Admiral Bradley for their war crimes off the coast of Venezuela! «
 Col. Douglas Mcgregor, December 3, 2025.
 
See also:

Monday, October 6, 2025

Mexico's Economic Rise Shifts Power from the US | Richard D. Wolff

Mexico, often viewed as dependent on the US, holds a significant edge in the global economy, with the US relying more on Mexico than most Americans realize. Beyond avocados and automobiles, Mexico is a vital hub for US supply chains in electronics, pharmaceuticals, automotive, aerospace, medical devices, textiles, consumer goods, and information/communications technology. As the US depends on Mexico, Mexico has strategically built leverage, shifting focus from politics to economics.
 

Mexico’s rise as an economic powerhouse challenges its subordinate image. Its leverage in trade, energy, and geopolitics makes it vital to the US. Rising labor and environmental demands could disrupt supply chains. The era of US dominance is fading, replaced by interdependence, and Mexico wields unprecedented influence. A fracture in this delicate relationship could swiftly impact the US. 
 
Mexico, once a trade partner, is now a force reshaping trade and energy policies, catching the US unprepared. The US has long focused on migration and border security, overlooking intricate economic ties. Mexico is a cornerstone of US production, driven by cost-effective labor and trade agreements like the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA, 2020).
 
 
This dependency stems from lower wages and proximity, but this corporate strategy has created vulnerabilities. US companies’ reliance on Mexico’s manufacturing gives Mexico significant leverage. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA,1994) boosted trade but moved US factories to Mexico for cheaper labor, eroding American jobs. USMCA preserved this structure. Mexico, no longer just a low-cost hub, has diversified into energy, consumer markets, and geopolitics, prioritizing labor rights and domestic growth, threatening the cheap labor model and US supply chains.
 
US policies, like subsidized agricultural exports, have displaced Mexican farmers, driving migration. US firms’ job relocation to Mexico exploits low-wage workers, creating an underclass on both sides of the border, with migration as a symptom of economic disparities.

Mexico, a key US oil supplier, is asserting control over its energy resources, nationalizing and tightening oversight, challenging US corporations. Its push into renewables diversifies its portfolio, enhancing global leverage. Prioritizing domestic energy could disrupt US imports, forcing a strategic shift.

 Mexico has surpassed China as the top US trade partner.
militarily occupy Mexico and use it as a substitute for China in its economic system. «  

Mexican labor movements demand better wages and conditions, undermining the cheap labor model, potentially raising US consumer prices. Environmental activists push for sustainable practices, challenging resource exploitation.
 
Amid the US-China trade war, Mexico is a nearshoring hub, benefiting from USMCA and proximity. China’s investments in Mexico create a trade triangulation, with Chinese components assembled in Mexico for US export, bypassing tariffs. Mexico negotiates favorable terms with both powers, gaining strategic autonomy.

 
 
Richard D. Wolff, American Marxist economist known for works like "Democracy at Work,"
is teaching at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and The New School.
 

Friday, September 12, 2025

Defeating the Enemy Without Fighting | Henry Kissinger

Rarely did Chinese statesmen risk the outcome of a conflict on a single all-or-nothing clash; elaborate multiyear maneuvers were closer to their style. Where the Western tradition prized the decisive clash of forces emphasizing feats of heroism, the Chinese ideal stressed subtlety, indirection, and the patient accumulation of relative advantage.

This contrast is reflected in the respective intellectual games favored by each civilization. China’s most enduring game is wei qi (圍棋, pronounced roughly “way chee,” and often known in the West by a variation of its Japanese name, go). Wei qi translates as “a game of surrounding pieces”; it implies a concept of strategic encirclement. 

The outcome of a Wei Qi game between two expert players.
Black has won by a slight margin.
David Lai (2004) - Learning from the Stones: A Go Approach to Mastering China’s Strategic Concept, Shi.
Carlisle, PA: US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute.

