Comments by "Ralph Bernhard" (@ralphbernhard1757) on "Geopolitical Economy Report"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
Stay out of the world's troubles, created by systems of greed seeking to create and gain from the flames they fan all over the world, hiding behind their stories of "good intentions."
"When two neighbouring countries fight each other, just know the USA visited one." - Nelson Mandela (Region: Southern Africa/Big picture timestamp: Cold War).
The statement is not quite correct.
When two neighbours fight each other, just know that an empire has been there previously.
It's the old joke that "If two fish are fighting, the British Empire has been there."
It is a truism about imperialism in general, and how divide-and-rule works.
Set up neighbours against each other, using a variety of ever-consistent techniques and strategies. With absolute certainty, the tribal leaders of Europe joked the same way about the Roman Empire 2000 years ago, as these outsiders/Romans plus proxies, openly flaunted their "Pax Romana" whilst in the background covertly favouring one "local neighbour", whilst setting them up against the others, using whatever reasoning it wanted.
Outsiders will come into a status quo (also covertly politically or via NGOs as the strategy of "cultural- and political capture"), and these outsiders try to lay down the foundation for division by setting up a "new-found friend" against its neighbours and if it is unsuccessful in one "state" (status quo), it will simply go to the neighbours and try the same. The more neighbours, the more chances of a successful division of powers, which is beneficial to the outside "divider". The more "neighbors", the merrier the games. Because if these neighbours all end up squabbling and fighting, the "divider" vacuums off gains (of various kinds) in the background. Such implemented and leveraged divisions do not necessarily stem from evil intent, since most of the participants in a divide-and-rule strategy have absolutely no idea that they have become "actors" in a great game, the scope of which they remain ignorant of. Even those with good intentions (political doves) can create division, because the "hawks" hide behind the stories the "doves" write...
1
-
The people of the Greater Middle East, including the Levant (most of whom are Semites, and the followers of Abrahamic religions) have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries. Because it is easier to divide people based on personal differences, than it is to unite them, based on what they have in common. Strategically ambiguous rulers make use of this, for own advantages. In the era of empires, first Rome/Constantinople, then during WW1 the seat of POWER playing these games changed to London/Paris, then after the 1950's as European colonialism's power decreased, starting around the time a bark by Washington DC in 1956 (Suez Crisis/War) showed who the new boss was, the role of divider was simply taken over by Washington DC (the entire ME was the playground during the Cold War).
Now the intention is simply to avoid unity in the ME, in order to "rule" over the dissent which is classical "divide and rule".
Today, their leaders are ALL tools.
Endless wars, constant dissent.
Insert "levers" of lies, mistrust...
Create favorites: favoritism...
Point the finger, everywhere else...
Divide and Rule.
Oldest trick in the book...
Who wields the POWER?
Who has had (in all historical cases in the ME/Levant) the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of being able to reach all the other little buck catchers (tools, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER), but could not be reached itself, because of a geographical-, technological-, organisational-, military-, strategic-, political advantage at any given point of a historical timeline?
Same people and systems. Different times. Same games.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RobertaSirgutz We are surrounded by ideologues, who cannot "see" their own ideology.
ideology
Source: Dictionary
noun
1. a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.
"the ideology of democracy"
Similar: beliefs, ideas, ideals
This "box" called "TV" billions bow down to, has got millions to believe they should lie and kill for their ideology. When the ideology they openly and proudly flaunt kills millions, their leaders say that the death of 500,000 children was "worth it" (Madeleine Albright), and there are no repercussions at all. Millions look at such deaths, and don't even bat an eye. They carry on with their lives in sinecure comfort...
Millions cheer and cherish their ideologues and dear leaders who appear to them in these "boxes". The ideology their ideologically indoctrinated leaders openly state they should send "dumb, stupid animals" (quote Henry Kissinger) to kill for, is democracy in colusion with corporatism, and the slogan they chant is "Make the world safe for democracy".
Strange, that their Bible says not to "lie, steal, and kill", but their leaders constantly lie and call upon them to kill to spread democracy.
One ideal, must be wrong.
When one criticizes an ideologue's ideology, they expose their true nature.
1
-
1
-
@TSD0416 It is not the people in every country who decide on a country's policy. It is the mega-rich, and politically connected "ruler/owner/donor" class...
Here's what you can personally do.
Start pulling the rug from underneath their feet...
Boycott: Much simpler than trying to remember the long loooong lists of what not to buy, and for whatever specific reasons, is to try and limit what one actually does buy: buy no-name brands from small companies (addresses usually on the labels), buy local foods (farmers markets), buy locally produced or handmade items, otherwise go slightly "over-regional," or buy fair trade wherever possible.
It is not a perfect strategy, but don't get sidelined by the whiners/finger pointers who will invariably ALWAYS show up like clockwork, trying to ridicule or nag with their dumb "...duh but your using a smartphone, but your using oil toooo"-gotcha style distractions. It is not MEANT to be "perfect"...
Methodology: JDI and make it a longterm lifestyle, not just a short-term knee-jerk "trend," because of some or other upsetting event in the news. Just boycott ALL corporations, as far as personally convenient and possible, and always remember that even if only 75% of all the people on the planet only get it right about 75% of the time, on roughly 75% of everything they buy, it will finally make a massive difference for all the causes you also value. Want to bring the boys home? Do you wish to limit military actions to becoming multinational, following the principles of international law only, and independent of any corporate "interests." Do you wish to contribute to end western imperialist actions and meddling all over the world? You wish to contribute a small share to forcing Israel into a negotiated peace process? Do you wish to give small companies a better chance in the dog-eat-dog capitalist world in your country?
Join BDS, because the international cross-border politically influencial rich and powerfull only REALLY start caring when their pockets start hurting.
Regardless of where you live, or how much money you have, just remember this:
- You are not going to achieve change by voting in elections.
- You are not going to achieve change by posting on social media.
- You are not going to achieve change by debating on any plattform, real or virtual.
- You are not going to achieve change by making use your "freedom of speech" in any way.
- You are not going to achieve change by protesting in any possible way which will politically make a difference.
Here is what you can do, easily:
1) Read Smedley-Butler/War is a Racket, a very short book (should be possible in a few hours)
2) realize that after around a 100 years, NOTHING has changed
3) start unravelling the connections between big business and Washington DC, by boycotting "big brands". 👍👋
1
-
1
-
Nobody is "exploiting the USA".
It is still the other way around, with around 4% of the global population, controlling around 30% of the world's wealth and resources.
That is simply down from previous levels of exploitation of the entire globe, as the world suffered after WW2.
In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff stated: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity." Kennan exemplified a GLOBALIST prototype. This is how the USA increased their wealth: by inciting conflict among people and siphoning off the wealth of entire regions with the creation of such policy "patterns" on the map.
And that is what you are fighting for. That is the hegemon's consistent approach, masquerading as the "good pax," while playing "good cop/bad cop" globally from a position of strength. Historically, the "good cops" were the internationalists with the soft words, while the "bad cops" were the imperialists with the stick. This is how divide-and-rule is executed. Refer to Halford Mackinder (Pivot of History, 1904) and Zbigniew Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard, 1997) regarding Eurasia for the framework. Consult W.T. Stead (Americanization of the World, 1901) for guidelines on political, cultural, and economic domination. Read Smedley Butler (War is a Racket) for insights into the operational methods of imperialism/militarism.
The games of Albion. Post-WW2, Albion 2.0 emerged.
THE LINK OF THE WORLD.
The entire system favored in the USA/collective West is based on a pre-established managed and moderated division, benefiting a select few at the top of the hierarchy, accompanied by a frequently repeated appealing narrative.
Who holds the POWER? Who has had the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE to influence all other "buck catchers" (tools, proxies, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER) while remaining unreachable due to geographical, technological, organizational, military, strategic, and political advantages throughout history?
1
-
"The Force" to influence billions of minds is strategy. The most effective of these is the divide and rule/conquer technique. It is also the most misunderstood of all strategies, usually and falsely associated with Nazis, bullies and other evil regimes: WRONG.
It is simply a technique used to effect the highest own potential systemic gain with the least own imput, by dividing any potential opposition, mostly via the cheap trick of appealing to people's emotions and biases. Once systemic dependecies have been created, on multiple tiers, these must come to the "divider" for "a ruling".
Every system which does not specifically forbid ze divide and rule/conquer technique, will systematically enable it.
No human system is immune to it, and neither are democracies, or our revered capitalism, or any form of "meritocracy".
One of the core techniques of the divide and rule/conquer strategy is favoratism: it is really simple, but no system of power which ever made it to the top, will ever admit how simple it is.
Most power players who discover the simplicity of the technique, will try to disguise it and misuse it for own gain, rather than to expose it for what it is: a means of deception, which once exposed and widely-known, will unravel the power it holds over billions of minds. Power players on all tiers of reciprocal human interaction with an intent of gain motive can never admit that they use ze technique themselves, nor can they accuse others directly of employing it, because they all employ it, either directly, or indirectly via proxies. Therefore you as a commoner will hardly ever hear it being discussed and repeated like the proverbial "mantra": it occupies a lowly existence in intellectual debates, even though it is the key to true power. Like the Nazis, all power players regardless of the "system of gain" in question, come up with all kinds of subterfuge to avoid being immediately exposed as playing the game of divide and rule themselves...
Enter any hierarchical system of power in any intent of gain model of reciprocal human interaction, and you'll enter a shark tank.
The favorite = the proxy.
Scale it up or down to whichever tier you wish.
All that is needed is a position of superior power.
The Big Lie is the power of the divide and rule/conquer technique, and even the Nazis hid their "Big Lie"-conspiracy theory, behind an even bigger lie: how they intended to play this game until they got into power after their failed coup d'etat.
The "Big Lie" is not a myth but a misrepresentation of the truth.
It is the power of "divide and rule/conquer" which lurks behind every strategy they follow, in order to gain.
No human being has ever come up with a means to overcome this age-old technique of ruling over billions of people, because it is predicated on human nature itself, which is enduring.
No power player wants to become associated with authoritarian, or "colonial" tactics and strategies, or Nazis, so they cannot use it as a political means to attack rivals: it will immediately result in blowback.
The "Big Lie" conspiracy masked the divide and rule technique.
No power player can ever accuse any other power player of using it, since it will immediately backfire: the accusation of using the technique themselves, which in most cases of intent of gain will even apply***. The disguise usually comes in the form of scapegoating or another form of appeal to the emotion of listeners, or addressing and fortifying their already existing biases.
"Scapegoating" = an appeal to lower emotions of potential supporters.
In our divided societies, appealing to these biases might always be that tiny little "weight" that tilts the scale in very tightly run political elections.
Most power players read books on strategy, with the intention of using these strategies for personal gain, not because they wish to benefit you (the individual).
There is always the urge to defend own favored systems, when one reads perceived "attacks" on these favored systems or own heroes, and the beloved own "-isms", which also reveal standard procedures, meaning the "attacker" soon falls into predetermined pathways to deflect and obfuscate from the core theory...
Footnotes:
**only applies in competitive "intent of gain" systems, *not benevolent forms of reciprocal human interaction which are 100% fair...
1
-
You are 100% on spot.
This "gut feeling" which you cannot explain, is in fact very simple: it is the effects of the strategy of divide and rule.
"The Force" to influence billions of minds is strategy. The most effective of these is the divide and rule/conquer technique. It is also the most misunderstood of all strategies, usually and falsely associated with Nazis, bullies and other evil regimes: WRONG.
It is simply a technique used to effect the highest own potential systemic gain with the least own imput, by dividing any potential opposition, mostly via the cheap trick of appealing to people's emotions and biases. Once systemic dependecies have been created, on multiple tiers, these must come to the "divider" for "a ruling".
Every system which does not specifically forbid the divide and rule/conquer technique, will systematically enable it.
No human system is immune to it, and neither are democracies, or our revered capitalism, or any form of "meritocracy".
One of the core techniques of the divide and rule/conquer strategy is favoratism: it is really simple, but no system of power which ever made it to the top, will ever admit how simple it is.
Most power players who discover the simplicity of the technique, will try to disguise it and misuse it for own gain, rather than to expose it for what it is: a means of deception, which once exposed and widely-known, will unravel the power it holds over billions of minds. Power players on all tiers of reciprocal human interaction with an intent of gain motive can never admit that they use the technique themselves, nor can they accuse others directly of employing it, because they all employ it, either directly, or indirectly via proxies. Therefore you as a commoner will hardly ever hear it being discussed and repeated like the proverbial "mantra": it occupies a lowly existence in intellectual debates, even though it is the key to true power. Like the Nazis, all power players regardless of the "system of gain" in question, come up with all kinds of subterfuge to avoid being immediately exposed as playing the game of divide and rule themselves...
Enter any hierarchical system of power in any intent of gain model of reciprocal human interaction, and you'll enter a shark tank.
The favorite = the proxy.
Scale it up or down to whichever tier you wish.
All that is needed is a position of superior power.
The Big Lie is the power of the divide and rule/conquer technique, and even the Nazis hid their "Big Lie"-conspiracy theory, behind an even bigger lie: how they intended to play this game until they got into power after their failed coup d'etat.
The "Big Lie" is not a myth but a misrepresentation of the truth.
It is the power of "divide and rule/conquer" which lurks behind every strategy they follow, in order to gain.
No human being has ever come up with a means to overcome this age-old technique of ruling over billions of people, because it is predicated on human nature itself, which is enduring.
No power player wants to become associated with authoritarian, or "colonial" tactics and strategies, or Nazis, so they cannot use it as a political means to attack rivals: it will immediately result in blowback.
The "Big Lie" conspiracy masked the divide and rule technique.
No power player can ever accuse any other power player of using it, since it will immediately backfire: the accusation of using the technique themselves, which in most cases of intent of gain will even apply***. The disguise usually comes in the form of scapegoating or another form of appeal to the emotion of listeners, or addressing and fortifying their already existing biases.
"Scapegoating" = an appeal to lower emotions of potential supporters.
In our divided societies, appealing to these biases might always be that tiny little "weight" that tilts the scale in very tightly run political elections.
Most power players read books on strategy, with the intention of using these strategies for personal gain, not because they wish to benefit you (the individual).
There is always the urge to defend own favored systems, when one reads perceived "attacks" on these favored systems or own heroes, and the beloved own "-isms", which also reveal standard procedures, meaning the "attacker" soon falls into predetermined pathways to deflect and obfuscate from the core theory...
Great Britain did not "win" from the "divide and rule/conquer" system they had set up in Europe, as a matter of an own London policy standpoint of making the strongest continental power their "default rival/enemy" system.
If you wish to truly understand the "how" and "why", then go to the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under this video. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired.
No, these essays are not a "conspiracy theory."
Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.
Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section):
Most of what we are fed by our systems, as "rote leaning" details, are "99% ancillary details": not saying these are untrue or wrong, but simply that they are not as important on the ranking or "tiers" of events as geopolitics and grand strategy.
For these geostrategists, divide and rule/conquer is their main strategy, regardless of what you as an individual believe.
Footnotes:
* only applies in competitive "intent of gain" systems, not benevolent forms of reciprocal human interaction which are 100% fair...
1
-
Trump isn't a "hero" in case he achieves peace in the Ukraine, never mind how weird this statement sounds. For all the wrong reasons, the "peace loving" part of the empire is a ploy. Trump is no hero, regardless of whether he achieves peace (temporary breather). He's just a figurehead and "ratchet" for the American Century, just like every other POTUS in history. Some might have been more openly imperialistic, but they all served an expansive empire.
Peace? YES.
Idolatry? No.
The MO has been consistent since 1776: marching onto another powers borders (systemically), also by proxy, then blame those encroached on/encircled if they REact, or blame the proxies if they are "too weak/failures". This recent post-Cold War march started during the 1990s, so even if the Trump admin didn't start the "marching order", fact is he didn't stop it either when he had the opportunity during the first admin (2017-2021).
This can be studied as empirical evidence (observation/map) which makes it clear who was encroaching on/encircling whom, and one should not engage with debaters basing their theories on ideology or feelings, specifically not if the advocate outs himself as dogmatist, prone to committing fallacies in reasoning or resort to cognitive biases. Such people are not interested in outcomes, but wish to make "debates" go around in circles forever, obfuscating, side-lining and finger-pointing in order to avoid the obvious: answering the question "Who started it?"
The current marching route of the empire, which started when the USSR economically faltered in the late-1980s with "carved-up Yugoslavia" being the first victim of divide-and-rule.
Systemic/ideological expansion into:
- Eastern Europe.
- Black Sea/Balkans/Caucasus Region (southern pincer of the marching route)
- Scandinavia/Baltic Sea Region (northern pincer of the marching route)
Keep on marching, marching, and when there is a reaction or resistance, start "pointing fingers" (narrative control). This type of imperialist behaviour as evident by Washington DC, and their subservient "collective West/NATO", did not only start after WW2. This marching order started in 1776, and first victims were neighbours like First Nations or Mexico, whose territory was desired.
"The US national interest is controlling other countries. So that whatever economic surplus that country is able to generate, is transferred to the US, to US investors, to the US govt & especially to US bond holders." - Prof. Michael Hudson (the "giant vacuum cleaner").
It is today, as it was since 1776.
Fact is that Trump, or any other previous admin, did not stop this "(systemic) slow march".
Nobody owes the government and the Trump admin anything for something the USA started itself based on the undemocratic self-proclaimed idea that it should be, and remain, global hegemony.
Based on the logic of the Golden Rule, which states "not to do to others as one does not wish to be done onto" (strategy of power aka fairness, to avoid escalation), a wise strategy is to find common grounds, reach mutually agreeable accords which all gain from. Even if the current issue is "solved", it does not solve the overriding issue: the expansive aims of the USA, which started in 1776 and never stopped, and the strategy it uses to achieve gains for its top tiers/elites, by pushing proxies ahead of it as "buck catchers" to catch the effects of the advances if something goes wrong. These so-called leaders, mostly people who nobody ever elected, want to be praised for solving the chaos they cause (or not stopped from escalating) with ostentatious theatrics whilst profiteering openly and proudly from the own lies, deception, and strategizing.
Why are we even having all these "debates" and arguments today, with all types of fools and "problem solvers" stepping into the limelight, proliferating themselves? Correct answer: politicians and power players who "do to others," (Golden Rule) creating situations they would cry like babies if "done onto" them (own systems). The worst types of "bunker boy"-style leaders one could wish for. Cause problems, and run for the bunkers if there is a reaction, pushing others in front of them to catch the buck...
Next up: How can the USA withdraw from NATO, cheered along by adoring fans back home, withdrawing the overwhelming part of Europe's nuclear umbrella while blaming the victims, so the setup established since the 1990s continues (US global hegemony/vassalized Europe/weak/divided), and then benefit from the setup of "weakened Europe" somewhere else if Europe doesn't make their peace with Russia FAST?
Foster division.
Notice how throughout history, that certain types were never there on the frontlines, when push came to shove...
These types foster division from the background. The first step, often kept quiet or apologized for, is to deceive to AVOID unity elsewhere, and thereby divide others, accompanied by the repetitive "nice-sounding stories."
Then...
1) Divide-and-gain.
If not.
2) Divide-and-control.
If not.
3) Divide-and-rule.
If not.
4) Divide-and-conquer.
If not.
5) Divide-and-destroy.
...then, when everybody else is down and out (exhausted), start again with 1) accompanied by a whole lot of finger pointing.
Just claim hero status for the self, and blame everybody else for everything which goes wrong.
The Albion.
The Albion 2.0.
The USA can gain somewhere else?
Already predicted. Greenland.
(Historical parallel: How the Albion 1.0 gained Cypress by pushing for war between the Three Kaiser League in the wake of the Russo-Turkish War of 1878/1879, which can be studied as "Albion template")
Wait for it...
