 |
| Sosse med parlamentariskt stöd av (V), (MP) och (C) på väg till underhandlingar om energipolitiken med högern och SD, efter att herr Bildt skrivit på deal med Ryssland om pipeline |
Observera att varken sossarna eller högern vill avskaffa momsen eller skatterna på energin, och att även den socialdemokratiska regeringen är medansvarig till kaoset (vinstkaoset?) på elmarknaden...
Not exactly an optimistic perspective. Let´s just say that Edward Dutton (who sometimes hob-nobs with Richard Spencer) isn´t a progressive leftist! Dysgenics 101.
Fiery speech by Dr John Campbell on "conspiracy theory", Chinese lab leaks and by implication you-know-what. Peer review this, Fauci!
Dr John Campbell discusses the excess deaths in the wake of the COVID pandemic. These deaths are not attributable to COVID, but it´s not clear what could cause them. At least not in the censored media environment of YouTube...
The lack of hard data is annoying. Especially since some figures seem to indicate that cancer has become more prevalent post-pandemic. Campbell fears that the situation will become even worse in the near future.
At the moment, though, the most dangerous disease is the cancer of censorship!
British Alt Lite bulldog Paul Joseph Watson isn´t one of my favorites, but his rant here isn´t entirely wrong...
Translation: the "COVID skeptics" won, and now the liberal wing of the establishment is doing damage control.
It´s obviously about unity in the Democrat camp before the midterms, since the "amnesty" explicitly excludes those who "spread misinformation" (i.e. the hard COVID skeptics, presumably here identified with the Republicans).
Personally, I´m willing to "amnesty" anyone and everyone...provided they testify under oath before a Congressional sub-committee and name names!
Let´s Declare a Pandemic Amnesty
Teachers´ union president supports calls for "COVID amnesty"
 |
| Credit: Mercurygin Cosplay (@mercurybonk)/Twitter |
Somehow, they will blame this on Donald Trump...
Obviously, I take absolutely no responsibility for whatever this might mean.
But I do think the needle just moved a bit!
 |
| Credit: emdavfro(@emmdavfro)/Twitter |
Där en del ser faror, ser andra möjligheter...
Have we
been naïve when it comes to Russia? Maybe Russia simply can´t change, due to
reasons of geography and history? For the past 500 years, Russia has oscillated
between autocracy and anarchy. Even its short democratic periods have been
either more on the chaotic side (Kerensky, Yeltsin) or more on the autocratic
one (early Putin). It seems Russia is still stuck in this ever-ending cycle,
with Putin now trying to turn the wheel even more towards the autocratic side.
Perhaps he will succeed, but another possibility is of course a new “time of
troubles”…
Russia´s
geography in the geopolitical Heartland of Eurasia makes it fated to come into
conflict with essentially everyone else, since the only way the Russian state
can break free from these geopolitical constraints is to expand towards the
oceans, at the expense of the peoples already living there. Russia also needs
to control the habitable zone roughly corresponding to Ukraine, if it wants to
be something more than just some isolated (and half-starved) northern polity. Or
look at Crimea, since time immemorial an important trade hub at Black Sea!
Russia and its neighbors seem doomed to conflict forever. Russia´s most
favorable geopolitical position was during Soviet times after World War II (before
China broke away from the Soviet bloc).
The
authoritarian state is presumably also a product of Russia´s geography. The
only way to beat back, control and ultimately suppress the nomadic tribes that
has roamed the Eurasian interior since at least the Copper Stone Age (when the
horse was domesticated) was to create a highly centralized, militarized and despotic
“early modern state” which (surprise) morphed into a even more authoritarian
high modern state later on (especially during Stalinist times). Indeed, I
sometimes wonder if real Russian nationalism even exist. Isn´t “really existing”
Russian nationalism simply loyalty to this bloated state apparatus? Regardless
of formal ideology or form of government, the state bureaucracy (and its
repressive political police) remains. The apparatus doesn´t even have to be
ethnically Russian. It can soak up any group: Frenchmen, Germans, or Scotsmen
during Czarism, Georgians and Ukrainians under Communism, various Asiatic groups
under Putin. While ethnic Russians of course dominate (at least after the fall
of Czarism), the whole thing doesn´t look like a real nation-state (let alone
Pan-Slavism). Isn´t there actually something de-nationalized and “universalistic”
about the Russian state? The irony! The Alt Right, which claims to support “nations”,
are really supporting another version of modern universalism…
The Russian
Federation is just a bureaucracy, intelligence service, military and mafia
built around Gazprom.
Perhaps
this explains the peculiar eclectic character of its official ideology. Putin´s
Russia seems to espouse a combination of imitation Communism, imitation fascism,
imitation Orthodoxy and perhaps even imitation 50´s America. The entire
simulacrum might be on the verge of becoming a vassal to another civilization
that constantly oscillates between imperial grandeur and warring states. Yes,
that would be China.
