How Long Before Washington’s Demonization of Russia, China, and Iran Leads to War?

 January 27, 2021 

How Long Before Washington’s Demonization of Russia, China, and Iran Leads to War?

Paul Craig Roberts

Biden, the current occupant of the White House, and President Putin of Russia have had their first telephone meeting. President Putin stressed that it is in the interest of the US, Russia, and the entire world for the tense relationship between Washington and the Kremlin to be normalized. Biden apparently, was noncommittal on this overriding issue and although indicating agreement to renew the 1991 treaty to limit and reduct strategic offensive arms, Biden mainly raised American propaganda issues with Russia.

Considering Washington’s record since the Clinton regime of simply abandoning out of hand previous agreements with Russia, renewing the START Treaty might not mean much.  The important issue is the normalization of relations between the nuclear superpowers. As Russia can wipe the US off of the face of Earth, Washington needs to be careful what impression it creates in the Kremlin.

Vladimir Putin is correct that a normalization of relations between the US and Russia is in the interests of both countries and that of the entire world.  The tensions that the American neoconservatives have created between the nuclear superpowers is not only a barrier to business and scientific cooperation but also a threat to the world because of the risk of war. However, Russia is fooling herself if she thinks Washington has any real interest in normal relations.  The Kremiln needs to keep in mind that normalizing relations was President Trump’s goal.  It was this goal that caused the US military/security complex to orchestrate the Russiagate hoax in order to prevent any such normalization and to remove Trump by stealing his re-election.  By investigating Trump for three years as a Russian agent, Trump was unable to normalize relations without confirming the propaganda that he was acting in Russia’s interest.  The Kremlin needs to understand that the US military/security complex requires Russia as an enemy in order to justify its budget and power.  Therefore, there can be no normalization.

It is pointless to talk about something that cannot happen.  President Putin needs to realize that to pursue normalization with Washington would make him appear naive and gullible to Washington.  Consider the issues Biden raised with President Putin in their first telephone conversation. Russian cyberattacks against America, Russian interference in American elections, alleged Kremlin bounties to the Taliban to kill US soldiers, and the never-ending portrayal of Vladimir Putin as a dictator—“the new Hitler”—and praise of US-financed Alexei Navalny against whom Washington alleges ongoing Putin plots.  Washington understands that these are propaganda issues used as operations against Putin and Russia. How can Putin expect to find common cause with an enemy that operates against him? Putin should take a different approach. The Kremlin should make it clear to Washington that when Washington stops demonizing Russia and her leader and requests a better relationship, Russia will consider it at that time.  Putin should avoid behavior that makes him look weak to Russians as a person who accepts endless insults and false accusations from Americans.  The Russian people want to see Putin stand up for Russia.  Once Putin does, Washington will be more careful.

On the question of how the Kremlin might more successfully pursue a better relationship with Washington, Putin could consider a different approach. The problem is that Washington does not respect the Russian government. The evidence of Washington’s disrespect is abundant.  Washington sanctions members of the Russian government and Russian business enterprises.  Washington seized Russian consulates and property for no other reason than an intentional provocation. Endless derogatory remarks are made about President Putin. Washington overthrew the Ukrainian government and installed its own, causing Russia problems with the EU and Ukraine. Washington interfered in Belarus. Recently House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton said that Putin had ordered Trump to have his supporters storm the Capitol.  “All roads lead to Putin,” said the Speaker of the House. See: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/20/russiagate-redux/ 

Until Washington respects the Russian government, Russia cannot negotiate on equal terms.  It is dangerous for Washington to disrespect the Russian government.  It could result in Washington miscalculating and provoking a war.  Russia could gain respect with more aggressive responses to Washington’s accusations and provocations.  It is Russia’s weak position to always be denying accusations.  Alternatively, the Kremlin could just turn its back on Washington, cease responding to the accusations, and go about its business in the rest of the world.  As long as Russia comes across as fixated on being part of the West, Russia is in the position of a suitor.  It is in the Kremlin’s interest to put Washington in the position of suitor. A very visible mutual defense treaty between Russia, China, and Iran would sober Washington and Israel considerably. By all means, the Kremlin should cease permitting Washington to finance a fifth column inside Russia. Alexei Navalny and his supporters are Washington’s agents.  They make propaganda inside Russia that Washington and NATO exploit outside Russia. The Kremlin seems to think that it is just being democratic, but what the Kremlin is really doing is destroying the image everywhere in the West that Russia is democratic.  Instead, Russia is understood by most Americans and Europeans as a dictatorship that poisons the leader of the democratic forces. This propaganda is dangerous to Americans, Russians, and the entire world. Propaganda is the empoyment of lies to create a false reality.  False realities are dangerous. They can take on lives of their own and lead to wars. 

https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/01/27/how-long-before-washingtons-demonization-of-russia-china-and-iran-leads-to-war/

