Killer combo.

And very nice blend of explanations of Prof Hudson with brilliant sarcasm of Prof Wolff.

Thanks for the recommendation of Marx essay. Quotes from Timon of Athens.

Prof. Hudson’s absence was noted on latest episode of GER.

Trump’s stance on this issue is irrelevant. The demographic protesting is core dem suppoters. So, they would not have voted for Trump anyway-they would just not vote. Secondly, due to incumbency factor and being in power, the situation would damage prospects of Kamala more than Trump.

In principal, i agree that Trump has done more for Israel than any president in last 35 years. Abraham accords, Jerusalem as capital and accepting Golan heights as Israeli territory are some of the gifts which no american president offered to Israel.

Have you had the pleasure to observe how people are shouting over her for gaza war and before here everywhere Biden spoke? They are lib white votes which is a crucial voting group for democrats. I think, your conclusion is premature.

Missile fragments had struck, killing and wounding many children playing football (the exact circumstances are still not clear). Western rationality however is perfectly capable to deduce firstly, that Majdal Shams lies in Occupied Syria; secondly, that the Druze community there remains overwhelmingly Syrian (rejecting Israeli citizenship) and largely pro-Syrian. And that they are neither Jews nor Israelis. The West seemingly cannot however, adduce the further very obvious conclusion: Why on earth would Hizbullah intentionally attack a Syrian community on Syrian land that largely is sympathetic to the Resistance?

Thank you for highlighting this. After the affirmations Yahoo received in congressional address, he wanted this kind of incident to expand the scope of war which is the only way for his fascist cult to stay in power. An evil man will burn his nation to the ground to rule over its ashes.
The timing, the choice of target and everything about this incident is suspect.

It is really interesting that stable coin holders are willing to let go 5 percent interest rate. It is official now. US is a world wide laundry for organized crime. What Ginsberg had been saying atleast since 1960’s. It is a washed up scheme to lure criminal proceeds. The interesting thing is that the going rate around the world for laundering money ranges around 5 percent. So, it is a well though out stratagem. Also, i would like to hear you comment about seigniorage income aspect of CBDC’s which is also very important i think. By various estimates, it is estimated to be half a trillion for convention currency where as CBDC has almost zero cost of issue. So definitely this is an important aspect.

As for trade between countries converting to local currencies having no effect on BOP, surely it does not have that effect. But it has tremendous effect on other related aspects. Firstly, non dollarized trade between countries locks them out of necessity to invest their proceeds in US markets. Secondly, it decreases the US dollar monetary base and thus decreases the ability of US government to run deficit against that additional flow and similarly, it deceases the seigniorage income. Finally, great amount of black money is generated through import over invoicing and export under invoicing which finally ends in US and offshore tax heavens. Local currency trade eliminates that aspect.

A bold follow-up step should be, for instance, a virtual conference on the Unit, featuring leading Russian economist Sergey Glazyev, Yannis Varoufakis, Jeffrey Sachs and Michael Hudson, among others.

Truly the dream team. We need all these people onboard and even some more like Prof. Desai, Prof. Wolff and others. Very pleased to learn the name of Varoufakis in the team.

Thank You Prof. Hudson for your defiant defense of the student protests. Hope it gains the momentum of the Vietnam protests.

Hey Y’all. Can anybody point to how to delete one’s archive of comments on UNZ? Much appreciated and thanks in anticipation.

Generally agree with your comment. However, i think Trotskyists conversion to neoconservationism started with Arab Israel war of 1967 and how global alliances were structured then and not with apartheid South Africa. Also, i agree that they transposed some elements of Trotskist ideology to the new camp of convenience. However, this does not mean that all people were like that.

And just today, the Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen is going to China and said, well, we can’t import the solar panels anymore because China’s government supports them, as if the U.S. government also doesn’t support them and other countries don’t support them. You’re getting a travesty almost of the public statements of why America has to avoid imports from China, impose sanctions on Russia. But the result is there are going to be shortages all throughout economies that are following this withdrawal from international trade.

Doesn’t this effectively mean that economic theory that US has been propagating was false? If PRC can find resources to support industry and effectively subsidize the world economy, why cant the US? It only emphasizes that US economic orthodoxy has been wrong and now is the time for reckoning.

Because I was reading actually, again, there’s been a very interesting statement by the governor of the Russian central bank, Nebulina, who is, by the way, somebody who I think personally, emotionally, was very wedded to the neoliberal, open market, unregulated economic model. She is absolutely astonished at what the effect, the actual effect of the push to a kind of enforced protectionism in Russia has been. And in this statement she says that what’s actually happening, and she says, I can’t explain it, this is astonishing to me, is that investment is rising. Consumer spending is rising. Wages are rising. And in conditions of an investment boom, production is expanding. She says, you know, I don’t quite believe this. I worry that the economy, our Russian economy, is growing faster than capacity, that it’s going to burn itself out in some way.

The problem with economists and central bankers like Nebulina is that they are so consumed by their quantificational, actuarial and statistical models of economics that they are can even accept reality when it doesnt conform to their models. These models are junk. The sanctions simply killed the incentives for wealth to be siphoned off. So all the off book wealth is finding is way back to the country or simply stopped being stolen because there are no venues for placing it. It is stimulus to the tune of hundreds of billion.

And now we see, as Varoufakis argues, he says, there’s no chance for Europe anymore. We will now be permanent. Well, the US will be a rent seeker, and our economy will become less and less competitive as wealth is extracted out.

Varoufakis conceptualization of cloud capitalism is very refined theoretical lens to understand where the future of wars lie. Data truly is the new oil.

And that means that China can only, and Russia, can only [attract] the rest of Asia, not to mention Africa and the global South, South America. They can only attract the other bricks into the system by actually offering a better mutual gain. And that entails really creating a whole new set of international institutions, parallel institutions that are different from the U.S., their own version of an international monetary fund, their own World Bank, their own version of the United Nations, or some kind of grouping among themselves.

That really is the crux of the matter. The old institutions based on financial, investment and technological colonialism have to end. Simple as that. Same tools will eventually lead the world to same results. The constraints to growth mainly are capital and technology. They have been weaponized to gain equity ownership of most profitable assets of the developing world. This system has to end. The center periphery conceptualization of human collective essentially has a tacit assumption: Some human beings are superior to others (Rationalizations can be as varied as knowledge, technology, capital or morality). It is as simple as this.

I made three trips to the Duma urging that they adopt a land tax to prevent the privatization that had occurred.Because even if you have oil and real estate privatized, you can collect the economic rents by a rent tax and basically make a profit and that’s it. Obviously this was not what the U.S. authorities wanted. And the Duma members who had brought me over had their elections fixed and were de-elected by the U.S. advisors.

By conceptualizing rent as price over cost, how can rent be taxed? I mean what incentive there would be for private owner of the asset? I mean, ideally the theory says that private enterprise collects as rents what it saves through it efficiency? How can it be quantified. More explanation of this would have been great.

Well, there is no alternative except a revolution, but we’re not in a pre-revolutionary situation. Nobody’s been able to solve that problem short of a revolution, and yet it’s not, people aren’t ready for it. They’re blaming themselves. We’re going to blame the victim, blame the debtors for being impatient, for over-consuming, for not saving enough, while not giving them an opportunity to have a job that enables them to pay the cost of living and build up the savings. The alternative that the Democrats and Republicans are talking about, well, let’s stop social security. Let’s roll back social security and medical insurance and Medicare. Let’s roll back the social spending.

This alternative that the duopoly is talking about of basically scuttling the last vestiges that binds the precarious chaotic equilibrium in balance would lead into the revolutionary situation. Revolutionary situations arise of inability to respond to most pressing social demands.

So if Russia’s not going to invade Europe, you don’t need a military expense except for the Denmark solution back in the 60s. You have a telephone with an automatic answering service saying, we surrender.

Hilarious. But quite true actually. Simply to use the template from 100 hundred years ago is simply irrelevant. Russia postponed the Ukraine conflict for good many 8 years and even then tried to get Ukraine to a negotiated settlement. On simple military calculus, it does not make any sense in Russia trying to take over Europe. I mean what for? What resource or technological or geographic superiority it would confer to Russia? And secondly, why would Russia sacrifice millions of people for what gains by its foray into Europe? What historic discourses and legitimization it would use for convincing its people? It is so non nonsensical that its almost comic.

Very interesting look underneath the hood of much fabled economic statistics. Interpretive turn in economic statistics. Also, lot of interesting coinages mainly skipmflation, shrinkflation, enshittification of economy and Mcjobization of labor markets, traumatized worker syndrome etc.

Very interesting point about if the banks are running in negative equity, then whats the point in private credit creation function and so called market decisions leading to best resource allocation-obviously its not working, if we end up at same place every decade. But why doesnt government nationalize them? The neoliberal answer that Not governments job to run the banks-it appears that its neither private sectors’ job to run the banks either. So, maybe make banks worker co-operatives to keep market mechanisms in place-but its still too socialist….

