ISIS not enough? How about another Cold War?

Standard

Both Western as well as Russian media sources seem to want to create another Cold War.  (Yes, some people are that evil.)  We can’t forget that within every authoritarian regime there have been propaganda agents diligently working to maintain some type of diversion so that oppression/elitism/inequality are never discussed.  Western propaganda is no different.

This is very dangerous because media trying to stir up Cold War conditions just so they have a constant scare tactic (and a constant source of eye-catching news) can become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

BBC logo

Gorbachev

(Click for link)

RT Logo Question More

Noam Chomsky

(Click for link)

From my perspective, I don’t think the Cold War was nearly as big of a deal as it was portrayed.  I’m positive the elitists on both sides quickly developed a common understanding that such things could be exploited to divert attention away from more pressing matters.  As much as I dislike George Orwell, he was right in depicting three global superpowers dominating the world with a piece left as undisputed territory.

Let’s pretend the West is Oceania, Russia is Eurasia, China is Eastasia and that the Middle East and Africa represent the disputed territories.  Despite the mental gymnastics one must do to visualize something so otherworldly, once this mental analogy is solidly in place, one can begin to see that the tactics of constant warfare, fighting for global dominance, and shifting of alliances seen within the novel also apply to the real world.

Russian media genuinely tries to make the West out to be a bad guy while Western media does the same to Russia (as well as China.)  Both Russian and Western media use chaos and terrorism within “the disputed territories” to their advantage.  However, if that tactic is becoming too obvious, neither have a problem recreating another Cold War stalemate that can be exploited by both sides.  Upon hearing about possible warfare, right-wing extremists will immediately start calling for greater military investment (just like during the Cold War, just like Nineteen Eighty-Four, just like Ancient Rome, etc.) just like they did when Putin and the West first tussled over Crimea:

Daily Signal Logo

Putin Obama

(Click for link)

People pathologically push for conditions where their natural/instinctive drives are selected for.  If someone is a natural born slave driver, they need a system that is oppressive (it doesn’t matter which one as long as there is a demand for slave drivers.)  If somebody is pathologically wired to constantly call for investment in warfare, they will do so regardless of common sense or lessons from history.


(However, there are also those who genuinely do want a more fair and harmonious world and try to push for such conditions since it’s a complete waste of time/energy/resources maintaining gross inequality purely for the sake of those who are good at maintaining it.)

In Chomsky’s defence, I feel RT sensationalized what he was saying:

Chomsky:

“…it’s come ominously close several times in the past…”

Headline:

‘World ominously close to nuclear war – Noam Chomsky to RT’

Advertisements

Intentions are everything!!!

Standard

The United States cannot support genocide one moment (ie. Gaza) and have the true intention of preventing genocide the next moment. People need to keep the intentions of any intervention straight at all times.

Those who pretend the United Stats government is out to help anyone on the planet but the US elite are either self-deluded or a servant of power at this point.

Image

This photo is exemplary of the way we (the public) should deal with the state when it comes to military intervention. (Please ignore the historical context of this photo. I’m just using the photo as an illustration.)

We should always be trying to hold back the natural imperialistic desires and military aggression of any state. The only time we should ever “let go” and allow the military might of any state to wreak havoc (for selfish intent) is for EXTREMELY dangerous opponents (eg. Nazi Germany) where the growing threat is so great, the people of one’s country could potentially be taken over and RULED by a new power. (ie. use self-defense for REAL self-defense.)

And it’s never the Heroic American Eagle vs the Big Bad. It will always just be Freddy vs. Jason and Jason better be EXTREMELY dangerous to justify any type of military intervention.

Britain and the US …

Quote

Britain and the US like to prove to the World that “democratic” states can be more wicked than autocratic ones and they’ve succeeded with flying colours!

Again, the discussion needs to shift to direct democracy, not totalitarianism.  This makes supporters of imperialistic democracy angry.  Why is that?

There’s nothing…

Aside

There’s nothing wrong with blame as long as it’s directed at individuals who are actually at fault.

The worst personalities will pathologically blame everyone else to divert attention from themselves and the misdemeanours they are glaringly guilty of.  And they refuse to stop doing this.  They can’t take any responsibility and refuse to feel any guilt.  Ariel Castro who kidnapped and raped multiple victims maintained that the sex was consensual up to the very end.

And worst of all, people like this who work their way into positions of power have managed to turn everyone else in society into clones of themselves.  Notice how oversensitive and defensive everybody in our society is today despite the glaringly enormous problems we face.