Garland Nixon and Scott Ritter: UKRAINE COLLAPSE – DRONE MISSILE WARFARE GAME CHANGE!

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Garland Nixon • Scott Ritter
Resize text-+=
This is probably the most comprehensive and authoritative explanation of the Ukraine war, and how the rules and ways of war-making are changing due to the massive introduction of drone, missile, and other technologies. Scott explains all that, plus the ways Russians are advancing to inevitable victory, while Ukrainians, despite their depletion, continue to offer stubborn resistance. Scott believes that Ukraine is already strategically defeated, and that the world, and especially the West, will have to adjust to a drastic new reality in which Russia sets the terms.

WARRIOR UPDATE WITH SCOTT RITTER EPISODE 64 - UKRAINE COLLAPSE - DRONE MISSILE WARFARE GAME CHANGE!

Garland Nixon
The rules of war continue to change rapidly in the Ukraine battlefield, notes Scott Ritter, as drone and missile (and other new or revised) technologies redraw the battlefield. Ukraine has definitely lost the war, notes Ritter, and the West will have to adapt to this reality as Moscow sets the term for the peace and the future of the region.

News 2739
  • If you approve of this article, please share it with your friends and kin.
  • Help us expand our reach. Defeat appalling hypocrisy. Lies cost countless lives.
  • We must act together to smash the VILE Western disinformation machine.
  • This is the Lying Machine that protects the greatest evil humanity has ever seen.
  • YOU know what we are talking about.

Things to keep in mind...

Neo-Nazi ideology has become one of the main protagonists of political and social life in Ukraine since the 2014 coup d'état. Meanwhile, fascist ideology and blatant lies also permeate the consciousness of most people in the West. Those in the comfortable top 10%, the "PMCs" (Professional Managerial Class), are especially vulnerable. They support and disseminate such ideas. They are the executors of the actual ruling class' orders, those in the 0.001%, who remain largely invisible. The PMCs are the political class, the media whores, the top military brass, some people in academia, and the "national security/foreign policy" industry honchos. Push back against these unethical, contaminated people with the truth while you can.

AND...where the US Government is at: LYING 24/7

RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Telegram
WhatsApp
Reddit
window.addEventListener("sfsi_functions_loaded", function() { if (typeof sfsi_widget_set == "function") { sfsi_widget_set(); } });

Print this article
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Since the overpaid media shills will never risk their careers to report the truth, the world must rely on citizen journalists to provide the facts that explain reality.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… 
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

 

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS



Convenient Ideologies

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

By Billy Bob
Billy Bob's Blowback Roundtable
THE WORLD THROUGH AN INDEPENDENT LEFT LENS
Resize text-+=

Mao was wise (and flexible) enough to implement the requisite changes. But capitalism has a fundamental ideological investment in the cult of economic freedom and competition, even in the age of multinational monopoly.

Entire ideologies have been developed and proliferated because they were temporarily advantageous to the economic and political interests of the ruling elite.  But as material conditions change, so too do the interests of the ruling elite and consequently their narratives must change as well, in order to better serve their new interests.

For a while, the narrative that "free trade is an eternal good", was beneficial to the interests of Western elites.  So for generations people have been indoctrinated to support and embrace "free trade" policies.  Since "free Trade" benefits those that are most prepared to win market competition, the imposition of "free Trade" policies in the colonies and throughout the developing world, was beneficial to the British empire.  This was particularly true throughout the years prior to WWII even though at the same time, Britain was nurturing and developing their domestic industries with subsidies and tariffs.

The gospel of "Free Trade" was also beneficial to US elites who inherited the British empire after WWII.  When the US accounted for half the global economy and only 5% of global population, "free trade" was an ideology that the US elites were keen to proliferate because by doing so, they ensured that their own industries (by now fully matured after being protected and nurtured by tariffs and subsidies) would be the greatest beneficiaries of market competition. So, the extent to which free trade policies were forced on the developing world, was the extent to which the Western elites benefitted from "market competition".

Additionally, Western elites set up institutes and other "educational" networks to train the leaders and future leaders of the developing world.  These "leaders" would be well compensated for demanding that their respective countries adopt exploitative "free trade" policies that were detrimental to their people but beneficial to themselves (in the form of kick backs etc.) and especially beneficial to Western oligarchs.

Unfortunately for Western elites, material conditions have changed.  China today is the most efficient producer of goods in the world and its greatest economic and industrial power.  The ideology of "free trade" and "market competition" no longer serves the interests of the Western elite.  Now Western elites must preach a new ideology which will better serve their interests and abandon the previous one, since they are no longer in a position to be the winner of market competition.

"While proletarian dictatorship develops policies and propaganda based on the best interest of the entirety of the working class, the bourgeoisie dictatorships decide policy and propaganda based on what is in the best interests of the wealthy elites..."

