In my opinion, the Professor's plot line is so accurate that it is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to contradict it. Quite the opposite of what happens with the current politicians in Washington.
Professor, what do you think the Baltic states should do if Ukraine declares neutrality with Russia? They also have Russian minorities, and are in NATO. Baltic countries are very closely aligned with the US inside of NATO vis a vis "old Europe." Does this serve their security?
The elephant in the room: No Europeans (ethnicity, race) dominating the American schwerpunkt system, no unipolar world order with America-the-Caesar. The race replacement "theory" supports that notion. HT to northwestern Europeans anyway.
I saw the discussion and I am very happy that the reporter was not too main stream, despite that big US military base in Qatar. As the Ukrainian war reveals itself to be a repeat of the 1970s American Tourister gorilla commercial (zoo attendant the US, the suitcase Ukraine and the 600 lb. gorilla Russia) I found the most intriguing part the discussion of the multipolar world. Two thoughts: the rise of the Brics should bury the financial institutions set up after WWII because the US will be no longer be able to bully states financially (where it really hurts) and finance the US debt. Where I have a disagreement is regarding the demographics. The US is the only country among the big powers and among even smaller ones like France that has high infant mortality. It is the economic system of the US in the Ukraine war that revealed itself to be unable to compete. The US no longer the leader in so much (a brand new chip factory set up in Arizona for the Taiwanese is idle.). Americans must choose to invest in the USA. If not it will be gone with the wind, but Russia and china will remain.
The United States is an idea. What happens to that nation when most of the citizens don't even know what the idea is anymore? I guess we'll see, but it seems to me that that nation will either get to know itself again or fail and become something else.
Great show! Very interesting comments on the possibility that the US could again eventually become a unipolar power as a result of demographic contractions in China in particular, and also Russia.
Assumes demographic contractions aren't present in other key countries, and that all those people crossing over and into the USA have got the skills needed for the new growth industries, and ignores the dominance that PRC has in many markets and their supply chains. The world may become unipolar, and sooner than we think, symbolised by a large yellow star and four satellite stars.
Professor mearsheimer should be open to his reasoning
If the west wanted to do good for the Jews they would have given land to them in Maine or Michigan
as reasoned by Naom Chomsky ( Jewish intellectual) Israel was created by the west as a military outpost to protect oil interests.
USA entered World War II after 6 million Jews were already killed it was too late but it entered World War II for its strategic objectives. If they had pity for ethnic minorities in Europe they would have saved 6 million lives.
Doesn't one of Mearsheimer's major points that Israel has not been of strategic utility, directly contradict Chomsky?
You might argue that between 1967 and 1973, it helped contain Soviet expansion in the region and inflicted humiliating defeats on Soviet clients like Egypt and Syria, helped protect Jordan, and provided useful intelligence about Soviet capabilities.
But US support for Israel was the cause for Opec's oil embargo that inflicted considerable damage on Western economies. Israel was of no use whatsoever during or after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, and both Gulf wars showed up Israel as a strategic burden, not being able to use Israel as a base without triggering Arab opposition.
The US has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel.
Israel does not behave like a loyal ally, and this war, with Netanyahu constantly ignoring Biden or publicly humiliating him, rather demonstrates that too, don't you think?
Both Pax-Britannica and Pax-Americana, whose transcontinental empires fostered a transnational elite, have maintained global control through the domination of sea trade requiring control of important choke points, which Israel is part of. Under Western hegemony, this also explains the lack of progress across large continents and the disdain for projects like the Belt and Road Initiative, which could challenge the West.
As hegemony wanes, one can view the clearing of Palestine as a means to shore up the strategic wedge of land between Asia and Africa, before the Global South rebels. Eventually, this would allow for a potential canal in Israel under Western control, while abundant gas reserves off the coast of Palestine also adds a more immediate temptation for Western monopolistic transnational capital. With this in mind, a two-state solution, pushed by the UN, is unworkable for these transnational class interests and their strategy.