Also, important point that if in financial crisis, govt guaranteed payment of home owners mortgage payments for two years, instead of bailing out the banks, it would not have the impact which it had. The banks took the bailout money, banks took the homes too, and changed the structure of real estate market, whereby vast number of people became rent slaves for rest of their lives. The best way to commit a fraud is to own a bank.

Another important point is that quality of homeownership has also become worse. In that young people who were expected to have their own homes by 30 instead kept living with their parents. They are not technically represented as renters. But it in fact they are. They are not financial renters but emotive or relational renters.

Interesting take down of hallowed statistics….. We became so afraid of becoming socialist that we became fascists.

I agree with your facts and enthusiasm but all economists are not like that. It is an unfair generalization. There are a plenty who has paid immense personal price in challenging the hegemony.

Besides, social and pure sciences cannot be compared. There are many reasons provided with philosophy of science/sociology of knowledge. Three main being pure sciences deal with objects with rather firm and fixed characteristics lacking agency, subjects of pure science are amenable to experimentation and lastly, the availability of data points in pure sciences is infinite.

If one compares state of scientific knowledge in fields dealing with very complex systems, the results are similar to social science. Take environment sciences and climate modelling for example.

I think you could have made the same point without the mention of whores. IMO lot of things you are saying is what Prof Hudson has been writing about for 60 years. Mainly the privatization of credit creation function, ills of the central bank and private banking.

Besides, these decisions were political. Sure, there were sell out economists churning out justifications for this, but there were just as many opposing them. The discourses were systematically suppressed to create the illusion of TINA. There is no alternative.

Actually Prof Hudson has written a lot about the whoring economists and their methodological obfuscation, mathematization of economics without regard for empirical reality, baking of neoliberal assumptions into the economic models etc.

You have it all wrong, RottenBill. Read what PCR, himself a great economist, writes about Michael Hudson. The greatest!

RUB-INR mechanism doesn’t work because the indian market has preference for western currencies and their is no effort from indian govt either because apparently the govt wants to ride both boats-the western one and the brics one. Ultimately, it would work adversely to Russia, those block funds would be proposed to be utilized as equity funding of Russia for joint defense production with technology transfer (It has happened before as well, how the INR accumulated through india-soviet weapons procurement programme had to be auctioned dime on a dollar in UAE in early 90’s). It would be tantamount to loosing same bet twice. RMB-RUB works because of govt efforts. There are ways to prevent this from happening. Mainly through portfolio investment of these funds into indian equities. However, central bank is way too risk averse and way too beholden to dogmas like central bank only invest in treasuries etc.

I agree that there should be a permanent working committee for local digital currency trade, a taskforce with mandate and budget for testrun their proposals. I dont think there is a person better suited for this than Glazyev.

Also the points about bureaucratic inertia, lack of imagination to visualize alternatives because of being programmed into neoliberal paradigm, Charter limitations of NDB and most importantly corruption is very important. I mean imagine a local currency/specialized digital currency paradigm. How would money laundering, import over invoicing, export under invoicing work? There goes all the yatchs in Mediterranean and villas in spain and portugal and vineyards in france. I think a better way to generate momentum for this is to make these proposals popular in mass population, because bureaucracy is constrained by its class interest. Or else use the momentum of bureaucracy against itself through bureau shaping model. By offering budget increases pro rata to the incremental benefits.

Good work Pepe for this interview. However, it would have been great if dug deeper into lot of interesting points raised.

And mention of China brings up another important point. It is that what is the public service philosophy underpinning a particular governance structure? In that sense, piecemeal reforms cannot offer a permanent solution. Technocratic solutions can only alleviate the symptoms temporarily. I think that culture/discourse production (in technical jargon value allocation function) of governance entity is the most important function, much more important that resource allocation function. Because ultimately even if resource allocation function is done right (highly improbable without right public service philosophy), it would be distorted over time by various ways and means.

Another important point besides bank lending being necrophiliac and lending against dead labor, privatized bank lending is the most important tool for the replication, multiplication and perpetuation of existing production relations which are unjust to labor. Because even when lending is for greenfield projects, it secured through lien on existing property. In simpler words of Groucho brothers comedy, bank is an institution that lends if you can prove that you dont need it.

About CBDC’s i think the prevailing criticism was covered briefly few episodes ago. The main criticism is loss of privacy leading to tyranny etc.

The answer was that there is no privacy to begin with. All aspects of citizen is already subject to record, track, trace, enumerate, compile etc. So that argument cannot be utilized to discredit the benefits which technological advancements can bear to bring upon societies. Remember the account seizure of truckers convoy participants?

Some important aspects most people tend to overlook in discussion of government interest in CBDC is not ability to track citizens (because govt already has it) but seigniorage income. Seigniorage income amounts to hundreds of billions dollars annually.

Citizen groups should use the opportunity of CBDC introduction more productively mainly by arguing that financial privacy for ownership structures that conceal asset ownership mainly through off shoring, benami and beneficial ownership, secrecy jurisdiction be eradicated as well.

Really productive session-with lot of actionable directions. It is a great news that both profs are campaign advisor for Jill Stein-i did not know that. I would pay attention to her policy positions.

I have a question though-which i wanted to ask. In case of nationalization of debt creation function, what happens to the stock of already existing debt? Also, the same question in terms of inter country debt?

And in case, it has to be vanquished, can it happen short of a revolution? I dont think so.

I whole heartedly agree with the assessment that there has always been markets, the question is of the type people would want. Alternatively, only system in play has always been socialism, the question is for whom?

In words of Bismark it would be some damn fool in the Balkans who would start the events leading to world war. He has been right before, lets see about this time.

Thank You for bringing up these other examples. I should have written “The bringing about and its successful continuation of revolutions”. The thing missed in the original analysis where industrial capitalism is considered beach head for socialism overlooks a fundamental problem. The problem of the costs of collective action i.e. extremely concentrated costs over vastly diffused benefits. Rural agrarian societies are better suited for bringing about and sustaining revolution because unlike industrial capitalism where options like moving to another industry or employer exist, the connection of peasant to land is far stronger and his ability to substitute land or skill transference is non-existent. Therefore, faced with substantial risk of survival or changes to land tenure, overwhelming personal costs can be overwhelmed.

Also, industrial capitalism as beach head for socialism is very interesting point from a historic perspective however, its relevance is strictly limited and not futuristic. Simple composition of workforce in modern society indicates that percentage of workforce engaged in industrial production (as conceived in the classical sense of Large scale manufacturing and its allied industry), is very limited. And it is consequence of various factors. One being that industrial capitalism, in order to undermine labor, evolves into finance capitalism, which in simple words is to generate rents without need for labor.

Another important aspect, and much less noticed, is that under industrial capitalism, the R & D and industrial innovation is dictated by the logics of capitalism, which is to eliminate the need of labor. And thus all new innovation i.e. robotics, AI, mechanical scaling of production processes etc is geared towards elimination of labor and moving towards dashboard production which a gentrified class of labor is skilled and qualified to operate and thus does not have any sense of collective interest and solidarity. E.g we see this trend mainly in gig labor where the yuppie class has no sense of class and are a purveyors of new Brahmanism.

I really want to understand the statement Industrial capitalism leading to socialism. Does it mean that socialism is historic destiny of industrial capitalism? And if so, then why did the US and German industrial capitalism did not lead to socialism? What were some important events which thwarted this historic destiny?
My view is that labor-capital frictions in industrial capitalism can be resolved in either of the two ways: Leading to hard socialism in case of labor victory or Finance capitalism in case of capital triumph. Obviously, industrial capitalism is intermediate stage but it can have both of these eventual outcomes depending on who comes on top.
Secondly, In case of labor coming on top in industrial capitalism, the resulting socialism would be of a particular hard type…. It cannot be some benign mix like government providing utilities so that capitalists pay taxes instead of wages.
Because ultimately, in such a mix, capital substitute wages for taxes. And this create new problems like resentment about waste and bloat of government, efficiency argument, freedom of choice argument, profit making oppurtunity by privatization of such public utilities etc. Also, the question arises again, in a liberal democracy, who watches the watchman? In a system of monetized electoral democracy, how capital’s control of legislature, social discourses, resource and value allocation functions be kept in neutral domain? It is simply not commensurate within the commercial logic of capitalism.
Also, industrial capitalism has poor history of developing into socialism. All empirical cases of revolutions USSR, PRC, North Korea, Cuba, Iran etc were basically rural agrarian societies at time of revolution, contrary to theoretical prediction.

I posted the same question in split posts at your tube too but here it has more probability of being answered. I would really appreciate if Prof Hudson can help me understand it.

Thank You for your work.

Modern monetary theory is tool of neoliberalism is a new concept to me. I would appreciate if you can take time to explain it more.

Prof. Desai is not suggesting capitalism to evolve into monopoly capitalism-she is just observing the fact and providing explanation for it. You and Prof is saying the same thing.

