Stay connected to your favorite content
Collective West - Blog Posts
BRICS+: Bright or Dark Perspectives of a Block of Countries in the Path to Real or Delusional Multipolarity
When last August, in the XV BRICS summit (22-24.8.2023), it was announced that the five constituent members of the Block (China, India, Russia, and Brazil, as initial members in 2006, with the addition of South Africa in 2010) agreed to admit another six (6) countries, namely Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and UAE (herewith mentioned in alphabetic order; Argentina did not make use of the offer, following the recent presidential elections), the member states ushered the world community in a new era. The groundbreaking decision will be effect January 1st 2024. The development -in and by itself- is neither good nor bad; the outcome will depend on the choices that will be made and the changes that will be implemented with respect to the nature, the status, the function, the targets, and the international role of the Block itself. In fact, right now, all options are open.
Contents
I - What BRICS is and what it is not
II - Strong points of BRICS
III - Weak points of BRICS
IV - The Expansion of BRICS
V - What next for the BRICS?
VI - Economic interests can be the basis of only loosely associated states (or a League), not a union of states
VII - Multilateral organizations of states can never be established as an opposite pole of a world power
VIII - Multipolarity: a reality or a delusion?
IX - Multipolarity tomorrow: a reality only through the isolation of the unipolar world center
What is better or more suitable? Is it wise to enlarge BRICS or to deepen the integration of this block of 11 countries? The challenges are enormous and the repercussions will be cataclysmic for the entire world. This topic has indeed been controversial for some time; Russia, India and Brazil were not enthusiastic about China's incessant suggestions for the "influx of fresh blood". In fact, the decision to invite six emerging market group countries was a compromise; several other states had expressed their wish to join, but after numerous deliberations, for various reasons they were not accepted now.
Before new members arrive, the existing partners should define what they truly want BRICS or BRICS+ to be; this issue is still perplex, diverse and vague. In this regard, it is crucial to always recall that the original concept of BRIC (for only four countries) is credited to an Englishman, namely Jim O'Neill (Baron O'Neill of Gatley), who was at the time the chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management; the idea was first expressed within very different context -quite noticeably- in November 2001.
However, the governments concerned took some time to explore and evaluate the thought before adapting it to their interests and perspectives; the first high-level meetings started in 2006, and the first formal summit (4 members) was held in Yekaterinburg in July 2009. Everyone today effortlessly understands that the world was very different at the time; meanwhile, the achievements of the 5-country block, although significant for the beneficiaries, were modest at the international level.
Consequently, before considering BRICS as the perfect counterbalance to the West (as President Putin stated openly last year), it is essential for anyone to accurately understand what BRICS is, what it is not, what it can be, and what it cannot.
I - What BRICS is and what it is not
BRICS is not an 'organization' like the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization), which is a Eurasian political, economic, international security and defense organization, and the EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union), which is an economic union of several post-Soviet states located in Eurasia. To be constructive and effective in his approach to this topic, an astute observer should dissociate three totally distinct issues:
a- the hitherto achievements of the 5-country block;
b- what BRICS is nowadays; and
c- what BRICS can become in the future. In this regard, what Muhammad Kamal wrote in the Egyptian daily Al Masry al Yom (« نحو عضوية «البريكس; Towards BRICS Membership) is totally inconsistent; worse, his pessimism for Egypt's adhesion to the 5-country block only reflects the wishes of the idiotic and corrupt stooges of Western embassies in Cairo. This type of thought may be disastrous for Egypt. If BRICS did not achieve 'much' in the past, this fact hinges on eventually misplaced worldviews and pointless considerations that the member states may have had. All the same, with a new approach, with an accurate perception of what an expanded BRICS can or cannot become, and with a strong commitment to the interests of these countries' populations, one can certainly mark a spectacular success.
Definitely, BRICS is not an organization; it is not an economic bloc, in spite of the numerous projects launched and materialized, such as the New Development Bank (launched in 2014-2015), the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), the BRIC Cable (the construction of which has not yet started), joint publications, and various initiatives. Under discussion are issues of paramount importance, namely a potential BRICS payment system and an eventual common currency. It becomes therefore evident that there are slow steps toward a comprehensive partnership.
Precisely because BRICS is not an organization, they don't have a proper portal, as it happens in the case of existing international bodies like the SCO, the Turkic Union or the African Union. Instead, they have a rudimentary site with basic info, and every annual meeting comes up with a separate, new site.
The rest is up to private initiatives, think tanks, research centers, online magazines, and the world's mass media.
As group of countries, BRICS is a heteroclite array of states with certain common interests, but also with very divergent economies, structures and legislations, and partly different socioeconomic visions; until now, no common long-term perspective has been envisaged – let alone agreed upon. This means that the governments of the member states have to seriously consider and scrupulously study how they will manage to set up a common economic space and how to first offer themselves the necessary tools in order to advance in that direction.
Many charts, tables, drawings and tables have been produced in order to highlight to all what BRICS really is; but this approach comprises also a drawback that can cause confusion and misjudgment. This is due to the fact that each visual representation highlights only one aspect of the reality; however one gets a complete idea of the reality, only if one goes through illustrations of all the existing aspects of the reality. One missing diagram about the BRICS is enough to obscure our understanding and confuse our perception.
II - Strong points of BRICS
As of end 2023, over 3.3 billion people lived in the BRICS countries, making more than 40% of the world population; BRICS states stretch over 30% of the world's land surface and account for 26% of the global economy. The 5-country block represents 18% of trade in goods and 25% of foreign investment. At this point, we already face some challenges in our effort to quantify the reality. Verifiable facts like the area and the population of a country are undeniable points of reference; the area of a country is measured in kilometers square, whereas the population is estimated in millions or thousands of people. However, when it comes to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of a country, there are two diametrically opposed methods of calculation; the end results may be very divergent.
GDP estimates published by financial and statistical institutions are calculated at market or government official exchange rates. But what is called 'Nominal GDP' is stated without taking into consideration the existing differences in the cost of living among the countries. This means that the data presented can vary enormously from one year to another due to fluctuations in the currency exchange rates; but this may be temporary and therefore irrelevant.
That is why GDP (PPP) forecast estimates are to be considered as a better reflection of the economic realities, and of the comparison between two countries; to sort this data and publish their databases, financial and statistical institutions calculate using both, market and government official exchange rates. PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) is a method of measuring that takes into consideration the relative cost of local goods, services and inflation rates of the country.
The ensuing difference can be colossal: China's nominal GDP for the year 2023 is 19.37 trillion US$, but the PPP-based GDP of China for the same year is 33 trillion US$; on the contrary, on either case, US GDP amounts to 26.85 trillion US$. As it can be surmised, PPP-based GDP is preferable for comparison; all the same, the size of an economy being also a matter of political propaganda, many Anglo-Saxon institutions deliberately show a predilection for Nominal GDP in order to occasionally show that Russia is not among the top ten economies of the world.
III - Weak points of BRICS
Be that as it may, the aforementioned impressive figures about the BRICS are not attested on other occasions; for instance, the total voting quota of the 5-country block in the IMF is only 14.7%, although in 2021 they accounted for about a third of world GDP, a fifth of world trade, about a quarter of direct investment, and their foreign exchange reserves reached 35% of the world's total. This point was highlighted by President Putin in his address to President Xi Jinping on 22nd June 2022.
On another note, in the US$ 109 trillion world stock market, BRICS represent only a small segment of the world market capitalization (around 20%), whereas the US, which is home to 39 of the 100 largest companies in the world, has more than 40% of the market and the European Union amounts to ca. 11%.
IV - The Expansion of BRICS
On the basis of the above mentioned data, one can understand that the recently admitted six (6) countries do not constitute a major expansion. When it comes to total area (in kilometers square), the six states {Argentina (2.780.400 km2), Saudi Arabia (2.149.690 km2), Iran (1.648.195 km2), Ethiopia (1.104.300 km2), Egypt (1.002.450 km2) and UAE (83.600 km2)} amount to ca. 20% (8768635 km2) of the land surface of the BRICS countries (ca. 40 million km2).
Similarly, with respect to population, the six newly accepted states {Ethiopia (107.334.000), Egypt (105.388.000), Iran (85.298.600), Argentina (46.654.581), Saudi Arabia (32.175.224) and UAE (9.282.410)} have a total population of 386.132.815 people, which is around 10% of the current population of BRICS. However, the 11-country block will be home to almost half the population of the world (46%); this marks a significant threshold indeed.
Similar conclusions we draw concerning the economic indicators of the six newly admitted states and notably their PPP-based GDP; combined the GDP of the six countries {Saudi Arabia (2.300.967 US$ million), Egypt (1.803.584 US$ million), Iran (1.691.819 US$ million), Argentina (1.274.807 US$ million), UAE (890.171 US$ million), Ethiopia (393.847 US$ million)} is around 8.350.000 US$ million; in other words, the six states produce only one seventh (1/7) of the total GDP of the current BRICS member states (56 US$ trillion).
This aspect was duly discerned also by those who are accustomed to rather take into account the nominal GDP; that's why they underscored the fact that "Saudi Arabia is the only trillion-dollar economy being added to the BRICS".
Combined the nominal GDP of the six new member states {Saudi Arabia (1.061.902 US$ million), Argentina (641.102 US$ million), UAE (498.978 US$ million), Egypt (378.110 US$ million), Iran (367.970 US$ million), Ethiopia (156.083 US$ million)} amounts to 3.1 US$ trillion; this is about one ninth (1/9) of the nominal GDP of the current BRICS member states (27.7 US$ trillion).
If we stop at this point and we do not further explore the manifold aspects of BRICS expansion, we will be left with the idea that, due to necessary compromises, the first major phase of BRICS expansion did not include several other countries, which also expressed the interest to join, notably Algeria, Belarus, Bangladesh, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, Vietnam, etc. But this will prevent us from observing a very interesting and crucial aspect of the development. As a matter of fact, this was not particularly highlighted by anyone in the world's mainstream mass media. There is indeed one economic sector in which the present stage of BRICS expansion made a significant breakthrough; this is the energy sector, and more particularly, the Oil production.
As a matter of fact, the addition of Saudi Arabia, Iran and the UAE will more than double BRICS' share of global oil production. With six out of the nine top oil producers being BRICS+ member states (Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Brazil, Iran, UAE), the 11-country block represents 43% of the world oil production.
This means that, in spite of the compromises made, BRICS made a big step ahead in preparing their forthcoming transformation from an ill-defined block of countries to a well-defined organization that will change the post-WW II world drastically and irrevocably. As I already said, the concept that they will have to adopt for their alliance is that of the common economic space.
V - What next for the BRICS?
Dangling between long term strategy and everyday opportunities, the governments of the 5- or 11-country block can really make of their partnership whatever they want. They can turn it to the tool par excellence for the transformation of the present world; indeed, they can make of the BRICS+ the cornerstone in the foundation of a human world order of unity, equity, justice, lawfulness, concord, and worldwide cordiality. Reversely, they can neglect their imagination, fail to create a vision, ignore their intellect, and thus waste their time.
