Ukraine and the Right of All Peoples to Choose the Form of Government Under Which They Will Live

Reflecting widespread Ukrainian hatred for Russians in Nazified, Banderite Ukraine, Ukraine's Parliament just passed a law to purge the country of Russian Culture. The policy is highly divisive, since 17% of Ukraine's population are ethnic Russian and 30% are Russian speakers. 

Ukraine's hated Russians and Russphones naturally resents this policy of cultural genocide, more so the exterminationist ambition of former Ukrainian Premier, Julia Tymoshenko. Moreover, being concentrated in Eastern Ukraine and the Odessa region, they naturally want self government, which is to say independence from the hate-filled, NATO-backed, lynch mob in Kyiv. 

So what to do? Obviously, the decent solution is to honor the principles of the Atlantic Charter set forth by Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Winston Churchill at a meeting in Newfoundland on August 14, 1941.

Specifically, among other rights, the Atlantic Charter proclaimed:

the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live

In accordance with this principle, the solution to the Russia: Ukraine conflict is clear: A referendum in every Ukrainian Oblast with a large Russian-speaking population to determine whether the people wish to be ruled by Kyiv, by Moscow, or live independently under their own culturally Russian state, such as the existing sovereign Donbas republics. 

But too many idiots now rule in the West, including Bojo the serially divorced, fake Churchill, Trudeau the Canadian dictator-wannabe who thinks it wise to provide Ukraine weapons with which to kill Russians, who are, after the Americans, our closest neighbours. 

Related: 

Another Zelensky Lie Debunked - White House Says Ukraine Must Give Up Territory

SCOTT RITTER: The Fantasy of Fanaticism

Larry Johnson: Why the Canadian Government Loves Ukrainian Nazis

The Ukraine Crisis Will Be The END of NATO w/Scott Ritter:

Czech Republic Has Exhausted Its Arms Reserves Supporting Ukraine, PM Reveals

Expansive CIA 'Stealth Network' Of Spies & Commandos Inside Ukraine

Understanding the NY Times Article on the CIA in Ukraine

John Mearsheimer's Ukraine Crystal Ball

G7 Commits To 'Indefinite' Military & Financial Support To Ukraine

Libertarian Institute: Brzezinski’s Proxy War Playbook

Paul Craig Roberts: If the Kremlin ever Wakes Up Things Will Go Badly for the West

Col Douglas Macgregor - Ukraine Russia War Update 21.06.2022.

Ukraine Forces Retreat From Encircled Severodonetsk As Russia Achieves Hold Over Luhansk Province

Russian forces encircle thousands as Ukrainian troops begin surrender

THE DARK SIDE OF THE UKRAINIAN PRESIDENT

Paul Craig Roberts: NATO Engaged in Direct Aggression Against Russia

Germany supplies Ukraine with most advanced artillery to kill Russians with

Russian Ruble Becomes World’s Best Performing Currency, Reaches Seven Year High Against Dollar

Russia says it’s ready for ‘big, colossal war’ with NATO

C.J. Hopkins: And the Germans Always Choose Nazism

Z.H.: Our New Best Friend, Nazified Ukraine, Bans Main Opposition Party, Seizes All Its Assets. Bravo

Meantime, in Canada: Trudeau’s online censorship bill charges ahead

Ukraine Does Not Have a Nazi Problem, It Has a Russian Problem

Ukraine's problem is not Nazis but Russians. Ukraine's Nazis hate Russians for the same reason that Germany's Nazis hated Jews, and Zionist Jews hate Arabs: they hate the presence in their society of people of alien race, religion and culture. 

And for Ukrainians the problem with Russians, not only their presence but also their frequent domination, has existed intermittently for over a thousand years. The first Russians in what is now the Ukraine were Vikings. These were people from Finland and other places to the North, who traversed Eastern Europe in light wooden boats that they portaged from river to river. In this, way Russians crossed the Eurasian continent from the Baltic to the Black sea, the final leg of their journey via the Dniepr River. It was on the banks of the Dniepr that they established, at a place called Kiev, the capital of the Russian state.

From the mouth of the Dniepr, the early Russian adventurers sailed the Black Sea to the Dardanelles, bringing honey, wax, fur and slaves from the forests of the North to exchange for cloth, porcelain, ironware, gold and silver  in the markets of the Roman capital of Constantinople. 

Over the course of time, the Ukrainian portion of the Russian domain was overrun by other groups including the Kazars, who converted to Judaism (hence the blonde blue-eyed Jews of the Ukraine), and the Tatars, a branch of Gengis Kahn's Golden Horde. But the Russians returned, first to the territory East of the Dniepr, which they acquired at the expense of the Polish-Lithuanian Empire in 1667. Subsequently Russia gained control of territory to the West of Dniepr through an agreement with the Cossacks. Then, in 1783, they conquered Crimea whence Tatars had made a practice of invading Southern Russia to kidnap tens of thousands of peasants each year to sell in the slave market at Constantinople.

Thus, prior to the Russian Revolution, the Russian Tsar ruled the three Russias: Great Russia, which was more or less coextensive with Russia today, including Crimea, White Russia, now an independent Belarus, and Little Russia, aka the Ukraine.

Following the Russian Revolution, the Ukraine became independent, experienced a civil war, after which it was conquered by the Soviet Union, becoming independent once again following the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

In light of that history, the ambivalence of feeling of Russians and Ukrainians for one another is understandable. However, since the break-up of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainians foolishly antagonized Russia and Ukraine's ethnic Russian population by threatening a genocide of ethnic Russians comprising a majority of the population of the Donbas region of Eastern Ukraine: an antagonism leading to the formation of the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk.