So while the ruling capitalist class was in a position to best harness competition and to harvest the fruits of "free trade" they were keen to platform the most ardent preachers of this gospel. Indeed, this gospel was so successfully evangelized, that large swaths of the population are today incapable of questioning their own certainty in the purportedly eternal truths of "free market" propaganda.

So the Western ruling elite have this eternal conundrum where their temporarily advantageous ideology which they proliferated and shoved down everyone's throat, must now shift a bit because it is no longer useful.  This is not a new phenomenon.  This phenomenon is as eternal and timeless as the existence of powerful elites that have interests that change over time, in accordance with changing material conditions.

In fact, a very similar phenomenon recently happened in China.  Not long ago, the CPC proliferated the ideology of self-sufficiency and opposition to private ownership, due to the Sino-Soviet split and the Western Trade embargo.  Mao was forced to embrace a policy of self-sufficiency out of necessity and this policy was sold to the public through the organs of state propaganda.  Once Mao's lobbying successfully ended the Western Trade embargo, a shift was necessary in order to take advantage of the newly available economic opportunities.  Some didn't understand this shift as they had fully embraced the propaganda of "self sufficiency".  Many had become true believers in the expedient propaganda that was temporarily useful due to the existing material conditions.  Once these conditions changed however, some of the true believers were unable to rationally recognize that it was in the best interest of everyone to embrace new policies and to update their ideology in order to better align with the changing material conditions.  These folks fought against the ideological change and economic re-orientation even though the new orientation was obviously in the people's best interest. Thankfully, pragmatism won out and irrational dogma was rejected by the majority and China was able to successfully overcome these obstacles.

Currently the West is facing a similar transformation.  Many are beholden to the temporary and expedient propaganda of yesteryear that was propagated in order to take full advantage of the material conditions that existed then.  Now, the ruling elite are attempting to develop a new narrative and a new dogma that they can propagate and shove down everyone's throat, in order to best deal with the emerging material conditions.

Just like the true believers in China that took to heart the ideology of "self sufficiency", in the US, there are those that have taken to heart the dogmatic gospel of "free trade" and they are struggling to come to terms with the fact that their deeply held beliefs regarding the "eternal way of the universe" (lol), was nothing more than a temporary and cynical propaganda campaign designed to maximize the wealth and power of the ruling elites.  Imagine the confusion of these poor folks as the ruling elites begin to abandon their old dogmas and embrace new ones in response to the changing material conditions and their own appraisal of how to best pursue their class interest.


A few points need to be made clear in order to not further confuse the already ideologically confused.  I do not equate the working class dictatorship of China with the Capitalist class dictatorship of the West.  While I understand that both the proletarian and bourgeois dictatorships respectively must deal with similar issues and must engage in ideological propaganda, censorship, and repression of their class enemies, etc., I understand that this is the inevitable result of capitalism and the class struggle that naturally follows capital's division of society between owners and workers.
 
I understand that capitalism results in class competition to control the means of political power (the state).  Again, it needs to be made clear that the difference between these two forms of government are absolutely existential and all important.

While proletarian dictatorship develops policies and propaganda based on the best interest of the entirety of the working class, the bourgeois dictatorships decide policy and propaganda based on what is in the best interests of the wealthy elites.  In other words, proletarian dictatorship is democratic and wants to further the interests of the masses while the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie is anti-democratic and is solely concerned with maintaining the power and privilege of the wealthy elites.  These two are not the same and one is objectively better than the other, hence the need for revolution and the replacement of the latter with the former.  Again, these are the inescapable and natural results of capitalism.

Capitalism of course was a necessary and tremendous improvement over feudalism but it contained within itself the contradictions that only socialism can solve. This struggle still continues as the capitalists resist progress as progress for the masses necessarily represents a decrease in their own wealth, power, and privilege.  But socialism's victory over capitalism is as inevitable as capitalism's victory over feudalism."

Here's Ben Norton with the commentary that stimulated the above diatribe:


"Economist Joan Robinson demolished "free trade" dogma back in this 1979 book, showing how it was preached by the British empire only when it was in its economic interest, and contributed to underdevelopment of the periphery.

The US is doing exactly the same today, with its return to protectionism and trade war on China.
Free trade "doctrine suits the interests of whichever nation is in the strongest competitive position in world markets".

Her argument recalls the observation by Friedrich List in the 19th century that wealthy countries hypocritically "kick away the ladder", so poorer nations cannot follow the path to economic development that they did (a concept popularized by economist Ha-Joon Chang).

Robinson explained:

"The imposition of free trade on Portugal killed off a promising textile industry and left her with a slow-growing export market for wine, while for England, exports of cotton cloth led to accumulation, mechanization and the whole spiraling growth of the industrial revolution".
"Under the British Empire, the imposition of free trade made it possible for the Lancashire cotton industry first to ruin hand-loom production in what is now the Third World".