The board, a grid of nineteen-by-nineteen lines, begins empty. Each player has 180 pieces, or stones, at his disposal, each of equal value with the others
. The players take turns placing stones at any point on the board, building up positions of strength while working to encircle and capture the opponent’s stones. Multiple contests take place simultaneously in different regions of the board. The balance of forces shifts incrementally with each move, as the players implement strategic plans and react to each other’s initiatives. At the end of a well-played game, the board is filled by partially interlocking areas of strength. The margin of advantage is often slim, and to the untrained eye, the identity of the winner is not always immediately obvious.

Chess, on the other hand, is about total victory. The purpose of the game is checkmate, to put the opposing king into a position where he cannot move without being destroyed. The vast majority of games end in total victory achieved by attrition or, more rarely, a dramatic, skillful maneuver. The only other possible outcome is a draw, meaning the abandonment of the hope for victory by both parties.

If chess is about the decisive battle, wei qi is about the protracted campaign. The chess player aims for total victory. The wei qi player seeks relative advantage. In chess, the player always has the capability of the adversary in front of him; all the pieces are always fully deployed.

» Ultimate excellence lies not in winning every battle but in defeating the enemy without ever fighting.
The highest form of warfare is to attack the enemy’s strategy itself. «
The Art of War, Sun Tzu.

The wei qi player needs to assess not only the pieces on the board but the reinforcements the adversary is in a position to deploy. Chess teaches the Clausewitzian concepts of “center of gravity” and the “decisive point”—the game usually beginning as a struggle for the center of the board. Wei qi teaches the art of strategic encirclement. Where the skillful chess player aims to eliminate his opponent’s pieces in a series of head-on clashes, a talented wei qi player moves into “empty” spaces on the board, gradually mitigating the strategic potential of his opponent’s pieces. Chess produces single-mindedness; wei qi generates strategic flexibility.

A similar contrast exists in the case of China’s distinctive military theory (中国军事思想). Its foundations were laid during a period of upheaval, when ruthless struggles between rival kingdoms decimated China’s population. Reacting to this slaughter (and seeking to emerge victorious from it), Chinese thinkers developed strategic thought that placed a premium on victory through psychological advantage and preached the avoidance of direct conflict.
 
» US imperialism is a paper tiger. «
 Mao Zedong, July 14, 1956.
 
On his secret mission to establish a US-China alliance against the Soviet Union, US National Security
 Advisor Henry Kissinger meets with Zhou Enlai (Premier of the PRC since 1949) in Beijing on July 9, 1971.
 
Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party Mao Zedong (founding leader of the PRC since 1949)
welcomes President of the United States Richard Nixon (1969-1974) in Beijing on February 21, 1972.
 
Xi Jinping, President of the People's Republic of China (since 2013), invites
94-year-old former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to Beijing on July 19, 2017. 
 
The seminal figure in this tradition is known to history as Sun Tzu (or “Master Sun”), author of the famed treatise The Art of War. Intriguingly, no one is sure exactly who he was. Since ancient times, scholars have debated the identity of The Art of War’s author and the date of its composition. The book presents itself as a collection of sayings by one Sun Wu, a general and wandering military advisor from the  Spring and Autumn period of Chinese history (770–476 B.C. ), as recorded by his disciples.

[…] Well over two thousand years after its composition, this volume of epigrammatic observations on strategy, diplomacy, and war—written in classical Chinese, halfway between poetry and prose—remains a central text of military thought. Its maxims found vivid expression in the twentieth-century Chinese civil war 
(人民战争) at the hands of Sun Tzu’s student Mao Zedong, and in the Vietnam wars, as Ho Chi Minh and Vo Nguyen Giap employed Sun Tzu’s principles of indirect attack and psychological combat (逸待劳) against France and then the United States.