The above
struck me when I was watching the surrealistic scenes coming out of Russian-occupied
eastern Ukraine lately. Obviously fake referendums, soldiers in long lines
before busts of Lenin, offices adorned with Czarist symbols and fascistic
flags, soldiers forcing voters to tick a “yes” on a ballot at gun point, the Soviet
– pardon, Russian – authorities pretending with grave faces that this is somehow
“legitimate”, and so on. It looks like a throwback to the absolutely ridiculous
propaganda exercises of Soviet times, but above all, it looks artificial and
eclectic, as if somebody had randomly throw together elements belonging from
entirely different time periods. But perhaps the average Russlander doesn´t see
any relevant differences between the Czars, the Reds and the Putinists.
Who knows,
maybe they are right. Maybe we have been naïve to think that we could ever
strike meaningful agreements with this polity, cooperate with them, or have a
balance of power with them. Maybe we should have tried to destabilize them all
along. Russia is the Evil Empire that never ended, indeed, the Evil Empire that
simply couldn´t have ended.
But there
is more. Historically speaking, many European powers have cooperated with
Russia. The ever-hypocritical British Empire at some points. France at others. Not
to mention Germany! As for Greece and Italy, they seem hell bent on becoming
Russian colonies, in the Italian case for reasons best known to themselves.
Same with certain irrelevant peoples without history in “Eastern” Europe, such
as the brave Czechs. Indeed, all of Europe made itself dependent on Russian gas
and oil, while bullshitting about “human rights”, “free elections” and green
energy. Many will still do it. Perhaps we have to face the brute fact that in
the end, most of Europe simply won´t resist Russia. Geopolitically, only
Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States, Finland and Scandinavia are obviously anti-Russian.
The others still feel they can maneuver somehow. We can´t. It´s difficult to
maneuver if the geopolitical monster wants to eat you whole. And probably raw,
too.
Is there some way out of this impasse? A time of troubles in Russia that lasts forever is one. But then, we might get a whole bunch of neo-nomads on our tail, instead. Or a ChiCom-sphere that extends all the way to Vyborg.
The other is for Japan
to get the bomb and unite with its long lost brethren at the other end of Eurasian
space…
Has Putin finally lost it? He is apparently threatening nuclear first strikes against anyone who threatens "Russia´s territorial integrity". But what does that mean?
Putin and the Greater Russian nationalists to his right de facto consider Ukraine as part of Russia´s territory. And if the referenda in the Russian-occupied regions of Ukraine move ahead, those regions might actually be annexed by the Russian "Federation" (like Crimea). By that logic, any Ukrainian military offensive to take them back would be a violation of Russian "territorial integrity" and hence worthy of a nuclear response...
I haven´t looked at Biden´s UN speech yet, but if I understand the US position correctly, they are moving towards a position of de facto expelling Russia from the UN Security Council.
Perhaps this is the Rubicon.
Unite behind the science, guys...
Still not enough to "move the needle", I´m afraid.
Wolfgang Hansson är orolig. Fuck around and find out?
"Väst skulle knäcka Putin - nu riskerar det att bli tvärtom"
Let´s be honest. Of course the high energy prices are primarily due to the Western sanctions against Russia, and the Russian decision to hit back hard by weaponizing its gas exports. The Western world could (perhaps) have planned for such an evantuality by expanding nuclear power or exploited alternative sources of gas, but since it didn´t...well, here we are. It´s wholly possible that we will experience another lockdown this winter, now because of energy shortages (and, if we´re really unlucky, a "new" COVID pandemic and certain after-effects of the "first" one).
How will people react to this? Here´s a clue: probably not by picking up books about peak oil or limits to growth, nodding along as they read.
They are more likely to draw the (in a sense correct) conclusion that the shortages are due to the war in the Ukraine, and that the prices would plummet if only the confrontation between Russia and the West could be ended somehow. Then, everything would go back to normal again. The "peace" camp will argue that Western support for Ukraine must end. The "war" camp will argue for regime change in Moscow. The doves will be in majority in southern Europe and many nations (though by no means all) in the former Eastern Europe. The hawks will form a majority in northern Europe. Germany and France are, perhaps, the keys to the situation.
But regardless of whether Europe choses freedom or Finlandization, the so-called Green energy transition is out. The need for fossil fuels (and nuclear power) is simply too great. Note the irony that the Green transition (and appended "movements") will be phased out at exactly the same moment that the climate crisis goes into overdrive...
Note also the increasingly authoritarian character of globo-liberalism, as it tries to fight equally authoritarian right-wing populism and nationalism.
So that´s the future, then. Resource wars for "energy security", or a Europe dominated by a Sino-Russian alliance. More fossil fuels, or more fossil fuel populism if the establishment tries to cling to its wind turbines a bit too long. A generally more repressive political and social atmosphere, regardless of what government is in power. And in the background, a climate crisis that continues unabated, oblivious to both the conservative denialists and the left-liberal "activists" (who really just want "woke" capitalism with more wind turbines).
Welcome to the turning point.
.jpg/440px-Patriarch_Kirill_of_Moscow_2021_(cropped).jpg)
_(52182434551)_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg/440px-Glastonbury2022_(218_of_413)_(52182434551)_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg)