THREE PROBLEMS HAUNTING THE WEST

6 September 2025

The root causes of our end of empire and civilisational decline.

The West faces a three-cornered crisis: an economy hollowed out by globalism and consumption, societies strained by mass immigration, and sovereignty eroded through vassalisation and endless foreign wars. 

These are not isolated issues but parts of the same “three-cornered hat” - distinct yet inseparable, and together they define our decline. Strategy begins with diagnosis, and we need to face these three root causes if our strategy for renewal is to succeed.

---

Strategic Logic and the Three-Cornered Hat

1. Introduction

• Strategy, in its simplest sense, is how you best use your resources to move from where you are to where you want to be
• That’s all it is. A roadmap. A bridge. A way forward. A program of works.
• Maganomics is one example Maganomics is an attempt at strategy on a grand scale
• But before you can decide where you want to go, you must first know where you are, and diagnose the problems.

Diagnosis before direction: you can’t have strategy without first knowing your condition.

---

2. The Three-Cornered Hat

• A good place to start to design the new system is to make a problems / requirements list
• If we do the same with the West today, we can sort our problems into three groups
• It’s like a three-cornered hat: three distinct points, but one hat.

---

3. Corner One - Economic Transformation

• We changed our economic model. We opened our markets. The globalists took over
• We outsourced manufacturing and jobs down long supply chains
• In return, we filled our supermarkets with cheap goods
• Instead of production and hard work, we built an economy of consumption and entitlement
• Foreign companies (China) worked for us, their economies became export-led, they lent us their profits so we could keep afloat our hedonistic lifestyle.

We are a consumption economy, living a relative high life on debt, the work of others abroad and subsidies at home.

---

4. Corner Two - Mass Immigration

• Globalisation means open borders
• Along with goods and capital, we accepted people - by the plane load, by the boat load
• We lost high-value manufacturing jobs, and gained low-skilled workers, suited to what work was left, the Macdo economy for most
• Wages failed to keep up with inflation. GDP per capita fell. Pressure on housing, health, and welfare mounted. The economy - inflation, employment - began to fail. Inequality and resentment is on the rise. Peoples take to the streets in protest at global injustice and the failures of the state at home
• The state responds by stepping in with heavy boots: curbing speech, restricting assembly, banning some flags, censoring... infringing the liberties we had fought for since Magna Carta.

In the name of public order, freedom is sacrificed.

---

5. Corner Three - Loss of Agency, Vassalisation, Imperial Overstretch

• The UK has lost its agency in the world. Sovereignty has been slipping away.
• We escaped the yoke of Brussels, but we have fallen under the wheels of Washington.
• Dependency - on America's middle class export market, on America's NATO defense provision for Europe - brings entanglement: endless forever wars fought for strategic agendas not our own, tythe obligations
• Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, each war drains our treasury, divides our people, and locks us deeper into dependency and the Emoites enemies into misery and death
• Historians call this imperial overstretch: when an empire extends itself militarily beyond its economic and social capacity
• Britain once ruled half the world. Now it joins wars designed in Washington, but paid for in London, Paris, and Berlin.
• A vassal state fights vassal wars, while its own foundations crumble.

Imperial overstretch destroys empires... and their satellites.

---

6. Conclusion

• Strategy begins with diagnosis.
• And the diagnosis is stark: economic hollowing, mass immigration, loss of sovereignty.
• Three corners, one hat.
• Until these problems are faced honestly, no strategy - Maganomics or otherwise - can hope to succeed.

Three corners, one hat: economic, social and geopolitical

---

Read More

THE ENGLISH LION TORN APART

3 September 2025

CAN THE UNITED STATES AND THE WEST RISE OUT OF THIS MALAISE?

A reader writes:

"I did like the bit where they were taking down the Palestinian and Ukraine flags to put up the English flag”.

See video 

1. Trump’s Mission

The easiest way I have found to see all this is first to recognise Trump’s mission, which is twofold:

End the wars

To end these wars, whilst retaining global hegemony, i.e. resisting multipolarism – already a huge contradiction in objectives.

Reform the economy

Which suffers from twin deficits of external trade and the government’s own budget – both are in deficit – whilst keeping the reserve currency and avoiding recession.

Mission impossible, again!

His mission is economic. There was Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, and there are his tariffs, which are designed to bring manufacturing back and deal with the trade deficit… and the hyper-financialisation.

I don’t see they’ve got any hope here either.

Hope of building the manufacturing infrastructure needed, nor the skill set amongst the workers – not in time.

And anyway, what kind of factories would these be? They’d be dark factories with robots, and the MAGA group would still be on the scrapheap.

Anyway, that’s the mission, which is largely economic.

2. Political Forces against the mission

Ranged against him, there seem to be at least three big ones:

Industry: only interested in profits and don’t care about the outcome of the war, drug-soaked citizens and social tensions, techno overreach and constraints on freedom of assembly and speech… just keep digging out that gold.

AIPAC: don’t need to say any more here – see other posts or read rhe independentist press.

The Streets and Foreign Infiltration: it’s a lot more serious than just waving a few Palestinian flags in the air! Oh my goodness, yes!

It’s that all these groups – Russian, Chinese, jihadist, North Korean, Iranian, global south generally – they’ve all penetrated our institutions, from the think tanks to Parliament, all the representative bodies and advice givers you can think of: infiltrated by agents of the Muslim Brotherhood, FSB…etc etc. They’ve all been infiltrating for years and our institutions are now compromised by foreign forces.

A few flag wavers are just scum on the surface (and in my opinion, recognising Palestinian independence – although it would achieve little practical for the Palestinian people – would maybe pull the fangs of these street mobs).

3. Your Argument

You say the problem is that we are not united behind “the flag”. I agree – we are not a homogenous society anymore, and we’ve been corrupted and pushed to the brink of an organised civil war.

But given all of the above, there’s absolutely no chance, in my opinion, of uniting such a diverse group of peoples – corrupted and compromised by various internal and external forces – behind one flag. It’s a familiar playbook that we ourselves helped write in all the preludes to invasions and forever wars.

No chance at all of uniting citizens behind the flag – there are too many nowadays.

The English lion in that video is being pursued by packs of wild dogs, clans of hyenas, and rival lions – and they are tearing it apart.

Once we recognise that, we can get down to the business of protecting ourselves. It is a personal responsibility, and there’s no point anymore in complaining about the way we are governed. We need to protect our families, our friends, our wealth – and prepare for the next phase, the next turn of the wheel.

4. References

1. Trump’s economic mission, deficits, and tariffs:

o Financial Times – Trump tariffs and protectionism

o Reuters – Dollar drop, politicised Fed

o Janus Henderson – Tariffs and the dollar’s reserve role

o The Australian – Economic method behind Trump’s upheaval

2. Political forces – Industry & AIPAC:

o The Washington Institute (founded with AIPAC support)

o Foreign Policy – AIPAC influence.

3. Foreign infiltration into institutions:

o Stimson – Foreign funding of think tanks

o Brookings Institution funding controversies

o Quincy Institute – Think tank funding

o Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC)

4. Flags and identity politics:

o BBC – UK flag protests

o The Guardian – Flag controversies in Britain

Read More

THE BRITISH EMPIRE HAS NOT DISAPPEARED, IT HAS DE-MATERIALISED

6 July 2025

Yesterday, we looked at Britain's influence over Washington. In this post, we shall consider the view that “all that’s left of the British Empire is the City of London”, and that financial power, not military empire, remains Britain’s legacy and its tool of influence.

1. The City of London: What Is It?

The City of London (not to be confused with Greater London) is a tiny, ancient jurisdiction - a square mile - with its own Lord Mayor, its own police force, and a certain legal status. In practical / financial matters, it is one of the three global nodes of finance alongside Wall Street and Hong Kong / Shanghai.