The narrative of aid and arms works to simultaneously garner the Muslim and peace vote as well as the pro-Israel vote in the coming U.S. elections. Depending on the audience one side will be pushed forward. For the majority who are anti-war, U.S. President Joe Biden, and let's face it any U.S. president, who is inevitably conditioned by the larger aforementioned systemic forces, can sell himself as one who tried their best despite "uncontrollable forces" – which are actually with the right interests controllable.
Simply put, aid to Gaza and arms to Israel is a symptom of a lack of democracy – the historical status quo of Western hegemony.
Thanks for replying, @EGERE. btw are you a Latin scholar (egere - to need)? I studied Latin and Greek at school and beyond, and also international politics, and have just published some old university notes on imperialism > https://open.substack.com/pub/charlesfiddespayne/p/western-imperialisms-in-all-their and have written other pieces on imperialism on other platforms.
So, what sources do you have for stating things like "maintained global control through the domination of sea trade requiring control of important choke points" rather maintaining freedom of the seas? Or "the clearing of Palestine as a means to shore up the strategic wedge of land between Asia and Africa"? Or, given US having this month stopped UNRWA funding, "The narrative of aid ... works to simultaneously garner the Muslim and peace vote ... in the coming U.S. elections"?
PS. it'd be nice if you addressed my question to you of Mearsheimer contradicting Chomsky, but I will understand if you don't because of reasons of space ...
In my opinion, the Professor's plot line is so accurate that it is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to contradict it. Quite the opposite of what happens with the current politicians in Washington.
Great job as always, go get’em Johnny!!!💪🏽
Professor, what do you think the Baltic states should do if Ukraine declares neutrality with Russia? They also have Russian minorities, and are in NATO. Baltic countries are very closely aligned with the US inside of NATO vis a vis "old Europe." Does this serve their security?
the war is a proxy war to weaken russia by the u.s and the west
@chris safos, you haven't answered either of the 2 questions posed by @GRAZIER.
Thank you professor
Will they support United Kingdom inspite of Anglo-Saxon predominance in institutions of influence
USA will not spend penny nor it will raise a finger even if Israel kills Americans or British reporters
Not because of lobby or AIPAC because of oil interests
Here are tabular, visual, and textual breakdowns and summaries of that interview:
https://open.substack.com/pub/complexiathesinker/p/llm-over-john-mearsheimer-israel
You’ll never convince this guy about Russia & Ukraine. He has his MSM marching orders. It’s so tiring.
The interviewer
The elephant in the room: No Europeans (ethnicity, race) dominating the American schwerpunkt system, no unipolar world order with America-the-Caesar. The race replacement "theory" supports that notion. HT to northwestern Europeans anyway.
I saw the discussion and I am very happy that the reporter was not too main stream, despite that big US military base in Qatar. As the Ukrainian war reveals itself to be a repeat of the 1970s American Tourister gorilla commercial (zoo attendant the US, the suitcase Ukraine and the 600 lb. gorilla Russia) I found the most intriguing part the discussion of the multipolar world. Two thoughts: the rise of the Brics should bury the financial institutions set up after WWII because the US will be no longer be able to bully states financially (where it really hurts) and finance the US debt. Where I have a disagreement is regarding the demographics. The US is the only country among the big powers and among even smaller ones like France that has high infant mortality. It is the economic system of the US in the Ukraine war that revealed itself to be unable to compete. The US no longer the leader in so much (a brand new chip factory set up in Arizona for the Taiwanese is idle.). Americans must choose to invest in the USA. If not it will be gone with the wind, but Russia and china will remain.
The United States is an idea. What happens to that nation when most of the citizens don't even know what the idea is anymore? I guess we'll see, but it seems to me that that nation will either get to know itself again or fail and become something else.
You said it right, since Ukraine proxy and Israel genocide, in Europe US has become the nazi US or as I like to call them United Criminals of America!
Great show! Very interesting comments on the possibility that the US could again eventually become a unipolar power as a result of demographic contractions in China in particular, and also Russia.
Assumes demographic contractions aren't present in other key countries, and that all those people crossing over and into the USA have got the skills needed for the new growth industries, and ignores the dominance that PRC has in many markets and their supply chains. The world may become unipolar, and sooner than we think, symbolised by a large yellow star and four satellite stars.