In this regard, it is clear that BRICS+ will be the reflection of the shared vision that the member states, the respective governments, and -above all- the civil societies will initiate. It is therefore essential to avoid extreme optimism or pessimism and to make an effort not to mix a long term perspective with any type of unnecessary political propaganda. The difference can be understood in the following examples:
Speaking about Russia’s vision of the BRICS+ format as early as February 2018, Sergey Ryabkov, a noteworthy statesman and Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister since 2008, stated: «we suggest that our partners consider BRICS+ as a platform for developing what could be termed an 'integration of integrations'».
This sounds as sheer advocacy of the 'single economic space' concept, which leads to economic union. Quite contrarily, Sergei Lavrov (Center for World Politics and Strategic Analysis) and Kirill Babaev (Director of the Institute of China and Modern Asia), both of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in their article «И вширь, и вглубь - Пути укрепления институциональной основы БРИКС» (Both in breadth and in depth - Ways to strengthen the institutional framework of BRICS / Бабаев К.В., Лавров С.В. И вширь, и вглубь // Россия в глобальной политике. 2023. Т. 21. № 5. С. 69–81)
present a far more realistic approach, opting for the 'common economic space' concept.
There are important differences between the two concepts, and it is essential to make this point clear, because the 'single economic space' concept simply cannot work in the case of BRICS, and even more so that of BRICS+. This is exactly what the authors of the aforementioned article do; the question is whether this is enough.
VI - Economic interests can be the basis of only loosely associated states (or a League), not a union of states
At this point, taking into consideration the international situation as it is evidently downgrading over the past few years, the governments of the BRICS+ member states must truly become consciously serious in their judgment, drastically bold in their action, and greatly resourceful in their vision before they are soon met with an aggravated deterioration of the world order in which their efforts will unfortunately be irrevocably meaningless.
Although BRICS+ governments are correct in their analyses and conclusions as regards the major structural problems of the world economy, they all apparently fail to understand where the world community is led to; this is due to the prevailing, very confusing, and definitely perplex situation. But the present condition of the world affairs makes of the aforementioned economic problems only a tiny sector of the very grave troubles that currently exist and impact every human across the Earth.
Consequently, in spite of the fact that the world economy is in major trouble, all its aspects cannot be tackled independently of the other, grave and thorny, issues of intellectual, academic, educational, scientific, cultural, and socio-governmental order that we are currently facing. As a matter of fact, erroneous intellectual concepts, delusional interpretations of the reality, intentional distortions of World History, ideological aberrations, and overwhelming oppression of indigenous cultures are at the origin of developments that brought the world economy to the brink of collapse. Scientific absurdities, military interventions, and corrupt governmental practices contributed to the overall deterioration, and have therefore to be also taken into consideration.
As far as BRICS+ member states are concerned, there is one word that terminally encapsulates the aforementioned reality in its totality: Western colonialism. What matters in this regard is that this term is not to be identified with only its military, political and economic dimensions.
Colonialism is basically a criminal and anti-human development the most crucial dimension of which is cultural; culture determines the psychology of people, nations, ruling classes and governments, and this -in turn- impacts the local economy.
In addition to the aforementioned points, there is a critical factor which must also be taken into account: only a union of loosely associated states can ever be successfully established on the basis of economic interests. This is a fundamental condition to retain. As situation, it is due to the fact that states do not exist in themselves, but constitute the receptacle of human activity related to the administration and the governance of the society.
Consequently, a number of states can form an effective organization that will impact worldwide developments only on the basis of major decisions taken by conscious peoples and statesmen genuinely representing their societies, which are known for their historically diverse values, distinct moral principles, varied cultural heritage, but shared goals and common vision. But this is much broader than an economic union.
The perfect example of failure is in this regard offered by the European Union. The debilitated union of states started before 72 years with the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC; 1952), which was designed to integrate the coal and steel industries in Western Europe (France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg). Evaluated for that purpose, ECSC was good, but it could never progress in the direction of transformation from an economic community to one nation-state.
Different peoples do not integrate into one nation-state without a unifying force; this can certainly be a faith, a cult, a worldview or even an ideology, but never economic interests. That is why BRICS+ member states, although they are forced to define how to set up a 'common economic space', have to broaden the box and try to see things as widely as they can.
VII - Multilateral organizations of states can never be established as an opposite pole of a world power
In spite of the urgency of their economic demands for new standards and rules or a new world order (as many people say), BRICS+ member states have got to approach the world affairs in a different, far broader, and definitely comprehensive manner. This imperative is due to both, their incomparably enormous size and the undeniable fact that they altogether constitute a worldwide organization with major, not only economic, interests that they have in common. Actually, the troubles that all these countries face at the level of the international trade and world economy are due to
a- political developments that took place over the last70-80 years,
b- two successive World Wars,
c- numerous earlier conflicts,
d- extreme ideological aberrations,
e- preposterous intellectual assumptions,
f- outrageous educational-academic forgeries, and
g- a 5-century long, nefarious and calamitous, colonial legacy.
In this case, BRICS+ member states cannot possibly imagine that they are able to rectify a so deeply rooted injustice and inhumanity that prevail worldwide by merely sidestepping the US dollar via
- local currency trading,
- Mbridge (a multi-central bank digital currency platform, which is shared among participating central banks and commercial banks, as it is built on distributed ledger technology in order to enable instant cross-border payments and settlement) or
- other alternative payment routes and methods of de-dollarization.
In fact, their true problem is what is accurately called 'the Collective West' in its entirety. The US dollar replaced indeed the British pound as the world’s reserve currency (in 1944 following the Bretton Woods Agreement); it ceased unilaterally to be convertible to gold (in 1971, due to the so-called Nixon shock); and it became the sole currency in which Saudi Arabia is paid for Oil (in 1974, as per the terms of the Saudi Arabia and US Agreement on Cooperation, signed June 8, that made the petrodollar possible, which also known as 'the petrocurrency effect' and 'the petrodollar recycling').
However, all these developments consist, truly speaking, in Microhistory, if viewed within a wider context. In fact, they constitute only in the latest episodes of the colonial conquest, contamination and putrefaction, which have progressively enveloped the world. That is why BRICS+ member states must see things within a macrohistorical context and shape their decision making processes accordingly.
Precisely because the aspects of the world troubles are so many, BRICS+ member states have to realize that the country, which capitalized on its monetary privilege, namely the petrodollar, did so while also defending all the other aspects of the 5-century long Western predominance, which proved to be catastrophic for the entire world, except for the West European colonial powers and their annexes.
As a matter of fact, the historically true definition of the USA is not "the country with the US dollar as national currency", but "the heir of 5-century long, colonial legacy". This is what the US stands for – not just a currency.
Indeed, the US dollar is not only the default world currency, but at the same time, the strongest currency of the Western world. All the same, people often tend to forget that the American currency was first one of the strongest in the Western world, then its strongest, and only 'recently' the world's medium of exchange. It is therefore undeniable that, also at the financial and economic level, it represents the 'Collective West'.
Due to the successive historical developments, which led the entire Mankind to the present occurrence and on which the US predominance has persistently based its delusional legitimacy, it would be foolish to believe that the US will ever accept the reduction of the systemically omnipotent Western world into merely two or three poles (EU, US, and -eventually- Japan) of a delusional multipolar system composed by them and by the rising, major BRICS+ forces. Nuclear wars of any form are far more plausible to take place than a multipolar world to be potentially formed with the participation of the EU and the US.
To put it in simple words, you can never possibly ask someone, who considers himself as extraordinarily enormous as a 'dinosaur', to condescend to accept few 'cockroaches' as equal; this metaphor does not constitute the exact representation of the reality, but it accurately reflects the mentality of the people who currently run the EU, the US, the UK and their annexes. These forces have by now carried out a fully obvious colonial agenda across the Earth; even worse, they are evidently intending to implement the next parts of the agenda, which has already been proven as inherently unacceptable to the mankind – the majority of the misfortunate inhabitants of the Collective West included. In other words, the world situation is far worse than what most of the foolish or fooled leaders of the BRICS+ member states have imagined.
VIII - Multipolarity: a reality or a delusion?
Discussing about the chances for the emergence of a multipolar world system does not hinge only on a qualitative examination of intentions and a quest for world peace and security; it is not sufficient to only scrutinize the purposes of the decayed and ailing but raucous and rancorous elites of US, Germany, France, England and Italy from one side and assess the aspirations of the ruling classes of China, India, Russia, Brazil and a nebula of several heavily populated countries, namely Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Mexico, Ethiopia, Egypt, Congo, Vietnam, Turkey, Iran, Thailand, Tanzania and South Africa.
Despite the undeniable importance of all the aforementioned parameters, there is another factor that determines even more conclusively the outcome of the present cleavage. This pertains to the process of historical developments that brought about the present state of international affairs. There are only specific procedures that allow a multipolar world community to be formed; it cannot rise anytime anywhere.
The past eighty (80) years have been characterized by a unipolar system of world governance; this was not the first time in World History in which a very large part of the Earth was under the control of one state (the Neo-Assyrian Empire, Achaemenid Iran, the Abbasid Caliphate, the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan, the Chagatai Empire of Timur/Tamerlane, etc.) without any other state being able to challenge it.
Several political commentators often dare to portray the present period as the first time in which one country 'controlled' almost the totality of the surface of the Earth, but this is definitely a maximalist approach. In fact, as description, it is wrong. As conclusion, it has only a nominal value; this is so because the 'control' was asserted only via various layers of proxies, who were, practically speaking, unable to always govern all the territory that they claimed to possess.
It is essential not to confuse the present conjecture with the days that antedated WW II or WW I; many irrelevant historians and inconsistent intellectuals are pleased to draw parallels between 1914 and 2024 or between 1939 and 2024, but they are very wrong, confusing, and dangerously deceitful.
Parallels as regards the ensuing consequences or outcome cannot be drawn between a past circumstance and the present occurrence; this is so because people know what came next, after the past circumstance that they take as one pole of the parallel, but only assume that the other pole (namely the present occurrence) will have the same exit (namely a war).
Parallels can be drawn between a past circumstance and the present occurrence only with respect to the anteriority of both moments that are taken as parallels. In this case, we know very well that no unipolar system of world governance existed either in the period 1870-1914 or during the interval between the two world wars.
Prior to WW II, the world community revolved around six major poles, i.e. England (as the British Empire), USSR, USA, France, Japan and Germany; the six powers gradually formed two heteroclite groups of allies of which one prevailed in 1945.
Prior to WW I, the world community revolved around nine major poles, i.e. England (as the British Empire), the Russian Empire, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, the Ottoman Empire, USA, and Japan.
It is very critical at this point to comprehensively comprehend that those major poles or constituents of the world community did not seek to establish a multipolar system of world governance either in 1914 or in 1939; it is actually necessary to take into consideration the fact that the concept of 'world community' had not yet been formed or formulated as a substitute to the criminal colonial activities of England and France, which attempted to divide Africa, Western and South Asia, and Oceania among themselves.
Even worse for the silly raiders of the lost multipolarity, it is even more crucial to take into account that, if a proposal for the establishment of a multipolar system of world governance was made back in 1914, the colonial powers England and France would be the first to reject it. Actually, the criminal gangsters, who always ruled Paris and London and later hijacked Washington D.C., deliberately triggered WW I, by duly utilizing their paranoid Serbian lackeys.
Why England and France back in 1914 would vehemently oppose any proposal for the establishment of a multipolar system of world governance is easy to assess; this development would block their effort to terminally dismantle Austria Hungary and the Ottoman Empire, while also effectively carrying out cruel operations of regime change in the German and the Russian Empires.
Furthermore, we have to also reckon with the fact that, if someone advanced a proposal as regards the establishment of a multipolar system of world governance back in 1939, he would surely be resolutely reprimanded by the criminal colonial rascals of London and Paris. England and France declared war on Germany, because they did not want to establish a multipolar world community including the USSR, Japan, Germany, and Berlin's ally Italy. As we all know, regime change operations took place in the latter three states in 1945, and 40-45 years later in the (until then greatly marginalized, continually defamed, and shamelessly vilified) USSR.
So, to conclude the present assessment, we have to perceive the establishment of the so-called 'world community' and the inception of the 'international law' as mere tricks, intentional schemes, and colonial contrivance deceitfully presented but successfully elaborated by England, France and their successor, namely the US. In fact, on multiple occasions over the past 80 years, it was fully proven that there is no world community, but a perilous jungle inhabited by ferocious monsters, which are more incensed and more devilish than any wild animal, those of the Mesozoic included.
The sole reality is this: what the mankind attested for 300 years -from the Carnatic Wars (1740-1763; Anglo-French wars in India) to the end of WW II- was only the rise of the Western colonial powers to world predominance. The world impressively shifted from a multipolar system of world belligerency (with 11 poles, namely Spain, Portugal, England, France, Holland, Austria-Hungary, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, Safavid-Afshar Iran, Mughal India, and Qing China) to a unipolar system of world governance, which can be conclusively described as the Western barbarism and colonial tyranny over mankind.
The above makes clear to all that the termination of a unipolar system of world governance can never happen through negotiations with the central pole of the system; in a Jurassic environment, only idiots would believe in and count on such 'negotiations'.
IX - Multipolarity tomorrow: a reality only through the isolation of the unipolar world center
It would be anything between foolish and paranoid to imagine that the forces, which controlled the Western states and elites over the past five centuries, will be ready to yield power to those whom they have been considering, for at least 350-400 years, as targets for conquest and world dominance.
BRICS+ member states stand therefore in front of a dilemma: either reject the Western unipolar dominance or capitulate. Since the latter is a non-option, it would be useful to explore the possible ways to reject the barbarian, catastrophic and heinous Western rule. However, before pondering on how the 5-century long colonial impact can be overthrown by the countries that represent ca. 90% of the world population, it would be essential for all of them, and more particularly, for the BRICS+ governments, to specify the sectors in which the rejection of the colonial rule (or unipolar system of world governance) must take place.
Because it will be partly functional and basically ineffective, if the BRICS+ member states challenge the Collective West only at the monetary, financial and economic levels, it is imperative for the respective governments to come to an agreement about launching BRICS+ commissions specializing in almost all the sectors for which there are presently fully-fledged UN Specialized Agencies, Programmes and Funds, Research and Training Institutes, Other Entities and Bodies, as well as Related Organizations. A separate commission in Decolonization and De-Westernization should be added, involving groups of study and rejection of all aspects of academic, educational, scientific, intellectual, cultural, moral, behavioral and socio-governmental colonialism.
Following a 6-month period of tense consultations, the commissions and the groups of study should come up with conclusive proposals about the restructuring of all the international bodies, their priorities, works, methods and processes. Effectively backed by a comprehensive refutation of the 5-century long Western colonial order, an overwhelming denunciation of the racist and fallacious Western version of World History, and an all-encompassing condemnation of the preposterous and biased function of the UN for 80 years, BRICS+ member states and all their allies should irrevocably withdraw from all the UN organizations, unequivocally deny any legitimacy to the fake international body, and immediately launch the All Peoples Assembly, as the sole legitimate international body. This will convene initially for an indefinite period of time and institute the fair, just, unquestionably multilateral, and solid international milieu to which all the people worldwide have long aspired. A new Internet will have to be rapidly launched for all the member states totally independently from the US-based legacy system.
This will be tantamount to complete transformation of the BRICS+ into the new international body, which has been badly missing to almost all the people across the Earth. All the employees of the new international body and its specialized agencies, institutes and related organization will have to be proportionally hired on the basis of ethnic origin, language and religion/belief. It will therefore be impossible for a group that constitutes approximately 0.2% of the 8 billion world population to literally invade key positions, promote sectarianism, and thus become the well-justified reason of its own rejection by all the rest.
Subsequently, BRICS+ member states and all their allies will be accepted as members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (CSO), which will turn out to be the de facto guarantee of worldwide peace and security. International relations with the NATO member states, their allies and satellites will be totally severed at all levels, commercial, educational, recreational, academic, intellectual, scientific, technological, economic, social, governmental and military.
This abrupt separation will evidently produce a tremendous international economic shock; but the BRICS+-led countries will be able to face the challenge, recover in relatively short time, and adapt in a far better environment totally void of the Western colonial barbarism, horrific criminality, heinous inhumanity, and evil delusions.
The Collective West must die and it will die; powerfully quarantined, asphyxiated within its borders, economically collapsed, socially imploded, and irreversibly poisoned by the evil delusions, sick literature, inhuman governance, rotten thoughts, insidious ideas, demented ideologies, corrupt arts, suicidal philosophies, absurd disbelief, and utter nonsense that their supposed spiritual, religious, intellectual and social leaders produced, the Western world will totally perish in the most deserved hecatomb, which will be the price they will pay for the unipolar system of world governance that they imposed and for the plans of human annihilation that they developed.
Quite unfortunately for the BRICS+ member states and their allies, there is no alternative; by totally isolating the unipolar world center (namely Canada, USA, UK, EU, Australia and New Zealand), which is what is called the 'Collective West', they will be in a position to effectively install a genuinely representative, peaceful, secure, sustainable multipolar system of world governance, which will extend covering the quasi-totality (ca. 90%) of the world population.
The only other possible transition from a unipolar to a multipolar world is nuclear; if the eventually foolish and fooled leaders of the BRICS+ member states do not truly know or do not duly expect this, it will certainly be too bad for them. If they do not act immediately according to the aforementioned description, they will inevitably offer their worst enemies the privilege of a surprise attack. This is so because the Collective West is very close to the point of no return; they reached the stage of irreparable social disintegration. Consequently, their own chance of survival is to trigger further wars abroad. This is actually what these barbarians have always done after 1492; but this time, it will surely be nuclear.
All those, who 'calmly' wait for the US presidential elections to take place and -even worse- anticipate the victory of Donald Trump, will be proven as the best, although unpaid, agents of the Collective West among the leadership of the BRICS+ member states.
And the establishment of a country, which is hit by a nuclear attack of any type, will have either to cause tremendous nuclear devastation -which involves also terrible collateral damages- or to leave in History the memory of a protracted but failed tenure. It will be a shame and an example to avoid.
The Collective West, its Mysteries, Illusions and Threats against the Mankind
Contents
Introduction
I. Colonization: worldwide imposition of the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model
II. The Western world: an abnormal self-denial and a terrorist rebuff of the History of mankind
III. The interminable internecine wars of the West, its composite nature, and the ensuing concerns for the rest of the world
IV. Westernization is not 'à la carte'
V. Westernization is part of eschatological agendas
De-Westernization for Russia, Africa, the Muslim world, India, China and Latin America means a) replacement of the fallacious 'Greco-Roman' and 'Judeo-Christian' material from academic curricula and educational manuals and b) substitution of the past documentation with major specimens of Asiatic and African Art, which bear witness to the historical interaction of the world's major civilizations. Example: back panels from the couch found in the tomb of the Sogdian merchant and nobleman An Jia (安伽), who was buried in Chang'an (長安), today's Xi'an (西安市), great Chinese capital, in 579 CE, founding year of the Daxiang (大象) era, during the reign of Emperor Jing; currently in the Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology; the representations of few significant moments of the deceased nobleman's life involve scenes of cult, meetings with nomad leaders, and conclusion of agreements.
In a previous article published few days ago under the title "World Politics as Black & White: Iran and Israel or how people fall victims of delusions intentionally projected on them", I made it clear that every sectarian thought does not only constitute a sin, but it also leads to misunderstanding, ultimately plunging the foolish guy, who thinks in this manner, into a delusion. From such traps there is usually no comeback.
Simple people and world-known statesmen are equally concerned in this regard, but the latter may destroy their respective countries in the process. You can read the article here: https://megalommatiscomments.wordpress.com/2024/05/16/world-politics-as-black-white-iran-and-israel-or-how-people-fall-victims-of-delusions-intentionally-projected-on-them/
There are many foolish guys worldwide, who persistently do not see the historical truth in Palestine; they believe a genocide that they never saw and they don’t believe a genocide that they see with their own eyes. And there are numerous inane people, who imagine that the ongoing war in Ukraine has -practically speaking- ended with the victory of Russia. More advanced daydreamers are convinced that the "collective West" has collapsed and that the BRICS+ are about to establish a new world order – or, if this expression embarrasses you, a multipolar world community. There is nothing more delusional than this.
I must however admit that a large part of my readers have been accustomed (and pleased) to reading my devastating attacks, denunciations and rejections of the colonial deeds of the maritime kingdoms which are -exclusively- responsible for every single problem that occurs in the world nowadays. But …….
Because I totally, overwhelmingly and comprehensively decry the evildoing of the colonial powers across the Earth, this does not mean that I expect their opponents to prevail anytime soon. Not at all! At least, not without major changes coming from the side of the BRICS+!
Introduction
Actually, my personal evaluation of the current situation is very negative; I am convinced that the world affairs are very ambiguous, very grim and very ominous, because the major continental states, their elites, and their governments are unable to accurately assess where the overall problem lies and to subsequently find the correct remedy.
It is correct to conclude nowadays that the "collective West" is in disarray, discord, disorder and decay. But so they were in 1492, in 1520, and in 1532, when they sailed to the so-called 'New World' (which was already known for thousands of years to ancient Oriental nations) and, in the name of the Satanic Anti-Christ of the Catholic Church, they intentionally performed the first two of a really long series of abhorrent genocides against the highly civilized Aztecs and Incas, also enslaving numerous other nations and ethnic-religious groups in the process.
All the same; this has always been the fate of the 'West', which consists in an abysmal anomaly in the History of Mankind. The barbarians of Western Europe always exported their problems to the rest of the world in order to survive. As a matter of fact, the Western elites accept as 'civilized nations' only the slaves of their fabrication, i.e. the so-called 'Western Civilization'.
When it comes to the non-Western world, the perverse idiots, who believe in the existence of a so-called Western Civilization, are the worst enemies of mankind and the most unrepentant traitors of their nations.
All the same, the so-called 'Western Civilization' is a villainous fabrication of the Western European barbarians, which was incessantly propagated, tyrannically imposed, preached as the 'sole civilization', praised as an all-human acquisition, declared as 'universal', and therefore meant (or hinted) as 'compulsory for every civilized human being'. This is of course entirely racist, but this is still a minor issue.
In fact, if the fabrication 'Western Civilization' stayed only within the circumference of the 15th–16th c. Western European states, it would never become a worldwide problem and, even more happily for the rest of the world, it would soon disintegrate, driving the Western European nations to extinction. When it comes to the vicious and premeditated propagation, imposition and acclamation of this construct, people all over the world must take into account the following five crucial aspects of the phenomenon:
a. Colonization is tantamount to Westernization;
b. The 'Western world' is first, an abnormal self-denial and second, a terrorist rebuff of the historical evolution of mankind;
c. The permanent internecine wars of the West demonstrate its composite nature;
d. Westernization cannot be 'à la carte' for anyone anytime anywhere and under any circumstances whatsoever; and
e. Westernization is part of eschatological agendas - not an intellectual caprice, an academic arrogance, a moral deviation or a mental degeneration
I. Colonization: worldwide imposition of the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model
Extensively but deliberately propagated as an economic affair, colonization is basically the premeditated exportation and the brutal imposition of the inhuman Western European civilizational model on the rest of the world. As a matter of fact, Colonization is Westernization. The first crucial aspect of the nefarious phenomenon is that, by means of military, political, economic, educational, religious, spiritual, intellectual, academic, scientific, cultural, technological, socio-behavioral and mental colonization, the aforementioned construct was repressively imposed worldwide.
After five centuries of persistent, mendacious, and oppressive effort, Westernization became finally inherent (in different degree) to everyone - with the only exception of the blessed people who happened to live in remote areas and remained unaffected from or immune to it.
The calamitous process started in Western Europe (namely the territories of today's Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, Holland, Belgium, England, Scotland, and Ireland) and then it was transferred / relocated to the Occupied Territories which conventionally are now called 'USA', 'Canada' and 'Australia'; for this reason, all these lands (along with French Polynesia, New Caledonia, New Zealand, etc.) are called the 'Collective West'. It was from those lands that emanated the multifaceted and multilayered colonization process that can also be called 'Westernization'.
Quite contrarily, Latin America -from Mexico to Argentina and Chile- is not part of the 'Collective West', although undoubtedly many Western Europeans settled there. The continent where the great civilizations of the Mayas, the Aztecs and the Incas had grown is a colonized continent, and the indigenous populations which de facto constitute the majority of the people must take their land back, impose their culture, religions and values, and terminate the colonial shame that started before 500 years.
Decolonization-de-Westernization is necessary to Latin America too.
Similarly and more critically, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Central Europe, the Balkan Peninsula, and the Scandinavian Peninsula do not truly constitute part of the 'Collective West; it is well-known that Austria-Hungary was aptly dragged by the Catholic Church into interminable wars against the Ottoman Empire, but this fact was the mistake of both imperial administrations which failed to assess the ignominious plans elaborated by the Anti-Christian Church of Rome against Constantinople and Vienna at the same time.
Later, Imperial Germany became also the victim of the papal plots, entering into academic, intellectual, economic and military competition with the then 'Collective West'; but this was exactly the trap! Attempting to acquire material gains against the English and the French, Germany started becoming part of the 'Club of the Evil', whereas it would be pertinent for the interests of the German Nation to fully oppose it. As a matter of fact, by competing with the Westerners in any sense, you simply get westernized, i.e. colonized – without even understanding it. Clearly, decolonization-de-Westernization is necessary to those parts of Europe too.
For the above reasons and due to many other parameters, it is safe to claim that every discussion about the 'economic motives' and the 'political predominance' of the colonial powers is merely a smokescreen. The same is valid for the often evoked 'missionary work'; it was only the camouflage. In fact, the Western countries invaded most of the other nations, lands and continents only to impose their construct, namely the inhuman Western European civilizational model.
Establishing an oligarchical economic system of social exploitation and arbitrarily imposing a parliamentary system of social deception in one colonized land are not enough for the devilish and criminal elites of the 'Collective West'! The colonized countries must always be in phase with the Western metropolises, when it comes to educational, religious, spiritual, intellectual, academic, scientific, cultural, technological, socio-behavioral matters.
II. The Western world: an abnormal self-denial and a terrorist rebuff of the History of mankind
The second crucial aspect concerns the formation of the West itself. This is a most concealed topic, as a systematic, comprehensive and monstrous misinterpretation of the historical facts was composed and propagated to compactly confuse people in the West and in the rest of the world. Because Western universities and museums, libraries, mass media, intellectuals and governments gave to the 'Collective West' a fallacious historicity, numerous explorers, investigators, commentators and historians were driven to the confusion that the divide between East and West existed always. This is entirely wrong.
The appellation "Ancient Oriental Empires" is the beginning of the historical fallacy. The great civilizations of Mesopotamia (Sumer, Elam, Akkad, Assyria, Babylonia, Hurrians, Aramaeans, etc.), the Nile Valley (Egypt/Kemet, Cush/Sudan), Anatolia (Hittites, Hatti, Luwians, etc.), Syria-Palestine (Canaanites, Phoenicians, Philistines, Hebrews, etc.), the Iranian plateau, the Caucasus region, Central Asia, Siberia and Mongolia, the African Atlas (Berbers, Carthaginians, etc.), India, Bengal, the Deccan, and China were all "central to the world", according to their own standards, sources and world conceptualization.
Designating these civilizations, peoples and empires as "Oriental" necessitates the preposterous anticipation that the center of the world was situated elsewhere and these entities were located east of the center. Limiting considerations at the purely natural and geographical level is certainly normal, and it was done by all in the Antiquity. But extending the geographical notion to the cultural-civilizational level constitutes an absurd categorization and a discriminatory distinction. And on this racist foundation has been built the pseudo-historical dogma of the 'Collective West'. But in order to be close to factual data, I have to continue.
What is now called 'Ancient Greece' was an unimportant, marginal and mostly uncivilized circumference to the Ancient so-called 'Oriental' world; the distinctive tribes that are now conventionally called 'Ancient Greeks' failed to establish an empire of universal vocation. Culturally, morally and spiritually different from them, Alexander the Great of Macedonia invaded part of Greece and forced some of the local worthless states to contribute to the exploit of substituting the ailing Achaemenid Iran with a more genuine universal empire.
Ancient Rome was also a peripheral and insignificant city that was transformed from kingdom to 'res publica' and later to empire; the Roman expansion was mainly due to the rivalry with Carthage, which was the ancient world's most democratic and most republican state. However, after the disintegration of the shameful 'res publica', the Romans failed to build a genuine and universal empire after the example of Egypt, Babylonia or Assyria, despite Rome's unprecedented contest and endless wars with the Arsacid and the Sassanid empires of Iran. These wars lasted almost 700 years (54 BCE – 628 CE), but their echo lasted until 1453, as Mehmet II the Conqueror viewed in himself an Iranian vanquisher of the Romans.
The Christianization of the Roman Empire demonstrated its limits; in fact, despite of a very sophisticated administrative-military organization, the state could not hold together. The main reason for this situation was the fact that no empire can possibly be created around a sea; there was never an empire around the Black Sea or the Caspian Sea. And when all the coastlands of the Red Sea belonged to the Islamic Caliphates, the gravitational center of all these different states (Umayyad, Abbasid, Fatimid, Mamluk, and Ottoman) was not situated in the Red Sea region.
However, due to the universal or ecumenical vocation of the Christian faith as per the Fathers of the Christian Church, following the division of the Christian Roman Empire (395 CE), the Eastern Roman Empire developed an ecumenical character that it retained for several centuries. But the terms used for the division of the Roman Empire were purely geographical, having no cultural-civilizational meaning. The same was also valid after the schisms (Photian: 863-867; final: 1054); the differences between the Eastern Roman Empire (Orthodox Christianity) and the Catholic Church were only religious, canonical and imperial, because the Roman pope interfered in the various states of Western Europe in order to generate opponents to the Eastern Roman Emperor. And it so continued until the Fall of Constantinople (1453) to the Ottomans.
In other words, prior to the Renaissance, there was never a cultural-civilizational differentiation between 'East' and 'West', because the Western Europeans, like all the civilized humans across the Earth, viewed the world civilizations across the Earth as a unitary phenomenon.
It is the entire Renaissance phenomenon that changed the Western Europeans, but as such, it first led them to an absurd self-denial. In its nucleus, Renaissance is an arbitrary approach to the Western Europeans' pre-Christian past, involving a deliberate idealization of the daily life and the activities of the pagan ancestors of the 14th, 15th and 16th c. Western Europeans. In real terms, it is an illusion that they produced and believed, before exporting it to the unfortunate others. But this totally ahistorical illusion was at the same time a full and complete rejection of the Western Europeans themselves, i.e. of their own Christian identity.
The progressive imposition of the illusory Antiquity on the 14th, 15th and 16th c. Western Europeans was carried out by different mystical, religious, intellectual and academic elites in a way that worsened the trouble caused because of the apparent detachment from reality. Rejecting their true, Christian identity and adopting an unreal ideal, the Renaissance elites went from disbelief to degeneracy, from deviation to corruption, from paranoia to madness, from delusion to disorder, and from being to non-being. Viewed in terms of massive social phenomenon, Renaissance is the only true Holocaust in the History of Mankind. It consists in a most comprehensive spiritual genocide that the then Western European ruling classes performed against themselves and their own peoples.
Being cut off from their identity and recent past which they 'excommunicated', the sick elites of Western European Renaissance were left with only one option: they had to
a) unquestionably, inevitably, and unrepentantly conquer and massacre the others,
b) forcefully change the identity of the survivors (: make them look like 'copies' of Western Europeans), and
c) flee ahead to even more unreal, more inhuman, and more absurd notions.
This means that they subsequently produced even more unrealistic schemes, lunatic concepts, illusory descriptions, and delusional suggestions, which ultimately led to worse types of colonization, repression, bloodshed, cruelty, and wars.
It goes without saying that these elites will inevitably resort to nuclear conflagration and total annihilation of mankind if they fail to materialize the incessantly more unrealistic projects, which are mere paragraphs of their ominous agendas.
We can therefore easily understand that the East-West (Orient vs. Occident) dilemma is a forgery; in fact, what we call nowadays the 'Collective West' consists in
1) the corruption of a part of the Mankind (namely the Western Europe),
2) the subsequent secession of that part of the world from the rest, and
3) the opposition to, and denial of, the rest of mankind, which is indiscriminately and pejoratively labeled as 'Orient'.
III. The interminable internecine wars of the West, its composite nature, and the ensuing concerns for the rest of the world
Many people are nowadays impressed because of the collapse of the so-called Franco-German axis within European Union (EU); but what is there to be possibly impressed with? Personally, I rather tend to believe that the so-called Berlin-Paris axis lasted for long. Taking into consideration the past that Western Europe has had after the Christianization of the Roman Empire (313-380 CE) and its final division into two parts (395 CE), we have to find the present divisions within EU as quite normal.