The British Empire once ruled over a quarter of the world's land and people, with its authority backed by naval power, colonial governors, and direct political control. Today, the Union Jack no longer flies over distant dominions, but the empire has not vanished, it has evolved from military rule to financial rule. A rule centred in the City of London and its offshore networks, where influence flows quietly through law, money, and global finance.

So the British Empire has faded in a military, overt power and control sense, but the City remains an empire of financing capital: a global command centre for currency trading, offshore finance, investment banking, and legal arbitration.

2. What Are Its Powers?

Here are the core instruments of financial power based in or routed through the City:

2.1 Foreign Exchange Control

London is the world’s largest foreign exchange market.

Over $3.8 trillion trades daily through the City (Bank for International Settlements, 2022).

This gives enormous leverage over currency flows, and thus over the monetary sovereignty of other nations.

2.2 Offshore Empire

The British "spider web" of offshore financial centres includes Jersey, Guernsey, the Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, Gibraltar, and more.

These Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories are legally distinct but act as tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions.

No one should be surprised when global elites and corporations use the good offices of the City of London to avoid taxes, hide assets, and move capital invisibly.

2.3 Legal and Dispute Infrastructure

So that is as to the empire of tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions.

In addition, the British law we are so proud of governs most international contracts, especially in shipping, insurance, capital restructuring and trade finance.

London is the preferred venue for commercial arbitration and debt resolution, even for foreign clients with no link to Britain.

This creates a judicial ecosystem of enormous influence on how global business is done.

2.4 Financialisation of Industry

The City manages financial services and thus how finance and investment is used to dominate the production of real goods. This financialisation model was later exported to the US under Reagan and Clinton.

We have discussed in previous posts how financialisation of economies is achieved and its consequences - British economic elites shifted away from manufacturing post-WWII and backed neoliberal globalisation, a switch that began in the 1980s and really accelerated with China's admission to the WTO at the turn of the century. This evolution benefited finance but shipped out the industrial base to low labour cost countries up valuing financial assets and down valuing the hourly wage.

2.5 Influence Over Washington

- Through shared interests between Anglo-American banks (e.g. HSBC, Barclays, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan) and law firms, there exists what some call an “Atlanticist deep-finance network.”

Take, for example, the case of Clifford Chance LLP, one of the UK’s “Magic Circle” firms. Clifford Chance specialises in banking, finance, capital markets, and international dispute resolution. It has deep ties to global banks, hedge funds, and sovereign wealth clients. With offices in over 30 countries, it has a truly global reach.

- The Federal Reserve, IMF, and World Bank are often staffed and influenced by alumni from institutions entwined with the City.

For example, Mark Carney is a key figure in global finance. He embodies the Anglo-American financial nexus. A former Governor of both the Bank of England and Bank of Canada, now PM of Canada, Carney spent over a decade at Goldman Sachs in London, specialising in sovereign risk and emerging markets. He later chaired the Financial Stability Board, advised the UN on climate finance, and played a leading role in shaping central bank digital currency (CBDC) policy, linking The City of London, Wall Street, and multilateral bodies like the IMF and World Bank.

- Think tanks (e.g. Chatham House, Atlantic Council) link British and U.S. policy circles with financial backing from City-connected entities. This is where the vision is conceived.

Here's a brief, concrete example. Chatham House, as we have said, a leading UK foreign policy think tank, regularly hosts senior figures from British banks, oil firms, and legal consultancies... many with City of London ties. Its funders include HSBC, Shell, and Standard Chartered, and it collaborates with the Atlantic Council, its U.S. counterpart, which is backed by JPMorgan Chase, BlackRock, and Goldman Sachs. These institutions frame reports on global governance, sanctions policy, and financial regulation, as used by policymakers in both London and Washington.

3. How Is This Power Used?

We have looked at the five most important sources of power of the City of London:

1 - Foreign Exchange Control - London is the world’s largest foreign exchange market.

2 - Offshore Empire of Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories that act as tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions.

3 - The Legal and Dispute Infrastructure that makes London the preferred venue for commercial arbitration and debt resolution.

4 - Financialisation of Industry is at least in part managed by The City, its financial services that dominate the productive capacity of The West.

5 - Influence Over Washington, achieved through think tanks linking British and U.S. policy circles with financial backing from City-connected entities.

Now let's look at how these powers are exercised in the execution of the City's interests and plans.

3.1 Market Leverage

The City can make or break currencies, tank emerging markets, or starve countries of capital. Nowadays, it does this with trade in preference to troops.

When a state challenges the liberal financial order (e.g. capital controls, nationalisation of national assets), it risks being locked out of markets or hit with a currency run. Colour revolutions replace non-conforming governments.

3.2 Elite Integration

Global billionaires and kleptocrats keep their money in British offshore centres, in laundered bank accounts, on investment platforms, in London real estate.

This creates a tacit alliance: oligarchs who may oppose the West politically are compromised by their financial dependence. (Which is why over use of sanctions and confiscations is not a smart idea.)

3.3 Policy Shaping via the IMF and World Bank

These institutions promote free-market capitalism, open capital flows, and global economic integration. They enforce integration through application of the “rules”: privatisation, deregulation, austerity.

The City’s expertise, staffing, and political networks heavily influence and lead these organisations, even as they sit in Washington, arch home of the neocon Deep State".

4. A “Post-Imperial” Empire of Finance?

While Britain no longer rules through redcoats and viceroys, it still exerts soft and hard power through its financial infrastructure.

The Transformation: Old Empire to Modern Format

This is how the old empire continues to punch above its weight and lead Washington:

Naval supremacy -> Currency and capital flow dominance

Governors and Raj -> Compliance lawyers and hedge fund managers

Colonial taxation -> Tax havens and offshore arbitrage

Gunboats -> Sanctions, tariffs, confiscations, even market pressure and "forward guidance".

5. Conclusion: The Empire Didn't Die, It Dissolved into Credit and Contracts.

The claim that “all that remains of the British Empire is the City of London” may be partly metaphorical, but it comes across as true.  What has happened is that the form of control has changed, from explicit political and military control over the sovereignty of other estates, to coaxing them in to financial dependency, from land to balance sheets, from army uniform to pinstripe suit - this is the real, though unadmitted, reason why Britain no longer has or needs an army (peace to Russia of course): power through financial control. 

The form of control has changed, but the reach remains global, the tools are more subtle and complex, but the consequences - 

nations lose sovereignty and are vassalised, public services are sold off cheaply to new oligarchs, inequality widens, entire economies can be crashed, governments get replaced - are just as real.

Control of capital flows, legal contracts, and offshore safe havens has replaced territorial conquest - the pen (and the spreadsheet) are mightier than the sword!

Read More

4TH OF JULY. HOW INDEPENDENT IS AMERICA OF BRITAIN?

5 July 2025

HOW INDEPENDENT IS AMERICA FROM BRITAIN?

1. 4 July: Political Independence, Economic Entanglement

The U.S. declared its political break from Britain on this day in 1776. But beneath the flags and fireworks, a deeper entanglement remains, especially in the financial, intelligence, and elite spheres. The question isn’t whether America governs itself, but whether it does so free of the old imperial circuitry.

2. Empire Repackaged as Finance

The City of London is no ordinary district. It’s a sovereign-like financial enclave, a global hub for offshore money, derivatives, forex, and tax avoidance. Many of America’s biggest corporations and hedge funds still operate through its looser regulations and offshore extensions like the Cayman Islands and Jersey. This isn’t colonialism—it’s soft entrapment, entrapment by design.

3. Still Whispering in the Corridors

Old ties never died, they just adapted. A network of shared education (Oxbridge, Ivy League), think tanks (Chatham House, Council on Foreign Relations), media (Economist, WSJ), and global finance (The City, Cambridge, Wall Street, rhe offshore treasure islands), continues to align U.S. and British elite interests. Quigley called it the Anglo-American Establishment. It’s not conspiracy, it’s structure. You can trace it from Bretton Woods to BlackRock.

4. Strategic Culture – The Shadow of Empire (The Five Eyes intelligence alliance) binds the UK and U.S. in near-total surveillance cooperation, with a sifnificant regional role for Israel. Military strategies, especially in the Middle East and Russia, often follow old British imperial routes and date back to the First Crimean War and Mackinder. Even soft power (the BBC, English common law, royal mystique) maintains a ghostly grip on America’s elite imagination.

5. Conclusion – Free, but not unentangled,

America is sovereign on paper, but in finance, strategy, and elite thinking, it remains woven into Britain’s imperial after-life, in particular via the City of London. The real independence war never ended, it just moved offshore.

Read More

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CAUCUSES

2 July 2025

Iran says no.

Azerbaijan as cattering ram into Iran, to split Iran from Russia

Azerbaijan crime ring, offset 1h20m

1. The Caucasus as "Shatterbelt"

Like the Balkans and the Levant, the Caucasus is what geopolitical theorists call a shatterbelt: a region caught between rival powers, fragmented by history, and prone to chronic instability.

This is a very mountainous zone, sandwiched between the Black and Caspian Seas. Its rugged topography of mountains, valleys, and rivers sharpens ethnic divisions, but its geography also makes it a natural transit corridor between Europe, Russia, Central Asia, and the Middle East.

2. A Region of Empires and Faultlines

For centuries, the Caucasus was contested by Turkey, Russia, and Persia. Even under Soviet control, Moscow never fully subdued the region, which includes volatile territories such as Chechnya.

The region’s diversity is staggering: dozens of peoples, languages, and faiths - Orthodox Christians, Shia and Sunni Muslims, Jews, Yazidis - all shaped by bitter memories of past imperialism, genocide, and forced migration. These faultlines are political as much as they are ethnic.

3. Shatterbelts on the Edge of Empire

Looking at a map, the Balkans, Levant, and Caucasus all lie along the tectonic political plates of Europe and Asia. When outside powers weaken or start backing different local actors, the communities of the Caucasus often default back to historic conflicts.

In particular, if Russia fails to secure its southeastern flank, it faces potential threats from Iran, or from jihadist flows and instability across the Middle East.

4. The Energy Corridor and Russia’s Strategic Dilemma

Of more immediate importance: two critical oil and gas pipelines traverse the South Caucasus, connecting Caspian Sea energy reserves to Western markets, and bypassing Russian and Iranian territory. This corridor is now of vital importance to Europe, given the steep drop in Russian energy imports as a result of the proxy war in Ukraine.

For Russia, the stakes are double-edged. It opposes these pipelines yet also has a growing interest in maintaining good relations with Iran - Iran is the only country that offers Moscow a realistic land-and-sea route to the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, bypassing Western-controlled chokepoints.

5. Conclusion: The New Great Game

What we are witnessing is the continuation of the Great Game that was once fought out between Imperial Britain, jealous particularly of the route to India, and Tsarist Russia, now being played out between NATO, Russia, Iran, and also rising Asian powers.

The Caucasus remains what it has always been: a "buffer, a battleground, and a bottleneck", as one writer, put it. Whether this region settles into fragile peace or erupts once again into conflict will depend not only on local actors, but on the shifting ambitions and fears of the great powers that surround it.

Glossary of Terms

1. Shatterbelt

A region caught between major powers, prone to fragmentation and conflict.

The Caucasus, like the Balkans and the Levant, lies between empires and civilisations. These regions often experience repeated foreign intervention, ethnic division, and wars—especially when global power balances shift.

2. The Great Game

A 19th-century term for the strategic rivalry between the British and Russian Empires in Central Asia.

The “new” Great Game refers to today’s geopolitical contest over the Caucasus, Central Asia, and energy routes, now involving Russia, NATO, Iran, China, and others.

3. Energy Corridor

A route that transports oil and gas from resource-rich regions to international markets.

The South Caucasus hosts pipelines that carry Caspian energy westward to Europe, bypassing Russian and Iranian territory. This makes the region vital to energy security.

4. Caspian Sea

The world’s largest inland body of water, bordered by Russia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Azerbaijan.

Rich in oil and gas reserves, it is a focal point of competition between powers that seek control of its energy exports

5. Strait of Hormuz

A narrow sea passage between the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Sea.

Roughly 30% of the world’s seaborne oil passes through it, largely to Europe. Although not in the Caucasus, Russia’s interest in accessing this strait via Iran underlines its strategic ambitions.

6. Buffer Zone

A region situated between two rival powers, often unstable but important for security.

The Caucasus acts as a buffer between Russia and the Middle East, and between Western and Eastern spheres of influence.

7. Ethno-religious Fragmentation

The coexistence of multiple ethnic and religious groups in a single region, often without a shared national identity.

This defines much of the Caucasus, home to Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Georgians, Chechens, Ossetians, Lezgins, and more.

8. Proxy War

A conflict where external powers support different local sides rather than fight directly.

The Ukraine war is the most visible example today, but the Caucasus has also seen foreign-backed factions play out wider rivalries.

9. Hierarchy

This is about order and chaos. The word "hierarchy" comes from the Greek "hierarkhia," meaning "rule of a high priest," which combines "hieros" (holy) and "archos" (ruler). Ipposite: anarchy - from Greek anarkhia "lack of a leader, the state of people without a government".

[End]

Read More

THE COLOUR REVOLUTIONS PLAYBOOK

12 June 2025

1. What Are Colour Revolutions?

Colour revolutions are non-violent protest movements, often backed by Western NGOs, that aim to overthrow authoritarian or corrupt governments — typically in post-Soviet or developing countries — through mass mobilisation, media campaigns, and symbolic colour branding.

They're usually presented as grassroots democratic uprisings, but are often accused of being geopolitical tools used to expand Western influence.

2. Why the Name "Colour"?

Each revolution is branded with a symbolic colour or flower — easy to rally around, good for headlines, and useful for international PR. Examples:

Serbia (2000): Bulldozer Revolution (no colour, but same playbook)

Georgia (2003): Rose Revolution

Ukraine (2004): Orange Revolution

Kyrgyzstan (2005): Tulip Revolution

Lebanon (2005): Cedar Revolution

Ukraine again (2014): Euromaidan (not a "colour" but same method)

3. The Basic Blueprint

1. Contested Election or Crisis

2. Mass protests erupt, often well-organised

3. Use of social media, NGOs, and youth movements (e.g. Serbia’s Otpor!)

4. Western diplomatic support, financial aid, or covert backing (via USAID, NED, Soros foundations)

5. The goal: regime change without military intervention

4. What Is the Purpose?

From a pro-Western perspective:

Promote democracy, civil society, human rights

Remove corrupt or authoritarian regimes

Align countries with Western economic and political structures (EU, NATO, IMF)

From a critical or anti-imperialist perspective:

Serve as tools of Western geopolitical engineering

Weaken Russian or Chinese regional influence

Install friendly, neoliberal governments willing to open markets and back Western security agendas

Often trigger instability or civil conflict (e.g. Ukraine 2014 → Crimea annexation, Donbas war)

5. Key Actors Behind the Scenes

National Endowment for Democracy (NED) – U.S. Congress-funded NGO that supports civil society and media

Open Society Foundations (Soros) – Funding for education, media, and legal reform

USAID – Official U.S. aid agency, often tied to soft power goals

CIA and Western intelligence – Alleged involvement in shaping the outcomes discreetly

6. Notable Consequences

Mixed results: Some revolutions led to democratic reforms, others to chaos or war

Russia and China now see colour revolutions as existential threats

Western support for such movements has contributed to global mistrust of NGOs and media

Colour revolutions laid groundwork for hybrid warfare, cyber ops, and info battles

7. Summary

Colour revolutions are branded mass uprisings, often backed by Western interests, that aim to topple regimes without tanks. Though framed as democratic awakenings, they are widely seen as tools of geopolitical power projection, with high stakes and long-term blowback.