Anti trust action was very effective since 1930’s for a few decades-then why did it cease to be so effective after sometime? What is the reason? Co-option by capitalist class through lobbying, revolving doors, bribery, lawfare, venue shopping, corruption of incentive structures of regulators (revenue sharing by regulatees to the regulator effectively making regulator a client of regulatees etc.) and various other tools.

Yeah, no doubt there SHOULD BE strong anti trust action, but what are the incentive structures in a society that prevents this to be the case? Prof is stating reasons for it, why it cant be so within the commercial logics of capitalism.

where are my striped pajamas?

My crime is that of living
on my ancestral home
gave to men that hate me
by some king upon a throne

I sit upon the rubble
deep beneath my family lies
even though I know they’re gone
I still hear my daughter’s cries

They came and stole our land
the country of our birth
burnd our fields and left us
this little patch of Earth.

even this they can’t abide
so finally it’s genocide
you watched this time on tv
and still you looked away

where is my museum
selective holocaust
ther’ve been so many Mai Lais
since humanity was lost

I have to agree with that.

If not now, when do they go around the bend and just turn into Berzerks?

Islamist fanaticism in the west is totally overhyped. It is nothing more than a dog whistle. If there was any such real threat, it would have materialized in past five weeks given the genocide unfolding in Occupied Palestine.

I think more analysts should start emphasizing this fact so that this discourse should meet its timely death and stop being utilized as a trope to divert attention from real issues.

Good to hear that you’ve divorced from the academicist herd mindset. This world…particularly our Ruptured Republic…does desperately need higher education…but one which is massively reformulated.

Western world’s first University was that of Bologna, somewhere back in the 13th Century, if memory holds. It was fully under the aegis of the Church of Rome and therefore controlled and effectually deracinated from the get-go.

So why not extend beyond the geocentric universe which was the accepted norm some 700 years back during the European Middle Ages?

For some years now, I’ve conceptualized a Cosmoversity, a project which would begin from the ground up…literally…by a group of truth-seekers and researchers who are dedicated to a re-boot. Working with one’s hands and doing that by being on one’s feet has some remarkable meditative qualities. Contrarily, sitting on one’s derriere all day and confabbing strictly with others bearing the same narrow discipline, is hardly conducive to creation of higher levels of consciousness and general awareness.

My own personal journey began in ’68, a most seminal year in which my War-Baby generation included individuals who were embarking into then uncharted waters. Failed my very first course in the senior year, a “distribution” requirement at the monstrous main campus of the University of Minnesota. At the time I was an honors candidate in history.

As a relatively slow-learner of the dimensions of contemporary reality, it finally dawned on me that a fresh, new dimension of life was of essence…so the winter quarter of ’68 was for me, the last straw with the constipated and convoluted university mentality and system.

All the best in your journey, Xafer. The Greater Awakening is fast upon us.

Correct. Sunni Arab states hated Ghaddafi because he was against the monarchs (kind of like the Muslim Brotherhood)… so that’s why they joined the US and France to have him killed. The Gulf Monarchs have (or had before deciding to join BRICS a decade later) a stake in perpetuating the US dollar system and they hated him. Libyans had better quality of life than any Muslim nation except Qatar

The real revelation is the role of “SAUDI ARABIA” the wahab house of Saud. Gawdawful bunch. The last person who said that to their face in a public forum was “offed” (Ghadaffi).

I am actually a recovering academic. Just bailed out recently. Sound judgement.

Thanks for the very insightful comment. I never thought of it at all.

Russia has made an offer to the Arab world, primarily because they are the main cultural and historic stakeholders and geographically contiguous. In fact, Russia has called for “Collective Action”, which means a lot.

The statement that which you paraphrase, the western imperial hegemony is based on a system of multiple exploitations namely finance colonialism, investment colonialism and more important where these tools dont work, simple old, plain and classic violence as in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Lebanon etc. This is a system of racketeering to collect blood rent, while keeping the domestic public assuaged through a system of mafia democracy (In fact, an original book title by ex mafia capo Michael Franzese in which he examines the parallels between the workings of western democracy and crime syndicates.).

The whole discourse about Israel-Palestine war is so duplicitous e.g. what does the statement ” we dont want a regional spread of hostilities” even mean? That give Israel license to mass murder Palestinians en masse without any reprisal, while USA sends ship loads of missiles to facilitate this mass murder. Or Blinken’s statement after foreign ministers meetings that we cant agree to ceasefire however, we agree that Hamas has no role in post war Gaza. The plan is simple and obvious. To eliminate the resistance forever so that no question of Palestinian statehood arise. A slow motion genocide, spread over three generations instead of three years, would do the job. These people would be murdered, strangled till they move and they would gradually vanish. Also, i have not seen any questions about the total amount of munitions provided by USA to Israel so far, the coroner reports of Israeli casualties that can shed light on if civilians died as collateral damage as part of military doctrine of IDF because Muhammad Deif has issued statements that civilians were not killed by Hamas, many of them were recruits and civilians died of IDF’s over whelming response. Or 14000 Palestinians in prisons, 5000 picked after 7 oct to gain an advantage in prisoner negotiations, many of them without trial and under extremely inhuman conditions. Efforts at various fronts are underway to demobilize any collective action: E.g. immediate release of 1 billion Euro grant to Jordan (you can make a good guess with what conditions), Offering Mahmood Abbas Gaza government (as if Gaza is for someone’s to offer, especially given that Mahmood Abbas’s government is in constitutional limbo given that no election has been held since 2011-i doubt that Mahmood Abbas can carry even West bank in a fair election). Also, how west bank government’s internal functioning is thwarted by not allowing fiscal and monetary authority and then using their own money to embed their security apparatus aligned with Israeli interests. Kit Klarenburg wrote an extraordinary piece about it, available at his substack, must read it if you havent already.

Let’s see how the broader Arab world in particular and Muslim world in general responds to this call to action.

Its correct that Zionists have used the term Amalek opportunistically to fit any current adversary i.e. Arabs, Palestinians etc.

By classic definition, i think only the inhabitants of the Sinai in Egypt are the Amalek.

Now go back to Deuteronomy 7:1-2, 24:

“Yahweh told Israel that he has identified “SEVEN NATIONS GREATER AND STRONGER THAN YOURSELF” (caps mine), that “you must put under curse of destruction,” and not “show them any pity.” As for their kings, “you will blot out their names under heaven.”

I have harped quite a bit about Wesley Clark’s quote about seven countries, but you have done amazing job of situating it in context of the scripture. It’s a very interesting topic to me how modern political thinking, especially of the Zionists, is deeply rooted in mythology, scripture and especially eschatology. Another interesting account is the failure of destruction of Amalek by King Saul causing his eventual madness and its repetition in Arab-Israel war.

Interesting coinage Iron Bathtub, maybe think about copy righting it.

Iran seems like a big bite to swallow. Iranian Fifth column seems like a good horse to bet on in this case, especially given the Mahsa Amini template. The girl simply slid to the side while sitting in an office bench and the video of it is publicly available (Although what happened before it remains open to debate). I want to direct your attention to a same template being employed and a similar video doing the rounds, i think in Guardian newspaper. A girl without hijab enters a train and then drop back out the door unconscious. That episode is being pumped up but its not getting enough coverage because the world is on fire.

But you never know. Zionists may get their battering ram to ram into Iran. Afterall, who would have thought that we will see ethnic cleansing and genocide in 21st century, in broad daylight, under the watchful eyes of a million cameras, broadcast live on 24-hour news cycle. Also, the rhetoric coming out of Zionists of creating false equivalency between Hitler and Khamenei points to this direction. Hasbara hounds are at it, again.

Seriously though: do you see how I put forth a vision, and then the vision manifests?

Not like a prophecy and definitely not like I’m dictating reality.

It’s simply that I have the best grasp on what is happening in the universe of anyone. At least of anyone who is publicly sharing their understandings.

I am the best there is.

Sometimes your humor surpasses your assessments or even your rants….

Hahaha…. i totally lost it at the Jordan Peterson meme. Clear your room. That guy had such a great fall. He was doing some really pioneering work through hermeneutical analysis of biblical accounts of the prophets and then he made the aaliya and came back a cuck.

All in all, the problem lies deeper than the second vatican council etc. The problem is that culture and law etc. are configurations of the interests of the currently dominant interest groups. And interest groups operate on simple principles of internal cohesiveness and strength of belief in collective cause. Some groups have more of it than others because of peculiar historic circumstances. One important factor is recency of events that shape collective identity.

So, if you take one set of role models with another, it would not change things substantially. Anyway, interesting thought experiment.

And for these three regional actors, without distinction, the current collective punishment of Gaza transgresses any possible red line.

I wholeheartedly agree with the overall sentiment of the article, your position and general sentiment that we wish more from Russia on this.

However, i do not agree with your assessment in the block quote. So, i am assuming you are talking about Iran, KSA and UAE as three regional powers?

Collective punishment is already underway, been going on for thirteen days and besides Iran, where do you see any resistance from?

For example, UAE has called for unconditional release of hostages (which is a very subtle way of supporting Israel, without causing too much public dissent). Besides, what KSA has done besides making Blinken wait for a few hours? It hasnt even matched the aid pledge of USD 100 million offered by US. What KSA is gonna do? Oil Embargo? Did you see the reaction after Qatar called for LNG embargo, the oil production went up and the price of oil went down 10 USD per barrel. KSA and UAE is not gonna do anything. And there is no red line. It appears that the fate of Faisal, Nasser, Bhutto and Qaddafi taught the lesson that was meant to be taught.

Shapiro is just a trojan horse, injected to monopolize the narrative on both sides. Its more important to control your enemies instead of your friends. And today’s right is situationally more left than ideological claptrap of identity non issues that identitarian left espouses which have no relevance to 90% of the public.

I agree. Generally, incremental reformism never works. Systems have to built anew from the ashes of the currently collapsing ones. Because existing systems are based upon deep ontological assumptions and such outlook can never be changed. Like current financial system is based on assumptions of western supremacy.

It makes absolutely zero economic sense for India to gain access to Europe through this route. First, load up on shipping vessel and transverse ocean, then unload and onto a 2000 km railway, than unload and onto a ship, then unload at final port of entry. If one adds up all the costs, its expensive especially given the capital cost of building 2,000 KM railway line, its operations and maintenance and transit fees to be paid to multiple countries. And total trade of India with Europe is not even 300 billion Eur. Without rerouting of Russian oil through India, its even below 200 EUR.

Just use the existing corridor at the Suez.

Another important point why railways is redundant for Arabs is that upto 90% of their exports is oil and gas. And oil and gas can be transported more efficiently through pipelines instead of railways.

I would respectfully like to disagree. The whole Sykes-Picot tailoring of middle east was aimed at thwarting pan Arabist and Arab nationalism by creating conflicting and competing claims so that a central power can keep playing the judge, the policeman, the protector etc. The whole world has upinto flames for this.

No thanks to the role of policeman for US after the grand coup orchestrated by China through Saudi and Iran relations normalization. No more policemen required.

The American neoliberal obsession at this stage of the New Great Game is, as always, all about Israel. Their goal is to make Haifa port viable and turn it into a key transportation hub between West Asia and Europe. Everything else is subordinated to this Israeli imperative.

You hammered the nail right on the head Pepe. All this corridor corridor word play is becoming increasingly annoying. Trade corridors makes sense in certain very specific contexts-major conditions for such corridors to be useful are: developing alternatives to vulnerable routes (as BRI is to bypass freedom of navigation harassment by USA in South China Sea), connecting hitherto unconnected markets to global supply chains (as in vast majority of land locked central asian countries which have been facing logistical assets deterioration and underdevelopment or in some cases complete absence since four decades as in case of Afghanistan. Tajikistan. Kyrgyzstan etc.), decreasing cost of transportation for high volume low value products where transportation cost is a very significant factor, promotion of certain industry of corridor developing nation e.g. auto industry of USA after Marshall plan funding for building highways in Europe. or economic hit jobs to saddle countries with unsustainable debt or create client oligarchies etc.

Now is you look at the very useful map of this corridor you added, none of the significant requirements of a corridor are present. The markets along the proposed corridor are highly integrated, with multiple lane highways and functional port systems. The only drape is to connect middle east with Europe through Israel instead of middle east to Jordan and then Egypt. And as you stated, its all about Zionism. And more importantly, it is to put the lipstick on the pig which is the normalization of Arabs with apartheid zionist occupation force. The whole corridor rhetoric is to drape this ignoble deed on “Economic imperative”, “Trade integration” to demobilize discontent with the direction that Arab leaders are taking in complete disregard of the sentiment of vast majority of their populations and their historic trajectory and national identity. For example, i dont think that a single arab intellectual of the stature of Laghoud, Said, Jibran, Munif. Mahfouz, Aflaq, Arsuzi etc. in last one hundred years can be found who would approve of this policy. So, a justification of normalization is to be found in neo-liberal economics.

Anna Khait and Tarah Price — Two women hired by private intelligence operatives to seduce and blackmail National Security Adviser Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster after Jewish mega donors Sheldon Adelson and Robert Mercer complained to Trump that he wasn’t sufficiently pro-Israel.

The third hyperlink in the quoted paragraph, and the most important one in the whole article, is broken. It links to a porn website instead of expose linking to Mcmaster story.

It is just that the bell has started to toll…. And firing of Tucker Carlson was the start. Brand’s takedown was in the making since last couple of years. Excellent point that none of this takes away from any facts he states. He has become a big nuisance and used social media as a powerful tool for alternative imageries. I think there a sum total of couple of dozen people in journalistic world like him and all of them would be coerced either into compliance or oblivion. Jimmy Dore, Kit Klarenberg, Kim Iverson, Tucker Carlson, Ben Norton, Aaron Mate, Max Blumenthal, Glen Greenwald, Brian Berletic, Danny Haiphong, Katie Halper and maybe a handful others. And it wouldn’t just be the content creators, the platforms would also be shaken up, with different sorts of legal and regulatory intimidation to dictate their content moderation policies.

Well, first thing is to host the channels on multiple platforms-so that if you get kicked from one, you can move your network to other platforms without loss of significant viewership. The whole research about misinformation, fact checking etc. is basically efforts to subvert democratization of information which is happening due to loss of gate keeping function of traditional media, with rise of social media. The consent manufacturing machine is breaking down irreparably.

It is my understanding that the crusading spirit came to the U.S. from the French Enlightenment, heir to Catholicism, rather than from Protestantism. I offer this as a speculative hypothesis.

Interesting hypothesis. However, i think tracing a direct antecedent is redundant. Modes of thought can transmit through generations by means of habits of mind, mores, cultural criteria of morality, criteria of individual/collective value etc. That is how seriously religious thinking can persist in new garbs under newer justifications in apparently secular societies.

Marxism has plenty of variants. Most people only understand it be dictatorship of the proletariat by direct control of means of production by a vanguard part as a delegate of proletariat, as in the soviet model.

China did a better job of shunting the ideological rigidity and introduced market mechanisms, price signals and accurate accounting processes for transfer pricing, transaction and opportunity costs. Marxism is not a religion that has to be followed to every word. Sure China has 500 billionaires. But those billionaires cant buy the party, legislature, regulators, media or the court. When China decides that media ownership concentration is bad, it can fix it within days.

“1980’s was called a decade of glorious funerals for passing away of large numbers of old Soviet leadership”

If my memory is correct during the last 15 years of the Soviet Union it had 9 “leaders” chosen by Politburo members. Excerpt for Gorbshov the last one (when it was too late) all aging and decrepit and clearly not individuals capable of leading an organization of that size and complexity.

So the question is: why did the Politburo elect the most feeble among them? Answer: It was self preservation. Most of the rest were in similar condition and the last thing they wanted was a strong minded, youngish, energetic leader because that guy would have cleaned house, including them.

Although 2023 Washington D.C. has not reached 1980’s Moscow depths there is similarity that is unnerving. Biden being example # 1. A crook from day one in the Senate, greatest skill was back slapping politicians of both parties, never very bright at his peak and now running at 60% of that is “elected” President of the United States.

Certainly a country of our size and duration will have included quite a cast of characters who have managed to reach D.C., but this type is no longer coming and going in even numbers. They are accumulating at a scary pace. I’m worried !

Putting Nation into socialism, a dangerous enterprise (Hahaha). I think George Orwell wrote about in 1940’s in one of his articles. The differences in objective conditions of working class across nations and thus their concerns and remedies, are so vastly different that it precludes any meaningful cross national class solidarity movement.

And it is not so difficult to imagine. E.g. the differentiation of labor into geographic centre (high value added) and periphery (low value added) cannot have same interests. Higher value added labor in centre is also dependent on the continued exploitation of the low value added labor activity in the periphery. In that context value addition at source in the periphery would be an anathema to the labor engaged in the same activities in the center. Paradoxically, it turns upside down the traditional relation between labor and capital-with mobility of capital from centre to periphery in search of undercutting labor in the centre to magnify its returns becomes the sole salvation of the labor in the periphery. This has been the large part of story of development in the global south in many industries in the last five decades.

Interesting comparison. 1980’s was called a decade of glorious funerals for passing away of large number of old soviet leadership. I think an interesting point is the ideological rigidity of the ruling class which leads to collapse and failure of any system. It precludes people to see which way the wind is blowing and entrenched interests keep milking the systems while it lasts. And generally, it tends to be very difficult to reverse the course once the decline has begun for simple reason that apparent signs of social decline takes decades to manifest after the real rot has begun. By such time, the financial resources and slack in the system required for course correction are already gone. As was the case in USSR, when the reforms under prestroika and glasnost began. it was almost late by two decades and short by couple of hundred billion dollars due to complexity, integration and consolidation of supply chains.

And when the polis internalize defeatism that there is nothing worth saving, the empires fizzle with a whimper instead of a bang.