"In the post-war period, American influence was exercised, directly and through various international agencies, in favor of free trade, but since Japan became the strongest industrial competitor, faith in the doctrine has begun to weaken in the United States". (The same is happening today, as China has risen up the value chain and can now compete with US technology monopolies.)"
 
 
ABOUT THE AUTHOR / SOURCE
Billy Bob is a dedicated anti-imperialist activist and blogger. He hosts the Blowback roundatable.  You can reach him at his Facebook page HERE.

Print this article
The views expressed herein are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of The Greanville Post. However, we do think they are important enough to be transmitted to a wider audience.

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP… 
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

 

[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS



The West’s Betrayal of Freedom

Please share this article as widely as you can.

DEFEAT CAPITALISM AND ITS DEADLY SPAWN, IMPERIALISM
ecological murder •
MATT TAIBBI
 

 

 

 

Trudeau Says US Fighter Jet Shot Down Object Over Canada
Feb 14, 2023
Confirming Canada's vassalage, Trudeau speaks of "US/Canadian" fighter jets coordination in defending their countries' sovereignty" from foreign intrusions. The fact that Canada is now a puppet of Washington, and that it has no independent foreign policy, or even its own independent domestic policies, either escapes him, means nothing to him, or he is too embarrassed to admit it.
 
Justin Trudeau might have a “too much freedom” problem, but that doesn’t mean anyone else does.

“Freedom cannot exist without order.” — Canadian Justice Paul Rouleau

The Honorable Justice Paul Rouleau’s “Report of the Public Inquiry into the 2022 Public Order Emergency,” an analysis of Justin Trudeau’s decision to institute Canada’s Emergencies Act and seize funds during last year’s trucker protests, blasted across Canadian media this weekend, reduced to a handful of headlines. As has become the norm in Western media, language was nearly identical:

  • Politico

  • Reuters

  • CBC

Rouleau’s report is clearly written by a man with mixed feelings. On one hand, he agreed “the Government did not have a realistic prospect of productively engaging” with those who “believed COVID-19 vaccines were part of a vast global conspiracy to depopulate the planet.”  At the same time, Rouleau refused to confine “misinformation and disinformation” to protesters:

Protest organizers’ mistrust of government officials was reinforced by unfair generalizations from some public officials that suggested all protesters were extremists… Where there was misinformation and disinformation about the protests, it was prone to amplification in news media… The fact that protesters could be at once both the victims and perpetrators of misinformation simply shows how pernicious misinformation is in modern society.

In the report you also find significant criticism of Canda’s Covid-19 policies and heavy-handed emergency measures like allowing Canada’s Border Services Agency (CBSA) to keep foreigners out. Rouleau even said he came to his main conclusion, that Trudeau’s invocation of the Emergencies Order was legal, “with reluctance.”

Justice Watchdog Finds Russia Probe Was Justified, Not Biased Against Trump.”

   
Déjà vu? No matter what a report says or how many pages it takes to say it, a single phrase — “justified,” or “met the threshold” — can override everything

Freedom’ has been a weaponized word. The Emergencies Act report finally tells us what it means.”

The article, which rails against the “warped idea of freedom… populism, and misinformation being sprayed all over social media,” reads like all the tsk-tsking editorials in the West you’ve read since Trump, which used every crisis to hype the idea that freedom = danger. It wasn’t long ago that a person couldn’t go outside without having the word “freedom” jammed in his or her ear, whether it was Mel Gibson yelling it over his hair extensions in Braveheart or Republican congressman Bob Ney engaging in a Pattonesque invasion of the House cafeteria so he could rename your potato-based side dish “Freedom Fries.”

They hate us for our freedoms” sounded a lot better than “They hate us because we support Israel and steal oil.”

Most of all, freedom was a joyous propaganda theme back when upper-class America still had an interest in getting the struggling small-town voter to identify with massive corporations eager to throw off the yoke of the EPA and the SEC. Ronald Reagan was the first politician to master selling the same economic “liberty” to poor workers and the giant manufacturers who’d soon abandon them. Freedom wasn’t a dangerous concept, in other words, so long as the very wealthy still felt a deficit of it.

often existentially so,” as American Enterprise Institute fellow Dalibor Rohac sighed.

So a new P.R. campaign was born, selling a generation of upper-class kids on the idea of freedom as a stalking-horse for race hatred, ignorance, piles, and every other bad thing a person of means can imagine: ...

ABOUT THE AUTHOR / SOURCE
Matt Taibbi is a well-known US independent journalist. Elon Musk recently entrusted him with the so-called FBI Twitter files, confirming the establishment's underhanded control of Twitter and in general all major media. Politically, Taibbi is an anti-communist left liberal.

