Don't Thank Congress.

President Trump "thanked" US Congress for its role in bringing "US-Russia relations at all-time & dangerous low".  Well, it is all fine and dandy but by now it should be absolutely clear to US President that US Congress, whose approval rating consistently hovers at below 20%, is not really a legislative body designed to represent interests of average citizens. Far from it, US Congress is there to finish off what's left of the myth of American "democracy". In fact, the prefix "US" has to be removed from the title of "Congress" because real American interests, that are the interests of the majority of American people, are the least of the concerns of this body of professional "self-electors". The filial of Knesset? Sure! Military-Industrial Complex puppets? Absolutely! Bunch of corrupt (with some notable but few exceptions, of course) to the core ignoramuses? Undeniably so, but not "US".

Now that Donald Trump lost his most important battle so far (no, it is not about Russia's sanctions, it is about Executive Branch conduct of US foreign policy) and was stripped of powers he was elected to exercise, we need to talk about... Putin. It is clear that he is not against, however timid, EU's (Germany's mostly) attempts to regain a semblance of national sovereignty. Germany, through Brussels, made her voice heard on sanctions "prescribed" by H.R. 3664, which under the pretext of countering a truck load of America's "enemies", made sure that the number of those may grow significantly. But Europeans here are secondary players in all of this game. If US really wants to, she will be able to coerce Europe in buying American LNG (for a much larger price than natural gas from Russia) and Europe will oblige--being denied, both out of its own will and by coercion, of political subjectivity for decades can not be overcome easily and in a short period of time. EU "elites" are really a pathetic bunch and are not equipped with necessary mental faculties to formulate a viable policy in any field which matters. 

But for Putin these sanctions are a great chance, in a face of open US hostility which now, for all intents and purposes, is a new Cold War (some want it hot in D.C.) and with US ruling class fractured and at the peak (or bottom, depends on POV) of its incompetence, to finally do away with liberal Parnassus in Russia by means of removing "chicks of Gaidar's nest", starting with Russia's pathetic Prime Minister Medvedev, from any power positions which allow to formulate any kind of policy. The "pushing" of all the right buttons in Medvedev's statement on US sanctions is a good indication of him understanding the danger which current situation puts him in. In the end, Putin is already running his election campaign and removing Russia's "liberals" (in reality full blown fifth column) from formulating economic policies will answer both sotto voce and, sometimes, loud open calls to remove this "market" cabal from Russia's economic levers. Will Putin, who still has an astounding 83% approval rating, finally hear it? I, certainly, wouldn't go as far as Prohanov who warns of a possible collusion between "liberals" and oligarchs in order to remove Putin--while possible, I don't think that such contingency is highly probable--but more radical reversal of economic policies of 1990s is definitely needed and Putin still does face one of the most important issues of Russia's 20th century history--most (not all) of Russian oligarchy are thieves who literally have stolen from the nation. While Putin made several statements to the effect that results of 1990s "privatization" will not be reversed, my feel is that he understands that he will have to address this issue at some point of time.  

But as of now--it is as good time as any to get pop-corn out and see, sometimes with pain, sometimes with amusement, how a bunch of morons in some Congress in D.C. just created America's worst case scenario with Russia and China all but becoming a full fledged allies (once Power of Siberia is launched in 2019, Europe can go to hell), with Iran now, inevitably, moving closer to this alliance. Talk about shooting oneself in a foot--but that was my position from the inception of this blog: the level of ignorance about outside world in D.C. is unbelievable and is clear and present danger to real American interests in staying much relevant and important major power in emerging new world geopolitical and economic order.   

In related news, Poland being Poland now demands huge reparations from Germany for WW II. Oh, gee-whiz, same old "players"!  And why I am not surprised that this is Poland, and, indeed, who else!? Will Brussels cut Poland's subsidies, which allowed her to think that she became a facade for East European post-Soviet "occupation" relative prosperity completely on her own? We'll see, but something tells me that Berlin has some own accounts to settle with Poland (whose main "argument" is influential US Polish diaspora) and... Russia may actually back Berlin up. Remarkably, at this stage both US and Poland are perfect cases for failing to learn anything from history. But about this--later.

 

Timber Sycamore No More.

Scott Ritter published today an outstanding piece in The American Conservative about CIA's dirty dealings with ME "clients" and their jihadist offsprings. Ritter's piece is an excellent illustration to the level of insanity (Operation Timber Sycamore) which afflicts majority of American political class and it fits extremely well (not to mention partially explains) Russia's Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's statement today. Lavrov, who served as the Russian envoy to the UN for 10 years, confessed he “could never imagine that US politicians may be exposed to this kind of mass hysteria.”

Well, neither could I, but here we are. But Lavrov's comments went much much further than merely describing the insanity. He openly accused outgoing Obama Administration of sabotaging Russian-American relations.

“We inherited a bulk of problems, ‘time bombs’ and simply undermining decisions from the Obama administration,” Lavrov said. He added that those decisions had been made “in the period of agony when the outgoing administration …chose to do nasty things to undermine US-Russia relations in the first place.”

