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

Wednesday, January 7, 2026

After Maduro, Might Makes Right | Alexander Dugin

What does the kidnapping of the president of a sovereign country mean? Like in the era of barbarian kingdoms, Maduro was brought in and paraded through the streets of New York like a captive enemy for the amusement of the crowd. Many note that this is reminiscent of Rome in its twilight years.

 » "Reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict. The world will never be the same again. «
 
[...] And what does all this mean? [...] International law no longer exists. Appealing to the UN, asking the West to pay attention to violations of certain principles, agreements, or provisions that contradict the letter and spirit of the law — all of this is now completely futile. 
 
[...] The idea that there are certain norms and rules that can be negotiated should be left in the past once and for all. There is no international law. There is only the law of force. In a sense, it has always been this way — this is nothing new. It’s just that, at certain times, after each "reshuffling of the deck" and global conflict, when spheres of influence are redistributed, the great powers assert their right to sovereignty.  
 
» International law is always a balance of power between the victors. « 

This was the case in the First and Second World Wars. When fascist Europe became a separate entity in world politics, it demanded that the world submit to it. The world rebelled, and that power is no more. But any international law is always a balance of power between the victors. That’s the point. For more than a century, nation-states have not been sovereign actors establishing world order; world relations are shaped by ideological blocs.

[...] Trump said nothing conceptually new, but he de facto scrapped the Yalta peace, the bipolar system, the UN, and even the very idea of globalization hitherto. His position is simple: "My interests are the interests of the world hegemon. Obey me." 

À la fin, ces voleurs infâmes et perdus, Comme fruits malheureux à cet arbre pendus, Montrent bien que le crime (horrible et noire engeance) Est lui-même instrument de honte et de vengeance. Et que c’est le destin des hommes vicieux D’éprouver tôt ou tard la justice des Cieux.  In the end, these infamous and lost thieves, Like wretched fruit hanging from this tree, Show clearly that crime—horrible and black in its breed— Is itself an instrument of shame and vengeance. And that it is the destiny of vicious men To experience, sooner or later, the justice of Heaven. 
 » In the end, these infamous and lost thieves, like wretched fruit hanging from this tree... « 
The Miseries and Misfortunes of War by Jacques Callot, 1633.
 
In fact, humanity is now in a state of fundamental humiliation. Trump simply called a spade a spade. Globalists used to soften this humiliation by pretending to listen to your opinion and allowing you to participate in the process. Now that multilateralism is over, only the right of force remains, and this is an irreversible process. The world will never be the same again.

We are in the midst of a protracted, long-running Third World War, where international law simply does not exist. It will exist sometime in the future, based on the outcome of this conflict. [...] Trump is casting an arrogant challenge: "If you are winners, then win. Like me, for example. Where is your Zelensky?" 
 
 » If you are winners, then win. Where is your Zelensky? «
 
From this point of view, only when you parade Zelensky, the terrorist Malyuk, the terrorist Budanov, or Zaluzhny through Moscow in a cage, and the crowd of "Russian Romans," the inhabitants of the Third Rome, shout "shame, murderers" at them, only then will they talk to you. Perhaps on some holiday: Labor Day or Friendship of Peoples Day. Only then will we be accepted into the club of great powers. But for now, no. We are trying to convince Trump with documents that hundreds of Ukrainian drones wanted to destroy the Russian president, and the response we get is something like, "I don’t believe it. First, you set it up yourselves; second, it’s a pity it didn’t work out; and third, I know that we sent them so that your life wouldn’t be too sweet."

[...] We must defend ourselves in the war with the West, because that is where the initiative to revoke our right to sovereign policy comes from. It is time to abandon illusions about "Western partners" or "shared values." Trump is right to drop the mask of hypocrisy and nonsense about human rights: for him, America comes first. We are in a shootout: shoot or you will be killed. Trump did not even start World War III — he simply confirmed its existence.

» Then the very moment would come. ‌« RS-28 Sarmat [dubbed 'Satan II' by NATO] is Russia's most capable hypersonic thermonuclear intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). With a range of 18,000 km and traveling 27 times the speed of sound, Sarmat can extinguish any target/country/enemy anywhere on the planet within minutes with one single strike. Including the US.
»
 
In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. «
 
[...] Only war decides everything — that’s the issue. And here the question of resources arises. Apparently, we are much better off with them than we thought: over four years of war, the people have demonstrated an incredible will for sovereignty. But now, in Ukraine, the question is not about the use of sovereignty, but about its acquisition. So far, it is not enough. Sovereignty is when you draw red lines and punish those who cross them. And when we demonstrate the Burevestnik, Poseidon, or Oreshnik, but nothing happens, it ceases to count in this world of shows and short cycles.