------------------------------------------
Footnote
With Europe set up against Russia, the USA will pivot to Asia to instigate trouble here (already the strategy since Obama).
We are supposed to admire them, but they never give anything of geopolitical/grand strategy value back. Ever. Ratchet principle.
1
-
1
-
The people of Eurasia, including Western Europe (most of whom are Christians) have been divided and ruled over by outsiders for centuries. Because it is easier to divide people based on personal differences, than it is to unite them, based on what they have in common. Strategically ambiguous rulers make use of this, for own advantages. In the era of European Imperialism, first London dragging along her junior partner Paris, then after 1945 as European colonial powers' influence decreased, the role of divider was simply taken over by Washington DC (the entire world was the playground during the Cold War).
Now the intention is simply to avoid unity in Eurasia, in order to "rule" over the dissent which is classical "divide and rule".
Today, their leaders are too weak to unite.
Endless wars, constant dissent.
Insert "levers" of lies, mistrust...
Create favorites: favoritism...
Point the finger, everywhere else...
Divide and Rule.
Oldest trick in the book...
In February 1948, George F. Kennan's Policy Planning Staff said: "[W]e have about 50% of the world's wealth but only 6.3% of its population. ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity." [end of]
And that is what they did.
America's allies and self-procalimed default rivals in Europe are still being burnt to ensure this disparity continues.
Set up European and Eurasian nations (including the MENA region) against each other.
It is how divide and rule is implemented.
The "playbook" of Great Britain and the USA for more than 100 years. Read Halford Mackinder (Pivot of History, 1904) and Zbigniew Brzezinski (Grand Chessboard, 1997).
Who wields the POWER? Who has had (in all historical cases in the ME/Levant) the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of being able to reach all the other little buck catchers (tools, and other Roman-era style instruments of POWER), but could not be reached itself, because of a geographical-, technological-, organisational-, military-, strategic-, political advantage at any given point of a historical timeline?
"Most of the great problems we face are caused by politicians creating solutions to problems they created in the first place." - Walter E. Williams
1
-
Of course, everybody who reads their "book of moral principles", the Bible, knows that Jesus said you must ENCIRCLE and ENCROACH on they neighbor, in order to be the "eternal good guy" of history. LOL, no. Just kidding...
A few historical examples of this have already been mentioned below, and typical REactions to such surrounding and encroaching.
The REaction, is ALWAYS a crisis, accompanied by threats of war with the side trying to implement this "encirclememnt", acknowledging its deception, and backing down.
Other examples of escalation continuing to the point of war...
1) As Napoleon started expanding on the continent around 1800, the thread of the "Pistol pointing at the heart of England" (Antwerp as "encroaching" on England) was enough for GB to kickstart the Napoleonic war as pretext. The real reason was of course to "avoid the single hegemony" on the continent, using lttle nations, like German speakers, as allies. As long as Prussia was weak enough not to threaten the balance of power, it would be beguiled, befriended to take on the strongest continental power/alliance which was France (and Austria-Hungary). Paris used "divide and rule" to nibble apart the weak Central European power, the Holy Roman Empire, which found itself without a true purpose as the Ottoman mpire withdrew from Europe in statges. At the time, around 1800, France was (of course) simply making the continent "SAFE FOR DEMOCRACY", and was therefore ...the ...err..."bad guy"?.
2) War of 1812, with European powers trying to "encircle" the fledgeling USA, using Native American tribes as "buck catchers". In the big picture analysis of geopolitics/grand strategy, Washington DC had beguiled one of the waring European empires (Spain), then picked one of the other European empires (France) as "temporary best fwiend", and attacked the other (GB) preventively. All other reasoning, like "poor little sailors", was of course "ancillary".
3) The Boer Republics becoming surrounded and encroached upon by the British Empire, decided to strike first by declaring war. The Boers had no international "best friends", since their fringe location far in the interior of Africa with little infrastructure, made their plight uninteresting for other major powers. They could only hope that a war somewhere else, would draw off the British Empire's resources, to address more pressing matters elsewhere.