Separation, however, was not acceptable to the Ukrainian nationalists who wish to possess an Eastern Ukraine minus ethnic Russians. Thus, as former Ukrainian Prime Minister Julia Tymoshenko avowed, the Donbas Russians, or cockroaches as the Ukrainian Nazis contend, should be nuked, or as other more humane Kievites contend, expelled from the territory of the Ukraine. Pending any other solution, the Ukrainians have shelled and sniped at the people of Donetsk and Luhansk, killing, so it is reported, around 15,000 of them, including hundreds of children. 

Most recently, according to US Colonel Douglas McGregor, Ukraine assembled in Eastern Ukraine an army of 60,000, including the notorious Nazi Azov Battalion, with the apparent intention of wiping out the breakaway republics. This action compelled a response from Moscow, which culminated in the current invasion. 

How the conflict will be resolved remains to be seen, but the obvious, humane solution would be a region by region referendum to determine how the people in each part of the Ukraine wish to be governed. Do they want inclusion within the Ukrainian state -- with its avowed intention to eliminate Russian culture and the use of the Russian language for all official purposes including education; independence as separate states; or union with one of the states adjacent to the Ukraine, these being Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Belarus, and Russia. 

A referendum in Crimea in 2014 which indicated overwhelming popular support for union with Russia, was followed by an essentially peaceful Russian annexation. However, no such decent solution to ethnic division in the remaining Russian-dominated regions of the Ukraine is acceptable to the Ukrainian leadership in Kiev. Furthermore, any such democratic solution, which would almost certainly result in further territory being annexed by Russia, would certainly be condemned by the self-declared global hegemon, the United States of Aggression and the leaders of America's NATO side kicks, including Bojo the Concuspicient, Trudeau the Maple Leaf Fuhrer, plus the zero Covid crackpots of Australasia.

Related:

Colonel Douglas Macgregor: The US is Deliberately Ignoring the Path to Peace in Ukraine

Prof. John J. Mearsheimer: The Causes and Consequences of the Crisis in Ukraine

Kiev Wanted to Use Drones to Deliver Bioweapons to Donbass Documents and other evidence from US-funded laboratories in Ukraine suggest that Kiev was planning to use drones to deploy pathogens against the Donbass as well as Russia, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Wednesday. Moscow has also identified specific US officials involved in the development of bioweapons in Ukraine. ...

These campaigns were “directly related to the son of the current US president, Hunter Biden,” Konashenkov added, citing investigations in the Western media. Last week, the Daily Mail published emails showing Biden’s ties to the Pentagon contractor Metabiota, which specialized in researching pandemic-causing pathogens that could be used as bioweapons. ...

Earlier this month, ... US diplomat Victoria Nuland testified before the Senate that there were “biological research laboratories in Ukraine” and the US was working with Kiev “to ensure that the materials of biological research do not fall into the hands of Russian forces.”

How Sanctions on Russia Just Happen to Advance the Great Reset

Russia Mythology Dominates the U.S. Media

Coming, April 1, Iain Davis: 
Ukraine War! What Is It Good For? The Global Reset

Germany Declines Zelensky's Demand for a New World War

CIA Officer Openly Confesses To Rigging 2020 Election For Joe Biden And Says They Would Do It Again

Zelensky says Ukraine's partners should ramp up military support to his country Thing is Zel, you have no "partners." 

Ukraine is not a member of NATO. And despite enthusiastic backing of globalist shills like Justin Trudeau for your campaign of ethnic cleansing in Donbas — which as everyone should remember was the cause of this war — no nation is under an obligation to save you from the consequences of your own vicious actions. 

You should have taken the advice of Israeli Premier Barrett when he told you many days ago to accept Russia's peace terms. You should take that advice now, instead of attempting to kick start World War III. 

Straight Talk with Hungarian FM Peter Szijjarto | Ukraine-Russia Conflict Why is it that the US, Canada, and Britain have no leaders able to speak in the clear, intelligent, and humane manner of tiny Hungary's Foreign Minister?

Tucker Carlson Speaks With "Totalitarian Thug" and Hungary's Prime Minister, Victor Orban

Why Democracy Died

To know why democracy died, it is necessary to understand why it came into existence.

Democracy is an improbable form of government. Throughout the thousands of years of human existence, before the emergence of cities, states and empires, humans lived in tribes of hunter gatherers, small groups of no fixed address, each tribe dominated by an alpha male or chief who impregnated most of the women and killed anyone who got in his way.

The agricultural revolution meant both an increase in population and the creation of settled communities with permanent housing, irrigation works, markets, temples, defensive walls and fortresses. With the rise of such communities, or city states, one man (or occasionally woman) rule remained the rule but with some elaboration. 

One man could not rule a city without a hierarchy of soldiers, administrators, and priests, the heads of each institutional group naturally acquired a degree of personal power independent of the Chief, or Prince, or King. But still the system remain firmly top-down, with trouble from uppity plebs subject to brutal suppression.

Rulers of large cities naturally sought to subordinate smaller cities, so that city states generally gave way to empires. But top-down government headed by a single person, the Prince, the King, the Emperor, remained the rule, though now with subordinate individuals, as for example, military commanders, tax collectors, architects, and priests wielding ever great powers.

But whatever the exact form of government of the newly risen city states and empires, no ruler had the insane idea of asking the people, the peasants, the surfs, the helots, the slave class, to take the reigns of power and dictate to the rulers what should be done.

Not, that is, until the emergence of the peculiar Greek city state of Athens during the late bronze age.

Why did this bizarre transformation in the government of Athens happen? Several unusual factors contributed.

Important was the geography of Greece which comprises many islands, and a mainland deeply indented by sea inlets and divided by mountain ranges, thus providing many small habitable areas of cultivable land sufficient to support a city state while providing natural defenses against attack by neighboring communities. As a result, the city states of ancient Greece survived long after Egypt, Persia, North Africa, Italy and China had been subordinated to imperial regimes.

Not that the inhospitable terrain discouraged imperialist ambitions among the leaders of the Greek city states who engaged repeatedly in mostly futile campaigns to subjugate one another.

A consequence of such wars was the acquisition of slaves, either soldiers taken captive in battle or the inhabitants of territory temporarily occupied during interstate conflicts. As a result, the landowning citizens of Athens were not obliged to till their own lands. Being free to pursue other interests, some naturally engaged in politics. And as the Athenian state was small, the most effective means to pursue a political career was by speaking in the town square.

This inevitably gave power to those who could rouse the mob. The game was formalized with those attending in the public forum registering their support for or against this or that proposal by marking a ballot in the form or a clay tile, or ostrakon, and dropping it into an urn to be counted. 

Athenian ballot form

Slaves and women were excluded from participation, but the male owners of slaves and women, referred to themselves as the people, or demos, hence democracy. Rule, that is, under the leadership of men of ambition and rapacity, who, intent only on elevating their own status, wealth and power even at the expense of the people, had the ability to sway the crowd. 

This crazy system, under which the greatest rabble-rousers drove Athens into endless wars against other Greek communities, might have continued to this day had not the Romans imposed imperial rule upon Greece from without. Thereafter, democracy became extinct throughout the world, until the modern era.

And it was modernity, and in particular industrialism and the consequent phenomenon of total war, that made the emergence of mass democracy inevitable.

Industrialization required the assembly and organization of large numbers of well disciplined workers in mines and factories, at docks and construction sites. Trouble was, the large assemblies of workers operating capital intensive systems of production and distribution were alarmingly prone to revolt against brutal conditions and long hours of work for miserable pay at a time when the newly enriched entrepreneurial class engaged in the most extravagant displays of wealth and privilege.

What to do?

Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, Commander in Chief of British armed forces, victor over Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo, and UK Prime Minister during the 1820's, urged the rapid development of railways to facilitate the movement of troops to deal with workers' rebellions. 

But instead of reliance on the systematic application of force, Britain's middle and upper class reformers reduced the risk of revolution by alleviating the horrible conditions of life for the mass of Britain's working people. This they did through successful campaigns to eliminate child labor, reduce working hours, improve work place safety, create a system of universal education, introduce old-age pensions (the necessary legislation set before Parliament by that prime target of today's British Woke university hatred, Winston Churchill), and  extend the franchise, universal suffrage for men being achieved in 1918.

That mass democracy arrived in Britain in the final year of Europe's great civil war was no coincidence. With millions of working men returning from a grotesque world of filth, lice, and mass slaughter in a struggle with German working men with whom they had more in common than with their own ruling class, some adjustment in the political system was essential to the maintenance of political stability.

That the war had already detonated Russia's Bolshevik Revolution to be followed by the deposition and murder of the of the Tsar, his wife and children, and that it threatened Germany with the same transformation, further concentrated the minds of the British elite on the need for greater deference to the interests of the lower classes. 

The refusal of Liverpool's dock workers to load armaments for shipment in aid of the anti-Bolshevik forces in Russia, provided further stimulus to ruling class deference to the opinions of the proletariat. 

Thus was democracy in modern form instituted in the nation that, more than any other, created the modern world. It was a response not to wokeness, but weakness. 

But the Western world is now post modern. 

A pair of hands is no longer worth a living wage. 

Automation and AI have largely eliminated the need for either a working class of unskilled or semi-skilled workers, or a lower middle class of clerks and secretaries. 

Furthermore, modern weapons have entirely eliminated the value of mass armies. Future wars will be won, not by laying down the lives of millions of citizen soldiers whose loyalty the ruling class has earned, but with advanced technology weapons operated by a small cadre of military technologists.

How then, for the elite, which is to say the owners of modern technology, to dispense with the encumbrance of democracy.

Cancellation would be one solution. But it would be messy. It would provoke demonstrations, probably violent. With blood spilled, resentments would burn indefinitely.

But technology provides a superior alternative: mind control through media manipulation; indoctrination in the guise of education; garbage entertainment as distraction; plus fake news; fake elections; fake presidents; and a fake pandemic to force compliance with an increasingly authoritarian state.

Hence, endless bullshit TV news; the woke university; pornography as acceptable entertainment; President Biden; Meghan Remarkables; plus Covid19, facemasks, lockdowns and social distancing.

Image source

Democracy was interesting while it lasted. Now get used to the increasingly arrogant Gates-style techsploitation, to population reduction, and a pivot to a world order of which the main features were anticipated by Aldous Huxley (Brave New World) and George Orwell (1984).

Related:

Caitlin Johnstone: The Fucking President Has Fucking Dementia: Notes From The Edge Of The Narrative Matrix

C.J. Hopkins: Manufacturing (New Normal) “Reality”

The Faces of Corruption

Ten things we have learned during the Covid coup:

1. Our political system is hopelessly corrupt. Virtually all politicians are hopelessly corrupt. No political party can be trusted. They all can be, and have been, bought.

2. Democracy is a sham. It has been a sham for a very long time. There will never be any real democracy when money and power amount to the same thing..

3. The system will stop at nothing to hold on to its power and, if possible, increase its levels of control and exploitation. It has no scruples. No lie is too outrageous, no hypocrisy too nauseating, no human sacrifice too great.

Read more:

Related:

Denying Reality Leads To Tyranny And Societal Failure

EU Rejects Britain's Terms for an Exit Deal

Linked here is the text of Boris Johnson's letter to EU Council President, Donald Tusk stating the U.K.'s conditions for an exit deal.

And here is the text of the EU's rejection of Johnson's proposal. So a no-deal departure from the EU now seems certain.

Things Not What You May Have Thought: March 20, 2019

Just as Canada legalizes the sale and distribution of pot, to the vast enrichment of those in on the Marijuana stock IPOs, we learn:

Smoking high-potency marijuana every day could increase the chances of developing psychosis by nearly five times, according to the biggest-ever study to examine the impact of pot on psychotic disorder rates. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/smoking-strong-pot-daily-raises-psychosis-risk-study-finds-1.5063745

###

Brexit deadlock shows 'democracy all but dead' - Donald Trump Jr. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47634365

Democracy in the land of the Mother of Parliaments has been dead a long time. Ever since the central party organizations dictated to the constituencies who was fit to run for parliament. The result, obviously, was the reversal of roles for MPs. Instead of representing the people to the Government, they came to represent the Government to the people. And at no time has this been better illustrated than the present when most voters in Conservative constituencies voted for Brexit, but most Conservative MPs are Remainers.

Meantime, the leaders of the EU seem in a hurry to get Britain out of the EU now, for fear the Breixteers will otherwise hang in there for ever and ever:

No new Brexit negotiations, no additional guarantees, Juncker says before summit With just nine days to go before the March 29 exit date, uncertainty surrounds Brexit with options including leaving with British Prime Minister Theresa May’s deal, a short or longer delay, a disruptive exit or another referendum.“There will be no re-negotiations, no new negotiations, no additional guarantees in addition to those already given,”Juncker told Germany’s Deutschlandfunk radio. https://www.rt.com/newsline/454282-brexit-negotiations-guarantees-juncker/

###

There is something quite weird about the New Zealand Mosque Massacre, particularly the insane threat of ten year's jail for possessing a video of the shooting. Now watching innocent and defenseless people being murdered is not something any normal person wishes to view as matter of entertainment, but that no one is to observe a video record of the crime strongly suggests that the crime was not as publicly reported.

New Zealand Shooter Connections to the Deep State, The 'Five Eyes' Intelligence / Operation Gladio: Capt. Dave Bertrand, Ret. +Video https://beforeitsnews.com/v3/opinion-conservative/2019/3441057.html News Reports Suggested 2 Shooters; IEDs Found Strapped To Multiple Vehicles; Suspect’s Strange Travel History https://www.activistpost.com/2019/03/memory-hole-new-zealand-news-reports-suggested-2-shooters-ieds-found-strapped-to-multiple-vehicles-suspects-strange-travel-history.html

###
Feminism and the death of the West:

During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!” What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me. https://sovereignnations.com/2018/02/14/marxist-feminisms-ruined-lives/

Race: Why Liberal Globalists and Communist Revolutionaries Agree There Is No Such Thing

CanSpeccy, October 6, 2014: Liberals and other agents of the New World Order, like hard-line Communists, are revolutionaries who seek to establish a system of global governance. The difference between the two is that the globalization aimed at by liberals will subordinate all humanity to the moneyed elite, the bankers, the billionaires and the chiefs of the giant corporations, whereas the Communist revolution will serve the Dictatorship of the Proletariat, which is to say the Nomenclatura for whom tyranny means thousands of comfy bureaucratic jobs with lots of power and privilege.

To both classes of revolutionary, the great obstacle to their dream is the nation state that declares the right of the people in any geographic area with the means to defend themselves to rule themselves as they see fit, which means maintaining control of the borders to prevent occupation of the territory by invaders or an uncontrolled flow of immigrants, and the preservation of the religious and cultural tradition of the people.

To the revolutionaries, there is a simple solution to the problem of the nation state and the desire of the vast majority of the people of the world to live among their own kind in accordance with their traditional manners, morals and forms of governance. It is to insist that there is no such thing as the nation, that all humanity is one race, and that it is simply bunk to claim that the English, say, have a privileged status in England, or that the Amerindians of Canada have legal and moral rights to control over their traditional lands and the freedom to live on those lands according to their own beliefs and traditions.

Liberals and Communists are thus in agreement on the need for universal genocide, which is to say the destruction of the nation state and its underlying human biological and cultural diversity. As a cover for this project, which is to be fulfilled through mass migrations, multi-culturalism and the suppression of the fertility of indigenous peoples, both liberals and Communists deny the reality of human racial diversity, for in the absence of such diversity, both the the nation state and the crime of genocide become meaningless concepts.

The war on the concept of race appears now to be heating up with the publication of multiple books on the subject the consequence of which is the creation of ever greater confusion and misunderstanding.

Among the more recent contributions to this great obfuscation is A Troublesome Inheritance, by Nicholas Wade. As a former deputy editor of Nature magazine and a one-time writer for Science magazine and the New York Times, Wade has pretty good credentials as an obfuscator of basic science for political purposes as anyone with long experience of those publications with which Wade has been associated would know, and obfuscation is what Wade provides in this book.

Race, Wade acknowledges, is real, but then proceeds to lay it down as a matter of fact that there are only five human races: black, white, red, and yellow, plus Australian aboriginal. Thus he either deliberately muddies the water or demonstrates that he doesn't know what he is talking about. Making it impossible to know whether Wade is merely confused or is acting as a globalist shill, he never defines the term "race," thus his more or less arbitrary five-fold division of mankind serves to reinforce the popular misconception that race is largely a matter of skin color, whereas in fact skin color is by no means definitive of race. For example, sub-Saharan Africans, Dravidians of the Indian sub-continent, the Australian aborigines, and some Amerindians are all more or less the same color, but they are by no means closely related. Conversely, there are thousands of white Africans (albinos) who are definitely not Caucasians.