In other words, that’s imagine your credit card has 30 percent interest interest rates compounded annually. The women who do the shopping in Kazakhstan have basically the families have been all driven into debt by microcredit, which is one of the most predatory, vicious kinds of credit.

But Prof. Hudson, doesnt the economic literature state that their is very high marginal efficiency of capital for micro businesses and thus 30 percent interest rate is justified? [Sarcasm]

I already touched on why Nigeria was not included in another thread on the situation in Niger: the actual president of Nigeria, Bola Tinubu, is a cia asset.
He was involved in (drug) money laundering, there was a case against him in Illinois in 1993

After working for Mobil Nigeria, a subsidiary of Exxon Mobil, he quickly rose to governor of Lagos from 1999 until 2007, to finally reach the presidency this year (he’s also minister of Petroleum resources).

Should brics put the proverbial worm in the apple?

The onshoring trend for US manufacturers is to relocate their factories to countries like Mexico in order to shorten their supply-chains. That imperative is based on both political reasons (national security) as well as economic expediency (time-to-market). Modi’s bet with his Make-in-India project is a case of the ‘China Syndrome’ which aims to replicate what Deng accomplished three decades ago when he opened China to foreign investment. But that train has already left as the onshoring trend has become the new mandate for US manufacturers. Trump’s trade war against China has exposed the political risks of outsourcing manufacturing to offshore locations like India. That’s why I think ‘friendshoring’ is DOA because there is no guarantee that US allies will be exempt from political risks which can be eliminated only through onshoring manufacturing to North America. The Biden Administration’s CHIPS Act exemplifies this strategic thinking as the US Deep State has belatedly recognized the political risks of American dependence on semiconductor manufacturing in East Asia.

Chinese economic planners started diversifying China’s industrial capacity away from serving the USA to Asia and Europe, 15 years ago after the GFC in 2008. Even Asian countries like Indonesia has now recognized that the US-led globalization trend is finally coming to an end. That’s why RCEP was born in order to create a bigger market for Asian countries like Indonesia. Ironically enough, Modi’s India had rejected the RCEP in favor of catching the US-led globalization trend with his Make-in-India project.

That is unfortunately too little too late for Modi’s India as the US-led globalization trend is finally coming to an end.

I would really appreciate the link to EHA executive’s admission.

So, what i gather the argument is (apologies if i am incorrect) that it seems implausible that such technology transfer as done by Baric happened. And premise is that we did not help USSR technologically. So, what possible strategic motives are there if we imparted such biotech, it seems like a mad move.

There is a whole host of literature by Antony C Sutton and others that covers critical technological capabilities including missile technology and components transferred to USSR. There had been extensive congressional inquiries into it as well. And it is a well documented fact. I think its covered somewhere at UNZ, or maybe it was some other venue. Also, it helped MIC in USA to justify budget allocations to its end by stating the race is getting closer and kept the merry go round going for 40 years.

Second question, what was the strategic motive in transferring technology? Strategic motives were a plenty.

E.g. in case of USSR, there has been whole host of research that indicates that star wars program basically distorted the resource allocation function in USSR because it did not have market mechanisms to auto rectify the distortions in production function. Thus, this brought it to ruin by reallocating resources from crucial services and food production. Coupled with bad planning, and engineered artificially low prices of energy in 1980’s, USSR’s mainstay of federal budget (Through use of excess production capacity in oil producing nations), it crystallized the inner simmering resentments and brought it to the fore (It is not a coincidence that same playbook is being employed against Russia this time around as well, pushing oil producing nations to ramp up production, artificial price caps on Russian energy and destruction of its delivery channels).

Interesting take, about radical centrism and neutrality. So, what are some major trends that you are observing in India’s policy in this context?

I agree that there would not be any more offshoring, given the prevailing public sentiment. But i highly doubt the prospects of any major onshoring for simple reason that unproductive rents and surcharges on local labor makes it quite expensive. So, friendshoring is about finding newer pastures for already outsourced industries which cant be brought back.

I agree with your assessment that time for major offshoring has passed.

Nice write-up Pepe. Especially the conclusion with Free flowing verse, with stream of consciousness writing and plenty of parallels to mythology & the reference to high art in the conclusion.

Really interesting facts by Glazyev about nano bots. And also naming of the new variant with its mythological origin and story which closely parallels the delicate maneuvers on global chess board.

As to Pepe’s question about why NDB has been a lukewarm force-charter is one factor and an important one but its not the only cause. E.g. the charter can be amended by consenting members. Secondly, it seems unclear why loan in local currencies would attract sanctions especially RMB and INR.

I think the main reason NBD has not been very effective is lack of monetary policy co-ordination framework-since there is no mechanism for redemption of currencies by central banks other than dollars, if you grant a loan to buy things on international markets, how would the loan recipient country use that money, if other country is not willing to accept currency other than usd?

A more granular and important problem in my opinion, is the lack of pipeline of investment projects that can be financed and completed by BRICS member countries jointly, because as current situation stands, a debt denominated in these currencies would be redeemable only at their own central banks.

A related problem is that the capabilities of investment proposal appraisal seem to be lacking. E.g stumbled up some job requisites posted for NDB and i was surprised to learn that it was almost mandatory to have familiarity with IMF, World Bank and UN frameworks and tool kits. It seems to betray lack of awareness how neoliberal assumptions are implicitly build into these frameworks and tools.

Now with the Russia’s openness to technology transfer and demand of leaders of Global south for value addition at source, i think projects can be scoped. But there needs to be a more concerted efforts and effective representation and coordination by chambers of commerce of BRICS member countries in working of NDB.

Excellent points about writing the new rules and manifesto for the BRICS+. I think, the most important point of the summit was made by Pres. Putin in what he said that current global order is based on financial colonialism and he went one step further and said something even more important which is that Russia is ready for technology transfer. All in all, an excellent showing. Reminds me words of Alexander Solzhenitsyn “A blow struck to the hegemony, for human freedom everywhere”. And not just an ordinary blow, the last volley of Muhammad Ali when he went ballistic on Brian London!

I think if this point is taken as the starting point of New new global order, it can have extraordinary effects for unlocking global growth potential. I think the real choke on development of global south is access to capital and technology. This capital constraint is used in three main ways: First to dictate the type of development that supports developed world, second to get majority shareholding in natural and public monopolies including banking, agriculture, insurance etc. of developing countries effectively making them vassal states permanently, corrupting their ruling class by converting them into client oligarchy and third destabilizing their social and political systems (E.g. despite all the platitudes about rules based disorder, there has not been any serious examination of banking secrecy laws and jurisdictions and ownership structures that hides real ownership-what is the justification to allow this crime to be perpetuated?). This system effectively creates monopoly rents for technologically advanced countries at the cost of developing world.

Pres. Putin has offered a way out-i.e. technology transfer including mineral development and exploration etc and technology for development of public utilities. This framework needs to be developed. Mainly, the benefit to the countries developing other countries resources should be through diverting increased incomes in reciprocal trade agreements to support new consumption and not asset stripping the developing countries of resources. It this framework can be developed, it would really be a gigantic shift in the financial hierarchy of the world. Also, important point was made by leaders of global south. That aim of international trade should not be to utilize the capital constraint of developing countries to turn them in raw material producing periphery. Instead make them a partner in prosperity by value addition at source, as much as their workforce has capability for (Prosperity through a rising tide lifting all boats). I think, in the context of these two related points, if some concrete plan can be developed to implement this into action, it would be the biggest game changer to the system that has been in place since atleast 1945.

Secondly, the point about trading in national currencies. The important point i have not seen any discussion about is perverse incentives and adverse moral hazard implicit in this arrangement. Framework for monetary policy coordination would be necessary for trade in national currencies to be effective. The main point is that without monetary policy coordination, it would be a repeat of the dilemma implicit in using dollar for international trade i.e. moral hazard to pass on inflation in one country to others and ever present political incentive to do this. How can this be checked? I would really appreciate if Prof. Hudson can tackle this issue in one of his talks.

The only sore thumb has been India. India’s role seems to be ambitious and ambivalent at the same time. It seems to be reluctant to expand the membership to other countries. Seem to me a kind of realization that its time has come to join the big club and now its time to get a foot ahead in the new emerging order and not on equitable partnership for all members. Also, its animosity with China and opportunism in utilizing it to get as many benefits for itself from the emerging rivalry between U.S and China. India is caught between contradictions in promoting itself in BRICS as well as a counter weight to China. E.g. Jaishankar’s remark in this context was instructive stating that world suffered badly during covid due to consolidation of supply chains, a not so hidden dig at China. Lets see what finally prevails in India: its BRICS aspirations for a free world or its desire to avail itself of the new carrot of “Friendshoring”. I am taking bets for friendshoring.

What RFK Jr. said about outsourcing the research program is a multi layered fact. He is not saying that it is outsourcing with full knowledge of its objectives, understanding or that it implies complicity.