Gil Scott-Heron - B-Movie

 

Gil Scott-Heron - B-Movie - YouTube

www.youtube.com › watch

Well, the first thing I want to say is: Mandate my ass!
Because it seems as though we've been convinced that 26% of the registered voters, not even 26% of the American people, but 26% of the registered voters form a mandate or a landslide.
21% voted for Skippy and 3, 4% voted for somebody else who might have been running.
But, oh yeah, I remember.
In this year that we have now declared the year from Shogun to Reagan, I remember what I said about Reagan, I meant it.
Acted like an actor.
Hollyweird.
Acted like a liberal.
Acted like General Franco when he acted like governor of California, then he acted like a Republican.
Then he acted like somebody was going to vote for him for president.
And now we act like 26% of the registered voters is actually a mandate.
We're all actors in this I suppose.
What has happened is that in the last 20 years, America has changed from a producer to a consumer.
And all consumers know that when the producer names the tune, the consumer has got to dance.
That's the way it is.
We used to be a producer - very inflexible at that, and now we are consumers and, finding it difficult to understand.
Natural resources and minerals will change your world.
The Arabs used to be in the 3rd World.
They have bought the 2nd World and put a firm down payment on the 1st one.
Controlling your resources we'll control your world.
This country has been surprised by the way the world looks now.
They don't know if they want to be Matt Dillon or Bob Dylan.
They don't know if they want to be diplomats or continue the same policy - of nuclear nightmare diplomacy.
John Foster Dulles ain't nothing but the name of an airport now.
The idea concerns the fact that this country wants nostalgia.
They want to go back as far as they can - even if it's only as far as last week.
Not to face now or tomorrow, but to face backwards.
And yesterday was the day of our cinema heroes riding to the rescue at the last possible moment.
The day of the man in the white hat or the man on the white horse - or the man who always came to save America at the last moment - someone always came to save America at the last moment - especially in "
B" movies.
And when America found itself having a hard time facing the future, they looked for people like John Wayne.
But since John Wayne was no longer available, they settled for Ronald Reagan and it has placed us in a situation that we can only look at -like a "
B" movie.
Come with us back to those inglorious days when heroes weren't zeros.
Before fair was square.
When the cavalry came straight away and all-American men were like Hemingway to the days of the wondrous "
B" movie.
The producer underwritten by all the millionaires necessary will be Casper "
The Defensive" Weinberger - no more animated choice is available.
The director will be Attila the Haig, running around frantically declaring himself in control and in charge.
The ultimate realization of the inmates taking over at the asylum.
The screenplay will be adapted from the book called "
Voodoo Economics" by George "
Papa Doc" Bush.
Village People" the very military "
Macho Man."

Company!!!"
Macho, macho man!"
Two-three-four."
He likes to be well, you get the point."
Huuut!

A theme song for saber-rallying and selling wars door-to-door.
Remember, we're looking for the closest thing we can find to John Wayne.
Clichés abound like kangaroos - courtesy of some spaced out Marlin Perkins, a Reagan contemporary.
Clichés like, "itchy trigger finger" and "tall in the saddle" and "riding off or on into the sunset." Clichés like, "
Get off of my planet by sundown!" More so than clichés like, "he died with his boots on." Marine tough the man is.
Bogart tough the man is.
Cagney tough the man is.
Hollywood tough the man is.
Cheap steak tough.
And Bonzo's substantial.
The ultimate in synthetic selling: A Madison Avenue masterpiece - a miracle - a cotton-candy politician...
Presto!
Macho!

Macho, macho man!"

Put your orders in America.
And quick as Kodak your leaders duplicate with the accent being on the dupes - cause all of a sudden we have fallen prey to selective amnesia - remembering what we want to remember and forgetting what we choose to forget.
All of a sudden, the man who called for a blood bath on our college campuses is supposed to be Dudley "
God-damn" Do-Right?

You go give them liberals hell Ronnie." That was the mandate to the new Captain Bligh on the new ship of fools.
It was doubtlessly based on his chameleon performance of the past: as a Liberal Democrat.
As the head of the Studio Actor's Guild, when other celluloid saviors were cringing in terror from Mc
Carthy, Ron stood tall.
It goes all the way back from Hollywood to hillbilly.
From Liberal to libelous, from "
Bonzo" to Birch idol, born again.
Civil rights, women's rights, gay rights: ...
It's all wrong.
Call in the cavalry to disrupt this perception of freedom gone wild.
God damn it, first one wants freedom, then the whole damn world wants freedom.
Nostalgia, that's what we want...: the good ol' days, when we gave'em hell.
When the buck stopped somewhere and you could still buy something with it.
To a time when movies were in black and white, and so was everything else.
Even if we go back to the campaign trail, before six-gun Ron shot off his face and developed hoof-in-mouth.
Before the free press went down before full-court press, and were reluctant to review the menu because they knew the only thing available was...
Crow.
Lon Chaney, our man of a thousand faces: no match for Ron.
Doug Henning does the make-up; special effects from Grecian Formula 16 and Crazy Glue; transportation furnished by the David Rockefeller of Remote Control Company.
Their slogan is, "
Why wait for 1984?
You can panic now...
And avoid the rush."

So much for the good news...
As Wall Street goes, so goes the nation.
And here's a look at the closing numbers: racism's up, human rights are down, peace is shaky, war items are hot.
The House claims all ties.
Jobs are down, money is scarce, and common sense is at an all-time low on heavy trading.
Movies were looking better than ever, and now no one is looking, because we're starring in a "
B" movie.
And we would rather had...
John Wayne.
We would rather had...
John Wayne.

You don't need to be in no hurry.
You ain't never really got to worry.
And you don't need to check on how you feel.
Just keep repeating that none of this is real.
And if you're sensing, that something's wrong,
Well just remember, that it won't be too long
Before the director cuts the scene.
Yea."

This ain't really your life,
Ain't really your life,
Ain't really ain't nothing but a movie."

This ain't really your life,
Ain't really your life,
Ain't really ain't nothing but a movie."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSOp507HJMA

Ian Buruma en de Taak van President Biden

Op gezag van de liberal opiniemaker Ian Buruma kan zijn publiek er nu van uitgaan dat president Biden, ‘de democratie’ in de VS zal ‘redden uit de puinhopen van een politieke crisis.’ Dit suggereerde mijn oude vriend namelijk in de NRC van 1 februari 2021, en zoals bekend is de lezer van deze krant hoog opgeleid, waardoor algemeen wordt aangenomen dat hij en zij begiftigd zijn met op z’n minst enige intelligentie. Gisteren schreef de prominente Amerikaanse auteur en journalist Stephen Kinzer op Twitter:

Biden has become the 3rd successive US president to bomb Syria.  Syria is a sovereign country with which we are not at war.  Therefore we have no legal or moral right to bomb its territory. Yet the bipartisan attitude in DC seems to be ‘We're the USA, we bomb wherever we want.’   

https://twitter.com/stephenkinzer/status/1365269339826515968 

Vandaag, 27 februari 2021 reageerde de Amerikaanse ‘Musician, Violin & Viola, Music Teacher, Republican, Captain (Retired),’ Peter Bax op Kinzer’s opmerking. Hij meldde ‘It’s a great deal worse than that. It’s just a matter of a few weeks in the time since 1942 that America has not been at war with someone’ en liet zijn opmerking vergezeld gaan van deze lijst van Amerikaanse militaire interventies:

Een beetje geïnformeerde journalist weet natuurlijk dat de VS in zijn hele bestaan sinds 1776 tenminste 93 procent van de tijd in oorlog is geweest met een of ander land. Daarnaast wordt op dit moment het Westen mentaal voorbereid op een oorlog met Rusland, en met China, waar nu 60 procent van de Amerikaanse vloot voor de kust is gestationeerd. De oud New York Times-correspondent Kinzer zelf wees er in 2016 op dat: 

Aleppo had been liberated from the violent militants who had ruled it for three years, but were liberated by Bashar al-Assad's forces. However, the American public was told ‘convoluted nonsense’ about the war. He commented further: ‘At the recent debate in Milwaukee, Hillary Clinton claimed that United Nations peace efforts in Syria were based on “an agreement I negotiated in June of 2012 in Geneva.” The precise opposite is true. In 2012 Secretary of State Clinton joined Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Israel in a successful effort to kill Kofi Annan's UN peace plan because it would have accommodated Iran and kept Assad in power, at least temporarily. No one on the Milwaukee stage knew enough to challenge her.’

Secretary Clinton was referencing the Geneva I Conference on Syria, during which principles and guidelines for a power transition were agreed to by the major powers.

In April 2018, Kinzer added:

‘According to the logic behind American strategy in the Middle East — and the rest of the world — one of our principal goals should be to prevent peace or prosperity from breaking out in countries whose governments are unfriendly to us. That outcome in Syria would have results we consider intolerable.’

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Kinzer 

Maar nu dan de Nederlandse broodschrijver Ian Buruma. In tegenstelling tot serieuze intellectuelen maakt hij zijn half-geïnformeerd publiek wijs dat Biden tot taak heeft ‘de democratie’ in de VS te ‘redden uit de puinhopen van een politieke crisis.’ Ik ben benieuwd of Ian Buruma in zijn nieuwe opiniestuk gaat uitleggen hoe het biljoenen dollars verslindende Amerikaanse geweld in het buitenland zich verhoudt met de ‘democratie,’ die volgens Ian in de VS gered moet worden ‘uit de puinhopen van’ de ‘politieke crisis,’ een chaos veroorzaakt door decennialang agressief Amerikaanse  beleid van zowel Democratische als Republikeinse machthebbers. Ik vrees dat Buruma niet logisch zal kunnen uitleggen wat 'de democratie' te maken heeft met wat hij 'het betrekkelijk goedaardige  imperialisme uit Washington' noemt.  Maar wie weet. Ik hou u op de hoogte.

 

Biden's War Crimes

 

Stephen Kinzer

@stephenkinzer

·

21 u

Biden has become the 3rd successive US president to bomb #Syria. Syria is a sovereign country with which we are not at war. Therefore we have no legal or moral right to bomb its territory. Yet the bipartisan attitude in DC seems to be "We're the USA, we bomb wherever we want."

Het Anti-Semitisme van Geert Mak's Gereformeerde Ouders (2)

Nee, we hebben niet meer te maken met het fascisme van de vorige eeuw, maar wel met de 21ste-eeuwse varianten van hetzelfde fenomeen,

zo sprak mainstream-opiniemaker Geert Mak tijdens de besloten Herdenking van de Februaristaking op 25 februari 2021. Op parmantige toon benadrukte mijn oude vriend tegenover een gezelschap autoriteiten: 

Het verkrachten van de waarheid, het bewust omhelzen van verzinsels verlokt steeds meer mensen tot een ideeënwereld die aan elkaar hangt van mythes en magisch denken.

Wie zou dit treffender hebben kunnen verwoorden dan de bestsellerauteur Geert zelf, die zich publiekelijk in 2012 de retorische vraag stelde:

 

Nemen wij, chroniqueurs van het heden en verleden, onze taak, het ‘uitbannen van onwaarheid,’ serieus genoeg. Zeker in deze tijd? Ik vraag het me af. Op dit moment vindt op Europees en mondiaal niveau een misvorming van de werkelijkheid plaats die grote consequenties heeft.

De vraag is dan ook wat deze multimiljonair bewoog te verklaren dat hij al die decennia niet ‘serieus genoeg’ bezig was geweest met het ‘uitbannen van onwaarheid,’ met andere woorden: zijn publiek bedroog, terwijl juist ‘op Europees en mondiaal niveau een misvorming van de werkelijkheid [plaatsvindt] die grote consequenties heeft.’ Zoekt hij op die wijze een manier om van zijn schuldgevoel af te komen? Immers, zeker voor een wedergeboren christen als Geert Mak geldt dat ‘confession refreshes the soul.’ Zijn zonden belijden ten overstaan van de voltallige gemeente van gelovigen lucht een christen op. Maar toch, waarom bant hij niet de ‘onwaarheid’ uit? Waarom blijft hij bewust liegen? Wie of wat dwingt Geert Mak zijn taak, ‘het uitbannen van onwaarheid,’ niet ‘serieus genoeg’ te nemen, om tenslotte negen jaar later anderen te beschuldigen van het ‘verkrachten van de waarheid’ en het ‘bewust omhelzen van verzinsels’? Ikzelf kan maar één plausibele redden bedenken: hij is bereid te liegen om zodoende zijn prestige en inkomen te vergroten. Zijn brandende ambitie wordt gevoed door een kleinburgerlijke afkomst. Mak wordt gedreven door de onverzadigbare drang gehoord en zo bevestigd te worden.  Bovendien, zolang hij anderen kan beschuldigen van ‘het verkrachten van de waarheid,’ zal zijn publiek hem niet verdenken een ‘ideeënwereld’ erop na te houden ‘die aan elkaar hangt van mythes en magisch denken.’ De huidige opdracht van de journalistiek is immers, in tegenstelling tot de kunst, een zo groot mogelijk publiek op sleeptouw te nemen. De grote joods-Hongaarse Nobelprijswinnaar Literatuur, Imre Kertész wees er terecht op dat het:

de taak [is] van de kunst om de menselijke taal tegenover de ideologie te stellen, om de verbeeldingskracht te herstellen en de mens te herinneren aan zijn herkomst, zijn werkelijke situatie en het menselijk lot. De keuze van de kunstenaar kan daarom niet anders dan radicaal zijn.

Die keuze staat lijnrecht tegenover de keuze voor de macht die Geert Mak heeft gemaakt, want, in de woorden van Kertész, ‘Wie ooit met de macht heeft gespeeld of zich vrijwillig als speelgoed van de macht heeft laten gebruiken, is nooit meer in staat over iets anders te denken, te dromen, te praten en te zedenpreken dan over de macht.’ Geert Mak is een sprekend voorbeeld van hoe de ‘waarheid’ wordt verkracht, zoals hij keer op keer bewijst met voortdurend aangepaste meningen. In zijn in het Engels vertaalde boek In America. Travels with JOHN STEINBECK (2014) beweerde hij zonder een greintje intellectuele distantie:

Russia is on the move again. After the collapse of the Soviet Empire it wants to start history once more, and how! Old myths about Russian greatness and the Russian soul are being dusted off. Borders are being redrawn, spheres of influence determined by force — it's as if we're back in the nineteenth century, complete with rigid and short-sighted tsarism. Russians have a sense that the Western world, including Western values and Western ways of thinking, are no longer paramount.