Race is a matter of kinship. To define the term formally, a race is an interbreeding population (human, for the purpose of this discussion) more or less completely isolated genetically from other populations by barriers of geography, politics, class, caste, or religion.

Defined thus, we can see that the tribalized people of black Africa are far from being a homogeneous group, but rather, are among the most diverse people on earth and may encompass greater population-level genetic variation than all other human groups combined.

Thus, as Wade notes, since 1980, all Olympic 100 m finalists have been of West African origin. But that does not make all black people fast runners. An East African on the Barak Obama model will never outrun a Jesse Owens over 100 meters, although an African of the latter type will never outrun the fastest East African over ten thousand meters.

But it is not just black Africans who display great diversity. Traveling over any significant area of the populated world one sees regional differences in the physical traits of the indigenous peoples: scull shapes for example, brachycephalics predominantly in North West Spain versus dolicocephalics in Southern Spain, or hair and eye color, to take another example, from dark-haired, brown-eyed Celts over most of the Scottish Highlands, to blond, blue-eyed people of Viking descent in Caithness in the remote North East of Scotland, and other coastal areas of settlement of the British Isles.

So racial differences can be seen at multiple levels. Between a Chinese and and Englishman, or a Glaswegian and an Edinburghian, and indeed between any two places where migration has not obliterated the pattern of genetic variation established during many generations of past reproductive isolation during which genetic drift, selection and random mutation have wrought differences among gene pools.

What these differences really mean, no one knows. Certainly Wade's presumptions about racial differences in psychology and their impact on the historical development of the world seem speculative to the point of absurdity. Yet such differences may indeed be important. Sadly, the globalist revolutionaries are intent on creating a global melting pot that will make all indigenous peoples a disappearing minority in their own homelands and wipe out in a generation or two potentially important racial aggregations of genes created over 100,000 years of human evolution.

Related:

CanSpeccy:
Universal Genocide and the New World Order

CanSpeccy:
Why and How Western Elites Turned Against Their Own People

CanSpeccy:
In Praise of Diversity

Donald Trump, An American Revolutionary, Has Raised a Rebellion Against the Bi-Partisan Treason Party

As we explained yesterday, the United States is, as those who drafted the US constitution intended, a plutocracy with the trappings of democracy to keep the plebs in thrall.

There are two parties, but the elected legislators of both parties sell their votes to the same moneyed interests, i.e., the banks, the mega corporations, and the dynamic elements among the billionaire class.

Killing the Sovereign, Democratic, Nation State

What is a sovereign nation state?

It is a human community that asserts its exclusive right to the occupation of  a territory — the assertion of exclusive occupational right meaning the beating off of interlopers, whether they be armed invaders or economic immigrants. A sovereign nation state thus reserves the benefits of territorial occupation, however those benefits may be distributed within the community, to the indigenous population.

However, in today's politically correct Western world, such territoriality is treated as hateful xenophobia, bigotry and racism. Yet the defense of territory is normal and adaptive behavior not only in mankind, but throughout the animal kingdom. It is the means whereby individuals either alone, or in concert with their kith and kin, act to secure  resources for survival and reproduction and thereby maximize their chance of being represented in succeeding generations.

Because the sovereign nation state excludes settlement by outsiders, its people exist in a state of reproductive and cultural isolation from the rest of humanity. Such isolation is never total, but is sufficient to result in genetic differentiation among nations resulting from founder effects, genetic drift, and local selective pressures. Isolation leads also to linguistic and cultural differentiation. A sovereign nation is a thus a population with a unique racial and cultural profile. It is, in other words, the basis of the beautiful racial diversity of the human species.

A democratic, sovereign, nation state is a sovereign nation state where the government depends in some measure upon the approval of the populace at large, which is to say a government that is perceived to rule in the interests of the people. Democracy in its ideal form, which is to say a government serving solely the interests of the people as a whole, is a fiction, since those who rule will invariably grant privileges upon themselves, and moreover, those most advantaged in society will seek to secure their advantage by using their advantaged position to skew the political process in their favor by means of bribery, blackmail or murder. Nevertheless, since the emergence of mass democracy in the 19th Century, more or less popularly elected governments throughout the West have established a vast range of public services designed to bring the benefits of education, healthcare, police protection, and the higher culture to the masses.

Today, however, the advantage of the most advantaged over the mass of humanity has never been greater, this being so not only because wealth has never before been concentrated in such vast amounts, but also because technology, not only in the physical sciences but also in the social sciences, makes elite control of the masses easier than ever before. Naturally, therefore, the most advantaged, which is to say the plutocratic elite or Money Power, seeks to wrest control entirely from the hands of the people and establish absolute ownership of the resources of the World. To this end, the sovereign, democratic, nation state, as an impediment to profit maximization (and mass impoverishment), must be eliminated, this objective being approached in two ways. First, the nation state as a racial and cultural entity is to be destroyed. Second, powers of government are to be transferred from national goverments to global institutions such as the UN, the World Bank, the WTO, NATO, etc., all of which will be controlled by the Money Power via its existing hold over national governments and more directly by bribery, blackmail or murder.

The destruction of the nation state is a work in progress, the chief instrument of which is mass migration, particularly from the essentially undemocratic Third World to the most powerful democratic nation states, which are those of the West. In this way, the solidarity of the people is destroyed. In addition, reproductive failure of the indigenous population is induced through sex "education" and mass entertainment that serves to promote the vice and perversion that Thomas Malthus recognized as an alternative to starvation as a way of limiting population. As a consequence of such methods, the fertility of all Western nations has already been reduced far below the replacement rate, which means that, as a consequence of immigration, the people of the Western nations will soon be replaced as the majority in their own homeland by people from elsewhere. In London, and other major urban centers, the English are already a minority in their own home. This is a high-tech, stealth genocide, conducted in the name of liberal anti-racist values: no blood, no gas chambers, just psychological manipulation leading to self-hatred, reproductive failure, and ultimate self-annihilation.

By destroying the homogeneity of the nation state through mass immigration, the notion that the government of, say, France or Germany or the United States should operate in the interests only of the French, or the Germans, or the Americans is undermined. People from outside the territorial limits of the nation state, it is asserted, have as much right to enjoy the accumulated cultural and physical capital of a country such as Britain, as the descendants of those by whose sweat and ingenuity the wealth of the nation was created. This globalizing tendency gains further momentum from the immigrant communities, which, loyal to the nationalist sentiments of their ancestors, lobby for their own cultural and racial interests, including those of their co-nationalists abroad, thereby further destroying the sovereignty of the invaded community.

To combat the resentment of the indigenous community so disrupted, the elite impose a system of speech regulation or political correctness, first imposed in Russia by V.I. Lenin, and culminating there in the Stalin terror that killed millions, for nothing worse than a muttered word of dissent.

In the West, political correctness serves chiefly as a shield for the Treason Party and their agents, the Blair's, the Clinton's the JEB's and Rubio's, the latter intent on vast personal enrichment through service to the Money Power. Thus, to speak in opposition to mass immigration is defined as racism, and racism is defined as a crime. The process of thought control through political correctness has infinite ramifications, as illustrated by the deployment of police to intimidate a school pupil who used a school computer to check the immigration policy of a legal, democratic political party supported by a millions of citizens. And here's a quote on the subject of immigration from that party's election manifesto:

Britain is a compassionate, caring nation. In the course of our island’s history we have welcomed millions of people to these shores and we are proud of that record. UKIP does not have a problem with migration. What we do have a problem with is the uncontrolled, politically-driven immigration that has been promoted and sustained by Labour and the Conservatives.  

Wow! Is that racist or what?

Britain is clearly finished as a Sovereign, democratic, nation state. Well done Tony Blair and the Tory Party.

Related: 

Patrick Buchanan: Will the Oligarchs Kill Trump?

Philip Giraldi: Hating on Trump

CanSpeccy: Will Donald Trump Trump the New World Order?

CanSpeccy: Universal Genocide and the New World Order

CanSpeccy: The Financial Times: The Ethnic Cleansing of the English From Their Own Capital City "Deserves Attention" LOL

Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME): Will Google Win the Presidency for Hillary?

A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government.

Kenneth Boulding

I read a good deal. Occasionally I provide a link to what I think is really interesting or important — confirmation by a billion-dollar experiment of Einstein's prediction about gravity waves, for example, or how to access publicly funded scientific research findings without paying ridiculous fees to commercial publishers. But here is a link to something orders of magnitude more significant.

The article, by Robert Epstein, provides an overview of a peer-reviewed study that represents perhaps the most important discovery in social science since the term "social science" was invented. What it tells you is how the Borg empire will be established here on earth without even the necessity of fitting everyone up with one of those snorkel thingies. What it reveals is how Google and other big data owners and manipulators can most likely determine what you think and, hence, how you behave. The result? The perfect democracy: a society in which the elite unfailingly persuade a psychologically enslaved mass to vote for the elite and to support whatever it is that the elite want to do to the psychologically enslaved mass (Think US public support for George Bush's Patriot Act and Homeland Security with six hollow point bullets for every citizen, and FEMA detention camps), or think Farenheit 451.

There is, of course, nothing tremendously new about this. For more than a century, the mass media, owned by the very rich, have been telling people what to think and how to behave, the people for the most part submitting without complaint to such control. But at least there was the appearance of choice. You could read the NY Times, the yellow press, or even some small circulation Communist paper. Likewise, the broadcast media seemed to provide some choice, CNN versus National Public Radio, for example. But in the search engine business, power is much more heavily concentrated. Moreover, the evidence of bias, if bias there be, is not, as this research shows, readily evident, or indeed evident at all. And it is precisely the lack of visibility that makes such bias deadly to a free society.

But does Google really skew search results to sway the opinion of voters to favor certain electoral candidates or to persuade consumers to purchase certain products? Well, as Robert Epstein points out, here's a clue: if they don't, then they are probably in breach of their legal responsibility to maximize shareholder value.

Related:

CanSpeccy: Why Freedom Was Greater Under the Absolute Monarchy of Elizabeth I, Than Under the Democracy of Barak Obama

Is the West on the Brink of Revolution?

"Revolutions," wrote Stephen Kotkin (author of Stalin, a biography) "are like earthquakes: they are always being predicted, and sometimes they come."

So, OK, we're not predicting a collapse of the US Empire, and if it comes, we will be as astonished as was V.I. Lenin, when, a month after complaining in a speech to Swiss socialists that "We the old people, won't survive to see the decisive battles of the forthcoming revolution," exclaimed at news of the February 1917 abdication of Russia's Tsar Nicholas II: "It's staggering. It's so incredibly unexpected."* 

All we're saying is: revolution? Yes, "sometimes they come."

But, the complacent will say, how can the West have a revolution? It's democratic, for goodness sake! 

Yeah, right: democracy shamocracy. 

Democracy requires a free press and a literate and informed populace. The West has a press, including in that term the news, information and entertainment media, virtually all of which are controlled by a handful of corporations, which naturally put a corporate spin on whatever they publish. And within those corporate-owned media properties exists a cadre of intelligence service agents to keep the message on track, should the owners fail to understand their own interest. "The CIA," as former CIA Director Colby remarked, "owns everyone of any significance in the major media." And the objective is, as former CIA Director William Casey made clear, to disinform: "We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

And that's not all. Throughout the West there are now 12 years of state mandated indoctrination, known as "education," to be followed in most cased by many years of wasted time in a so-called institution of higher learning where the finer points of political correctness are instilled.