What he is saying between the lines (and for obvious reasons that he is running for president-and it means that he should not make a conjecture going beyond irrefutable facts-especially about a topic which is very recent and current, and can mire his campaign in controversy), is exactly the third possibility that you have highlighted long before anyone did. The main point is that he also said Ralph Baric from UNC taught gene editing and hiding proof of such editing to some Wuhan scientist, back in 2014.

I think how all these facts fall together is a game of 100 mirrors and smoke. The outsourcing of such research program was done in a compartmentalized manner, with various different labs working on very narrow part of a big machination, funded through third party “research alliances” like EcoHeath Alliance. Aim of funding GoF research was to encourage scientists to go beyond the research proposal and play around to develop something beyond the scope of research proposal and then you need a tap in the lab to splatter is around the landscape. It seems to me a classical case of giving a man enough rope to hang himself. It provides perfect deniability. And it hides the source perfectly. Thus, the reticence on part of Wuhan lab.

There would not be any 100% error proof support for 3rd hypothesis. It would always be conjectural. And it is all there. Ralph Baric teaching gene splicing and techniques to eliminate its proof in 2014, a research grant by ecohealth alliance in 2018 for gain of function research in cov virus and voila, a lab leak in 2019.

Especially, in the PNAC style event fortunately happening in time, when a new rival power appears on horizon, to splice the reality in a forever before and after, that makes any kind of aggression justified to mobilize the hearts and minds of an eternally reluctant public!

Capitalism is essentially about how to maximize profits.

That pretty much sums up what we found so intolerable about the world we were born into. But for some of us, carrying Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book was first and foremost the primo way to cheese off mom and dad, who were so propagandized by the jingoist garbage they were exposed to during the horror show we call World War II. Their mindset was the inspiration for the much misunderstood slogan, “don’t trust anyone over thirty”, which was trivialized by a hostile media into an apolitical ageist manifesto. Socialism had a new appeal for my generation, for we noticed the great success of the US economy when it was centrally planned by Washington to win that unnecessary war – which was (then as now) about achieving global hegemony by sowing global chaos.

Of course, Vietnam was the catalyst. Every week the TV would tell us another five hundred Americans were killed, while tens of thousands of VC had been exterminated and the end of the tunnel was clearly in sight. The military lied and blustered, just the way we are told Ukraine is about to trounce Russia today. Worse, we kept getting personal RSVP invitations to join the pajama party, year after year after year, even as Dick Nixon’s “secret plan” to end the war proved to be by expanding the damn war. We found ourselves in a Kafkaesque world (hence we took to spelling it “Amerika”, the title of his allegorical novel) that made no sense and had no escape. The popular 1969 movie Easy Rider had as its tag line “a man went in search of America and couldn’t find it anywhere” and this was a widely shared experience. And as we looked honestly at our history, we saw the war was not what we regarded in our innocence as a monstrous aberration, but rather imperialist business as usual.

The rage at the hideous injustice of it all led some of us to imagine we could correct it by violent revolution. 1776, and all that. This strikes me as the same detachment from reality that had made some believe in 1859 that seizing a federal arsenal in Virginia would trigger a great slave revolt. No sale, no interest, no thanks. As John Steinbeck commented, socialism never caught on here becase people see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires rather than the oppressed proletariat they are. That’s the evil genius of our variant of capitalism, allowing workers enough shiny toys to convince them their interests dovetail with those of the oligarchic class. And “keep them doped with religion, and sex, and TV, and they think they’re so clever, and classless and free” as John Lennon so aptly put it. And when they start to wise up, hey presto, send their jobs overseas and keep them down, where they belong.

Sure, it’s true that there were lots more jocks eager to beat up us longhaired pinko fags than there were us longhaired pinko fags, as I recall. It’s truly hilarious now to see them in their old-fartage bullshitting about how groovy they had been too. After Woodstock they started to grow their hair too, and they descended on our communities with no other ideals or ambition than to score free dope and easy sex.

As I get older I think another prime factor of why some of us went a bit batshit in our youth is that we grew up in the toxic shadow of the unspoken rage and anguish of our parents’ generation. The heartbreakingly young faces that stare back at us in fading photos of the servicemen and women of the so-called “greatest generation” are the images of innocents betrayed by the same warmongering elite which today is scheming to destroy China and Russia. They had suffered the unimaginable privations of the Depression and the war while being forbidden to speak honestly about how they really felt about it. They were collectively forced to endure waking nightmares by some of the most worthless leaders in our history – the very ones whom so many mistakenly idolize to this day.

Very informative piece and exhaustive literature review of controversy surrounding HIV. However, i dont agree with the conclusion that RFK Jr should make it a campaign point for several reasons.

The point does not have a broad based appeal for vast majority of electorate.
The issue is more that four decades old, topic is not current, its consequences not immediate.
The ambivalence of evidence and its nature preclude it to be amenable to structure of public rhetoric.
The evidence is ambivalent and mixed, and to harp upon it would be inconclusive.
The issue does not have the hallmark features of a focusing event, which can provide immediate salience and ignite public debate.
The issue would take time and resources away from other issues of broad appeal that are inherently more relatable e.g. hollowing out the middle class core and destruction of repository of the the american creed which is middle class.
The issue would put many people off who may agree with his platform on regulatory capture, militarism, environmentalism but are generally respectful of medical orthodoxy.

However, the issue can be used strategically in a limited way in launching the broadside against big pharma, and only in that capacity.

That America is in the same position as the Roman Republic, when it finally turned into the Roman Empire.

Excellent interview. I think it might not be relevant but i would really like to see Prof. Hudson explain the sociological implications of this end stage capitalism- Especially in terms of race relations, state vs. center relations and how it would impact various fault lines in the society. Also, the idea of Immigration as anti-labor policy is not new to me, i would like to know more about Carter’s role in it which can link the policy to explicit aim of labor suppression (Not just a theoretical connection).

This war is between the idea of the nation-state that is allowed to choose its own path of development, and the concept of an empire claiming the right to impose its pattern of progress on others, cynically using slogans about the fight against “fascism.”

Not really. This war is about expansion of one empire in the area of influence, trade pathways and effective range of deterrence of another-and it has been stated as clearly as possible, probably over a thousand times, in the last 30 years, since the NATO start expanding into Eastern Europe in mid 1990’s.

NATO’s expansion of 1990’s was also an imperial encroachment, in an effort to reinvent itself, in face of collapse of Soviet Union, which was the sole justification for its creation.

An instructive read:

http://www.sam.hi-ho.ne.jp/~minovic/gervasi.html

Is it sad and unfortunate? Yes. Is there a counter factual human history in which this was not the governing dynamic of center-periphery relations? No.

Unless, a new modality of human social organization emerges, this is how it would unfold.

Nice read Pepe. Currency substitution is not difficult actually. Because it does not have to a shared national currency. It just needs to be a trade currency, with trade surpluses being able to be accepted at major debt, capital and commodity markets and its covert-ability in any global currency. Besides, who would like to repeat the Greece experience with shared national currency?

The technical infrastructure of such digital trade currencies already exists e.g. Asian currency unit (ACU). The governing legal and regulatory framework is also present as in digital trade currency frameworks, which does not require new regulatory and legal regimes.

Another important point that some scholars make is that for settlement in national currencies to work, all partners should have bilateral zero trade surpluses or deficits. It is a wrong assumption. The correct requirement is that the new trading block should have, in collective, a net zero trade surplus and deficit, provided that each national currency of a block member country can be easily converted into any other block member country currency.

Strange turn of events. I havent seen an article running 3,000 words which starts with the premise of society being a neo-leninist quagmire and then goes on to pin the same phenomena on the alienation caused by capitalism. So, what is it really?

Also, for an excellent treatment of the Nordic dream (Nordic Nordic not Nordic American), may i humbly suggest Den brysomme mannen (2006)?

Probably the most important thing that nobody mentions how Elon’s spaceX Starlink satellite net interface is being used for military purposes extensively by various extra national armed outfits, also mainly by Ukrainian military while he preaches peace.

Interesting insights. Especially blocking reserves of a country is tantamount to blocking sewage of a country if you go to war with them, nice analogy. Also, interesting point about the wildfires in Manitoba where Prof. Radhika is based. The importance of independent arbitration mechanisms & judges for responsibility sharing for debtor and creditor countries.

Probably lot more going on than meets the eye, if looked at from uninformed perspective.

Sure, that dog didn’t bark at many pivotal moments of history! Probably cause they dont want to give you more weight Ron than you already have.

Always a treat, anything from Prof Hudson.

The Matrix is objectively more useful to the pro-white Right than the anti-white Left, but you have to look past the casting to see that. In The Matrix, the bad guys are all clean-cut white men. The good guys look like the Left: a coalition of non-whites and white misfits. But just bracket that out for a minute. Imagine the movie with a monoracial cast and you’ll see that the story itself is not anti-white. Only the casting gives that impression.