 

Sunday, September 7, 2025

State Central Banking vs Private Central Banking | Wen Tiejun

Let's delve into the core reasons underlying the strategic confrontation between the People's Republic of China and the United States of America, as this unveils a significant systemic discrepancy: [...] The issuance of the renminbi (RMB) is fundamentally based on the authority of the Chinese government, specifically through the People's Bank of China (PBC). The basis for the issuance of the renminbi is definitely not gold. The reason this money is valuable is because it is a sovereign currency issued by the state and backed by state authority. Empowering a sovereign currency establishes credit. The currency creates credit, and the sole resource available is political authority. Thus, political authority, governmental power, and the administration in control align with the currency system.
Wen Tiejun (温铁军) is a Chinese agricultural economist and a professor at the Renmin
University of China, best known for his studies on the Three Rural Issues in Mainland China.
 
On the other hand, the source of the US dollar's credit is an institution established by private bankers, not a country. Pay attention, this difference matters: The US dollar is actually issued by an institution called the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is neither an official entity nor a government institution; instead, it is an organization operated by private bankers. This particular organization possesses the authority to issue the national currency and determines the financial policy of the United States, which the government then implements.
 
 
» The root cause of global chaos is financial capital globalization, which is
supported by military hegemony. « Wen Tiejun's complete discourse video.  
 
This occurrence is quite rare across the globe, both in terms of nations and systems. In the majority of countries, it is the political power of the state that grants authority to its national currency, forming a sovereign currency. In a select number of nations, such as the United States, institutions are established by private banking entities, and the government subsequently enacts the policies of these private banker collectives.

[...] Therefore, throughout the extensive history of the United States, numerous influential presidents have attempted to reclaim monetary authority. All of them ultimately failed. Almost every president who was resolute in their determination to reclaim monetary authority ended up deceased, including the widely recognized Kennedy assassination. These events all share similar demands to restore monetary rights back to the government, yet none of these plans have been fully realized.

[...] China continues to maintain its national control over financial capital. For what specific purpose? In recent years, when China faced global crises and a decline in exports, the Chinese government mainly relied on national finance, investing in infrastructure that may not yield immediate profits. A straightforward example is the allocation of funds for the construction of roads and railways in rural, mountainous, and even desert regions. All these investments cannot be recovered in the short term, and it's also difficult to recover them in the long term. So, should we invest? We should, because if we don't, businesses will have no market and workers will become unemployed. On the other hand, the government would have to use its finances to pay for unemployment benefits. Rather than doing that, it's better to invest. 

» The United States exploits the world's wealth with the help of "seigniorage." It costs only about 17 cents to produce a 100 dollar bill, but other countries had to pony up 100 dollar of actual goods in order to obtain one. It was pointed out more than half a century ago, that the United States enjoyed exorbitant privilege and deficit without tears created by its dollar, and used
the worthless paper note to plunder the resources and factories of other nations. The hegemony of the US dollar 
is the main source of instability and uncertainty in the world economy. «
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, 2023. 

[...] I perceive this as one of Trump's most proactive and forward-thinking policies—to focus on the advancement of infrastructure development. His most significant challenge is that the US lacks the so-called state-owned enterprises (SOEs) similar to those in China. Additionally, it doesn't have a state-owned banking system. China's system uses state banks to receive currency from the government, which is directly paid to state-owned enterprises. These enterprises then directly engage in infrastructure construction, maintaining China's economic growth and sustaining employment. The US uses private banks to issue more currency to buy government bonds, which then leads to a virtual capital expansion, with two hands shifting the crisis to the whole world.

[...] Analyzing this with American theory suggests China's state-owned banks and state-owned enterprises are inefficient. They don't provide tax revenue and occupy a large amount of capital. But just because financial resources are utilized doesn't mean nothing is produced. A significant amount of wealth is indeed generated, but this wealth manifests in the form of airports, seaports, train stations, highways, and high-speed railway systems. None of these investments can generate returns in the immediate short term. Consequently, a substantial amount of capital in China's state-owned banks is currently tied up. According to general free-market economic theory, those that can't be recovered soon should all go bankrupt. As long as you genuinely and sincerely execute what is purportedly stated in the media today, China's economy should have gone bankrupt long ago because its large investments can't be recovered quickly.