Worked example of playbook

Here is a worked example of a Colour Revolution, using Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution as a case study — a textbook example of the Colour Revolution playbook in action.

1. TIMELINE: THE ORANGE REVOLUTION (UKRAINE, 2004)

Background

Ukraine at the time was caught between two spheres of influence: Russia, which backed a pro-Kremlin elite, and the West, which backed EU/NATO-friendly factions.

Two key figures:

Viktor Yanukovych (pro-Russia, incumbent regime)

Viktor Yushchenko (pro-West opposition)

Step-by-Step Breakdown of the Colour Revolution Playbook:

1.1 Trigger: Contested Election

Presidential elections held in October–November 2004.

Yushchenko was poisoned with dioxin during the campaign, widely believed to be an assassination attempt.

Official results in November declared Yanukovych the winner, but allegations of electoral fraud quickly emerged.

1.2 Mass Mobilisation

Spontaneous-looking protests erupted in Kyiv’s Independence Square (Maidan Nezalezhnosti), with orange (Yushchenko’s campaign colour) as the unifying symbol.

Protesters camped out in the square for over two months in winter conditions.

Estimated turnout: hundreds of thousands in Kyiv, with protests spreading across the country.

1.3 Branding and Narrative Control

The term “Orange Revolution” was quickly picked up by Western media, NGOs, and political commentators.

The movement used slogans, coloured clothing, and youth energy — much like Serbia’s Otpor! four years earlier.

Western-funded media like Channel 5 Ukraine promoted the protest narrative.

1.4 NGO and Western Support

Funding and support flowed through:

National Endowment for Democracy (NED)

George Soros’s Open Society Institute

USAID

Western embassies provided logistical support, training, and advisory services to opposition campaigners.

Alleged involvement of foreign political consultants (e.g. from the U.S. Republican and Democratic parties).

1.5 Elite Defection

Key members of Ukraine’s security services and business elite refused to crack down on protesters.

Portions of the military and judiciary shifted loyalty or remained neutral.

1.6 Outcome: Regime Change via Legal Reversal

The Ukrainian Supreme Court annulled the election results in December 2004.

A re-run of the vote was ordered.

Viktor Yushchenko won the re-run and was inaugurated as president in January 2005.

2. Geopolitical Results

For the West:

Huge soft power win. Ukraine appeared to pivot toward EU and NATO alignment.

Served as proof-of-concept for peaceful regime change without direct military intervention.

For Russia:

Strategic loss. Putin viewed the revolution as a Western coup in his backyard.

Moscow began developing counter-revolution strategies: information warfare, energy leverage, intelligence activity.

3. Legacy of the Orange Revolution

By 2010, Yushchenko’s coalition fell apart. Yanukovych returned to power — democratically — before being overthrown again in the 2014 Euromaidan uprising, a kind of Colour Revolution 2.0, this time with open Western diplomatic presence and violent escalation.

The Orange Revolution became the playbook template used in Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, and attempted in Belarus, Hong Kong, and elsewhere.

4. Summary

The Orange Revolution followed the Colour Revolution blueprint: a disputed election, coordinated mass protests, NGO/media support, elite defections, and a regime change — all under the veneer of democratic mobilisation, but backed by deep geopolitical interests from both East and West.

Here's another : Belarus

And here is the process itself, the "playbook"

Here is a process-driven view of how a Colour Revolution typically unfolds - a neutral analysis of the playbook at rhe tactical or operational level. This framework has been repeated, with variations, from Serbia to Georgia, Ukraine, Lebanon, Belarus, and beyond.

1. The Colour Revolution Playbook: Process View

Step 1: Identify the Target Regime

Choose an authoritarian, corrupt, or unpopular government.

Best results in semi-authoritarian states with weak institutions, some media pluralism, and contested elections.

Bonus if the regime is aligned with a geopolitical rival (e.g. Russia, China, Iran).

Step 2: Prepare Civil Society Infrastructure

Build or support local NGOs, student movements, media outlets, and legal aid groups.

Secure external funding (e.g. from Open Society Foundations, NED, USAID).

Conduct training in non-violent resistance, information warfare, and election monitoring.

Step 3: Wait for a Trigger

Triggers include:

Disputed election

Police violence

Corruption scandal

Economic collapse

Ideal trigger = rigged vote → emotional legitimacy for protest.

Step 4: Brand the Movement

Choose a unifying symbol (colour, flower, or flag).

Keep the branding simple, visible, emotional: e.g. orange, rose, tulip, red-white flag.

Launch slogans, social media hashtags, and PR campaigns to own the narrative.

Step 5: Mass Mobilisation

Coordinate mass protests, strikes, sit-ins, and student actions.

Occupy symbolic space (e.g. main square, parliament building).

Ensure optics: peaceful crowds, dramatic visuals, women and youth leadership.

Use smartphones, livestreams, and social media to bypass state media.

Step 6: Seek International Attention

Appeal to Western media, EU, UN, and international NGOs.

Leak videos of regime violence to inflame global opinion.

Frame the movement as pro-democracy, human rights-based.

Pressure foreign governments to issue sanctions or withhold recognition of election results.

Step 7: Trigger Elite Defection

Persuade sections of the elite to switch sides:

Security services

Judiciary

Business oligarchs

Use backdoor diplomacy, threats of sanctions, or promises of post-transition power.

Step 8: Force Regime Crisis or Negotiation

The regime cracks internally or is forced into negotiating transition (new elections, resignations, etc.)

If violent crackdown fails to stop momentum, the regime may collapse from within.

Step 9: Transition Phase

Install interim or opposition-backed government.

Write new constitution, reform media laws, pursue “transitional justice.”

Integrate the country into Western political and economic structures (EU/NATO/IMF).

2. Summary

A Colour Revolution follows a fairly standard script: build soft power infrastructure, wait for a crisis, mobilise symbolically, and escalate until the regime fractures — all under the banner of democracy, but often with external interests quietly at play.

Goals, desired outcomes, strategy programmes of work. The process

That structure makes perfect sense. Here's a comprehensive process map for executing a Colour Revolution, starting with the Goals, then Desired Outcomes, followed by Strategy for best use of resources, and finally the detailed Programmes of Work (Playbook).