In this new situation, Europe is vulnerable, at least in the short term. The continent is divided and susceptible to blackmail because a number of European countries have become highly dependent on Russian gas. Defence has been neglected since the end of the Cold War; NATO has expanded its territory without strengthening its own armed forces; most European countries have implemented severe cutbacks and a common European defense policy remains a distant prospect. After decades of peace, America’s traditional allies represent a serious security problem… over recent years America’s military capacity has been reduced to a historically low level.

En zo werkt de man, die nooit een oorlog van nabij heeft meegemaakt, mee aan het creëren van een uiterst gespannen sfeer die een Derde Wereldoorlog tussen de kernmachten mogelijk maakt, een oorlog die, zo wordt algemeen gevreesd, in een nucleaire holocaust zal eindigen. Naar aanleiding van het Eichmann-proces in Jeruzalem schreef Harry Mulisch in zijn magistrale in 1961 verschenen boek De Zaak 40/61:

Wat hebben wij eigenlijk over Eichmann te beweren? Wij, die zelfs de ongeborenen bedreigen: en die oorlog tegen ons nageslacht is al (sinds Hiroshima) zestien jaar aan de gang! Maar zoiets heet geen 'oorlog' meer, dat heet een vervloeking. Hier vervloekt de mens zichzelf, zijn eigen kindskinderen, hieruit spreekt een haat zo fundamenteel, dat wij wel moeten vrezen, de mens nog altijd overschat te hebben.

Het gruwelijke is dat juist de Brave Hendrikken, en de zogenaamde beschaafde autoriteiten de mensheid steeds verder naar de afgrond duwen. Wat dit betreft is de oud PSP-er Geert Mak een even grote verrader als zijn vader Catrinus, die als dominee in 1936 werkelijk alles waarin hij geloofde, tot aan God’s Uitverkoren Volk toe, verraadde door te beweren dat het verbannen van de joodse Duitsers uit het publieke leven ‘staatkundig tolerabel’ was.  

Why is China painted as ‘capitalist’ by Western propaganda?

 Why is China painted as ‘capitalist’ by Western propaganda? 

by Andre Vltchek | Published: 00:00, Jul 08,2020

      

 

 

— New Eastern Outlook

LET us start with the punchline: ‘Mass media in the United States, Europe, Canada, and Australia is depicting the People’s Republic of China as “capitalist” because “capitalist” is now a dirty word. Even people in the West see “market economy” as some sort of filth.’

To call China ‘capitalist’ is to smear China. It is as if to say: ‘Chinese people are precisely like us. China is doing to the world the same injustice, committing the same crimes as we have been doing for 500+ years.’

Western, but particularly the British and the US demagogy, have managed to reach ‘heights’ of nothing lesser than deadly perfection. They already conditioned billions of brains, in all corners of the world, forced them into the uniformed, servile way of thinking. All this is not just propaganda anymore; it is the true art of indoctrination. It hardly ever misses its target. And even if it fails to convince some strong individuals completely, it always leaves a mark on the psyche of even those who are struggling to be different and ‘independent.’

In short: Western propaganda is perfect. It is deadly. Until now, it is bulletproof.

All those terms like ‘capitalist China,’ ‘Chinese state capitalism,’ are violating the truth, and they are repeated over and over again until no one dares to contradict them anymore.

The same goes for the lies about Uyghurs, Hong Kong, the Sino-Indian border, as well as various historical events.

But why really lie about China ‘not being socialist’?

The answer is simple: it is because most people associate words like ‘socialism’ and ‘Communism’ with hope. Yes, they do! At least subconsciously. Even after decades of brainwashing and smear campaigns! ‘Socialist China’ means ‘China which brings optimism to its own people and humanity.’ On the other hand, people on all continents associate ‘capitalism’ with something depressing, stale, and regressive. Therefore, call China ‘capitalist’, and it evokes feelings of gloominess and slump.

Imperialist, capitalist West cannot compete with socialism, anymore. Therefore, it tries to drag it through filth, tries to destroy it. Either indirectly, by sanctions and attempts to orchestrate coups in places like Iran, North Korea, Bolivia, Cuba, and Venezuela, or directly, like in the Middle East. China is being attacked on ‘all fronts,’ from economic ones to ideological, although not yet militarily. The most powerful and repulsive weapon, so far, has been constant injections of lies, contradictions, and nihilism. Just look at Hong Kong!

