Comments by "John Roberts" (@view1st) on "George Galloway"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
China will continue on its path and will surpass the United States in its own good time and if this means the dollar loses its status as the world's reserve currency or the United States defaults on its debts and becomes bankrupt then that is what will happen regardless. And if that happens the USA will either take active and vigorous steps to emulate the Chinese model of growth (moving away from service industries into manufacturing, implementing extensive central state planning that prioritises long term gains over short term profits, and begins a programme of heavy investment in infrastructure projects in such fields as transport, communication, education, healthcare and housing) or... it will fall further behind and become a third world country. It can, perhaps, delay this by forcing parts of the world (eg. Europe, Latin America) to continue propping up its economy, but ultimately the economies of Asia will overtake it and begin using their economic, military and political power to force it into a position of dependency, creating a comprador elite that serves the interests of the East at the expense of its own people, like exists now in such places as Latin America.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It has has much right to its independence as Libya, Iraq, Iran, Yugoslavia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Elsted Salvador, Sudan, Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Palestine and all the other places the USA and its protégés in Europe and elsewhere have attacked, are attacking, or plan to attack.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davehallett810
Anglo-American capital located in the USA and Britain in no small way caused the wars against Germany and Japan in the first place, as well as the war against Russia by proxy.
The idea that the corporations of London and New York, the two biggest empires on Earth, both genocidal, racist, anti-disabilist, war-mongering, slavery practicing, paraphilia-phobic and anti-semitic/anti-catholic, are the heroic saviours of the world and its people is to any genuinely dispassionate observer simply untrue.
At the heart of the matter is that the German, Japanese and Russian systems of industrial capital were successfully competing and beginning to undermine the parasitical, piratical and predatory system of extractive rentier capitalism of the British and the Americans and as a consequence had to be destroyed.
1
-
1
-
@Mabibol
"Sociological and political stage."
Sounds too much like a teleological explanation or an explanation based on historicism – that history has a purpose or that we go through stages with each stage better than the one before it. In other words, the peculiar idea originating in western Europe of something called 'progress' exemplified in the division by the West of the rest of the world into developed, developing and underdeveloped countries, something which seems to me to be nothing more than an updated (yet despite this universally accepted) form of racism whereby it is postulated there exists in the real world a hierarchy of countries (in previous eras, races) that are compared to one another with one group (usually implicitly) representing the best, the most civilised, the most virtuous, by virtue of ostensibly objective, empirical and neutral criteria (such as GDP, Gini coefficient, human development index, human rights, democracy, etc.). A certain book by the title of The End Of History And Last Man by one Francis Fukuyama exemplifies this kind of thinking.
The events of the 20th century along with post modernism should have put an end to such ideas, ideas which, furthermore, easily lend themselves to a misguided sense of moral superiority and cultural chauvinism. Dialectical/historical materialism is a case in point, the idea that you can deduce 'laws' from historical events and then assume that your society is the pinnacle of progress and that if you just implement x policies society can be improved.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@betrousaltaweel
Considering that the group known as Al-Qaeda is basically at this point in time a proxy for the USA and its ally Saudi Arabia, as well as a propaganda meme used to justify US interventions around the globe and prop up the 9/11 official government conspiracy narrative, I would say the question you ask is both moot and rhetorical.
It is the USA and its allies who are enabling this so-called Al-Qaeda to do what its doing by supplying them with weapons, training, intelligence and safe havens to launch attacks from and generally protecting them from being effectively dealt with. The USA, Israel, Britain and others are the ones providing Al-Qaida and its offshoots with both material and political support so it's not really 'terrorists' who are attacking other countries, it's countries that are attacking other countries (i.e. it's the USA's 'war on - read of - terror').
In answer to the question though I would emphatically say, no, terrorists should be dealt with. But they should be dealt with by the domestic authorities of the countries being attacked through international efforts coordinated by the United Nations in accordance with international law, something consistently thwarted by the United States.
To reiterate my original post: countries that are being attacked, invaded, occupied, sanctioned and their peoples daily subject to the war crimes and other indignities of a foreign occupation on pretexts we know are false (Iraq had nuclear weapons, Afghanistan was in some way responsible for 9/11, the Syrian government is gassing its own people, etc.) should be resisted and such resistance is entirely legitimate.
1
-
Britain –London to be more precise – is a major centre of money laundering, fraud and foreign flight capital as well as being a refuge for miscreants and terrorists from other countries (Russian oligarchs and political opponents of other countries come to mind). It's also a rentier economy that maintains a parasitical relationship within the global economy, constantly seeking rent and other forms of unearned profit.
Because the Russian Federation is now probably one of the few places that has not been fully exploited by this Anglo-American form of capitalism (banksterism, corporatism) the British rentier class naturally as it as an enemy and an obstacle to their control over Russia's assets, whether that be land, labour, minerals, whatever. Like in the USA, the ruling class of Britain abhors autarky and mercantilism. Resistance to the whims of western finance and corporations, such as countries engaging in protectionism, stopping capital flight or industrial development that redirects resources and capital away from the Global North to use in their own economic development is something that cannot be tolerated. That's also why they don't like China. Countries that will not submit to western capital must be subverted or destroyed. This is the western, and in particular the Anglo-American model, of economics.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1