1. GOALS TO BE ACHIEVED
(What the revolution seeks, overtly or covertly)

• Regime change: Remove an authoritarian or unfriendly government
• Democratic façade: Install a government legitimised through elections
• Geopolitical realignment: Shift the country toward Western spheres of influence (EU, NATO, IMF)
• Privatisation and market reforms: Create conditions favourable to Western investment
• Civic mobilisation: Energise youth and civil society in support of “modernisation”
• Media narrative control: Win the global PR battle by owning the definition of events

2. DESIRED OUTCOMES
(Indicators of success or transition)

• Incumbent president or ruling party resigns, flees, or loses re-run
• A pro-Western opposition figure takes power via election or accord
• New constitution or legal reforms reflecting liberal-democratic norms
• The country accepts Western financial and security integration
• International institutions recognise the new government
• The old regime is discredited or prosecuted, erasing its future power bas

3. STRATEGY OVERVIEW
(The model guiding action)

• Soft power before hard power: Change is achieved via influence, not invasion
• Symbolic legitimacy: Use elections, mass protests, and colour branding to construct a “popular uprising”
• Hybrid operations: Combine legal civil action with covert support, tech disruption, and international pressure
• Pressure from below, fracture from above: Stir mass discontent to trigger elite defections
• Timing is everything: Strike when institutions are weak, elections are contested, and legitimacy is brittle

4. PROGRAMMES OF WORK (The Playbook)
(Tactical implementation – what to do and in what order)

4.1 Pre-Crisis Preparation

• Build and fund civil society infrastructure (NGOs, think tanks, youth groups)
• Support independent media and digital influencers
• Conduct training in protest strategy, cyber-activism, and legal protection
• Establish foreign donor channels (NED, Soros, USAID, EU delegations)

4.2 Mobilisation and Trigger Exploitation

• Wait for or manufacture a trigger event: rigged election, police brutality, corruption leak
• Mobilise the base: students, middle class, cultural elites
• Launch non-violent protests in urban centres and symbolic locations
• Ensure strong visual branding: flags, flowers, colours, slogans
• Use viral media, livestreams, and English-language posts to globalise the message

4.3 International Narrative and Pressure

• Activate foreign media and diplomats to condemn the regime
• Document regime abuses and push for international sanctions
• Lobby the EU, UN, and U.S. Congress for statements of support
• Arrange high-profile visits by Western politicians or NGOs

4.4 Escalation and Elite Fracture

• Sustain protests with rotating demonstrations and hunger strikes
• Apply pressure to the judiciary and military to “do the right thing”
• Expose regime divisions (leaked tapes, defector interviews)
• Encourage business and oligarch classes to cut support for the regime

4.5 Transition Negotiation or Collapse

• Push for election re-run, resignation, or transitional government
• Fill power vacuum with trained opposition figures
• Create a Truth and Reconciliation framework to isolate old regime
• Enshrine Western-aligned policies in the new legal structure

4.6 Consolidation Phase

• Invite IMF, EU, NATO officials to formalise partnerships
• Purge regime loyalists from courts, media, and universities
• Rebrand the nation with global campaigns (“New Ukraine”, “Democratic Georgia”)
• Begin long-term monitoring and influence through embedded NGOs and trade deals

5. Summary

A Colour Revolution is not just a protest — it’s a systematic campaign of regime disruption, driven by clear goals, defined outcomes, a hybrid strategic doctrine, and a coordinated set of programmes. It uses symbolism and street energy as cover for deeper political realignment, always timed for maximum geopolitical leverage.

References

https://www.livingintheair.org/?m=1

[End]

Read More

WE ARE DOOMED (WW3)

5 June 2025

The CIA organise the bombing of a strategically, important russian airports. They are focused on breaking up Russia and collateral consequences are out of their scope....that's what POTUS does - but if he won't attend the daily briefings, what is he to know about what's going on? However you look at this, Donald Trump is responsible (and responsible for escalation) and where is Tulsi Gabbard - she is Director of National Intelligence (DNI)? Her responsibilities:

- Oversight of Intelligence Agencies: Gabbard oversees all 18 U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, NSA, and FBI, coordinating their activities to ensure national security

- Principal Intelligence Advisor: She serves as the primary intelligence advisor to the President, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council, providing assessments on global threats and intelligence matters 

- Reforming Intelligence Practices: Gabbard has emphasised the need to depoliticise the intelligence community, aiming to restore public trust and ensure that intelligence operations are conducted without bias...ha ha!

- But the DNI is part of the executive branch, so this is internal oversight, not fully independent.

The whole thing is out of control, and this is what is so frightening. The UN can do its worst, but will just get swatted away. 

There will be a reality check at some point (defeat for the Western powers seems the likely eventual outcome, but why did it do they so confidently persist?). 

It is likely that there will be a military alliance with China, things could reach the top rung if not, 

but it would be so much better if the people could step in first.

For a taste of what's to come, see the Rand Corporation's strategic thinking from 2019, RR_3063, available on the internet. Noone's going to read 200 pages. But there is a chapter specifically on a dozen or so measures to what they call "extend" Russia.

Here is what the people rely on for insuring peace and safety in foreign policy:

1. Congressional Oversight

a. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI)

b. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI)

These bipartisan bodies are legally empowered to review budgets, operations, and abuses.

They receive classified briefings, hold hearings, and issue reports.

However, they often face delays or restrictions on access and may lack technical expertise.

2. The Executive Branch Inspectors General

Each agency has an Inspector General (IG) – a watchdog office that can audit and investigate misconduct.

The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) handles issues across agencies.

IGs are supposed to be independent, but they report to agency heads, and have been fired or sidelined in controversial cases.

3. The President and National Security Council (NSC)

The President sets intelligence priorities and can restrain or unleash the agencies.

The NSC (chaired by the President) integrates intelligence into policy decisions.

In practice, the President may use or abuse this power to shield allies or target opponents.

4. The Courts: Limited Role

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) approves surveillance requests on U.S. citizens.

It operates in secret, and critics argue it is too compliant (approving over 99% of government requests).

The Supreme Court and federal judiciary can step in when intelligence operations violate laws, but this is rare and reactive.

5. The Press and Whistleblowers

Investigative journalism (e.g. Snowden leaks, CIA torture) plays a crucial external accountability role.

Whistleblowers within the agencies can report abuse, but face legal and professional risks, especially under the Espionage Act.

6. Civil Society and Academia

NGOs (e.g. ACLU, EFF) and university research analyse surveillance trends and push for reform.

They can lobby Congress, sue the government, and raise public awareness, but have no formal authority.

*Conclusion*

The U.S. intelligence community is checked by a patchwork of oversight mechanisms, none of which is fully independent or consistently effective. Power is concentrated in the executive, and accountability often depends on internal discipline, whistleblowers, and public pressure. As DNI, Tulsi Gabbard sits atop this system, but she’s also part of it.

I'm not sure what ended the Vietnam war. I think it was just defeat, although there were lots of public protests. I don't think these had any effect.

We are doomed.

Read More

TWO CENTURIES OF WAR WEST V. RUSSIA

2 June 2025

1. A Long War Against Russia

Russia’s intervention in Ukraine on 24 February 2022 is widely portrayed in Western media as a unilateral act of aggression. But in Moscow - and across much of the Global South - it is viewed as the latest chapter in a two-century-long Western campaign to check, contain, fragment and pillage Russia. This is not a conspiracy theory, it is a matter of documented geopolitical fact.

2. Western Campaigns Against Russia Since 1812

Western states have repeatedly organised themselves into coalitions to confront Russia militarily, often with the stated aim of “balance of power” or “humanitarian intervention”, but consistently resulting in the weakening of Russia’s influence or territory.

2.1 Napoleon’s Invasion (1812)

France, supported by numerous European nations, launched the largest land invasion in history to crush Russian resistance to continental hegemony. The disastrous failure of this expedition did not however mean the end of Western suspicion of Russian power.

Napoleon had just triumphed over Austria and Prussia and established client states across Europe. He imagined himself the architect of a united continent under French influence. Russia stood as the final major power not fully under his control or aligned with his interests.

Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812 primarily because Tsar Alexander I had broken with the Continental System, Napoleon’s economic blockade against Britain. This system, established in 1806, aimed to cripple Britain’s economy by forbidding European trade with it. Russia initially complied but found it disastrous for its own economy, which depended heavily on British trade, especially exports of grain and imports of manufactured goods. By 1810, Russia resumed trading with Britain.