But if the system of mind control is so firmly in place, how could there be a revolt? Well, here's the thing: all this bullshit and indoctrination is not for the Hell of it. The purpose was, and remains, to reduce the populace to helpless slavery, in which condition it can be used, abused, or if deemed best, eliminated, at will. But if the abuse is severe, even if the plebs are unable to figure out why what is happening to them is happening, there will always be highly intelligent and highly motivated individuals, such as V.I. Lenin, who will take advantage of the circumstances to enlighten the people and rouse them to insurrection. 

And when the people are severely humiliated, as in Cologne in recent days by an organized mass of feral Muslim rapists, gropers and Islamic supremacists, pauperized and demoralized by a massive rise in unemployment (albeit hidden by lying Government statistics) driven both by off-shoring of jobs and mass immigration of cheap labor, it's not that difficult to open people's eyes. 

Add a few leaks on Bill and Hillary's corruption, mendacity and basic personal vileness, of Obama perhaps taking a pay-off for services rendered while still in office, of the murderous duplicity and destructiveness of Imperial policy in the Middle-East and Ukraine, and it's insane economic and proxy military aggression against Russia — the only power on earth capable of reducing the West to smoldering radioactive rubble, and you have a seriously aroused populace, including members of the armed forces who might just land a dozen black helicopters on the White House lawn, and announce game over. 

———

*Stephen Kotkin, 2014: Stalin. Penguin.

Related: 

Breitbart: WATCH: Muslim Men Shoot Up Nightclub, Govt And Media Refuse To Use The ‘M’ Word

Why Won't Those Goddam Ukrainian Moskals Just Die, Instead of Holding Fake Stinkin' Elections

The Brainwashing of the West

CTV:
Pro-Russian rebels hold rogue elections in eastern Ukraine ...

CBC:
Ukraine rebels hold election despite international outcry

(Outcry by CBC, Foreign Policy, Reuters, etc. etc. LOL)

Wall Street Journal:
Pro-Russia Rebels Open Polls Across East Ukraine in Renegade Elections

Foreign Policy:
Eastern Ukraine's Fake State Is About to Elect a Fake Prime Minister

Reuters:

Europe won't recognize vote in eastern Ukraine, Merkel tells Putin 

(Merkel tells Putin! Why doesn't she tell the East Ukrainians that Germany doesn't give a damn about their right not to live under a Nazi-backed government that has just killed thousands of them, including hundreds of women who were raped before they were murdered.)

The PuffHo:
Ukraine Breakaway Regions Hold Criticized Elections

Oh, and here's a good one:

The Interpreter:
Fake Monitors “Observe” Fake Elections in the Donbass

The “Donetsk People’s Republic” (DNR) and “Luhansk People’s Republic” (LNR), which are officially considered terrorist organisations by the Ukrainian authorities, will hold “parliamentary elections” on Sunday, November 2, on the territories occupied by them with the help of the Russian army.

These “elections” are widely considered illegal and illegitimate ...

Yes these are clearly "terrorist" organizations, since they have been fighting punitive battalions in Nazi regalia sent by the US/UK/Canada/Austrialia/EU-backed Kiev government to "kill those damn Russians."

Meantime:

Incumbent Donbass leaders Zakharchenko and Plotnitsky win elections - final results

US General NcNeely pranked to reveal NATO plans for military assistance to Ukraine

Ukraine Lawmaker: Today we are ready to invade Russia

Eric Margolis: Afghanistan, None Dare Call It Defeat

USAma Bin Laden died in December, 2001 of Marfan Syndrome

Why Freedom Was Greater Under the Absolute Monarchy of Elizabeth I, Than Under the Democracy of Barak Obama

The West is at war with the Rest to establish a global system of governance subject to the  clandestine control of the money power.

The only effective resistance to this criminal war of aggression is provided by the independent nation states. All nation states, as independent political entities, are thus targeted for destruction, their natural and human resources to be appropriated in the drive for global empire.

The first nations to fall, were the European states, effectively occupied by the US, despite some French resistance, since the end of World War II.

These nations are now all more or less tightly bound into the globalist system, under the control of globalist plutocracy and their puppet rulers and systems of transnational integration, including NATO, the EU, and the WTO.

Thus destruction of the racial and cultural identities of the European peoples is well advanced and is almost certainly now irreversible, the process being driven by mass immigration, propaganda delivered under the guise of education, and legally enforced political correctness aimed at the demoralization of the indigenous populations and the near criminalization of Christianity, the moral system that dominated Western thought during Europe's age of greatness.

The European settler states are likewise in an advanced stage of disintegration as outpost of European civilization, the European majorities fast fading to powerless and more or less discriminated against minorities throughout the Americas, as in Africa and Australasia.

The Muslim states are now the primary target for assimilation to the global system, those that have proved resistant to internal subversion being subject to direct Western military intervention and the installation of globalist puppet regimes. Meanwhile, no opportunity is lost to incite destructive conflict among the most independent and assertive Asian powers.

Among the brainwashed of the West, the globalist transformation of the world through universal national genocide is largely justified by the spread of the West's supposedly most precious attributes: freedom and democracy. Yet such attributes are mutually exclusive.

Thus, Thomas Jefferson said of democracy:

It is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away the rights of the other 49%.

 To James Madison, a pure democracy

can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

 Most percipiently, John Adams wrote:

Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide.