No, it isn’t. And such fantasizing is ridiculous.
“Imagine the movie with a monoracial cast…” Huh? Imagine TRIUMPH OF THE WILL with Jews, and it could be a pro-Zionist movie. So, is it really crypto-pro-Jewish?

We have to respect, or at least acknowledge, the original intent of the film-makers, and MATRIX isn’t rightist in any meaningful sense. Now, it appropriates certain styles of fascism, as did STAR WARS, and its emphasis on aesthetics has an element of hierarchy — as few men have the stuff of heroism and transcendence — , but it is really a work of post-modern fashionism. From an ideological viewpoint, it is neither right or left. Just shallow and stupid.

Also, we need to distinguish between the ideological right and the situational right.
Communism began as a radical ideology but became the new conservatism in the Soviet Union, much like Christianity that began in rebellion against Judaism and challenge to the pagan order, became the official ‘conservative’ religion of the West. From a situational point, the right can find itself in the ‘left’ positi0n and vice versa. Today, the dissident right is very much in the position that the (real) left was long ago. So, situationally, today’s real right is ‘situationally leftist’. Does that mean the left has become situationally ‘rightist’ as it has the blessings of the super-rich and the deep state. I would say no because the real left is totally dead. Stuff like globo-homo isn’t leftist in any meaningful sense, and the powerful push that stuff because vain/narcissistic homos are such an asset to globalism. Homos are some of the most tireless people working CIA, FBI, law firms, Hollywood, and etc, even as aids to GOP politicians. Homos love privilege and proximity to power. And Jewish Power isn’t ‘leftist’ but ultra-rightist tribal-supremacist. And BLM is about black supremacism, something Jews use to bash whites because Jews know whites are in awe of black prowess in sports, music, and sex. White ‘wokeness’ about blacks isn’t egalitarian but about special consideration and reverence for blacks as the naturally superior race. All these ‘woke’ types feel zero sympathy for victims of black crime. Of course, outwardly they rationalize it as an understanding of black crime resulting from ‘systemic racism’, but the real reason is more primal. ‘Wokemons’ see blacks as the rightful predators, the lion kings, with the right to feed off on the lesser races. It’s like all the prey animals bow down to the lions in the idiotic cartoon THE LION KING. There is no real Left anymore, and we’re doing a favor to Jews, blacks, and homos by labeling them as ‘left’, thereby giving the false impression that they are about equality when, in fact, all three groups are totally about their own power and privilege. Where is ‘wokeness’ on BDS or Palestinian plight? NOTHING. That gives the game away. The current struggle isn’t between the left vs the right. It’s about the ultra-right vs the right. The ultra-right are Jews, blacks, and homos who want all others to revolve around themselves. The right, or sane right, is about each people and identity having dignity of autonomy, or universal nationalism. The master stroke of Jews is in having dressed up their ultra-rightism as a kind of ‘leftism’, and it goes on and on because even those in the dissident right keep calling the Jews, blacks, and homos the ‘left’.

Purely from an ideological viewpoint, leftism was historically more pro-people and pro-reality. When leftism really entered history as a force, the right was associated with the church, theology, dogma, aristocracy(vanity and decadence), monarchy(often with idiot kings). It was about the privileged class living in their own cloistered world. Why was the French monarchy so powerless to stop the revolution? It lived in its own little world and ignored what was brewing among the masses. Same with the Shah of Iran. He totally ignored the needs of people and spent lavishly on the festivities and feasts with Persepolis, with nearly all the guests being foreign dignitaries and luminaries. He had no real contact with the people. He was like Michael Jackson in Neverland. And the Tsar of Russia had no idea what was really happening or what was necessary. His wife fell under the spell of nutjob Rasputin. And the whole Russian court was moronic.

It is always immense pleasure to read anything by Prof. Hudson. Amazing new insights. This is a very important contribution to economic history as well as philosophy of history, at par with putting materialism into dialectical method and Muqaddama of Ibn Khaldun on reasons of state failure. History, as a documented progression of events, needs a temporally consistent causal explanation for those events-and this colloquia just provide a valid causal explanation. In absence of such a causal mechanism, many a brilliant historians have fallen victim to utilizing deus ex-machina, e.g. great man idea of history generally or for example, passionarnost by Lev Gumilev.

It extends the scope of production relations retrospectively to feudal and pre-feudal pastoral and nomadic societies. Also, Ben Norton navigates the interview very well to highlight all the major arguments and evidence used to reach the main conclusions. Thanks for your work.

Pussies like you are why we need Chinese-style re-education camps. If we humiliated you enough, starved you enough, and had Black men rape you enough, you’d love NATO. That’s what America SHOULD do.

Their major interest in this – apart from indirectly hitting Mother Russia – is that
Albania is their training camp and supply hub for the Mujahideen-e-Khalq.

Let Assange be a lesson to all who conspire against the United States of America: it’s probably not gonna end well for you.

Your best case scenario is a lonely and paranoid Russian exile. Life in prison or a drone strike blowing up your car is more likely.

Thanks Pepe, for flashing the light where it is most needed.

I think the conclusion that popular history is an artificially curated construct is not so difficult to reach, especially since the mighty wurlitzer project in the 60’s. Before that, surely it must have occurred, mainly through omission, not commission.

Otherwise what is the point in the statement that we will deem our job complete, when everything the public believes is false.

The statement that capital has tendency towards accumulation is not explained or understood properly in most cases. Capital is inanimate, its tendency towards accumulation is inherent in human nature, the profit motive. The problem is that systems of public governance would be subverted by motive of capital accumulation, as they always have been, and then they would have to be restored back. It is a constant struggle which repeats itself after a few generations in every society.

The way RFK Jr talks about rural and local communities, it reminds of america from John Steinbeck’s books. Beautiful and sublime, almost spiritual.

As for how he would do once in office being an unknown parameter, the fact is his life’s work speak for itself. He has put personal limb on the line and has taken the bull by the horns for atleast four decades.

The last point about failure of capitalism is not failure of capitalism but instead crony capitalism…. The problem is that capital tends to consolidate supply chains and has a tendency towards accumulation. Then it finds novel ways to subvert public life to pursue this tendency. This is inherent constituent property of capital, not an anomaly. But obviously this cannot be said in mainstream political discourses.

The solutions he proposes are very interesting e.g. bifurcating the analysis and operations divisions in intelligence functions, eliminating the funding models for public regulators whereby they are funded by regulatees, patent sharing between the authorities that approves these patents and industry etc. Its classical constitutionalist approach of suggesting checks and balances etc. It would be interesting to see these proposals implemented.

Besides, he is trying to run a balanced, pragmatic campaign, saying all the right things. Like his answers to political dynasties in politics, Importance of being armed to teeth locally to be impregnable but not internationally militant, closed borders with legal routes to migration, his refusal to run an activist campaign about vaccines or environment etc. Also, his openness to accept that he may be wrong, but proof of burden is on you to show me how…. These are very redeeming qualities.

The important question is if this constitutionalist approach would be sufficient or the rot has set in too deep? Only time will tell.

Maybe read Gen. Wesley Clark’s “Winning Modern Wars”. Served as supreme allied commander Europe. He clearly stated in the book published in 2003 a Wishlist of seven countries that will be taken down. Read that list. And see what happened in each of it after 2003.

https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=87F9141921B7773CE9C454F531E77ADD

Also Aaron Good’s “American Exception: Empire & the Deep State” is an excellent source.

https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=EFD22DF4C6B472ACC961EDDD9A443804

I have appended links for the books hosted at library genesis freely. Collectively, these both books have about 20 instances, maybe you can find a bastard to fit the bill for each of these twenty instances.

Agree about 2000 & 2016. Not so sure about 2008.

I found Ron’s use of We very insightful. The dichotomy between public and government promotes impunity for crime by encouraging moral bystander effect.

I realized it few years ago incidentally. It was some news scene of a bombed out city by US aggression and there were some relief workers distributing goods in packages by US Aid. It was almost funny… One hands gives and the other takes away. What was written on the packages was even funnier- From the American people. I thought-the statement would be complete if it was: From American people, through a C.I.A conduit!

Secondly. there is no justification in a democracy for people to distance themselves from the actions of their government.

Also, as for education that we don’t do assassinations, maybe not directly. But by fomenting adversarial groups and institutions against each other in a country, arming them, and allowing them to assassinate leaders is still very applicable. Very recent examples include Hassan Morsi, Qaddafi & Bashar al-Assad, almost (Thanks to Russians for the stitch in time).

To the question, why Russia hasn’t wrapped up the whole deal in 15 months, the answer is that Russia is not a war criminal nation. Their way of fighting is constrained by international rules of war. Several important facts points to this. Firstly, the 1-7 ratio of civilian causalities to combatant causalities (30,000 civilian to 200,000 combatant causalities, as per UN figures) indicates that Russia is not fighting Shock and Awe style, basically bombing civilian cities of ten million population for days in a row and decimate tens of thousands of people before rolling in. These are probably the lowest civil to combatant ratio in major armed conflict in decades.