Print this article

Unfortunately, most people take this site for granted.
DONATIONS HAVE ALMOST DRIED UP…
PLEASE send what you can today!
JUST USE THE BUTTON BELOW

 

[/su_spoiler]

Don’t forget to sign up for our FREE bulletin. Get The Greanville Post in your mailbox every few days.

[premium_newsticker id=”211406″]

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

NOTE: ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.


Missing George Carlin

Please make sure these dispatches reach as many readers as possible. Share with kin, friends and workmates and ask them to do likewise.

Updated Nov 30, 2020 • First iteration Dec 4, 2015

GEORGE-CARLIN_BW-portrait

Yea, we like George Carlin. And we miss him. We miss him big time. For Carlin was honest, brave, gifted with colossal wit, and without a doubt the last of the great comedians whose natural shtick was not just "observational comedy", but acerbic social and political criticism. Looking at the sellout court jesters we have today, the Steven Colberts, the Jimmy Kimmels and the rest, a decidedly unfunny and predictable lot, propagandists, really, for the Democratic Party noise machine, just Imagine what he'd say about what's been going on since he left the great stage. Think for a minute what he would have done with the #metoo frenzy, or Russiagate, and the many manifestations of our dominant complacent, pussified liberal culture, as he would have called it. Even the establishment-controlled Wikipedia has this to say about Carlin, the arch-anti establishmentarian:

Carlin just 2 months before his death

George Denis Patrick Carlin (May 12, 1937 – June 22, 2008) was an American stand-up comedian, actor, social critic, and author. Regarded as one of the most important and influential stand-up comics of all time, he was dubbed "the dean of counterculture comedians".[1] He was known for his dark comedy and reflections on politics, the English language, psychology, religion, and taboo subjects. His "seven dirty words" routine was central to the 1978 United States Supreme Court case F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, in which a 5–4 decision affirmed the government's power to censor indecent material on the public airwaves.

So here's a small anthology to remember him by. 



In less than 2 minutes Carlin demolishes all the pretensions of the business class. MBA anyone?


Expanded version: The greatest oxymoron of them all, business ethics.

"The immune system needs practice..."

Carlin: the US class system in one paragraph.

Carlin: the US class system in 2 paragraphs.


As he got older, his infirmities diminished his edge...but only a little. When he left he was still very much in the ring, with his gloves firmly laced.

horiz-black-wide
ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.




Has Rachel Maddow Entered Her Infowars Period?

Actually there is no need to imagine. It's happening already.

By Shane Ryan  |  January 31, 2019  | Pastemagazine.com / Opinion

Screencap via YouTube Politics Features Rachel Maddow

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he fact that MSNBC host Rachel Maddow focuses excessively on Russia-gate is not new, and it’s not unique—clearly, there is some kind of ratings incentive for cable TV news hosts like her to chase the Kremlin dragon in lieu of topics that you or I might consider more concrete and more important. That’s life on the small screen, and while it’s easy to rue the melodrama and the superficiality, Russia has been the moneymaker since Trump was elected, and it’s not going to change.

That said, there’s a big difference between obsessively covering the Mueller investigation and…this.

This is something different, and bizarre, and frankly you just have to watch to understand:

When I showed this to Paste's Jake Weindling, he said, “if you transcribed that and said it was Alex Jones ranting, no one would dispute your assertion.”

So I transcribed it. Here you go:

And it is like -50 degrees in that Dakotas right now. What would happen if Russia killed the power in Fargo today? Alright. What would happen if all the natural gas lines that service Sioux Falls just poofed on the coldest in recent memory and it wasn't in our power whether or not to turn them back on? What would you do if you lost heat indefinitely as the act of a foreign power on the same that the temperature matched the temperature in Antarctica? What would you and your family do?

First off, I have to ask: What is the point here, if it's not just blatant scaremongering? It seems like a vague reference to this story, which was—sorry to use the phrase—fake news:

That was nonsense, and quickly led to this two days later:

 

(Side note: For a comprehensive list of the media’s worst Trump-Russia failures, go here.)

So, again, in the absence any actual connection to actual Russian attacks on our grid, what on earth is Maddow up to here? Is she just using a nasty weather event to stoke the fear that Russia could make it worse? Because that’s definitely what it seems like she’s doing! And fearmongering on that level, with no evidence to support her wild speculation, is deeply irresponsible and extremely reminiscent of the conspiratorial ravings you’d see on Infowars or any other alternative right-wing media source. It’s building an enemy from scratch.  Maddow’s insular red-baiting does no favors to anyone, on any side, and only encourages tribalistic thinking.

If this is what we can expect from her show, or from MSNBC in general, it may be time to retire the idea, once and for all, that we can count on any TV outlet to cover the issues that affect us the most on a daily basis, or to hold our institutions accountable for anything beyond the dark fantasies of a host who has clearly lost the thread.

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.

black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]