2.2 Crimean War (1853–56)

Britain, France and the Ottoman Empire sought to halt Russia’s advance towards the Mediterranean.

The Crimean War was triggered largely by fears in Britain and France that Russia’s growing influence over the declining Ottoman Empire would give it control over the Black Sea and eventually allow it to dominate access to the Mediterranean via the Bosporus and Dardanelles straits. 

The war introduced modern media warfare and an early coalition logic that Russia must be contained.

2.3 Allied Intervention in the Russian Civil War (1918–22)

British, American, French and Japanese troops landed on Russian soil under the pretext of stabilising post-revolution chaos. In practice, they attempted to shape the post-Tsarist future...and failed.

2.4 Operation Barbarossa (1941–45)

Although this was Nazi Germany’s war, Hitler’s invasion force was composed of troops from many European countries. Russians remember this as the last total war, an existential invasion that was met with the need for a quite staggering sacrifice on their part.

2.5 Cold War and NATO (1947–91)

The containment of the USSR became official Western policy, reinforced by nuclear arms races, proxy wars, and the construction of NATO. From a Russian viewpoint, this was four decades of encirclement, threats and impoverishment.

3. Post-Soviet Wars and the Yugoslavia Precedent

After the USSR collapsed, Russia was promised “not one inch eastward” in NATO expansion. That promise was broken. But before the waves of NATO enlargement reached Russia’s doorstep, the alliance tested its post-Cold War power in Yugoslavia.

3.1 The NATO Bombing of Serbia (1999)

Russia’s historic Slavic and Orthodox ally, Serbia, was bombed by NATO without UN approval. The attack, justified as humanitarian intervention over Kosovo, was a wake-up call for Moscow: if Belgrade can be bombed, so can we. Putin later described it as “a turning point".

3.2 Yugoslavia as Strategic Laboratory

The dismemberment of Yugoslavia, through sanctions, colour revolutions, partition, and airstrikes, was viewed by many Russian analysts as a prototype for later strategies used in Georgia (2008), Ukraine (2014), and beyond. Serbia was the first post-Cold War casualty of unipolar enforcement.

4. 2022: A War With History

The war in Ukraine is not just about NATO or territory. It is not a proxy war. For Russia, it is the culmination of a long pattern of Western encirclement, where every advance of NATO, every "proxy" war, and every economic sanction, echoes all the previous campaigns. The siege of Leningrad. The carpet bombing of Belgrade. The Maidan coup. From Moscow’s viewpoint, these are not separate episodes, they are one war. It is seen as a direct war: Ukraine is doing the fighting on behalf of the Western coalition. 

The war in the theatre of Ukraine can be traced from 22 February 2014 with the Maidan coup in Kiev, back to the Bucharest summit of 2008's decision to include Ukraine in NATO, and further back still to Clinton's fateful decision in 1994 to expand NATO eastward.

It’s about geopolitics. The idea of a Eurasian bloc - Germany, Russia, China - terrifies Anglo-American strategists going back to Halford Mackinder (1904). Preventing such a bloc is a doctrinal imperative of Western grand strategy.

5. Conclusion: Nothing New, Just the Endgame

Seen through Russian eyes, the "unprovoked invasion" of 24 February 2022 is not a beginning. It is the continuation of over two centuries of conflict - sometimes overt, sometimes covert - between Western coalitions and Russian statehood. NATO is not so much a defensive alliance, as the military arm of a geopolitical project - currently, we have "project Ukraine". And so for Russia, this war is simply the latest - and perhaps final - confrontation in that long and bitter story, that it is expected will end in a disastrous and strategic and possibly final defeat for the West.

Read More

TRUMP'S PLAN AND HIS ENEMIES INCL EUROPE

30 May 2025

What will happen next?

Trump's MAGA goal is to definancialise the economy and end the wars. I'm not sure he'd be ready to accept the losses of dollar reserve status and hegemony, ie a multipolar world with three spheres of influence and more cooperative Modus Operandi ( in particular, the other sides in trade deals expected to cooperate by giving concessions in return for security protection). 

His plan for China is to win round Russia.

But no matter, he's taking a battering from his enemies, hence he is forced into flip-flopping, he's not making any headway with implementation and he has lost credibility and authority.

His enemies are from the status quo of course. They want to force back a unipolar world, lost around 2017 with the serious rise of China. The status quo economy flourishes on war, but relies on constant expansion of the money supply, raising inflation and interest rates, making it unsustainable. The status quo is also hegemony, and foreign profits reinvested in the assets inflating the wealth of the elite.

The elite - the governors - are a shadowy group - banks, insurers, hedge funds - and behind them an AIPAC-type lobby controlling Congress, elected assemblies, and directing liquidity flows.

https://www.youtube.com/live/aCpXRsssHZ0?si=Cfw9z5Xk503W_SIm

Where is Europe? Trump sees a BoP deficit of $300b and wants it back. Europe fears Trump's plans means it loses cheap protection and their economy will be ruined to restore American manufacturing.

Their plan is to provoke Russia, keep the war going and America in Europe, oust Trump. Germany is the current standard-bearer - no limits means Taurus strikes on Moscow.

This could all end badly -  badly for America at least and quite possibly for mankind on this planet!

---

1. Core Thesis: Economic Shock as Strategy

Trump and senior officials describe their agenda as “economic shock therapy”, likening it to a necessary, painful reset to break dependency on low-wage imports and excessive government spending.

---

2. Tariffs and Protectionism

Tariffs on imports—especially from China—are central. The administration accepts that this will raise costs for consumers, but believes it will rejuvenate U.S. industry in the medium term.

---

3. Detox from Deficit and Bureaucracy

Treasury Secretary Bessent said: “We’ve become addicted to this government spending… There’s going to be a detox period.” The goal is to reduce deficits while cutting government involvements and reorienting the economy toward productive sectors.

---

4. Tax Cuts and Social Program Cuts

The Big Beautiful Bill enacted sweeping tax cuts and spending reductions in welfare and healthcare, shifting funds toward defence and border security. This mix of fiscal retrenchment and tax relief is intended to support industrial renewal, but places short-term strain on lower-income households.

---

5. Accepting Short-Term Pain for Long-Term Gain

Officials acknowledge the prospect of inflation, recession, and market disruption. Farmers and exporters may face difficulties. Consumers will feel inflation from tariffs. Stock markets might drop.

---

6. Broader Strategy: Unorthodox Trumponomics

This policy represents a paradigm shift from traditional Republican economics—industrial subsidies, capital controls, and strategic trade security carve-outs.

---

7. Risk and Reward

Potential rewards include a revival of manufacturing, reduced trade deficits, and fresh fiscal health. But risks include global retaliation, weakened recovery, an inflation-wage spiral, and the erosion of trust in conservative economic orthodoxy.

---

8. Political Gamble

The administration is counting on Republican voters' optimism, even amid cost pressures. Red-state voters are more tolerant of inflation if it brings industrial revival. But real-world pain (higher food costs, job losses in trade-dependent industries) could erode support.

---

Glossary

Economic shock therapy means deliberate, large-scale disruption to reset economic structures. A tariff is a tax on imports, used here to incentivise domestic manufacturing. Deficit detox refers to the intentional reduction of government spending and borrowing. Trumponomics is Trump-era economic policy focused on protectionism and security-linked trade.

---

Conclusion

Trump’s team is embarking on bold economic experimentation—accepting short-term hardship to pursue long-term structural change. Whether the reset achieves its industrial aims or provokes deeper instability depends on global pushback, domestic reaction, and whether the predicted benefits outweigh the immediate sacrifices.