Also, refusal to take out connecting links and hubs, electrical, transportations, Information, communication, industrial infrastructure also indicate that Russia is fighting constrained by international rules of war. These are usually first things to go in a war.

I think Prof. Hudson doesnt make sharp observations and then fits them into socialist/marxist ideology, i think he makes these sharp observations because he examines the banking and finance through socialist/marxist ideology.

I agree about systemically important banks. The fully informed markets with perfect infomation with self correcting mechanisms, supported by effective regulation, in a non monetized system of politics where role of political agent is to govern the system as per wishes of large populace of people, formed through open deliberative forums and discourses, in short the capitalist fairy tale, is a fiction. In final analysis, socialism is the only game in town. The choice is between if the socialism would be for the 1 percent or the 99 percent.

What is the cost of battery and/or fossil fuel backup power systems when the sun doesn’t shine? This happens with considerable and predictable regularity, as most people know.

Yes, most of us do know that the sun doesn’t shine all the time. When people assess the cost of power at utility scale, a solar farm is already very competitive, despite the extra cost of storage. (I am not a fan of fossil-fueled backups.)

Have a look at Lazard’s 2023 report on Levelized Cost of Energy (link). The levelized cost is the cost to generate a specified amount of energy if the total lifecycle is included (building, operating, and then decommissioning the generator).

If you look at the first graph (“Levelized Cost of Energy Comparison — Unsubsidized Analysis”), “Gas Combined Cycle” is currently cheapest at $39-101. “Solar PV + Storage — Utility-Scale” is only slightly more expensive at $46-102. “Coal” is far more costly at $68-166.

Note that storage is included in the Solar case — and the total cost of PV + storage is very competitive already. Solar panels are rapidly becoming cheaper; the cost has dropped 30% this year in China, the world’s largest market. The cost of storage should also fall as the technologies improve. So in just a few years Solar+Storage should win big. Of course, Solar is carbon-free and will last as long as the Sun shines (at least a billion years).

In fact, solar is so competitive now that Australia plans to close its largest coal-fired power plant in two years (link). The reason? It’s losing money. Quote: “The reality is that electricity consumers have decided in their droves that solar offers an attractive option for their power needs.” (Emphasis added.)

The Talk of the Town Trailer Estates Park Sociology Round Table opines as follows:

Granny Yiddell (bitter retiree) – Banks…smanks, they give loans to crooks and then cry like babies when they don’t pay.

Jabber (shut-in) – I made $3,202,789.67 in the past 12 months on crypto, so I don’t give a darn about old fashioned banks.

Mother (old school mother) – My son, Jabber, literally makes money in bed with his computer AND he’s not a degenerate.

Father O’Hair (wannabe priest who enjoys moralizing) – Throw the money changers to the wolves…I think the Good Book says.

Fiona (park fun lady) – I like money if it’s spent on me. Jabber is my boyfriend since he became wealthy.

Agreed about administration 2008 onwards. Also, it wasnt about not knowing, it was about finance capitalism reaching its inherent contradictions.

Good point. I am not saying it to be a 24 hour solution. For 9 or 10 hours that it works, based on that its cost benefit matrix is favorable in certain applications e.g. agricultural irrigation.

For a holistic system, there needs to be place for composite solutions, including fossil fuels. But not only fossil fuels.

The government can print its currency, the bank cannot. Therefore technically government cannot default.

What happens is that it can cause inflation by printing more money but still you will get the nominal money promised to you, worth much less.

the 247 trillion USD value in derivatives is notional value of the outstanding derivatives. The settled value is far less, maybe around 2% of the notional value.

Two things:

1) 2% of $247 trillion is $5 trillion. That’s still a lot money if it all goes missing at once.

2) The net settled value of “2%” is only 2% if none of the counterparties go belly-up, which, as 2008 demonstrated, is not the way to bet. Counterparties, who are typically intertwined in various invisible ways, have a habit of going down like a row of dominoes once the drill-down-the-balance-sheet party gets started.

While derivatives can be used for relatively benign hedging and insurance purposes, as Hudson’s example demonstrates, the cost is usually a wash to the gain, so unless you have inside info, there isn’t much incentive to do it.

Instead, derivatives get used to hive a bunch of ugly risk liability away from published financial statements so that CEOs and government officials can make public statements about how “sound” they are. They are not sound, and a lot of the unsoundness is hidden in the derivatives market, where no one will find it until after the Crash and the perps have escaped to their sinecures.

Solar electricity is actually much cheaper than fossil energy in vast swathes of global south. Its actually so cheap that latest tariff for solar in KSA is 1.2 cent per kwh. I thonk it would be difficult to find a fossil fuel run power plant that is offering this tariff anywhere in the world.

Besides, i know from working on a project that solar tubewells comparision with those run on electricity from the grid. Its atleast 4-5 times cheaper on a lifetime cost analysis basis.

I agree however, that its not the case everywhere and certainly there is a fanatic zeal about this green thing which puts people off and climate is too complex to model with minute changes in assumptions yielding very different results. But it doesnt change the fact that solar power infact has a very strong economic case in global south countries with too much sun and no fossil fuels.

I think you should read this for understanding that Balkan theatre was far more than testing toys….
It was an effort at reinventing itself, in face of looming obsolescence. Interesting, its was written in 1995, so no ex-post facto reasoning here.

https://www.srpska-mreza.com/nwo/Gervasi.html

Amazing interview. However, the 247 trillion USD value in derivatives is notional value of the outstanding derivatives. The settled value is far less, maybe around 2% of the notional value. Still a systemic risk, but its an important distinction to make. A better way to cope with derivatives related risk is to outright ban derivatives for price speculation and derivatives contracts only be allowed to written for underlying assets transaction-which was the initial purpose of derivatives-to hedge prices against wild speculation in agri commodity markets.

Interesting point about no arbitrage in fully informed markets, banks had no option other than to count on inertia, if they had gone for hedge, it had discounted their portfolio immediately to yield 4%. The surprise is not that its happening, the surprise is how did it take 15 years…. It was an ultimate consequence of the zero rated policy-whenever inflation had to return and interest rates need to be increased, this was going to happen. The administration in 2008 kicked the can down the road.

I need to understand one thing however, privatized credit refer to ownership structure of the FED and how it enables financial industry to be its own regulator or its something else-like fractional reserve banking? I think Chinese banking industry is also run on fractional reserve or maybe i am missing something. What exactly are distinguishing features of privatized vs. public credit creation?

Xafer wonders:
“It would be interesting to read about special social cases and circumstances in which public debt forgiveness proclamations were made after the solidification of modern property relations (probably around 500 B.C, with Roman aristocracy)………”

A partly educated guess would be to search the areas in The Middle East, Asia, parts of Eurasia to see what direction they took. Did those regions also commit to “jubilees” or not. And if so, how long did that last before Western Society became fully franchised into the notion of “DEBT.”

You are welcome.

Thanks, for elaborating.

I wrote in my comment that “if it can be navigated wisely, which i dont hope it would be”. In case if would be, i think it can have the positive effects which i listed.

Do i think it would be navigated wisely? NO.

So, in that case what would happen? A speculative entreprise but i can make some guesstimates. The neocons and MIC would double down to try more of the same. To retain a dying empire at every cost- a replay of seven years imperial war between Britian and France. To try strategy of “dynamic tension” by using tools of subversion, sabotage, coups, elimination of leaders, proxy wars, cordon de sanitaire, colored revolutions using human rights, democraxy, freedom of navigation, pink washing etc as justification, in cynical hope that the fluid situation would give rise to a post WWII like situation which enables it to negotiate the emerging order to its benefit and that it gets to retain the empire. Besides, if not this, then disruption of supply chains can cause a non productive overhead on the productive economies and add a premium of uncertainity in the production processes, price them out or atleast slow them down.

I think the scenario you listed is a more realistic one as to how it would unfold. Return of western compact and rest of the world etc. Return of the cold war and inter block politics. But never give up hope!

It is not about falling to worthless crap. Its about assuming its real effective exchange rate without its status as reserve currency which allows it to run a huge trade deficit which is then invested in debt and capital markets- a merry go round for the ultrarich. Its maybe a 15-20% downward revision in value but that is actually just enough to make a final call to cut unnecessary expenditure i.e. mainly foreign militarism.

It may have actually some very excellent effects, depending on how its navigated, not hoping that it would be navigated wisely:

1. Dethroning of MIC and removing that non productive overhead on economy.
2. Dethroning the neocons and financialization of politics and restoration of popular grassroot discourses in popular politics.
3. Dethroning the choke of financial elite on politics.
4. Restoration of manufacturing and productive capacity in US and making its exports more attractive.
5. Breaking monopoly on academic, cultural and folk knowledge production and dissemination.
6. Dismantling theoretical justification of public choice theory and maybe pave way for universal healthcare and removing rent surcharges on livelihood of productive citizens.

It is only bad for the 1 percent. It would cause massive social disruptions but eventually it would settle for the better.