Nihilism is deadly. It destroys enthusiasm, and it robs countries of confidence and courage.

And that is precisely what the West is trying to achieve: to derail progressive socialist countries from marching forward and prevent nations oppressed by neo-colonialism from dreaming, hoping, resisting.

The Western demagogues know: China robbed of its essence — and the essence is ‘the Socialism with Chinese characteristics’ — is China which cannot inspire, cannot offer alternatives to the world. The most effective way to smear China, to silence it, is precisely to convince the world that it is ‘capitalist.’

Such techniques were used, for instance, by German Nazis who claimed that resistance against their occupation actually consisted of a bunch of terrorists. The US is known to do the same. Or the British Empire, which christened rebellious local people in its colonies as ‘hordes of savages.’ Just reverse the truth and win!

Twist things shamelessly, turn them upside-down, repeat your lies thousands of times, print them in all your mass media outlets. Chances are, your fabrications would be eventually accepted by billions of people.

In the case of China, West is trying to convince the world that PRC is the same type of gangster states like the United States or Great Britain, France, or Canada. It is doing it by calling China capitalist, by calling it even imperialist. By ridiculously equating China’s behaviour to the behaviour of the Western colonialist powers. By declaring that China is oppressing its own minorities, as the West has been doing for centuries.

BUT China is not a capitalist country, as it is not an imperialist one. It is the least expansionist major country on the planet.

It does not kill millions of human beings worldwide, it does not overthrow governments in foreign countries, and it is not robbing already destitute nations of all they have left.

It is not governed by bankers and oligarchs. Instead, it is directed by the socialist 5-year plans. Its private and state companies have to obey the government and the people. They have to produce goods and services in order to improve the standard of living of the nation and the world. Companies are precisely told what to do by the government, which represents the people, not the other way around, as happens in the West. Because in the West, it is companies that are selecting the governments!

That is socialism. ‘Socialism with Chinese characteristics.’ The socialism which managed to get rid of all extreme poverty in the country with almost 1.4 billion inhabitants. The socialism which is building ‘ecological civilisation’. The socialism which is connecting the world, including, until now, the destitute countries on earth, through the ‘Belt and Road Initiative’.

In China, democracy is not about sticking pieces of paper into a box. It is literally the ‘rule of the people’; it is all about the country which is developing in a socialist way, consistently making lives of its men, women, and children better and better, year after year.

It is a fresh, optimistic, constantly improving, and evolving system. Ask people in the Chinese cities and the countryside, and they will tell you. The vast majority of them are happy; they are hopeful and optimistic.

Ask people in the North American cities or countryside, and… you know what they will tell you. That increasingly, life is s**t!

***

THE big problem is that the majority of North Americans and Europeans know China only from the hardly strategic position of their couch commonly facing the television set or from the heavily censored Yahoo or Google ‘front’ news pages.

Many of those who go to, or who ‘do China’ are travelling in groups, visiting major tourist destinations only. Even that is, of course, much better than nothing. China is impressive everywhere.

But only a small fraction of the Westerners, those who dare to pass judgements, know China in depth. This includes even such ‘top White House advisors,’ like Peter Kent Navarro, assistant to president Donald Trump and director of trade and manufacturing policy, who knows close to nothing about China, speaks no Chinese, but writes anti-Chinese books. Or such as senior Republican senator Marco Antonio Rubio.

And the propagandists in London, Paris, and New York are well aware of the lack of knowledge about China, at least in the West. They feel free to declare and to publish the most outrageous lies and fabrications because they know they’d not be confronted. And if confronted, they’d easily manage to censure those individuals who’d dare to contradict them.

How many times have you seen on a British television channel, a Chinese Communist man or a woman, speaking about his or her country? Never! It is forbidden. Truth is not allowed, at least in the West. Only those Chinese people who are tugging the Western propaganda line can speak freely on Western channels. Never thought about it? Then think! Or, how many Russians, pro-president Putin or pro-Communist, have you ever heard on the British or US radio stations?

The Western firewall is complete.

Media is digging out the filthiest chapters of Western history, and without blinking an eye, turns things around and attributes them to China. Australians, North Americans have been sterilising natives, Roma, Aborigines, or other women. So, they invent, say that China is doing it now. For centuries, West has been locking people in its colonies and even in Europe, in the concentration camps. In a twisted way, propaganda gurus in London and Washington are attributing such behaviour to China.

No proof is needed. Let your imagination run wild. People are used to lies. They are obedient, brainwashed. And they like it when other, non-Western nations are smeared, especially when they are accused of the same crimes which Europe and the United States have been committing for centuries. It makes them feel less guilty. They can then say: ‘The entire world is disgusting. We are all equally terrible!’

Perhaps, after these propaganda assaults, there is no more hope left. But at least, in the West, there is no rush to shed those complexes of superiority, and to get rid of the privileges.