4) World War 1, which had its long-term causes in the intention to surround and encroach on (1st) Germany, by France and Russia (in stages, 1891-94), and then following that up with an equal attempt to "encircle" Austria-Hungary, by closer relations and a potential alliance between Russia and Serbia. Note: The suitably highlighted and (quote) "oh so important" event, the "Bosnia Crisis" (1908) came AFTER the 1903 coup d'etat in Belgrade, which put Serbia into the Russian/French "camp", and AFTER London's "entente" with Russia. The final annexation of Bosnia in 1908 was of course an EFFECT, not a "cause" (see concept of "retrocausality"). In reality, the status quo in the Balkans as around 1900, had suited Vienna just fine, but Vienna would not accept a "pistol pointing at the heart" of Austria-Hungary, by subversive Serbian attempts in Bosnia, using Serb nationalism as pretext. The side "pushing" after 1903 became the Entente Cordial, which intended to use Serbia as "buck catcher" (John Mearsheimer) for Russian intentions of gain in the Balkans, and this expansion had been tacidly "nodded off by London" (logic/reasoning: it deflected Russian expansive drive back to the Balkans, away from the Far East and Asia) during the talks re. the "entente" with Russia (1905/1906).
5) In August 1939 Poland became "encircled" by a temporary alliance of her neighbors (Germany/SU), with the intention to "carve her up" in a 4th partitioning, but decided to do nothing and not "strike first". Warsaw felt safe enough, and "protected" by empires. As long as she did not provoke an attack, France and Britain would engage Germany with a "2-front war" in case of aggression. *Unlike the USA in example nr.2) Poland had refused to "beguile" some neighbors, and make "friends" with one side of her neighbors, and paid the price.
6) Israel, encircled and feeling encroached by her Arab neighbors started several wars, either allying with empires (1956) or starting a preventive war by own choice (1967). Others were "preemptive wars" or "defensive wars" (Yom Kippur, 1973).
7) The "Special Military Operation" of February 2022, by Russia into the Ukraine. After 2007/08 the Ukraine was built up as the "buck catcher" for NATO expansion, pretty much the same way Japan was set up as "buck catcher" against Russia in the leadup to 1904 (longer essays below). The attempt by the west to "encroach" on Russia with NATO expansion, using the Ukraine as their "tool", was prevented with an invasion of "rest-Ukrainia" by Russia, since NATO does not expand into war zones" (Effect: NATO expansion is avoided by war, or as long as the Ukraine stays in one piece).
All of these wars offer sufficient overlap with regards to a systemic analysis, to become compatible.
Lesson to be learnt?
Do not do onto others as one does not wish to be done onto.
Do not surround or encroach on they neighbor.
1
-
1
-
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." - Malcolm X
The picture he painted, is faaaaaar bigger than that.
If you're not careful, the entire apparatus steered by the global elites will have you hating the people who are being ideologically encircled and divided, and loving the people who are doing the ideological encircling and dividing...
Search the term ideology in a dictionary.
It is a noun, and a defined term.
It is a system of ideas and ideals, especially one which forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy.
Like the ideology of democracy.
YES, believe it or not, what YOU believe in, is an ideology.
Similar to this concept are systems of beliefs, systems of ideas, and systems of ideals.
ALL of these, need "dumb, stupid animals" (quote Henry Kissinger) in order to break out of the theory level of things, towards a real existing form of POWER.
They need you, yes, YOU, to lie, and kill, so they can steal in the background, and YOU, yes, "you", are not better that anybody else on this planet if you lie, and kill for an ideology.
These dumbed down masses reveal themselves by the way the speak...
They are all tools, of others.
These power players preach from their "boxes" called "TV" and millions bow down to them, and these power players have got millions to believe they should lie and kill for their ideology, and become ideologically indoctrinated warriors. When the ideology they openly and proudly flaunt kills millions, their leaders say that the death of 500,000 children was "worth it" (Madeleine Albright), and there are no repercussions at all. Millions look at such deaths, and don't even bat an eye. They carry on with their lives. Millions cheer and cherish their ideologues and dear leaders. The ideology their ideologically indoctrinated leaders openly state they should send soldiers to kill for, is democracy in marriage with corporatism, and the slogan they have chanted since World War 1 is "Make the world safe for democracy".