So much for the globalist causus belli: mere rubbish to flatter the propaganda-addled masses into believing that those in power somehow, against all the evidence, actually give a damn about what they, the plebs, think.

And, in fact, the thoughts of the masses, stupefied as they are by endless propaganda force-fed as education, political correctness, TV lies, degrading entertainment, and bogus Hollywood history, are not products of independent thought or moral conviction, but only the end product of the process of mental conditioning to which the masses have been subjected.

Election outcomes are determined by the ruling elite through mind-control of the electorate.

The absurdity of confusing the West's so-called democratic forms of a government with some ideal notion of what those forms of government are supposed to be, is nicely expressed by Thomas, Lord Macaulay in his essay on William Cecil, 1st Baron Burghley, Elizabeth I's chief political adviser throughout her reign.

It has long been the fashion, a fashion introduced by Mr. Hume, to describe the English monarchy in the sixteenth century as an absolute monarchy. And such undoubtedly it appears to a superficial observer. Elizabeth, it is true, often spoke to her parliaments in language as haughty and imperious as that which the Great Turk would use to his divan. She punished with great severity members of the House of Commons who, in her opinion, carried the freedom of debate too far. She assumed the power of legislating by means of proclamations. ...

Such was this government. Yet we know that it was loved by the great body of those who lived under it. We know that, during the fierce contests of the sixteenth century, both the hostile parties spoke of the time of Elizabeth as of a golden age. That great Queen has now been lying two hundred and thirty years in Henry the Seventh’s chapel. Yet her memory is still dear to the hearts of a free people.

The truth seems to be that the government of the Tudors was, with a few occasional deviations, a popular government, under the forms of despotism. At first sight, it may seem that the prerogatives of Elizabeth were not less ample than those of Louis the Fourteenth, and her parliaments were as obsequious as his parliaments, that her warrant had as much authority as his lettre-de-cachet. The extravagance with which her courtiers eulogized her personal and mental charms went beyond the adulation of Boileau and Moliere. Louis would have blushed to receive from those who composed the gorgeous circles of Marli and Versailles such outward marks of servitude as the haughty Britoness exacted of all who approached her. But the authority of Louis rested on the support of his army. The authority of Elizabeth rested solely on the support of her people. Those who say that her power was absolute do not sufficiently consider in what her power consisted. Her power consisted in the willing obedience of her subjects, in their attachment to her person and to her office, in their respect for the old line from which she sprang, in their sense of the general security which they enjoyed under her government. These were the means, and the only means, which she had at her command for carrying her decrees into execution, for resisting foreign enemies, and for crushing domestic treason. There was not a ward in the city, there was not a hundred in any shire in England, which could not have overpowered the handful of armed men who composed her household. If a hostile sovereign threatened invasion, if an ambitious noble raised the standard of revolt, she could have recourse only to the train-bands of her capital and the array of her counties, to the citizens and yeomen of England, commanded by the merchants and esquires of England.

Likewise (to paraphrase Macaulay), it has long been fashionable to describe the Western form of government as democratic and Western society as free, as undoubtedly appears to be the case to a superficial observer. Barak Obama and other Western leaders, it is true, often speak to the public in language as humble and ingratiating as that which an accused person might address to a judge.

 ... Yet we know that such government is not loved by the great body of those who live under it. ...The truth seems to be that the democratic government of the West is with a few occasional deviations, a despotic government, under the forms of democracy. Despite outward marks of servitude to the popular will, the authority of Obama, Cameron, Hollande and their likes rests solely on the support of the police, the army, the security services, and the great bureaucracies of state that consume most of the wealth of the nation, while the hostility of the people is perpetually feared and continuously guarded against, with drones, surveillance cameras, spies, torture, assassination, agents provocateurs, and false flag terrorism.

Those who say that the power of Western governments is not absolute do not sufficiently consider in what that power consists. It depends on the legally enforced obedience of subjects to codes of conduct and speech that are antithetical to their fundamental beliefs and interests, the resort to all the standard means of control deployed by tyrants throughout the ages, but greatly enhanced through the application of advanced technology, and a sense of general insecurity induced in the populace through state-sponsored violence against innocent persons. These are the means, and the only means, which "democratic" governments have at their command for carrying their decrees into execution, for destroying the resistance of the people, and for creating hatred for those foreign nations yet to be destroyed.

See This Blog in Dynamic View!

Except, "Dynamic View" don't seem to work no more. But here's another way of looking at this blog: http://canspeccy.blogspot.com/view/snapshot

-- just view the pictures?

Or there's this: http://canspeccy.blogspot.com/view/flipcard.

The principles of British foreign policy and the corruption of democratic government

Based on the study of classified government documents released to the public under the 30-year rule, British historian Mark Curtis has shown that the formulation and presentation of British foreign policy is based on a total contempt for the intelligence of the public. Such contempt is evident in the glaring gap between state realpolitik, as manifest in the open and frank discussion of real goals in secret government documents, and the government's claim to benevolence in foreign policy objectives, e.g., to prevent, Saddam Hussein, Col. Quadhafi, whoever, from killing their own people, infecting everyone in the Christian West with anthrax and the plague bacillus, or simply being the new Hitler.

Through the general application of this principle of government, democracy has become a soft dictatorship. Coercion is rarely necessary because the entire public political discourse is a fantasy in which sound bites and video clips are woven into a public relations story that leaves no room to doubt that our leaders offer the nearest that can be attained to the practical application of those principles of our Saviour, Jesus Christ the Lord, as enunciated in the Sermon on the Mount.

But if a serious threat arises to the management of public perception, the Government PR machine and its collaborators in the corporate-controlled media readily put a gloss on the necessity of an occasional assassination, rendition and torture or denial of habeus corpus.