American political class degenerated to a collection of egocentric, spiteful, narcissist  and incompetent hacks long ago but it was on Obama's watch when the very fabric of American society began to be literally shredded to pieces--from destroying already fragile interracial relations, to closing eyes on real danger from jihadism, to supporting Islamic militants to deliberately wrecking US-Russian relations. Obama and his circle, of which HRC was a direct political and ideological globalist off-spring, were stunned by real America's vote in 2016 Presidential Elections and as spineless and spiteful self-centered children (most of them are about this level of maturity) they took their revenge by further wrecking what's little was left of US foreign policy. In this respect, Obama was an ultra-liberal reincarnation of W. Moreover, he went even further. 

Looking today at a pathetic exhibit which US political class has become, one has to appreciate the fact that President Trump, for all his massive and easily-visible flaws, increasingly looks more and more as an American statesman whose feet are simply stuck in stinky, sticky rotten swamp of corrupt (and treasonous) American political establishment. This very swamp which can not produce anymore any real statesman, not speaking of simply decent human. US politics urgently needs adults--without them this nation is doomed.       

On US Sanctions on Russia... Again!

US Congress finally "agreed" on measures punishing Russia for her blatant "interference in US 2016 elections" and that was expected from US political body which is corrupt to the core and whose main loyalties are to Israel. Even fake-news outlets are forced to admit that the measure is not much about Russia. After all, US legislators somehow forgot to put under sanctions US-Russian space cooperation--talk about having "firm" principles. No, the measure is about President Trump and of globalist cabal (neocons, "liberals" and so called Republicans) being desperate in trying to prevent any kind of rapprochement between US and Russia. This time, however, those sanctions, to which Russia adapts with unprecedented efficiency, ricocheted into EU. 

EU bureaucracy is even sleazier than Washington's one but, boy, do they get all alert and "principled" when the talk is about money! Now they are all up in arms against US Russia sanctions. Talk about getting hit where it truly hurts. I think they are getting pop-corn out in Moscow. Fascinating, really. Trump, most likely, will be coerced in signing the sanctions' bill but that wouldn't by now make any difference since the picture got clear to everybody who haven't spent last ten years under the stone. US is trying to bully EU to buy natural liquid gas from the US (hence efforts on part of Poland and Ukraine, controlled from D.C., in sabotaging Nord Stream 2), this gas will be much more expensive than that from Russia. 

Well, it doesn't matter much for Russia anymore. As was stated not for once, more sanctions mean stronger Russia. As scandal with Siemens gas turbines in Crimea has shown, Russia does not particularly care anymore about losing key European suppliers for the reasons of:

1. Being able to successfully develop own manufacturing (in Russian);

2. Having a number of other suppliers who would be glad to see Siemens leave Russia's market. 

In other words, Russia has options, plenty of them--EU doesn't and, for that matter, the US doesn't have them either. In the end, continuous sabotage of Russia merely prompts her to move even closer to East Asian markets and Russia's energy, machinery and hi-tech, especially weapons, are a very hot item there. Meanwhile anti-Russian hysteria in the West continues and now it did reach its crescendo with this paranoia--Russians slowly becoming a second class citizens and I will not be surprised that at some point of time they will have red stars sown to their clothes in a good Nazi tradition and will be herded into ghettos, after all, who knows what they mean when state that "lessons learned", never mind that combined West is not capable anymore of learning anything. As long as the world stays away from nuclear conflict, things should be alright.

  

US Ukraine Delu..., I Mean Policy.

By now, I usually avoid reading any "analytical" materials from US main stream "media" or any other "intelligence" organizations--some materials of Communist Party of the Soviet Union Congresses contained more substance and actual analysis. Nor am I of a very high opinion of many representatives and senators in US Congress--incompetence (corruption) and delusion are a defining characteristics of many of them. Yet, even if to discount a traditional spin on everything, US Secretary of the State Rex Tillerson's statement on Ukraine (that is Russia) and the so called Minsk Agreements yesterday was a remarkable one. As Bloomberg Reports, Tillerson stated that:

Tillerson said the administration wants the flexibility to intensify or ease sanctions against Russia depending on whether relations improve. He emphasized that he sees the Ukraine issue as separate from evidence that Russia meddled in the 2016 U.S. election.

“It is very possible that the government of Ukraine and the government of Russia could come to a satisfactory resolution through some structure other than Minsk but would achieve the objectives of Minsk, which we’re committed to,” Tillerson said at the hearing Wednesday. “So our caution is I wouldn’t want to have ourselves handcuffed to Minsk if it turns out the parties decide to settle this through a different agreement."

Obviously, as was expected, some of US congressmen disagreed.

   

Tillerson’s remarks generated immediate resistance from Representative Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat.