We have put everything at stake — the existence of Russia and our people — to prove our sovereignty. [...] In this game without rules, Russia must win by any means necessary. There are no taboo topics: we can abolish the Constitution, declare a state of emergency, do away with all conventions, and do whatever is necessary to survive. If we observe propriety and lose, it will not count in our favor. But if we succeed, no matter what, the victors will not be judged. Only the defeated are judged: if we slip up, they will hold a new Nuremberg trial over us.

 
This is the seriousness of 2026: it is a year of war and extraordinary measures. Peaceful life is being completely erased, like a wet rag wiping outdated formulas off a blackboard. Everything we counted on no longer works. We are in a cowboy saloon where a shootout is taking place without rules or regulations.
 
 [...] Now, thanks to Trump and his new doctrines, the situation has changed. Trump says, "I will conquer you all, I will shoot without warning." And look what he’s doing: he really is shooting. [...] We must act just like the strongest players — the West or Trump. Do as Trump does, but with completely different content, goals, and objectives. 
 
Key Aspects of Schmitt's Großraum Theory      Critique of the Nation-State: Schmitt perceived the nation-state as increasingly incapable of representing concrete spatial reality and managing the challenges of modern international politics, particularly what he saw as the failings of liberal universalism.     Hierarchical Order: In a Großraum-based world, the principle of formal equality among sovereign states is replaced by a hierarchical structure. A predominant, hegemonic power (like the German Reich in his vision) would exist within a larger territorial space, asserting leadership over subordinate nations.     The Monroe Doctrine as a Model: Schmitt viewed the United States' Monroe Doctrine (declaring the Americas off-limits to European colonization and influence) as the classic example of a functioning Großraum: a regional power establishing a sphere of influence and excluding external interference.     Exclusion of External Powers: A core tenet of the Großraum order is the right of a hegemonic power to define the external orientation of its region and prevent "spatially alien powers" from intervening in its sphere.     Pluralistic World Order: Ultimately, Schmitt envisioned a multipolar world (a "pluriverse") characterized by several independent Großräume, which would achieve a new balance of power, contrasting with a unipolar, liberal, or Anglo-American dominated global order.
Key Aspects of Schmitt's Großraum Theory      Critique of the Nation-State: Schmitt perceived the nation-state as increasingly incapable of representing concrete spatial reality and managing the challenges of modern international politics, particularly what he saw as the failings of liberal universalism.     Hierarchical Order: In a Großraum-based world, the principle of formal equality among sovereign states is replaced by a hierarchical structure. A predominant, hegemonic power (like the German Reich in his vision) would exist within a larger territorial space, asserting leadership over subordinate nations.     The Monroe Doctrine as a Model: Schmitt viewed the United States' Monroe Doctrine (declaring the Americas off-limits to European colonization and influence) as the classic example of a functioning Großraum: a regional power establishing a sphere of influence and excluding external interference.     Exclusion of External Powers: A core tenet of the Großraum order is the right of a hegemonic power to define the external orientation of its region and prevent "spatially alien powers" from intervening in its sphere.     Pluralistic World Order: Ultimately, Schmitt envisioned a multipolar world (a "pluriverse") characterized by several independent Großräume, which would achieve a new balance of power, contrasting with a unipolar, liberal, or Anglo-American dominated global order.
»
 
There is no other way out. «
 
Methodologically, there is no other way out. China has achieved its goals through economics, but in a military confrontation, the question remains open: the Chinese are not the most warlike people, and there is a huge pro-Western elite there. We have not been able to compete economically, but our strengths are warrior bravery, courage, and faith. God is on our side: "Tremble, nations, and submit, for God is with us."
 
Went from scramble for Africa to scramble for Europe and Latin America real quick.
 
Neolib Zionist supremacist Jake Tapper (CNN host) and neocon Zionist supremacist Stephen Miller (Trump's
Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy), fighting over how to execute the takeover of Venezuela, January 5, 2026. 

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. 
 
» 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.