AND so, ‘China is capitalist!’ While baobabs are actually bougainvillea. Western-imposed global dictatorship is, believe it or not, democratic. And Western advisors have a full moral mandate to lecture the world.

Some Chinese Communist Party officials are now banned (by the West) from travelling to the United States. In contrast, the US officials, who are responsible for ordering mass killings in all parts of the world, can travel virtually anywhere.

The Communist Party of China is responsible for building a prosperous, highly educated, and increasingly ecologically sound nation of almost 1.4 billion. While the Imperialist apparatchiks of the United States are responsible for overthrowing countless progressive governments, bombing millions of people, ruining the environment in the colonies, and starving hundreds of millions through sanctions. But they are not sanctioned themselves and can go almost anywhere they desire. Strange world? Go figure….

The better China is doing, the more it gets smeared. If it manages to do even better in the future, it may get attacked directly, perhaps even militarily.

And rest assured that socialist China will be doing better and better. Yes, you are guessing correctly: Under the banner of the Communist Party!

So, what should we prepare ourselves for? World War III? Annihilation of the human race? Just because the West doesn’t know how to lose? Just because capitalism and imperialism would not let go of their global grip on power, even if it means the end for all of us?

Just because North America and Europe are notorious liars, suffering from pathological complexes of superiority, as well as genocidal instincts?

I don’t think this is a good prospect for our planet.

 

New Eastern Outlook, July 3. Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He is the creator of Vltchek’s World in Words and Images, and a writer who has penned a number of books.

https://www.newagebd.net/article/110558/why-is-china-painted-as-capitalist-by-western-propagandabut

Het Anti-Semitisme van Geert Mak's Gereformeerde Ouders

Op uitnodiging van de polder-elite sprak dit jaar mijn oude vriend Geert Mak bij de Herdenking van de Februaristaking ondermeer de volgende woorden uit:

Weer staan we hier, we gedenken, we eren, met onze blik naar de Dokwerker. En dat is altijd weer prima. Maar steeds vaker moet ik denken aan wat een van die moedige stakers van toen, de trambestuurder – later wethouder – Harry Verheij ooit na zo’n herdenking zei: ‘Waarom draaien we ons niet een keertje om, en kijken, met de Dokwerker mee, naar onze stad, en naar onze toekomst?’

Ja, laten we dat eens doen. En wat we dan zien, stemt niet vrolijk. Racisme en neofascisme bleven, soms openlijk, vaak sluimerend, altijd aanwezig in onze samenleving. Maar het was in de marge. Nu, in deze jaren, maken wij een omslagpunt mee. Dit soort kwaad is, vooral op internet, weer gangbaar geworden. Het jargon, de taal, de ideeënwereld van toen, ze zijn opnieuw een onderdeel geworden van het normale publieke en politieke debat. En dat is nieuw. Het zijn opeens geen theorieën meer, of angstige herinneringen. Nee, het is er, heel concreet.

Deze visie werd verwoord door de zoon van dominee Catrinus Mak, een gereformeerde christen met antisemitische reflexen, die door Geert worden ontkent, zoals ondermeer bleek toen mijn oude vriend geschokt reageerde op mijn conclusie, na de lezing van zijn bestseller De eeuw van mijn vader (1999), dat zijn ouders vóór de oorlog antisemitische opvattingen koesterden. Zijn vader, Catrinus Mak, liet namelijk in 1936 via De Sumatra Post zijn medechristenen weten dat de antisemitische Neurenberger Rassenwetten ‘staatkundig tolerabel’ waren, terwijl zijn moeder zich destijds beklaagde dat ‘een bepaalde film heel mooi was,’ maar wel ‘een beetje pro-joodsch,’ hetgeen haar kennelijk dwars zat. Zoon Geert’s verklaring voor de houding van zijn ouders tijdens het interbellum is dat zij ‘nu eenmaal niet [wisten], zoals niemand dat weet, op welke plek ze zich bevonden in de geschiedenis.’ Niemand van zijn lezers heeft hem erop gewezen dat dit geen argument is, laat staan een rechtvaardiging, aangezien ‘niemand weet’ op ‘welke plek’ hij of zij zich bevinden ‘in de geschiedenis.’ De vraag is dan ook waarom atheïstische communisten wel  in verzet gingen, terwijl de christelijke zielenherder Catrinus Mak het ‘uitverkoren volk’ van zijn  God verraadde. 