»
I think he [US Fed chairman Jerome Powell] is a very stupid person, actually. «

Not-calling-the-shots POTUS, July 13, 2025.
 
[...] How Trump might approach the situation? He doesn't have China's methods. So, how will he do it? By relying on private bankers to reform America's railways? How long will it take to recoup the investment? Why would private individuals invest in rebuilding American roads and airports? Private investment is dropping. This is similar to what's happening in China: whenever there's an economic crisis, China's private investment decline is inevitable. So, how do you counter it? You have to rely on state investment to push it up. One goes down, the other goes up. That's how it is. 
 
»
The US uses private banks to issue more currency to buy government bonds, which then 
leads to a virtual capital expansion, with two hands shifting the crisis to the whole world. «
 
A significant number of individuals are critical of China's system. I don't intend to imply anything else; I'm merely suggesting that you observe the actual impact. I also don't wish to defend this so-called closed system of China because I equally dislike this bureaucratic system, but it actually maintains the nation's foundational employment and crucial economic development.
  

Friday, August 29, 2025

Who Invented BRICS | Yuliana Titaeva

Many people believe that the idea of this strategic alliance was proposed in 2001 by Goldman Sachs analyst Jim O’Neill. In fact, he only came up with a successful name—BRIC (“brick”), formed from the first letters of the countries. The point was that these four economies would be the engines of global growth in the 21st century.
 
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit from August 31 to September 1 in Tianjin.
 
But in reality, the idea of an alliance between Russia, India, and China was first voiced by… Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. In 1920, Lenin wrote a “Letter to the Indian Revolutionary Association in which he directly addressed the Indian people, called for liberation from British colonialism, and emphasized that India’s struggle was part of the world revolution. For Lenin, Russia had to be the natural ally of India and China in this struggle.

» The spiral of history. «  
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, 1920. 
 
Of course, Lenin thought in terms of revolutions and class struggle, not trade blocs. But still, this was the first articulation of the "Russia–India–China" connection as a historical and political project. He was the first to see in these three civilizational giants natural allies against Western hegemony.

SCO Unites to Crush NATO’s Pressure, Pepe Escobar, August 29, 2025.
 
Seventy-eight years later, in 1998, the foreign minister of the new Russia, Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov, formalized the idea of the strategic triangle RIC (Russia–India–China) as a foreign policy concept. In 2006, the tropical giant Brazil joined the "triangle," and the four countries turned the abbreviation into a real international club. Today, before our very eyes, BRICS is beginning to perceive itself as an alliance against Western hegemony. The spiral of history.

 
 
See also:

Monday, July 28, 2025

The Art of the $1.3 Trillion 'Screw You' Deal: EU Pays Up, US Gives Nothing

The $1.3 trillion US–EU trade agreement, reached after a tense 40-minute meeting held between US President Trump and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen at Trump’s Scottish golf course on July 27, avoids a full-blown trade war. 
 
Trump celebrates his "biggest trade deal" yet.
 
As expected, Brussels, the tribute-bound US vassal, folded under pressure, and the circus ringmaster turned European diplomacy into an intergalactic howler: The EU accepted a 15% US tariff on its exports—while the US kept zero tariffs in return. Europe agreed to invest $600 billion into the US economy, pledged to buy hundreds of billions' worth of overpriced American weapons, and committed to $750 billion in US LNG purchases—$250 billion over the next three years alone—because apparently that's better than cheap gas through Nord Stream. In exchange, the US gave... absolutely nothing.
 
Von der Leyen, "You're known as a tough negotiator and dealmaker." Trump, "But fair." 
Von der Leyen, "And fair." Trump adds, "That's less important." Room erupts in laughter.
 
This 'screw you' deal and EU bailout for the US is seen as an absolute geopolitical and geoeconomic win for Trump, reinforcing his strategy of tariff threats and pressure, echoed in recent deals with Japan, Vietnam, and others.  
 
Brussels' Barbie—Trump’s total contempt: incompetent, corrupt, compromised.
 
Marine Le Pen, a veteran right-wing politician from France, calls the deal a political, economic, and moral "fiasco", and "an outright surrender for French industry and for our energy and military sovereignty"; Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov predicts "it will accelerate Europe’s deindustrialization".
 
Reference:
 
It is difficult, indeed.
 
了解你的敌人
Know your Enemies.
 

Thursday, April 17, 2025

China is Ready for Any Type of Conflict and Economic Decoupling | Victor Gao

China will fight to the end, as the government has declared, and it has now imposed a retaliatory tariff of up to 125 percent on all US exports to China. If things are not handled properly, this could mean a complete halt to China-US trade—both ways. No goods will be exported from the United States to China, and everything made in China will cease to be sent to the United States. This is decoupling. 

»
 In essence, China is now declaring that it is prepared to fight to the end
—whether in a trade war, tariff war, technology war, or even a real war. «

If the United States truly welcomes this, China will reciprocate, leading to the breakup of China-US relations. Whether this situation evolves from peace to war remains to be seen, but we must all be prepared. In essence, China is now declaring that it is prepared to fight to the end—whether in a trade war, tariff war, technology war, or even a real war. So, the ball is in Trump's court. He decides, and China will reciprocate. China will never succumb to US pressure.


This is the moment of truth. China wants to defend free trade; the United States wants to destroy it. The rest of the world is watching, and a choice will be made by the end of the day. However, China will not accept being held at gunpoint, forced to swallow impossible demands. China is a country that values dignity and decency above economic gains or losses. So, if you want to hold a gun to China’s head, China will hold a gun to yours. If you want to strike China on the cheek, China will strike back. That is the decision and determination of the Chinese nation.

Ref
erence:

» Americans, you don't need a tariff. You need a revolution. «

They rob you blind, and you thank them for it. That's a tragedy. That's a scam. That's why I'm saying this right now: Americans, you don't need a tariff. You need a revolution. For decades, your government and oligarchs shipped your jobs to China—not for diplomacy, not for peace, but to exploit cheap labor. And in the process, they hollowed out your middle class, crushed your working class, and told you to be proud while they sold your future for profit. 

Yes, China made money. But we used it to build roads and lift millions out of poverty. From healthcare to raising living standards, we reinvested in our people. My family benefited from it too. What did your oligarchs do? They bought yachts, private jets, and mansions with golf course driveways. They manipulated markets, dodged taxes, and poured billions into endless wars. And you? You got stagnant wages, crippling healthcare costs, cheap dopamine, debt, and poverty wrapped in a flag—made in China—while they picked your pocket. 

As part of the growing 'Trade War' TikTok trend, a Chinese factory has gone viral after 
revealing that the true cost of producing a $38,000 Hermès Birkin bag is just $1,400 
— and now, high tariffs are ringing the death knell for Western luxury brands.

For 40 years, both China and the United States benefited from trade and manufacturing, but only one of us used that wealth to build. This isn’t China’s fault. This is yours. You let this happen. You let the oligarchs feed you lies—while they made you fat, poor, and addicted. Now they blame China for the mess they created. You don’t need another tariff. You need to wake up. You need to take your country back. I think you need a revolution.

Saturday, April 12, 2025

The Last Tariff: China Ended the US’s Trade War With a Whisper | Gerry Nolan

It happened with no fanfare. No saber-rattling. No choreographed press conference. Just one quiet statement from Beijing’s Customs Tariff Commission: "Tariffs on US goods will rise to 125% — and this will be our final adjustment. Regardless of future US actions, China will no longer respond." In Washington, they saw a concession. In reality? Beijing walked away from the last imperial leverage DC had left.