This should be modeled and simulated.
hi, i'm art guerrilla, and i'm here asking for your vote for World Dictator For Life ! muh platform : I'm no psychopath !
8^)
if SWMBO would allow me to
think i could rule this whole planet
‘cause most of you don’t have a clue
you would never know who ran it
.
i’d be a swell puppet master
have great glee pulling your strings
laugh as i make you dance faster
oh the mirth crazed puppets can bring
.
and all the world would be my stage
all of you my marionettes
but do not make the master rage
or punch and judy’s what you get
.
don’t think of puppets as restrained
only free as the strings allow
they’re being lovingly leash-trained
they only read from my script now
.
what kind of show should i produce
a tragedy or comedy
which of the stars will i seduce
enjoy a little sodomy
.
before the final curtain call
you do not want to leave your seat
the finale is grand guignol
a favorite of elites
.
The Worlds Most Dangerous Poet
all about conflicts
Professor mearsheimer should be open to his reasoning
If the west wanted to do good for the Jews they would have given land to them in Maine or Michigan
as reasoned by Naom Chomsky ( Jewish intellectual) Israel was created by the west as a military outpost to protect oil interests.
USA entered World War II after 6 million Jews were already killed it was too late but it entered World War II for its strategic objectives. If they had pity for ethnic minorities in Europe they would have saved 6 million lives.
Doesn't one of Mearsheimer's major points that Israel has not been of strategic utility, directly contradict Chomsky?
You might argue that between 1967 and 1973, it helped contain Soviet expansion in the region and inflicted humiliating defeats on Soviet clients like Egypt and Syria, helped protect Jordan, and provided useful intelligence about Soviet capabilities.
But US support for Israel was the cause for Opec's oil embargo that inflicted considerable damage on Western economies. Israel was of no use whatsoever during or after the Iranian Revolution in 1979, and both Gulf wars showed up Israel as a strategic burden, not being able to use Israel as a base without triggering Arab opposition.
The US has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel.
Israel does not behave like a loyal ally, and this war, with Netanyahu constantly ignoring Biden or publicly humiliating him, rather demonstrates that too, don't you think?
Both Pax-Britannica and Pax-Americana, whose transcontinental empires fostered a transnational elite, have maintained global control through the domination of sea trade requiring control of important choke points, which Israel is part of. Under Western hegemony, this also explains the lack of progress across large continents and the disdain for projects like the Belt and Road Initiative, which could challenge the West.
As hegemony wanes, one can view the clearing of Palestine as a means to shore up the strategic wedge of land between Asia and Africa, before the Global South rebels. Eventually, this would allow for a potential canal in Israel under Western control, while abundant gas reserves off the coast of Palestine also adds a more immediate temptation for Western monopolistic transnational capital. With this in mind, a two-state solution, pushed by the UN, is unworkable for these transnational class interests and their strategy.
The narrative of aid and arms works to simultaneously garner the Muslim and peace vote as well as the pro-Israel vote in the coming U.S. elections. Depending on the audience one side will be pushed forward. For the majority who are anti-war, U.S. President Joe Biden, and let's face it any U.S. president, who is inevitably conditioned by the larger aforementioned systemic forces, can sell himself as one who tried their best despite "uncontrollable forces" – which are actually with the right interests controllable.
Simply put, aid to Gaza and arms to Israel is a symptom of a lack of democracy – the historical status quo of Western hegemony.
Thanks for replying, @EGERE. btw are you a Latin scholar (egere - to need)? I studied Latin and Greek at school and beyond, and also international politics, and have just published some old university notes on imperialism > https://open.substack.com/pub/charlesfiddespayne/p/western-imperialisms-in-all-their and have written other pieces on imperialism on other platforms.
So, what sources do you have for stating things like "maintained global control through the domination of sea trade requiring control of important choke points" rather maintaining freedom of the seas? Or "the clearing of Palestine as a means to shore up the strategic wedge of land between Asia and Africa"? Or, given US having this month stopped UNRWA funding, "The narrative of aid ... works to simultaneously garner the Muslim and peace vote ... in the coming U.S. elections"?
PS. it'd be nice if you addressed my question to you of Mearsheimer contradicting Chomsky, but I will understand if you don't because of reasons of space ...