Contrarily to what happened in the Eastern Roman Empire with the prevailing Caesaropapism (which is tantamount to absolute prevalence of the emperor over the patriarch), in the ill-fated and short-lived Western Roman Empire, the pope of Rome prevailed over the local emperor by means of a well-orchestrated deception (and this is called Papo-Caesarism). Even worse, the papal authority devised an ignominious plan as per which barbarian 'kingdoms' ruled by idiotic thugs would supplant the Western Roman Empire as an imperial institution, thus leaving the pope as the sole ruler of Western Europe.
By ceaselessly pursuing divisive tactics and by keeping a balance among the barbarian rulers, the counterfeit administration of Anti-Christian Rome, while fervently fighting against the Eastern Roman Empire, implemented systematically a devilish policy of acculturation during the long process of Christianization of the uncivilized migrant tribes in the lands of today's Northern Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, England and Ireland. This means that in fact all these populations never became truly Christian, but believed that they were Christian while remaining pagan, cruel and incestuous.
Quite contrarily, in the truly Christian Eastern Roman Empire, the emperor and the patriarch implemented methodically different approaches to the successive waves of migrating nations, i.e. religious integration, cultural assimilation and administrative incorporation. The alternative solution was always military victory, expulsion and dispersion of the enemy. For this reason, in the Eastern Roman Empire there were few religious quarrels and conflicts, whereas in Western Europe there were endless tribal, feudal and later monarchical hostilities, which were always wars of plunder.
Consequently, spiritual, religious, doctrinal and theological opposition went extinct in the Eastern Roman Empire after the 9th c., but across Western Europe, numerous groups survived in clandestine form from the times of Late Antiquity until the 15th c. The Eastern Roman Emperors never faced an opponent like the Knights Templar; but the papal power, which was never counterbalanced by any royal (and the exceptions only confirm the rule), was unable to uproot secret movements and doctrinal factions that challenged its authority in later periods, because they had aptly managed to penetrate several religious orders and the papal hierarchy.
With the gradual arrival of Ashkenazi 'Jews' in Northern and Central Europe (9th–10th c.), the admixture (or if you prefer the circulation) of elites that formed the modern Western world (also known as the 'Collective West') was ready. Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923) understood it quite well. Consequently, it was only normal for Western Europeans to experience interminable internecine wars, while expanding colonially. This fact only reveals the composite nature of Western Europe; it also explains the present conjuncture.
Originating from diverse religious societies of the Late Antiquity, the three main forces, which composed Modern Europe and controlled the world by means of colonization, always managed to make compromises for their reciprocal interests in spite of the enormous differences that their eschatological agendas comprise. The three most influential groups (or 'nebulae' if you prefer) are the following: the Jesuits, the Freemasons, and the Zionists. About their agendas and remote antiquity, you can find general information in my earlier publications:
and
Quite interestingly, I read only recently a compelling article about the intentions toward Russia that three major groups of the Collective West have; it was first published before one year (8 May 2023). Titled Шахматы войны (Chess of War), the article was authored by the world-known Russian intellectual Alexander Dugin (https://katehon.com/ru/article/shahmaty-voyny). For an English translation (by Lorenzo Maria Pacini): https://www.geopolitika.ru/en/article/chess-war
The article was written after a chess-like style and that is why the 'Collective West' is designated as "Black", meaning a black set of chess. In his second part (Black's centers), A. Dugin makes the following distinction:
«With Black we can distinguish three main macro-figures, which are not symmetrical with each other, but each of them has a sufficient degree of sovereignty to actively influence the course of the entire confrontation. We have named them as follows:
The party of complete and immediate victory over Russia
The party of delayed victory over Russia
The party of indifference to Russia».
In fact, the first 'party' represents the Zionists; the second 'party' corresponds fully to the Jesuits, their world conceptualization, mentality, attitude, and agenda. And the third 'party' can clearly be identified with some leading Freemasonic lodges (at this point, I have to clarify that there is an ongoing fierce dispute among several apostate lodges).
Further expanding upon "the party of total and immediate victory over Russia", Alexander Dugin identifies it as the "most radical part of the globalists", stating more specifically that it consists of "the British secret services, which act in close connection with certain US neo-conservative centers (Kagan, Nuland, Kristol) and with the Pentagon and CIA circles close to them".
Focusing on "the party of delayed victory over Russia" (i.e. the second of the three groups), A. Dugin exemplifies the group with the Roman Catholic General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, a ferocious enemy of former US President Donald Trump. While explaining the geopolitical positions of this group, the Russian intellectual adds current US President Biden in the picture: "This is the position of Biden himself and most of his administration".
When it comes to the third party (or "The indifference’s party"), A. Dugin draws the political portrait of Donald Trump: "the position of those American political forces that do not identify US interests with globalism, do not rely on the rules of Atlanticist geopolitics (where the main goal of the Anglo-Saxon civilisation of the sea is an overwhelming victory over the Eurasian civilisation of the land, i.e. sovereign Russia), and are therefore indifferent to Russia, which, on a soberly pragmatic analysis, does not threaten US national interests - neither in the military nor in the economic field - in general". He then epitomizes it by adding that "this is exactly the position expressed by former US President Donald Trump. His claims, that if he becomes US President again the conflict in Ukraine will immediately cease, are not boastfulness, but pure realism".
The composite nature of the 'Collective West' and the total control that the Jesuits, the Freemasons, and the Zionists exercise over the governments and the societies of Western Europe and North America (and through them over the rest of the world) are indeed very preoccupying issues and quite determinant factors for the rest of the world. This is so for the following four reasons:
a) the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model that Western European elites imposed first locally and then worldwide is similarly a composite corpus of notions; it contains gravely divergent concepts that were finally adopted after many gradual, trilateral compromises.
b) in the same manner, the bogus-historical dogma, which was elaborated by Western European academics and then colonially imposed worldwide, is also a composite patchwork. This can be attested in several terms, which are meaningless for the rest of the world, but in fact, they are the result of compromises. Examples:
'Greco-Roman world', 'Hellenistic and Roman' times, 'Judeo-Christian' culture, 'Helleno-Christian' civilization, 'Helleno-Orthodox' doctrine, etc.
c) at any given moment during the last 500 years, the flee ahead to even more unreal notions, ideas or theories led always to final compromises, modifications, and new composite constructs, which had Jesuit, Freemasonic and Zionist components and dimensions. The same is also valid for the conflicts ensued and the treaties signed at the end.
d) even more importantly, the penetration of the Western elites into the rest of the world was also composite; this means that countries, parts and/or sectors of the non-Western world are controlled at all levels by representatives of the three groups of power. Due to this phenomenon, the internecine wars of the Western World have spread across the Earth, making of any potential disentanglement a very difficult and very dangerous option.
IV. Westernization is not 'à la carte'
Due to the situation described as per above, it is impossible for any non-Westerner to stand opposite to the 'Collective West', selecting only some of the theoretical systems, philosophical maxims, intellectual approaches, academic considerations, political ideologies, and governmental practices produced and implemented by the Western world. Although this attitude is not straightforwardly opposite to the Western world, it is considered as gravely inimical by the paranoid rulers of UK, US, EU, NATO and their satellites.
It is actually misplaced to attempt to view the modern Western world as a diachronic entity, because it was never such and it was not geared to be anything of the kind. You don't have the option to possibly accept 'this' and reject 'that'. It is true that, in every historical period after Renaissance, the Western elites came up with several theoretical options, governmental concepts, social ideals and philosophical concepts, which were entirely fallacious and still opposite to one another; at a later date, one of the conflicting poles may have subsided or eventually both were brought together, and a new -always delusional and inhuman- environment appeared. Many scholars described this type of developments as 'Hegelian', but in reality they were entirely Manichaean.
However, average people everywhere, either in the Western colonial metropolises or in the colonized peripheries, were always asked to promptly, duly and fully cope with the new environment. No feudal state was tolerated in the 19th c.; no imperial state was accepted in the 20th c.; and no Communist state is permitted in the 21st c. The 'logic' (truly speaking: the 'absurdity') of the conflicting Jesuit, Freemasonic and Zionist agendas that have formed the historical developments over the past 500 years is 'permanent update'. For this reason, the concept of 'evolution' (spread as delusion among people worldwide) was necessary to all major societies that rule the Western world: those who supported and promoted notions relating to Darwinism and those who opposed this theory.
The 'permanent updates' to which all have to concur every now and then have been scaled over the past five centuries, because in reality every delusion made, every change occurred, every development introduced, and every scheme implemented were either a distinct paragraph of one of the aforementioned agendas or the ultimate compromise between the divergent paragraphs of two among them.
The Westernization project that was launched since the first days of the Renaissance is a compact eschatological program of which no one can possibly accept only a part without signing his death warrant. This is true for anyone anytime anywhere and under any circumstances whatsoever; for this reason, every selective approach to the inhuman scheme of worldwide Westernization would inevitably constitute a certain opposition to the provisions of one of the existing agendas.
This fact is not understood by several statesmen, politicians, diplomats, academics, intellectuals and religious authorities in countries other than the 'Collective West'; similarly, average people, who live in the Western world but still value their own cultural heritage, ancestral traditions, faith, moral, and spirituality, fail to grasp the true nature of the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model and the ensuing Westernization of the world. They mistakenly think that 'only now' or 'only recently' the Westerners started 'forgetting' their past and values. However, this approach is shortsighted, narrow-minded, and totally false.
The error is due to the fact that all those, who find the so-called 'woke culture' or 'cancel culture' as a drastically different from the earlier Western norms, values and standards, have beforehand developed a diachronic view of the modern Western world. But this is very wrong. Over the past 500 years, people in the West passed through several, different from one another, stages; every stage was diverse from the previous and constituted (for the Western elites) an 'advanced step' if compared with earlier conditions of life.
The so-called 'woke culture' or 'cancel culture' looks very different from the average culture of Westerners in either Western Europe of North America in the 1930s, and this is true. But if we add to the equation few turning points or moments of upheaval like the May 1968 protests, the 1969 Woodstock festival, the lawless legalization of the abortion (1975 in France / "la Loi Veil"), and the evil decriminalization of the adultery (1987 in Belgium; 2006 in Romania), we understand that nothing happened suddenly or abruptly. Every step of moral degradation and social corruption of the Western societies was small enough and it was made slowly enough in order to be accepted over a period of time that was accorded to it.
Consequently, to the eyes of today's Western statesmen, academics and intellectuals (i.e. the puppets of the devilish Western elites) it appears as 'hypocritical' or 'absurd' or 'crazy' that statesmen, who reject today's Collective West, like President Putin of Russia, refer to Franklin Delano Roosevelt, admire Peter the Great (who attempted to emphatically westernize Russia), state publicly that they were inspired by Catherine the Great (who opened Russia to Western philosophers), and expect their approach to possibly please their eventual Western interlocutors or disreputable haters or to create a feeling of cultural-historical familiarity. The following articles are only indicative in this regard:
Putin, Citing Roosevelt, Hints at a 3rd-Term Bid
Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in quest to take back Russian lands
How Catherine the Great may have inspired Putin’s Ukraine invasion
Vladimir Putin justifies his imperial aims in Tucker Carlson interview
However, President Putin was undoubtedly responsible for the 'mistakes'; the reason for this conclusion is due to the fact that the Westerners do not view their modern world as a diachronic entity but as a series of successive stages through which they reached the present status. Consequently, to the Western elites of today, Reagan, Roosevelt, Clemenceau, Napoleon, Louis XIV, and Charles V, pretty much like Hegel, Kant, Rousseau, Voltaire, Pascal, Shakespeare, du Bellay, Rabelais, and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola had a certain value but only as fully functioning factors of their times – not diachronically. Their importance (as it is viewed by the present Western elites) is their contribution to the developments of their time, but Rabelais (or any other 16th c. Western European intellectual) had become obsolete and meaningless at the time of Karl Marx, and subsequently, the latter is -in turn- truly excoriated today. The same approach applies to music, literature, art, theater, law, science, and -last but not the least- the manner of living.
It is crystal clear that this situation causes terrible troubles to the rest of the world, i.e. the colonized periphery; this is so because of the complex manner through which the colonization / Westernization process was carried out. Different countries in Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, Africa, and Latin America accepted diverse stages and aspects of the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model in distinct moments and junctures. This automatically makes of them the disparate members of a group that exists only in one dimension: that of being irrelevant to 15th-16th c. Western Europe.
Then, the fact that notable historical persons or a restricted elite from the past of one non-Western country may have accepted in their time a certain stage or an aspect of the Westernization project (which was later widely propagated across the nation in question) makes today the de-Westernization effort a very strenuous task for the said country to undertake. But this is another issue, because it concerns the non-Western world. Example: Western Theater was alien to the average Russian society of the time of Ivan IV the Terrible (1530-1584; reign after 1547); however, it was initially supported by the 18th c. royal elite, and it became gradually accepted by more people (mainly the nobles and the then rising Russian bourgeoisie). The Bolshoi Theater was built in Moscow before two centuries (1825), but it is a monument of Russia's Westernization. Many Russians, Christian or Muslim, rejected the Western notion of Theater at the time as an Anti-Russian abomination. All the same, if today's Russians want to reach out to the spiritual concept and imperial ideal of Holy Rus (Святая Русь), they will certainly have to allow their de-Westernization effort to cover that sector too.
As a matter of fact, it is certainly noteworthy that across the Earth numerous aspects of Westernization were accepted subliminally, and this situation will apparently necessitate an enormous effort during the process of liberation (de-Westernization) that those countries have definitely to launch.
V. Westernization is part of eschatological agendas
For the leading internal forces of the West, Westernization is the process needed for the implementation of variant eschatological agendas; in other words, the inhuman Western European 'civilizational' model was not an intellectual caprice, an academic arrogance, a moral deviation or a mental degeneration. It was the basic means that these forces have used to fool, corrupt and enslave their populations and the rest of the world, and -more importantly- to impose on them their eschatological agendas.
The sinister Renaissance -with all its attributes and paraphernalia- was evidently conceived as the foreclosure of History. I can only admit that it simply failed to fully impose its barbarous, inhuman and evil scope and to comprehensively enforce its blasphemous delusion across the Earth in only 500 years. But the abysmal attempt to terminate History does not start with the infinitesimal, petty propagandist Francis Fukuyama and his absurd and nonsensical book.
It started with the ominous specter that the devilish Western European monks, priests, mystics, academics, intellectuals, artists, and statesmen devised before 500-600 years; this is the true, atrocious face of Renaissance, which still threatens all historical nations with spiritual and material extinction, having the nuclear sword of Damocles hanging over the head of the entire mankind. Actually, the conflagration was envisioned by Mani, the Iranian founder of Manichaeism, before almost 1800 years as the right and proper eschatological end of mankind. Lenore Marshall's essay "The Nuclear Sword of Damocles" (1971) came only too late for readers interested to discover their fate (https://energyhistory.yale.edu/lenore-marshall-the-nuclear-sword-of-damocles-1971/).
It is really foolish for theoreticians like Miriam Leonard to come to the conclusion that «Heidegger and Loraux articulate how the historical can and should act to disrupt the "final repression" of history. If difference "alone is historical through and through and from the start" it is also crucially able to resist the foreclosure of history». {The Uses of Reception Derrida and the Historical Imperative, p. 116-136 (see the last page); in: Classics and the Uses of Reception, Editor(s): Charles Martindale, Richard F. Thomas, 1 January 2006, Blackwell Publishing Ltd (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/book/10.1002/9780470774007)}
This is so because the concept of 'classics' is fallacious, ahistorical and intentionally delusional, whereas Western Europeans first and their colonized victims (starting from later dates) have already lived «the "final repression" of history» in the lapse of time between the diffusion of the Renaissance concepts and notions among them and the present moment. The atemporal period in which post-Renaissance people live is the disruption of history of which today's theoreticians are purposelessly afraid of; this is actually the final deception which was inevitably stated in the New Testament (2 Thessalonians 2:11/ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο πέμψει αὐτοῖς ὁ Θεὸς ἐνέργειαν πλάνης εἰς τὸ πιστεῦσαι αὐτοὺς τῷ ψεύδει,/ Ideo mittet illis Deus operationem erroris ut credant mendacio,/For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie.).
The elaboration of eschatological agendas by the 'venerable elders' of the hierarchical societies that constitute the ruling elites of our world is something natural, normal and even intrinsic; average people today find it difficult to believe but it is not. One must never forget that these groups originate from diverse religious societies of the Late Antiquity. There is no religion without a version of Cosmogony, a description of Cosmology, and a salvatory narrative of Eschatology, i.e. 'Soteriology'. In fact, the secular appearance of those societies in our times constitutes only their smokescreen; but their members are in reality 'priests'.
Even more importantly, I have to point out here that several theories, philosophical systems, and ideologies conceived and propagated by members of the said societies are purely of eschatological content, although this is somewhat dissimulated. In fact, modern sciences, academic theories, philosophical systems, political ideologies, and even art movements are in reality dissimulated forms of eschatology. And there is no Cosmogony, Cosmology and Eschatology without an underlying notion of religion and spirituality.
That is why the Collective West and the colonized world have been submerged over the past 200 years in particular with (unidentified as such) eschatological narratives and systems. Utopian Socialism, Marxism-Leninism, Darwinism, Impressionism, Monism, Anarchism, Atheism, Fascism, Nazism, Materialism, Eugenics & Scientific Racism, Abstract Art, Robotism, Islamism, Christian Zionism, Liberalism, Leftism, Consumerism, and a multitude of other similar systems or subsystems are in reality Westernization-promoting parts of the eschatological agendas of the Jesuits, the Freemasons, and the Zionists.
If the evangelized societies and the salutatory orations appear to be so distressing, gloomy and calamitous, and if many people across the Earth start discovering that these promises are totally dystopian and hellish, this is due to the totally evil nature of the ruling societies and the world elites. Not only are the initiated members of those organizations degenerate enough to see the Hell as an optimal choice, but their secret spiritual doctrines are counterfeit versions of religions.
To many it may appear odd that atheism, materialism and consumerism can be considered as forms of eschatology, but this is only the result of the deception carried out. People have been fooled up to the point of being unable to understand that, even if someone expresses the idea that the present society is perfect and makes the wish that it always stays the same, this is already a form of eschatology.
However, the inevitability of the final conflagration is only underscored by the fact that every eschatological narrative includes an unprecedented clash. And this is something that the evil high priests of these societies intend to bring about anytime soon. For this reason, it is foolish to take their supposed rationalism for granted.
Reason, reasoning and rationality have been propagated only to fool, distract and divert the rest: the Russians, the Indians, the Africans, the Latin Americans, the Chinese, and the Muslims. But only insanity, lunacy, paranoia and chaos prevail in the backside of the evil minds and the dark bottom of the venomous hearts of the ruling Western elites.
The advantage of the first (nuclear) strike is the 'privilege' that the inhuman rulers of the Western world reserve for themselves; that's why they must be stripped of this prerogative. For this reason, it will be totally disastrous for the rest of the world not to isolate the Collective West. Instead of the nuclear conflagration that the evil elites of the West intend to cause in order to materialize their nauseating wickedness, a domestic implosion, a social explosion, and a final disintegration must be forcefully adjusted to European Union, UK, Canada, Australia, and the US.
All the same, de-Westernization is imperative and inevitable to all; otherwise, even if the Collective West disappears supernaturally, the non-de-Westernized states of BRICS+ will only function like Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, France, Italy, England, America and Japan on the eve of WWI. Then, the same cycle of wars and bloodshed will be lamentably repeated, the empires will be merely substituted by others, and the humans will be taken in the maelstrom of Tiamat.
==============
Download the article in PDF:
World Politics as Black & White: Iran and Israel or how people fall victims of delusions intentionally projected on them
Мировая политика как черное и белое: Иран и Израиль, или как люди становятся жертвами намеренно проецируемых на них заблуждений
To a previous text of mine about Iran, an apparently pro-Iranian and pro-Palestinian reader reacted expressing his fervent support for Iran; however, when it comes to modern states, governments, non-governmental organizations, companies and conglomerates, as well as international bodies, any blind support is totally wrong, misleading and destructive. It actually prevents people from accurately assessing the situation in each and every point. Even worse, when the absurd consideration and the erroneous evaluation of a state is laced with an equally false demonization of the opponent, then people enter into the vast realm of the unreal, the fictional, and the delusional.
Darius I the Great (522-486 BCE) of the Achaemenid dynasty, Khosrow (Chosroes) I (531-579 CE) of the Sassanid dynasty, Adud al-Dawla (949–983) of the Buyid dynasty, and Tahmasp I (1524-1576) of the Safavid dynasty in the dates of their reigns; neither the ayatollahs nor the leader of the self-styled National Council of Iran Reza 'Pahlavi' can represent the colossal historical and cultural heritage of 3000 years of Iranian History. All the same, all the Iranians together and their military commanders in charge of the administration can certainly afford the task.
Содержание
Введение
I. Каждый сектантский подход и каждая сектантская мысль являются порочной ошибкой и нетерпимым поступком
II. Политическая ситуация и международные отношения не определяют природу режимов, правительств и государств
III. Когда дело касается мировых дел, не существует шахматной доски с «черными» и «белыми» клетками
IV. Все СМИ сообщают одну и ту же ложь, меняя только «шахматные наборы»
V. Достоинство иранцев и палестинцев является наиболее спорным вопросом
VI. Вера в обещания, данные врагами, замаскированными под друзей, может оказаться смертельной
VII. Военные и фермеры против королевской семьи и аятолл
VIII. Нет никакой разницы между Ираном и Египтом, когда дело доходит до раболепия по отношению к крупным колониальным схемам
Contents
Introduction
I. Every sectarian approach and every sectarian thought are a vicious mistake and an intolerable act.
II. Political situations and international relations do not define the nature of regimes, governments, and states.
III. When it comes to world affairs, there is no such thing as a chessboard with "black" and "white" squares.
IV. All mass media report the same lies, changing only the «chess sets».
V. The dignity of the Iranians and the Palestinians is a most controversial subject.
VI. Believing promises given by enemies disguised as friends may be lethal.
VII. Military and farmers against the royals and the ayatollahs
VIII. There is no difference between Iran and Egypt when it comes to servility toward major colonial schemes.
Introduction
When it comes to humans, human societies, and states, there is nothing as mistaken as a "black & white" contrast; the people, who intentionally adopt and propagate such an erroneous approach, stance and attitude, become inevitably integral part of the problem they intend to discuss, because they thoughtlessly victimize themselves. Quite unfortunately, all regimes, establishments and states have gone astray and all will be duly, terribly and inescapably punished; in this case, as usual, the exceptions confirm the rule. What follows is my response to the reader's comment that I republish first.
Mauro Meneghin
Your comment against Ayatollah Khomeini appears unclear and not justified. I'm not an expert on the history by any means, but I now see that Ayatollah Khomeini is standing up with honour to defend the sovereignty and dignity of Iran and of the Palestinians. Ayatollah Khomeini is a wise man who uses reason and moderation in his decisions, and his religious approach serves well to provide moral guidance.
If you dislike him, I wonder if maybe it's due to envy because Egypt is a puppet of the US, but instead, Iran is still a sovereign country with honour.
My response
Thank you for your comment that gives me the opportunity to clarify several issues, which trouble and confuse billions of people today. I am sure that you misread and misunderstood my brief text, but this is the least.
I realize that your approach to events is essentially a Manichaean aberration, which divides everything into "good" and "evil" or "black and white"; quite unfortunately, this categorization does not exist. It is an inconsistent and absurd falsehood that has been systematically spread and dexterously imposed worldwide by all ruling elites, secret societies, governments, states, regimes, establishments, and international bodies. They all need you and me (and all the rest) to be stupid enough to believe that some "good guys" combat "the evil ones". This never happens. And anyone who adopts this false and disastrous approach is genuinely incapacitated to ever understand what happens.
An even worse version of this fallacy is the story of "peoples" fighting against "cruel elites" or "poor people" standing up against the "world Mafia of money"; for the purpose of confusing, deceiving and deluding all the people across the Earth, several subliminally strong terms are created, but they are all nonsensical, fallacious and harmful for the average people. It is essential for everyone not to be caught in the malicious process, because its end will be the destruction of the Mankind.
As a matter of fact, few people escape from this mental, intellectual, educational and academic delusion, which is certainly worse than any pandemic. This is so because by means of a technically Manichaean conceptualization, people are fooled, fail to understand what happens around them, and are therefore easily, complementarily and comprehensively controlled by all the forces, which -while fighting against one another- need exactly to spiritually, mentally and intellectually enslave and utilize the masses by reducing them to "followers", "admirers", "supporters", "adepts" or even "party members" and by canceling the enormous potentialities that the non-deceived and non-deluded people have.
You say that Ayatollah Khomeini "is standing" and that he "is wise"! Odd! Ayatollah Khomeini died in 1989! I am afraid that you confusingly thought that I referred to Ayatollah Khamenei, who is currently the imam of Iran. You did not realize that the reference that I made in my text is about the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and not the current imam.
In addition, you speak about "defending the sovereignty" of a country, but this is totally unrelated to the theological concept that Ayatollah Khomeini developed and which I denounced, stating that the notion of "Wilayat al faqih" (conventionally translated as "Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist", in other words, the regime of the ayatollahs) is historically rejected as nonexistent throughout the History of Iran, and the History of Islamic states.
All the same, beyond this rather minor issue, in your comment, I find a most misleading approach that turns every person to a victim of one of this world's major forces and backstage societies. These historical orders have nothing to do with states and do not care at all about countries; they only use governments and international bodies, by incessantly placing their stooges in positions that enable them to duly implement the agendas of their superiors.
So, the main part of my response will revolve around the following points:
I. Every sectarian approach and every sectarian thought are a vicious mistake and an intolerable act.
When it comes to faithful people, it is even worse; any sectarian approach is a grave sin. It greatly damages the person (or government or state) that happens to be foolish enough to believe that their choice is perfect and that the opposite is evil. All people who think that what they like is "good" and what they reject is "bad" are so idiotic that they -in and by themselves- justify the agendas of secret organizations that intend to eliminate the major part of Mankind.
To make things clear, I herewith define sectarianism as an egoistic, partial, narrow-minded, deliberately subjective, and therefore always wrong adherence to a specific idea, thought, opinion, concept, notion, ideology, political ideology, conviction, philosophy, theology, cult, belief, religion or system of values; sectarianism is a very immoral attitude, behavior and model of life anytime anywhere and under any circumstances whatsoever. This is so because it always constitutes a abhorrent sin and a calamitous transgression not to consider another person's, group's, society's, people's or nation's rights, values and standpoints.
Detrimental to anyone against whom it is expressed, a sectarian predisposition automatically prompts support, at least partly, for the concept or idea that is rejected by a sectarian person. Sectarianism is disastrous to everyone who happens to be too weak and too erroneous to avoid succumbing to its attraction; this abhorrent stance discredits every sectarian thinker or activist, religious leader or statesman, rendering him untrustworthy, intransigent and fanatic.
The only possible remedy to sectarianism (within the mind of every sectarian) is a reconsideration and a systematic, forcefully implemented at the personal level, effort to evaluate the other's (any other person's, group's, society's, people's or nation's as per occasion) measures, standards, rights, needs, and values objectively, impartially and neutrally.
At the level of international relations, an abhorrent example of sectarianism (noticed during the past few days) is the attitude of Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and many other states in the region toward the Bedouin citizens of Israel. For reasons particular to them, this ethnic group decided to accept the existence of the Zionist state. All the same, many of them have been mistreated by the Israeli authorities on many occasions. Few days ago, around 50 Bedouin families in Israel were left without homes, because the respective authorities demolished their illegally built edifices.
Yet, building structures wherever they find it opportune has been very common to nomads since time immemorial all over the Earth. However, none of the supposedly "good" states, which care for "justice" and fight for the "rights" of the Palestinians, did not champion the rightful cause of the Bedouins, because they are not their "political tool". About:
Authorities level 47 illegal homes in Bedouin village, leaving hundreds homeless
This fact fully demonstrates that Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and many other states in the region are as criminal, heinous, vicious and unacceptable structures as Israel. Any person and any state that is characterized by sectarianism are totally untrustworthy and genuinely dangerous for the society or the international community (if we ever accept that such notion exists!).
II. Political situations and international relations do not define the nature of regimes, governments, and states.
There is no doubt that the Palestinian nation has been a long time victim of the cruel colonial plans, deeds and practices of England, before being targeted with genocide by the anti-Jewish, Zionist state. But by supporting the Palestinians, Iran (or any other state) does not get the nature of its regime approved; these issues are very different from, and totally unrelated to, one another.
The nature of the Islamic regime of Iran is entirely fraudulent; it is viciously anti-Iranian and even worse, it contradicts all historical standards of Islamic states that existed throughout Iran since the 7th–9th c. CE. Khomeini's absurdity of Wilayat al faqih is a preposterous, colonial novelty masterminded by the English colonials, who invited the young Ruhollah Khomeini to Iraq in the 1930s for studies and managed to aptly guide him as to how to invent a counterfeit concept that is tantamount to Sunnitization of Iran.
As a matter of fact, this deceitful theory consists in a form of political islam, which is a colonial fallacy invented by 19th c. colonial Orientalists as a tool first against the Ottoman Empire and Qajar Iran. Political islam is the worst enemy of the Islamic world, because Islam has nothing to do with the filthy world of politics, and there had never been 'politics' in any Islamic state.
By acting as per the needs of the apostate Freemasonic lodge of England, which attempts to destroy the (also fake) state of Israel (by means of an alliance with the Jesuits, the Anti-Christian pope Francis I, and a degenerate Zionist synagogue), Iran became the tool of the most ferociously anti-Islamic forces. In any case, since Day 1, the detrimentally anti-Iranian regime of the Ayatollahs has proved to be a useful plaything for the most perverse forces of financial globalism. It must therefore be replaced as soon as possible.
III. When it comes to world affairs, there is no such thing as a chessboard with "black" and "white" squares.
The world is not divided into "good" ones and "bad" ones; Zbigniew Brzezinski's 'The Grand Chessboard' is a fraud. It consists in a historical falsification, a political aberration, and a technically Manichaean delusion. Most of the naïve people who read it did not understand that its purpose was mainly to fool eventually all the readers by projecting onto their minds deliberately invented fallacies. No assertion made in the book is correct. The proof of what I am saying at this point has been available online for many years ever since the notorious and very much publicized meeting between the fraudulent author and the Russian intellectual Alexander Dugin took place in 2005.
"The meeting had been set with a photo-prop of a chessboard placed between Brzezinski and Dugin (to promote Brzezinski’s book). This arrangement with a chessboard prompted Dugin to ask whether Brzezinski considered Chess to be a game meant for two: “No, Zbig shot back: It is a game for one. Once a chess piece is moved; you turn the board around, and you move the other side’s chess pieces. There is ‘no other’ in this game”, Brzezinski insisted".
Strategic cultural fond, https://dzen.ru/a/YkLt_-d9BHIRxNMi
This story tells us something simple; the chessboard exists only if you are naïve enough to accept that it does. In other words, it is a nonexistent reality or, if you prefer, a delusion structured in lines that lead to destruction those who admit that they exist.
IV. All mass media report the same lies, changing only the «chess sets».
In Gaza and elsewhere, the mass media systematic falsehood makes everyone believe that "innocent people" are murdered by "cruel rulers"; this is a central part of the confusion spread in order to drive Mankind to extinction. In fact, there are cruel acts perpetrated by all, but there are no "innocent" or "good" or "enlightened" rulers in today's world. Consequently, this evaluation is extended to governments, states, and international bodies.
The same is valid for peoples, ethno religious groups, and nations indeed. Within the colonial and postcolonial context of the last five centuries, no people and no nation managed to preserve their cultural integrity and national identity; only very few subjugated nations, which are located in remote regions of Africa, Asia and Latin America that are lacking technological infrastructure, make an exception.
Before the colonization process started (in different times from continent to continent and from land to land), all different nations were in variant forms of decay; and during the colonization period, all the peoples and ethnic groups underwent a severe process of Westernization. Because of these facts, one should not exempt peoples from being held to account for their contribution to the onerous and troublesome situation in which they find themselves nowadays.
For this reason, all the news, the reports, the editorials and the fact files published here and there are practically speaking identical; what the Iranian mass media report as news on Israel is equivalent to what the Israeli mass media propagate about Iran and Hamas.
V. The dignity of the Iranians and the Palestinians is a most controversial subject.
In fact, the dignity of every nation hinges on the morality, the dexterity and the ability of their elites and rulers. Many nations have been dishonored, subsequently destroyed, and ultimately vanished because of their immoral and incompetent elites. At the very beginning of every case of decay, there is always immorality – evaluated as per the local standards and values.
When the ignorance of the elites and the rulers, their inability to cope with rivals, and their naivety turns them to mere tools in the hands of the enemies of their enemies, then you can expect the worst! This is so because only strong nations attack enemies directly; on the contrary, weak, vile and perfidious nations that cannot attack directly their enemies search always for fools able to do the job for them. In fact, the nations, which are governed by idiots believing that "the enemy of my enemy can be my friend", risk being disintegrated.
Unfortunately, Iran became -gradually and secretively- the ally of England against Israel; UK-based Muslims are in their majority fake, because they fall into the traps of the English secret services, namely the fallacy of multiculturalism, the fraud of political islam, and the false promises that the colonial statesmen, diplomats and academics often make to their forthcoming victims.
And this is exactly what happened to the Islamic Republic of Iran because the ill-fated state has become the tool of the anti-Israeli, Zionist-Jesuit establishment of the UK and the US. In fact, Iran and Israel have nothing to divide and do not need to be enemies; the silly, anti-Israeli stance of the unrepresentative, religious Iranian authorities caused only harm to their country and people. This becomes evident, if one takes into account the fact that, if tomorrow Israel collapses, Iran will gain practically speaking nothing.
The true forces that clash in the Middle East and in other parts of the world are:
a) the anti-Israeli, globalist, Zionist-Jesuit establishment represented by Vatican, the 'deep state' in the US, President Biden, many EU figureheads that are in striking contrast with earlier European statesmen, former UK premier Boris Johnson, the so-called Neo-cons, the Israeli Left, and -last but not the least- the majority of the top IT companies in the US;
and
b) the pro-Israeli, Freemasonic-Zionist establishment represented by major Oil companies worldwide, former US President Trump, the US Pentagon, few EU figureheads after the end of the tenures of Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder, notably Victor Orban and Marine Le Pen, Xi Jinping's China, Naredra Modi's India, Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli non-religious Right, Elon Musk, and -last but not the least- Putin's Russia.
There are also other major forces and influential societies that I don't mention at this point, but they either side with one of two establishments or stay neutral or inactive to some extent.
Opposite such forces, the Islamic Republic of Iran is an infinitesimal quantity. What naïve people fail to grasp is that, if Iran proved to be able to survive, this is due to the fact that the anti-Israeli, globalist, Zionist-Jesuit establishment made it known to the countries that dealt, cooperated and allied with Iran that they do not mind if they do so to some extent. Iran is a useful instrument to them. Therefore, there is no 'bravery' involved, and the Iranian rulers are typically immoral, cynical and hypocritical - just like their 'enemies'.
In addition, it would be definitely foolish and totally misleading for anyone to eventually imagine (let alone conclude) that sizeable organizations and international bodies can possibly be impenetrable and therefore utilized exclusively by one of the aforementioned two establishments; it is totally inconsiderate to believe that for instance BRICS+, as a group of states, acts as a tool for the interests of only the pro-Israeli, Freemasonic-Zionist establishment. As a matter of fact, the original concept of BRIC is known to have been credited to a major globalist thinker, Jim O'Neill who back in 2001 was chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management.
The bottom line is that, under current circumstances, the dignity of the Iranians and the Palestinians is none, because both nations have been fooled by their corrupt elites and leaders. It is very sad, but it is like this, and the same is valid for most of the peoples and the nations across the Earth.
VI. Believing promises given by enemies disguised as friends may be lethal.
Hamas and Gazan Palestinians are in exactly in the same position as the foolish Ukrainians who believed the mendacious discourses of Boris Johnson and every other English governmental and diplomatic filth, only to ruin their own country. Stupid Poles, silly Czechs, and the worthless Baltic elites are about to commit the same lethal error.
As a matter of fact, Iran is not a sovereign state, but a tool of UK's Foreign Office. Iran's dignity has therefore been ridiculed due to impermissible policies that Iran pursued at the international level only for the sake of the English globalist agenda. Crypto-Jesuits, like the former Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, the notorious Mohammad Javad Zarif, also known as "Boris Johnson's Filipina", infiltrated the Iranian state, killing gallant but unfortunate military and paramilitary officers, who were honest enough not to grasp the filth of Iranian politics.
Only idiots may believe that Sardar (General) Qasem Soleimani (1957-2020) was assassinated by the Americans (3 January 2020) without consent from the ruling ayatollahs whose vengeance against the abhorrent assassination was evidently too pale, too insipid, and too timid. The pathetic theologians, who are genuinely unable to run a government, may have been frightened due to false data 'leaked' to them, as per which Soleimani had been about to undertake a regime change, supplanting the worthless religious dogmatists with military pragmatists. This shows the extent of incapacity that typifies the Islamic Republic, which is a shame for Iran's three millennia long History.
Similar disaster befell on the Palestinians of Gaza. Having known that Hamas was openly and repeatedly supported by Benjamin Netanyahu, Gazans are now being punished for not reacting against the shame of their leadership. Every Palestinian knew very well that Hamas took control of Gaza only with the help of Netanyahu; it would therefore be foolish for any Palestinian to imagine that this deeply immoral act would not lead to an unsurpassed disaster. This is what truly happens now.
While two million people in Gaza lost their properties and currently live in tents, facing starvation, death, and exile, the disreputable Hamas leaders rejoice the lavish environment of their fabulous villas in Qatar. Nice resistance indeed! One should be mentally degenerate and morally dead in order not to understand that it is all an entire theater played at the detriment of all the populations of Palestine irrespective of state, religion, ethnic origin, and ancestry.
VII. Military and farmers against the royals and the ayatollahs
There is certainly a medication to the very preoccupying, current situation in Iran, but by definition it cannot be the son of the last shah of Iran. It is known to all that the family of Mohammad Reza lived in France and America, i.e. in states that were historical enemies of the Iranian Empire. By so doing, they discredited themselves to the eyes of the average Iranians.
Even worse, the infamous claimant to the throne Reza 'Pahlavi' irreparably stigmatized himself as an Iranian and Muslim renegade by shamelessly making known the following: "Just as I defend the rights of every Iranian, I am proud to stand up for the rights of the Iranian LGBTQ community". https://twitter.com/PahlaviReza/status/1723830025374351830
In fact, pretty much like the Islamic Republic of Iran has been a Western colonial forgery that tarnishes indeed 14 centuries of Islamic faith, culture and civilization in Iran, the ill-fated Pahlavi dynasty (1925-1979) was a colonial trick that besmirched 2500 years of Iranian History. The pseudo-kingdom utilized the country's pre-Islamic past in order to fool the masses and to introduce Western concepts and behaviors, instead of aptly modernizing the country and duly empowering its infrastructure while preserving the traditional culture and revivifying the historical heritage after the example of Kemal Ataturk in Turkey.
Even worse, the pseudo-religious regime put in place an alien system, the pseudo-Shia "Islamic republic", which functioned as the ultimate colonial instrument geared for the replacement of the Islamic Iranian culture with a Sunni-styled political activism.
Because of the aforementioned situations, Iran's survival will be guaranteed only by a transient military regime that will reflect in the governance of Iran the values, the traditional culture, the historical heritage, the social order of the rural areas, and the provincial particularities or localisms. In its practices, Iran's forthcoming military establishment should combine tolerance for the Westernized Iranian Diaspora, vision for Iran's role in the world, and absence of religious ideology. After extensive consultations, numerous conferences, public debates, and active participation of people from all the walks of life, a series of referenda will help bring forth a totally new form of governance fully supported by all the people of Iran.
Meanwhile, the transient military regime of Iran will have to make it clear to every Iranian that there cannot be national sovereignty without a deeply decolonized and de-Westernized national education which must be based on truthful evaluation and accurate representation of the nation's historical past and heritage. It is degenerate, despicable and ridiculous for the anti-Iranian and pseudo-Islamic regime of the ignorant and illiterate ayatollahs to pretend that they defend the rights of the Palestinians without first protecting the majestic past of Iran from all the Western academic distortions, Orientalist denigrations, colonial historiographical clichés, constant references to fallacious sources (such as Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, etc.), and the bogus-scholarly interpretational schemes, divides, and cases of foremost anti-Iranian and anti-Oriental racism due to inferior 'Ancient Greek' authors, the likes of Aeschylus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Plato, Aristotle, and others.
Instead of mobilizing the entire world against the colonial forgeries of Hellenism, Classicism, Greco-Roman civilization, Judeo-Christian heritage, as per which the world is divided into two parts, namely "the Civilized West" and the "Barbarian Orient", the silly ayatollahs played the game of the English and the French colonials.
Without rejecting the present world order, which is based on the so-called Western European Renaissance and the ensued fallacies, the useless Islamic Republic played exactly the role ascribed to them by the Western colonizers; they became part of the problems that the Anglo-Saxon racists created in the Middle East.
VIII. There is no difference between Iran and Egypt when it comes to servility toward major colonial schemes.
I don't understand why you mention Egypt in the last sentence of your comment. All countries in the region are subservient to their Western colonial masters; there is no difference. Turkey, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc. are all controlled by the colonial countries, England, France, America and their satellites. All these so-called regional powerhouses have no proper national education, no decolonized and de-Westernized universities, no true national identity, and no cultural integrity. It is therefore totally absurd to supposedly fight for independence without a strong feeling of historicity that permeates the education and the entire society.
The same is also valid for the Palestinians, who never undertook a nation building process, simply because this was not the priority of their treacherous leaders who wanted to make money with their bogus-resistance against Israel. Otherwise, all Palestinians would be proud to know that their presence in Palestine antedates that of the Ancient Hebrews and that their ancestors came from Crete, Western Anatolia, and the South Balkans during the Sea Peoples Invasions. In fact, because of the ineptitude of their leaders, Palestinians remain a populace without true national consciousness.
Iran and Egypt are exactly at the same level in this regard. Just like Tehran, Cairo has always been, under khedivial, royal, military and republican administration, a docile and servile capital filled with empty words, useless threats, angry jargons, and unrealistic purposes. Irrevocably fooled with the nothingness of Pan-Arabism and the worthlessness of political islam, the Egyptian academic, intellectual, religious, military, economic and political elites never imagined that their foremost task would be to denounce at the international level and to eliminate at the local level the colonial forgeries of Hellenism, Classicism, Greco-Roman civilization, Judeo-Christian heritage, as per which the world is divided into two parts, namely "the Civilized West" and the "Barbarian Orient",
Actually, such things would be too difficult for theologically indoctrinated morons like Khomeini and uneducated fools like Gamal Abdel Nasser to comprehend.
As you see, you don't need to be Egyptian in order to reject the fallacious notions advanced by Ayatollah Khomeini. You need to be Iranian.
After all, why should a historian side with one or another state, when both fail to defend their historical heritage, national dignity, and cultural integrity?
To conclude I would say that a honest historian cannot possibly allow himself to be caught up in the fight among the Jesuits, the Freemasons, and the Zionists; even more so in the under-covered conflict between the UK and Israel, and in the clashes of their respective instruments, i.e. the Islamic Republic of Iran and Hamas.
=========
Download the article in PDF:
