More than ever before in the history of modernity, our cosmopolitan body politic, that is, us citizens of the world (in full throttle defiance of the crimes waged against humanity perpetrated by those who kill in the name of “Freedom”), thrice over, intuitively, deductively and inductively, apprehend the impasses and corridors produced by the chimera of globalization. Nevertheless, the average citizen of any country that has the World Wide Web at its disposal—perhaps, only a third of the world, a rough estimation—is left with a redoubtable task: how does one take an entire legion, if not a series of googolplexes of URLs on the Internet, and find the information that truly corresponds to reality, and not only the appearance thereof?
Case in point: I came across an article two days ago—one that changes geo-political coordinates—which left me with a suspicion that everything will be okay, as long as someone, on the margins, out there is telling not only the facts, but the truth about what’s taking place on the global stage. Information on its own is empty. It must be set within coordinates, which illuminate the truth and give the information meaning. Hermeneutics, a sub-discipline of phenomenology, where we apprehend phenomena, including political phenomena, even what we consider to be reality through observation, structures certain principles of interpretation to our reading of texts, whether these texts come to us in form of essays, books, journalistic articles, website content, and blogs.
Thankfully, many people in the world now are, if not boycotting Mainstream Media (MSM), ignoring it with substantial force, and fact-checking and the like, reading a lot of meta-journalism: a journalism about journalism, or a critique of journalism, which, in fact, this selfsame article sets out to accomplish.
All people writing out there, either as a journalist or even as poet or fiction writer, in any capacity or genre have a take on the world and that take is reflected in the writer’s and researcher’s projects, which can both inform and/or deconstruct public opinion.
That which is invisible in the political world is the crux of what is really taking place. Every time I even try to read something off CNN, Fox, Forbes, New Republic, New York Times, LA Times and others, by the second paragraph of an article, one plainly sees more set-in-advance opinion over “just the facts.” Independent research is crucial to contraindicate the current state of affairs, where the State Department can amplify or diminish any nuanced point or aspect of a story by “kicking it up or down a notch here and there.” I can’t stress this enough. As Immanuel Kant put in his essay “What is Enlightenment?”…
“Enlightenment is man’s release from his self-incurred tutelage. Tutelage s man’s inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude! “Have courage to use your own reason!”- that is the motto of enlightenment.”
Sapere aude! can also be translated as “Dare to know!”
This is precisely what is needed today.
Whereas the U.S. war machine and British financing of the machine can be summed up by the adage “business is usual,” it is not an accident that only two weeks before the ousting of Viktor Yanukovich on February 22, 2014 and events in the Maidan, Kiev, Ukraine, Germany was warning the United Kingdom that if the U.K. left the European Union, the results would be disastrous. It would lead to political and economic instability. The E.U. could even collapse, not because of the U.K. alone, but because Chancellor Angela Merkel and over 3000 German businesses that work with Russia knew that they both needed Russia and the U.K. to secure its place in Europe as an economic force. The political, economic, and military commitments that Germany has made to the U.S. are fairly widely known. Yet what happens when Germany finds out that it is being spied on by its own “ally”? Perhaps, John Kerry and the State Department know. Perhaps, the spying is just “business as usual,” like putting puppet president Poreshenko into power in the Ukraine, so he can bomb his own country the first day he took office.
Even before the Ukrainian army began fighting with the pro-Russian separatists, leading to the quagmire that still remains today (one would think it would be over by now), there were other debates taking place: debates about money, financial markets, gold, the collapse of the dollar, the use of sanctions against Russia as an economic weapon, or even as other red flags started popping up that it made it probable that Putin could get away with a lot more than the U.S. thought. In fact, Russia is in such a position where it can ultimately make the European Union fail, making Frankfurt the new capital of finance on the continent, rather than that relying on London.
Before explaining how this could be done, it would be worth taking a look at what the E.U. really is. One scholar, Peter van Ham, invoking Ferdinand Tönnies, insisted the debate about European identity could be summed up by understanding two distinct types of social organization, Gemeinshaft and Gesellschaft.
Gemeinshaft, or ‘community’ in German, “relates to a certain sense of belonging based on shared loyalties, norms, and values, kinship or ethnic ties. . . [an] organic association based on a priori unity” (59). Gesellshaft, ‘society,’ on the other hand, “relates to the idea that people as individuals remain independent of each other, but may decide in a ‘social contract…to group together. . . ‘a convention’” (59).
Applying these definitions to the EU, then, Peter van Ham claims that the EU certainly is “not a truly European Gemeinshaft., a community. “Contemporary Europe shows a diversity of peoples and communities with only marginally overlapping points of references” (59). In other words, Ham insists that although the two types of social organization are, more or less, sometimes in discord, before envisioning a “European community’ one must primarily read the EU as a political-monetary ‘society.’
If the E.U. is primarily a political-monetary society, one must then consider how if one types in the current date and the word “Ukraine” one will surely get certain results that are appealing to the West: one, in fact, will receive newspaper headlines in the order of popularity, number of hits, and by extension the number of readers of one particular viewpoint: that the Ukraine is somehow a politically stable enough to enter the E.U. This is somewhat dubious, given that Prime Minister Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk resigned on Thursday, July 24, 2014, despite the hopes that Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State for European affairs) had for the Ukraine in tandem with the national interests of the United States of America.
Sometimes, however, one finds a jewel among the chaff. On Jun 23rd, 2014 an article published in The Examiner, revealed that Germany—wary of sanctions on Russia, which it feels would cripple its own economy as well as Europe’s, and also wary of the discovery of two U.S. spies caught in Germany—will set out to bolster financial, if not political alliances with Russia, China and BRICS nations. Even the aftermath of a downed Malaysian commercial airliner that flew over Ukrainian airspace, which leads to an international investigation, the accusatory rhetoric on the part of President Obama left one with the impression that he was leading his opposing political party out of pressure to establish a “hawkish” stance on Russia, while diminishing the idea that that there is still great political instability within the Ukraine as a whole.
That article says:
“On July 23, Dr. Jim Willie, a well-respected statistician and founder of the Hat Trick Newsletter, was a guest on the USA Watchdog weekly podcast. During the 30 minute interview with host Greg Hunter, Dr. Willie provided an astonishing announcement from a high level source within the London banking system that Germany was on the cusp of severing its long-standing obligations to the U.S., and was ready to leave not only the European Union, but also the Euro currency and NATO to join then join up with Russia, China, and the BRICS coalition to strengthen the financial and economic power of the emerging global system coming out of Eurasia and the East.”
It goes on to say: “Germany is already disgruntled with the United States for their aggressive tactics in trying to usurp Ukraine from their age old position in the Russian camp, and from day one, has been opposing the American superpower’s attempts to bring in Europe to solidify sanctions on Russia, which have been done outside the vote of the United Nations, and solely for the benefit of U.S. national policy and protection for the dollar.”
While the Ukraine allows Nazis, or to be more precisely, the Svoboda Party, which are literally the descendants of Ukrainian Nazis during World War II, to be part of the Ukrainian government, Germany remains the only European country where Holocaust denial is punishable by imprisonment, even “though neo-Nazi parties have been tolerated as long as they draw no explicit links with the Nazi regime.”
That being said, so then why does U.S spy on Germany? To fight Nazism? Hardly.
Chancellor Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin know fully well that there are over 3000 German companies that do business with Russia. The idea for more U.S and European sanctions against Russia as the latter is implicated in “destabilizing the Ukraine,” is based on U.S. accusations against Russia, not proof, that Russia was directly involved with the downing of Malaysian flight MH17.
It appears Germany is tired of lying for the U.S. and so is much of the world The Turkish Prime Minister Erdogon won’t even pick up the phone when the President Obama calls (he will, however, speak with Biden), so tired is he of being harangued by U.S. for applying more pressure on Russia, notwithstanding Erdogon’s stance on the what is taking place in Gaza.
Does the world itself want a unipolar world or are all tensions part of a larger process?
What about global security? If Russia has NATO on its doorstep, what then? What then are the interests of Russia? Global domination? According to who? Timothy Snyder?
During Vladimir Putin’s speech 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy in 2007, he, in fact, expressed his position on the untenable consequences of a unipolar world. He, to be blunt, exposed the New World Order and Chancellor Angela Merkel, the most powerful politician in Europe, who was in the front row listening as Vladimir Putin said:
“Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems. Moreover, they have caused new human tragedies and created new centres of tension. Judge for yourselves: wars as well as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before. Significantly more, significantly more!
Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible.
We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to one state’s legal system. One state and, of course, first and foremost the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way. This is visible in the economic, political, cultural and educational policies it imposes on other nations. Well, who likes this? Who is happy about this?
In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so-called issues of political expediency, based on the current political climate.
And of course this is extremely dangerous. It results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasize this — no one feels safe! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race.”
The CIA is the spine of Europe. One nerve twitches and the rest of the body notices the oscillation plainly. Unless, of course, the body is under anesthesia. Then all the body feels is pressure and that pressure is unkind, regionalized, and ultimately political.
If Germany left the E.U., France would surely follow. France is also tentative about further sanctions on Russia. It trades with Russia, too. The Franco-Russian relationship, of course, runs deeper than the recent selling of French battleships to Russia.
Here are some words Catherine the Great wrote in her famous Nakaz (Instruction).
6. Russia is a European power. . .
The proof for this is as follows. The changes which in Russia were undertaken by Peter the Great were all the more successful because of the manners which prevailed at the time were quite unsuitable to the climate and had been imported to our land thanks to the intermingling of peoples and the conquest of foreign lands. In introducing European manners and customs to a European people, Peter I then found facilitating factors such he himself had not expected.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The sovereign is autocratic; for no other power save that which is united in his person can act in manner commensurable with the extent of so great a
Here, Catherine the Great’s rhetoric clearly reveals the conceptual inconsistency between a Western idea of Russia, which she entertained, and Western ideas for Russia, which she rejected. That is, while Catherine insisted “Russia is a European power” (because Peter the Great reformed “the manners which prevailed at the time were quite unsuitable,”) she remarkably emphasized the role of the sovereign, which in this case, “is united in his person can act in a manner commensurable with the extent of so great a state.” Before Catherine even codified the laws for Russia, it is clear she went on a full blown Asiatic conquest of Siberia with a “universal vision, (gaining meridian after meridian for the sake of Empire)” writing to Voltaire
“These laws, of which so much is being said at present, are not quite completed as of yet. . .consider only, if you will, that they are destined to serve both Asia and Europe: and what a difference there is between them in terms of climate, people, customs, and even ideas. Here I am finally in Asia; I have wanted so terribly to see it with my own eyes. There are in this city twenty different people who do not resemble one another in the least. We shall nonetheless have to design a garment that would fit them all. General principles can certainly be found, but what of the details? And what details! I was about to say: we will have to create, unify, and preserve a whole world.”
This is not unlike what Putin imagines for his vision of a Eurasian Economic Union with Belarus and Kazakhstan, which will be unveiled January 1, 2015, and also its linking itself up with BRICS nations, not to mention the huge alliance that Russia made with China, in an effort to systematically thwart the use of the Petro-dollar, which is making the Bilderberg Group extremely nervous.
Germany is at a crossroads.
Once the international investigation of the downing the Malaysian flight MH17, it will become clearer what the future holds and who is the true rogue state. Why would it be in the interest of Russia to down a commercial airliner over a warzone? Some U.S. politicians insist, perhaps, it was an accident, back paddling on their first, hardline reaction, which was that Russia in the bona fide aggressor absolutely (and without evidence). A test for war is not an act of war. It is mass murder preceding war or the belief that war will come. If the test for war reveals facts, but not truths about the enemy, the results of the test are contingent on public opinion. All war is based on deception. Watch the stock market fluctuate. According to Jim Sinclair, Russia is one move away from collapsing the U.S. economy. But that is one view among many.
As journalist Kenneth Shortengen Jr, for example, points out “the United States becomes more isolated and the world slowly, but with an accelerating pace, dumps the dollar in favor of more stable and less restrictive markets for trade, control over the global financial system will invariably move East, and away from European and American domination.”
Rose Jacobs of The Irish Examiner, meanwhile, says “there is little delight in Germany over its dominion. “The last thing Germans want is to even have a view on these issues,” says Winder. In terms of non-Eurozone European relations, Chancellor Angela Merkel has tried to keep the UK engaged in EU politics rather than withdraw – the favored option of many people both within David Cameron’s Conservative party and outside it. In doing so, she’s won some praise for seeking a balanced EU in which the UK’s free-market tendencies serve as an important counterweight to more protectionist impulses elsewhere.”
That is why the article in The Examiner “buried” in the Internet—-about Germany leaving the E.U., dropping the Euro, and leaving NATO, is so alarming, yet not ready for mainstream media to even touch. No alarms, no surprises—those are marks of political and economic stability, and perhaps that is precisely how Germany wants to operate. It is seriously questioning its commitments to the United State while the Military Industrial Complex, all the same, will continue do what it can to keep the war machine a lucrative global endeavor lest it paddle back and give itself some time to re-think what America really stands for rather than what it says it stands for in slogans, in pledges, in quoted texts of the Forefathers, who certainly did not want London, at that time, to have dominion over its tea market.
The center of gravity today, however, is clearly shifting East.
Van Ham, Peter. European Integration and the Postmodern Condition. London: Routledge
© 2014 Paul Rogov
All rights reserved, including the right to reproduce this website, or portions thereof, in any form.