 » Tariffs on US goods will rise to 125% — and this will be our final adjustment.
Regardless of future US actions, China will no longer respond. «
China's Customs Tariff Commission, April 11, 2025.

In Trump's chaotic circus, tariffs are sold as economic patriotism, blunt-force trauma marketed as “tough negotiation.” But tariffs are the last resort of a hollowed-out empire that no longer produces, competes, or innovates, only thinks it can still dictate.

Trump’s latest move, slapping a 125% tariff on Chinese goods, was meant to flex dominance. Beijing waited, matched it perfectly, then froze the board. "There is no possibility of market acceptance of US goods in China." Translation: “We don’t need you anymore.” No further hikes are necessary. The US is de facto cut off from the colossal Chinese market. That's not de-escalation. That's de-dollarization in practice. Geoeconomic Aikido, using the empire’s aggression to accelerate the break from it.

Chinese Embassy in the US, April 10, 2025.

Washington still believes in a world that no longer exists. It thinks it can dictate trade terms while running trillion-dollar deficits, threaten its way into solvency while its factories rust, and that China will forever tolerate economic warfare just to retain access to Walmart shelves and US Treasury bonds, bonds that are a ticking time bomb for the hollowed empire.

But that world is gone. China has reoriented trade through Belt & Road. It’s fortified currency alliances with BRICS+, hardened internal markets, and invested across the Global South. Most importantly, it has shifted away from Western export dependency.


So when Beijing says, “we will ignore further US tariff moves,” it’s not a concession. It's sovereignty. The US has already been priced out, there’s no need for more theaters. This is the reckoning of a rentier empire built on financial parasitism, not production.

The definition of narcissism.

America doesn't have the tools to win a trade war, it doesn't make the tools anymore. Wall Street eviscerated its industrial base. Labor was deskilled by decades of outsourcing. Infrastructure crumbled while $10 trillion burned in forever wars. Trump’s 125% tariff isn’t policy, it’s a symptom. An empire in late stage declined. The power of Beijing’s response isn’t the tariff, it’s the refusal to respond again. No escalation. No panic. Just a clean break from a failing system.

A message to the Global South: “We won’t be dragged into Washington’s chaos. We won’t fight over a burning house. We’ll build new ones.” It's multipolar maturity. Let the US isolate itself, tariff its own supply chains, and raise rates until its middle class fractures. Beijing will trade in yuan with the Global Majority, while America tariffs itself into irrelevance.

 » The reckoning of a rentier empire built on financial parasitism, not production. « 

Markets have lost nearly $6 trillion net since February, despite brief rebounds. Wall Street knows: this isn’t 2001. China isn’t cowering. It now holds the keys to rare earths, battery tech, and semiconductors. Trump framed the tariffs as punishment for “ripping off the USA.” 
 
But who really gutted America’s industries? China? Or Goldman Sachs? Who looted pensions, turned homes into hedge fund fodder, and spent trillions on wars that only enriched Raytheon and BlackRock? The real theft wasn’t done in Beijing. It was done in boardrooms, think tanks, and Senate halls under the banner of “free markets” and “security.”

 » There is no possibility of market acceptance of US goods in China. «
The US is de facto cut off from the colossal Chinese market.

This moment isn’t the climax of a trade war. It’s the end of illusion, that the US can sanction, tariff, and bully its way to eternal dominance. Beijing just called time. 125% is the ceiling. From here forward, they won’t play the empire’s game. They're building a new one, with bricks, not bombs. With real trade, not tribute. With allies who don’t need threats to stay loyal.

 
 
Trump economic counselor Peter Navarro accuses China of killing "1 million Americans with fentanyl" and "destroying over 60,000 American factories and 5 million manufacturing jobs". Who prescribes opioids to millions of Americans, leading to addiction? Did China choose to ship these factories offshore and deindustrialize for tax evasion and cheap labor?


See also:

And, of course, no one understands tariffs—only Trump does.