Strange, that their Bible says not to "lie, steal, and kill", but their leaders call upon them to kill to spread democracy.
One of them, must be wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The question posed to Asians (mainly Chinese and Indians/citizens within these borders) remains the same as during the era of imperialism.
The obfuscators and dividers will use the same techniques in reasoning as they use in politics: they will "hop around" on criteria, causing dissention in debates on the micro level (society), in the same way the power players "hop around" on entire countries/governments/capital cities/key politicians in geopolitics on the macro level...
The technique of "divide and rule"...
Hop over here, hop over there, whatever standpoint brings the own short-term advantage, because THE POWER has the GEOGRAPHICAL ADVANTAGE of not having to suffer consequences from it's own actions.
The question posed to all Asians remains.
Whether they can see that they are in the same positions they were in 200 and 300 years ago.
The dividers come with "promises" which they mostly don't intend keeping, or offer "treaties" (in which these dividers themselves hold the geographical advantage of distance), make all kinds of excuses why the dividers don't keep their promises, or why the dividers don't suffer the same percentage of harmfull effects in times of crisis/war as the "chosen ones". These promises are very enticing to power players, and offer the prospect of glory and achievement to the side the promises are made to...
Anthony Blinken making some Indians FEEL***(see footnote) very proud with repeated offers of NATO membership, just like previous US admins made such promises to the Ukriane, which no doubt made many Ukrainians FEEL very proud, and then the dividers with the geographical advantage, subsequently citing all kinds of "difficulties" why such "pwomises" then cannot be effected in a short timespan.
Meanwhile, exposing the "Ukraine"/proxy to extreme danger as the feet were dragged and dragged and dragged...
Of course, in the game called divide and rule, it is not the fact THAT it is a ridiculous offer, in view of recent events in the Ukraine exposing the danger of such folly, but rather the fact THAT such an offer is repeated. The fact THAT the offer is on the table, already causes mistrust/dissention amongst ASIAN neighbors.
Of course, if India refuses, the divider (of Asia), Washington DC can simply go to China and "promise Taiwan" to Beijing (signed away) in return for a deal, to surround Russia. The potential for "divide and rule" rests on the side with the geographical advantage, as long as the targets for division do not unite, specifically with a comprehensive Asian security agreement.
The question to Asians remains the same.
What are they going to do to create a SINGLE HEGEMONY (alliance) in East Asia, in order to speak with a united voice, against the POWER of division.
BRICS is not enough.
Any other deal or treaty, or even the "UN's" laws and the "rules based order" cannot stand up to the POWER of divide and rule.
It needs a comprehensive security agreement for all of those in the FRACTURE ZONE 4 (stretching from North Pole, via Japan, Taiwan, through Thailand, the Indian subcontinent, towards the Middle East).
If no comprehensive security agreement is achieved, mutually beneficial for all, then simply wait for history to return ("rhyme")...
Or are Indian leaders like... first they came for Russia, but I did not care because I was not Russian. Then they came for China, but I did not care because I was not Chinese, and even saw an advantage for myself (economy) if China got "carved up" and weakened...
Indian leaders: It'll be great, if WE can CONTROL the WATER flowing into China, from Tibet...such tempting "offers" and promises...
"Around 1900" repeating for Tibet.
Finally though, if everything is burning, divided, in quagmire of revolution and war, and Asia the "new Middle East" (as unfolded after the 1882 British invasion, followed up closely by "Sir Lawrance the divider ofArabs"), finger pointing, and harsh language in the neighboring state, then who will speak up for India when the dividers come for you?
DESIRABLE OUTCOME in any divide and rule system: The dividers will subsequently have the "upper hand/higher ground" (leverage) of POWER for all future negotiations with the resulting "statelets".
The secret towards more Indian "power" lies in the continued "power" of its neighbors, not these neighbors' weakness.
* The appeal to emotion
1
-
1