---

Here’s a summarised analysis of the FT article “We have to rebuild our country: Donald Trump and his team pursue economic shock therapy”, conveying the main insights:

1. Core Thesis: Economic Shock as Strategy

Trump and senior officials describe their agenda as “economic shock therapy”, likening it to a necessary, painful reset to break dependency on low-wage imports and excessive government spending.  

2. Tariffs and Protectionism

Tariffs on imports, especially from China, are central. The administration accepts that this will raise costs for consumers, but believes it will rejuvenate U.S. industry in the medium term.

3. Detox from Deficit and Bureaucracy

Treasury Secretary Bessent said:

> “We’ve become addicted to this government spending… There’s going to be a detox period.”  

The goal is to reduce deficits while cutting government involvements and reorienting the economy toward productive sectors.

4. Tax Cuts and Social Program Cuts

The Big Beautiful Bill enacted sweeping tax cuts and spending reductions in welfare and healthcare, shifting funds toward defence and border security.

This mix of fiscal retrenchment and tax relief is intended to support industrial renewal—but places short-term strain on lower-income households.

5. Accepting Short-Term Pain for Long-Term Gain

Officials acknowledge the prospect of inflation, recession, and market disruption:

Farmers and exporters may face difficulties.

Consumers will feel inflation from tariffs.

Stock markets might drop.  

6. Broader Strategy: Unorthodox Trumponomics

This policy represents a paradigm shift from traditional Republican economics - which are about industrial subsidies, capital controls, and strategic trade security carve-outs.  

7. Risk & Reward

Rewards: Potential revival of manufacturing, reduced trade deficits, renewed fiscal health.

Risks: Global retaliation, weakened recovery, inflation wage spiral, and potential erosion of trust in conservative economic orthodoxy.  

8. Political Gamble

The administration is counting on Republican voters' optimism, even amid cost pressures:

Red-state voters are more tolerant of inflation if it brings industrial revival.

But real-world pain (higher food costs, job losses in trade-dependent industries) could erode support.  

Glossary

Economic shock therapy: Deliberate, large-scale disruption to reset economic structures.

Tariff: A tax on imports, used here to incentivise domestic manufacturing.

Deficit detox: Intentional reduction of government spending and borrowing.

Trumponomics: Trump-era economic policy focused on protectionism and security-linked trade.

Conclusion

Trump’s team is embarking on bold economic experimentation, all the while accepting short-term hardship to pursue long-term structural change. Whether the reset achieves its industrial aims or provokes deeper instability depends on global pushback, domestic reaction, and whether the predicted benefits outweigh the immediate sacrifices.

We have to rebuild our country’: Donald Trump and his team pursue economic shock therapy 

3References

https://youtu.be/IptKs2RqbaY?si=3gOZyNDaLMoBBcu9

https://www.livingintheair.org/2025/05/uk-elite-betrays-people-in-eu-trade-deal.html

Is Trump Missing the Boat?

https://youtu.be/4bn943sPgI0?si=gAsXsLK8IJsDZcTt

Read More

THE FIVE FORCES FACING WESTERN PUBLICS

28 May 2025

The five forces threathening the future of western publics : 1. refusal to accept a multipolar world; 2. the consequences of unsustainable debt on interest payments, inflation, taxes and austerity; 3. hyper financiation or the reinvestment of the global south's profits into western assets, inflating their value and leaving the rich richer and the poor only with debt ie inequality as source of unrest; 4. the domination of western governments by corporate interests at the expense of the people; 5. democracy is bypassed as the elites kettle rhe people and condition the democratic process to their own ends, rather than respond to national needs for peace and prosperity.

Ralph Nader:

It is a very good video, up until the end. It is the shocking truth. And Nader's remedy is? ... write a letter to your MP....perhaps I misheard.

Means, in effect, there's nothing we can do, f'ed everywhere you turn! The establishment itself is facing too many problems and so how can the people avoid being collateral damage to the elite's greed and fear?

1. MULITIPOLAR. Loss of hegemony and war everywhere you look - how to accept a mulipolar world & diffuse centres of power?

2. DEBT. Debt & now Trump adds more - how to pay the interest, how to roll over the short end or sell long term bonds, how to have bond markets accept coupons below inflation ( this is the only real way to pay down the debt), how to live within our means w/out tax hikes or austerity, how to avoid bloodbaths of civic non-acceptance of further solutions that continue to privilege the top few percent.?

3. HYPER-FINANCIALISATION. How to de-financialise... To explain...the US persuades the rest of the world from the 50s and 60s onwards to use the dollar for trade purposes, meaning that by the 1974 trade agreement with Saudi, to buy oil you need to first buy dollars. This created an unnatural demand for the dollar, pushing up its value, pushing down the competitiveness of US exports, obliging the US to export its manufacturing jobs to low cost countries eg China, and the condition was that the profits are reinvested in the US. 

The established elites will never willingly accept this, never! How to balance trade (the balance of payments deficit is the profit of the other end of the global supply chain, that they have up to now "lent" to the US for the safe and good returns, but the heightened demand for assets they invest in just inflates their value (hence the S&P at historic multiples of earnings) and who owns these assets...the elite...they see, their assets continue to increase in value while most people have only debt ?

4. AIPAC The jewish / zionist / corporate  lobby has its boot on the West's throat, how to free up our resources and energies for our own use?

5. DEMOCRACY. And finally, how can the people get the leadership the country as a whole needs?

The answers to these questions will not come from a better public relations strategy or a new centrist manifesto (that is binned anyway as soon as the section of the elite gets into power). They require rethinking everything: our economic logic, our global position, our idea of leadership, and our relationship with power itself. 

The West is not dying, but it is being reborn under pressure - the only real-world question is whether that rebirth will come through democratic renewal or systemic collapse.

Read More

THE ART OF THE DEAL. DO TRUMP'S BUSINESS TACTICS APPLY WHEN TRYING TO REACH A GEOPOLITICAL SETTLEMENT

21 March 2025

1. Top Ten Tactics in Business Negotiations

These are classic tactics used by the stronger side to control the negotiation process and steer it toward a favourable outcome:

1.1 Anchoring High

Open with an ambitious position to define the frame.

Forces the weaker side to negotiate downward from your terms.

In geopolitics: e.g. “End the Fighting - The Must be an Immediate Ceasefire.”, "There must be a Territorial Status Quo - No Further Advances can be Tolerated", "Keep Ukraine out of NATO and Limit its Military", "Sign This Minerals Deal / Hand Over Your Power Stations and The US will Protect You".

1.2 Minimise Objections ("These Are Just Details")

Dismiss key concerns as minor technicalities.

Builds urgency and downplays complexity.

Trump often uses this: "We’ll get it done—no problem."

1.3 Project Confidence and Optimism

Assumes the deal is inevitable and success is certain.

Psychological pressure on the other side to not be the one who “derails” progress.

1.4 Control the Agenda and the Timeline

Set the pace and structure of talks.

Speed does benefit the better-prepared party.

Trump may say, “We want a deal in 30 days—let’s get it done.”

1.5 Divide and Conquer

Split up the other side’s internal factions.

Exploit differences between allies or interest groups.

Classic in geopolitical deals: e.g. Trump has used NATO divisions to push the idea that some states (like Germany) aren’t paying their share, creating splits over how to respond to Russia.

1.6 Use of “Carrots” and “Sticks”

Offer incentives, but also threaten consequences.

“Agree now and sanctions ease. Refuse, and we double down.”

Except Trump doesn't have any sticks, and there is little that Russia wants from him other than an enduring peace settlement.

1.7 Create a Sense of Scarcity or a ‘Last Chance’

Pressure to agree by suggesting the deal window is closing.