De eeuw van mijn vader (1999) is Geert Mak’s best verkochte boek in Nederland, en dit is geenszins vreemd, want het schampt langs de geschiedenis. Ook hier wordt het collaboreren verkocht als datgene wat opiniemaker Bas Heijne het 'accomoderen' betitelt. Ook bij hem wordt de vraag omzeild in hoeverre de Nederlanders medeschuldig zijn geweest aan de Holocaust, en wordt het eigen foute optreden genegeerd. Op Heijne’s eufemistische bewering dat in ‘Nederland de overtuiging [leeft] dat accommoderen beter is dan confronteren. Om erger te voorkomen, ’ reageerde de Duitse  documentairemaker en schrijver van de bestseller Les Amnésiques (De geheugenlozen), Géraldine Schwarz terecht met de terechtwijzing:

Dat begrijp ik, maar het is riskant. Denk aan de appeasement van Chamberlain! Ik heb het gevoel dat er nog altijd groot ongemak over die periode bestaat, die een echte verwerking moeilijk maakt. Dat er dertien jaar juridisch gesteggeld is over een nieuw Auschwitz-monument in Amsterdam, vind ik beschamend. Een bevolkingsgroep die een groot stempel op de geschiedenis van de stad heeft gedrukt, is compleet vernietigd en dan is daar in 2019 nog geen opvallend monument aan gewijd? Het huidige monument is heel mooi, maar niemand die het ziet. Er is in Nederland ook geen Holocaustmuseum, terwijl er wel een in Boedapest staat. Nederland weigert nog altijd excuses aan te bieden voor het lot van de Joden, terwijl vrijwel alle Europese landen, Andorra en Luxemburg inbegrepen, dat wel hebben gedaan. Het wijst erop dat men in Nederland nog altijd moeite heeft om met zichzelf in het reine te komen.

Dat lijkt me een slechte zaak, want zonder excuses, zonder erkenning van fouten, kun je geen vrede met het verleden hebben, met de slachtoffers, en ook niet met de vijanden van weleer. Dat is een basaal psychologisch feit. Een volwassen democratie moet het verleden onder ogen kunnen zien. Het is zo’n achterhaald idee dat wanneer je demonen uit het verleden oproept, je daar alleen maar minder van kunt worden. Het verleden alleen gebruiken om jezelf een goed gevoel te geven, om te kunnen gloriëren, echt, dat is iets uit de negentiende eeuw.

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/11/01/streven-naar-consensus-kan-een-excuus-voor-lafheid-zijn-a3978843  

Een journalist/jurist als Geert Mak, die zich opwerpt als historicus, als chroniqueur van ondermeer Amsterdam en Nederland, zou in De eeuw van mijn vader niet hebben moeten suggereren dat zijn ouders geen anti-semitische opvattingen bezaten, en dit zeker niet, tegenover mij, hebben moeten ontkennen. Als een onafhankelijke waarnemer had hij de werkelijkheid moeten beschrijven. Nu komt hij niet verder dan de terloopse opmerking:

Soms vraag ik me af: heeft bij de mannenbroeders van voor de oorlog, die zich zo graag ‘de kinderen Gods’ noemden, wellicht ook een onuitgesproken jaloezie meegespeeld? Jegens de enige echte ‘kinderen Israëls’? 

Kortom, hij doet het hier voorkomen alsof er geen sprake van anti-semitisme was, maar van ‘jaloezie,’ oftewel ‘afgunst, ijverzucht, kinnesinne, naijver.’ De bestsellerauteur vraagt zich dit ‘soms af,’ meer niet. Deze houding maakt hem ook zo populair bij de Nederlandse burgers. Die voelen zich niet schuldig voor het kwalijke verleden zoals de slavernij, een misdaad waardoor Nederland zo rijk is kunnen worden. Het poldermodel heeft het mogelijk gemaakt dat pas recentelijk begonnen is met een officieel onderzoek naar de Nederlandse oorlogsmisdaden in Indonesië, ruim 70 jaar geleden. Dezelfde mentaliteit is er de oorzaak van geweest dat Nederland pas in 2020 excuses aanbood voor de ‘accomodatie’ aan de eisen van de nazi’s, die in een slachtpartij van joodse Nederlanders eindigde.

 

Die collaboratie-mentaliteit is nog lang niet afgelopen. De Nederlander heeft in dat opzicht werkelijk niets van de Tweede Wereldoorlog geleerd. Geen van de op mijn weblog  aangehaalde opiniemakers, Geert Mak, Hubert Smeets, Bas Heijne, Frank Westerman, Ian Buruma, die altijd onmiddellijk vooraan staan om hun mening te geven over wat dan ook, heeft erop aangedrongen dat de Nederlandse bewindslieden, die illegaal steun verleenden aan terroristen in Syrië, hiervoor juridisch worden vervolgd. Zij kijken wel uit, het zou hun vorstelijk inkomen en braaf imago in gevaar brengen. Het is waar Geert, oude vriend,  'zonder excuses, zonder erkenning van fouten, kun je geen vrede met het verleden hebben, met de slachtoffers, en ook niet met de vijanden van weleer.' Ik kom hierop terug, want jouw hypocrisie is niet alleen weerzinwekkend, maar ook het verkeerde voorbeeld.