“This is your only chance for peace—don’t miss it.”

1.8 Control the Narrative/Public Perception

Shape media and diplomatic messaging.

Make refusal seem unreasonable or dangerous.

Trump might leak to media: “Russia's refusal proves they don’t want peace.”

1.9 Framing Concessions as Generous Compromise

Position minimal concessions as major goodwill.

Pressures the other side to “match” your “generosity.”

Eg the pause in attacks on each other's energy infrastructure is actually no concession at all.

1.10 Repetition and Consistency

Repeat key messages until they become accepted truths.

“Ukraine needs peace. We are offering peace. Russia refuses peace.”

2. Limits of Business Tactics in Geopolitical Negotiations

2.1 National Interests Are Non-Negotiable

In business, everything has a price.

In geopolitics, some things don’t: borders, sovereignty, ideology. This is a really hard one for the West to understand.

2.2 Domestic Political Constraints

Leaders must answer to parliaments, factions, voters - not to shareholders.

A deal that looks good on paper can be rejected by political realities.

2.3 Security and Trust

States deal in security dilemmas and have long memories affecting Trust.

Russia remembers every broken promise, from 1990s NATO "not one inch East", to 2008 Budapest "Ukraine and Georgia will join NATO", to 2015 Minsk I and II, to March 2022 Istanbul, to the Belgorod incursion on the eve of this ceasefire ; Ukraine remembers Crimea.

2.4 Face and Prestige Matter

Saving face, especially for strong leaders, is vital.

Business negotiators can walk away quietl - countries cannot.

2.5 Multilateral Complexity

Geopolitical deals often involve coalitions, not just two parties.

Business logic can fall apart in a cats cradle of conflicting interests.

3. Conclusion: Trump’s Style – Business vs Statecraft

Trump’s negotiating style—high pressure, optimistic framing, ‘art of the deal’ - works well in real estate.

But geopolitics is not a Manhattan property deal. The other side may prefer ruin to humiliation.

Business tactics help, but must be embedded within diplomatic conflict resolution, realism that recognises that some goals are non-negotiable, and the art of the geopolitical deal especially requires an understanding of historical grievance.

[End]

Read More

WAR OR WEALTH: BRITAIN AND AMERICA FALL OUT OVER STRATEGY FOR UKRAINE

11 March 2025

We've had no explanation so far as to why London and Washington are so profoundly at odds over the flow of weapons and intelligence and also over the mineral rights deal. 

Moscow has apparently offered Washington a deal over development of Russia's 70 trillion dollars worth of natural resources. Kiev is auctioning off its 7 trillion's worth and this might be included as a secret annex to the one hundred year friendship agreement.

It seems that Europe is suffering from collective russophobia, (the panic-monkeys! - Russia does not represent an existential threat).... The front line states, you might call them, suffering from even more confusion, from pro-Russia Hungary and Slovenia, to Ukraine where Zelensky is constantly asking for security guarantees.

Washington, on the other hand seems to be more concerned with the dire state of its economy and its focus is on extracting the wealth of these countries.

Rifts between Washington and London are pretty unusual. There were crises suez and kippor.

So you might see it as fear in Europe versus greed in America but this video from Alex Krainer goes deeper into the matter and puts it in the context of the Anglo Saxon empire.

Nicely explained here

https://youtu.be/bPYoT24B2uc?si=LO68M4yltnl_vWqR

Alex Krainer explains the economics behind Halford Mackinder's geopolitical theory, ie the reason for an empire to seek and maintain hegemony.

Read More

RIYADH AGENDA, A NEW FRAMEWORK FOR PEACE AND ECONOMIC REVIVAL

22 February 2024

Riyadh Agenda: A New Framework for Peace and Economic Revival

The recent summit in Riyadh has sparked intense debate, most notably these last few days from Ukrainian President Zelensky. His criticism centres on Ukraine’s apparent exclusion from the peace talks. However, the purpose of the meeting is not to leave Ukraine out but to establish a comprehensive agenda for the upcoming summit between presidents Trump and Putin. The aim is to agree on broad headings and working groups, under which discussions can later accommodate all parties. In due course, a legitimate Ukrainian government nominee will find their place within this framework.

At its core, the Riyadh meeting is firstly about restoring something in the way of friendly relations and trust, and reopening, embassies, moscow and washington, iz, materialization of the wish to restore good relations, setting a clear agenda and a supporting process to realise this agenda, and choosing the people for the organisation to run the process. 

Leaders are working to define key areas of discussion, from conflict resolution to energy to economic revitalisation to a eurasian or even tripartite security architecture.. The goal, as we've said, is to create an agenda and way-of-working for addressing these issues. This will start to bring order, bearing on the chaos of ongoing conflicts over the last 33 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, allowing for a systematic approach that eventually integrates all voices. 

So Riyadh, rather than a final agreement, is about creating the necessary structure for future negotiations.... Ultimately, the goal is a new world order, "a new golden age" as Trump puts it.

On the economic front, there is a bold vision for the future. The proposal is to put an end to endless military engagements and to lift the sanctions that have long stifled economic growth. This strategy is expected to free up capital that has been locked in unproductive investments. Once released, these funds could be diverted towards public infrastructure and private research and development. In essence, the plan is to restart the American economy—and by extension, the world economy—by realigning investment towards areas that foster growth and innovation. This shift could herald a true rebirth, as productive investments replace the costs of perpetual conflict.

A crucial element of this world economic revival is the concept of liquidity. Liquidity refers to how easily assets can be converted into cash without significantly affecting their value. In modern economies, ample liquidity is essential; it ensures that money flows smoothly through financial markets and reaches businesses that need it. If liquidity dries up, even the most promising investments can falter because funds are simply not available when required. By enhancing liquidity, policymakers hope to unblock capital, allowing for greater investment in infrastructure and new technologies. This, in turn, would support sustainable growth and help stabilise the broader economy.

The strategic agenda being set in Riyadh is about more than just immediate conflict resolution—it is a forward-looking plan that seeks to transform global dynamics, it is the geopolitical vision that goes beyond Trump's apparent chequebook strategy for paying down debt and restarting the american economy using tarrifs to put manufacturing as the beating heart of the economy, rather than financials. 

By agreeing on a framework agenda that spans multiple issues, the supporting process intends to create a multilateral platform of participants. This platform should gradually incorporate the concerns of Europe and Ukraine, ensuring that when their turn comes, all major players eventually have a voice. Critics may call it exclusionary, but the intention is to establish a structured process that lays the groundwork for broader inclusion later on. This means the jealous and anxious squealing of Zelensky and European leaders misunderstands what is going on. Instead, they should wait there turn and meanwhile play their role as loyal vassals and start communicating the new multipolar world order to their publics.

Zelensky needs to pay special attention to organise elections and he needs to nominate someone to represent Kiev in negotiations with Russia. The alternative to negotiation is defeat on the battlefield. Many European leaders remain tethered to outdated cold war views of Russia, some even want to send troops with air cover to Ukraine. Instead of clinging to these anachronistic ideas, they must listen, re-engage with true democratic values and genuinely represent the interests of their peoples. The alternative is to find themselves obsolete and out of office in a rapidly evolving global landscape.

In the end, while Zelensky’s objections are understandable, they reflect a short-term view of a longer process. The real breakthrough, if it comes, lies in agreeing on the agenda and the process to obtain it. If successful, this could not only pave the way for resolving protracted conflicts, but also release and inject much-needed liquidity into the global economy, staving off recession and ultimately revitalising public and private investment.

This post has been specifically about the Riyadh summit and Zelensky who is yesterday's man and "the chief thief", but take a look at the broader context and what is really happening.

Read More