“I hear what you’re saying, but I disagree because I believe that the only thing that Russia understands is tough talk, and if they think that we’re somehow willing to relax sanctions before they’ve complied with the Minsk framework and left Crimea, I think it will just encourage Putin to continue his bullying,” Engel said of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

I think Tillerson knows the game (at least part of it), Engel, on the other hand, doesn't, since exhibit all signs of mental disability which struck so many in US politics so hard. Two points immediately:

1. Engel doesn't know what "tough" is when applied to Russia. If he learns, which is not to be expected, his world would turn upside down.

2. Sanctions. Realistically, Russia doesn't care, whatever sanctions are. No doubt, there are many morons in Congress who would love to cut every single tie with Russia, including financial ties. Obviously, consequences will be disastrous for US-designed institutions first of all, but calculating outcomes is not legislators' forte.

I don't single US Congress out, there are many imbeciles in Russia's State Duma too, not to speak of European Parliament--man, that is where a density of idiocy is off the scale. But then again, "democracies" do tend to produce, at best, a mediocrity, at worst--sleazebags and down right stupid people.  Periodic emergence of truly great statesmen, such as Ike or FDR in American case, merely confirms the rule. Yet, Tillerson's statement is important one and this has everything to do with WHO will be paying for Ukraine minus Donbass (and eventually some areas of Eastern Ukraine). Anybody who is not struck with a severe case of Alzheimer or Dementia can easily recall that current regime in Kiev is flesh and blood of the EU and US, who organized and paid for events of early 2014 which brought to power in Ukraine a bunch of neonazis and oligarchs who got rid off a legitimate (yes, corrupt, but in Ukraine this is the only way) government. 

Things are not that peachy in Ukraine from any point of view. They do not work as planned--such as disastrous campaigns by Ukrainian Armed Forces. Russia also didn't get sucked in directly into this conflict and Armed Forces of LDNR are doing their job just fine. It is also obvious that Russia will not allow any military resolution in Donbass. But, here is the catch. What those "great" strategists from State Department and other neocon think-tanks (Vicki "Fuck The EU" Nuland, anyone?) didn't understand was the fact that Russia is not interested in the whole Ukraine. The wet dream of D.C. neocons was Russia involving herself in Ukraine's civil war and getting stuck in the quagmire didn't come to reality. Russia is not going to pay for Ukraine and the mayhem which is coming (in fact, it is there already) in the process of Ukraine's inevitable disintegration. That leaves EU and US with the necessity to deal with this festering hellhole right in the middle of Europe. What was conceived as a valuable bargaining chip in geopolitical game against Russia is suddenly reduced to a trash, penny stock for Russians and a huge pain in the ass for Europe. Let it deal with it. US, meanwhile, and Tillerson's statement is precisely about that, wants out.

Short of outright genocide of Russians in Ukraine--and there are many of those in EU and US who would love to see that--Russia is not going to intervene. Many loyal Ukrainians and Russo-phones moved to Russia already. Let Western Ukraine deal with her European neighbors such as Hungary and, of course, Poland--it is their business and eventually both Hungary and Poland will grow territory-wise. The rest? Who knows. Ukraine can not be singled out of a larger US geopolitical game which was (still is) designed to weaken and eventually destroy Russia. After Ukraine, overwhelming majority of Russians, including Russian political elites, have no doubts whatsoever about US intentions. In the end, empirical evidence is there, right in a front of Russia's nose. 

Here we have to look at a larger picture. Yes, President Trump was successful in "convincing" Saudi Arabia to "suddenly" develop a huge interest in "investing" in US. This money couldn't have come at a better time for US which, frankly, simply ran out of resources to meaningfully "rule" the world. Trump knows it, he is a smart man. So, in the absence of those resources, and US has way bigger fish to fry than Ukraine, strategic tasks of addressing US internal economic situation, not being thrown out of the Middle East and facing off with China will require immense resources and that leaves Ukraine in a position of a free loader who provides very little, if any, benefit to US' strategic plans. Sorry folks, nothing personal, just business. Now, US needs to extricate herself from Ukrainian quagmire through some acceptable arrangement and without losing her face. I think Russia can accommodate such a desire but only on conditions of EU getting Ukraine on their books. Also, sorry folks, nothing personal--just business. In the end, Rex Tillerson is also a shrewd, highly experienced businessman--he knows how the deals are made and what it takes to close them. Russians know this too. Today, during his Direct Link with Russia Putin was explicit about Russia's intentions in turning Syrian Army into modern force, the same is being done with LDNR forces, which, in case of unpleasant contingencies, may be upgraded really fast into world-class military force. A lot will depend on personal meeting between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, I think they may like each-other, for the rest in D.C.--they better start taking blood thinners to avoid heart attacks or strokes. We'll see....

Grand Bargain?

I didn't have the chance to really listen to Sergei Lavrov's press-conference (disposition and the tone do matter here) but one phrase which caught attention of many in Russia after Lavrov's meeting with Secretary Of the State Tillerson and President Trump was this: 

"At present, our dialogue is not as politicized as it used to be during Obama’s presidency. The Trump administration, including the president himself and the secretary of state, are people of action who are willing to negotiate,"

As I stated many times before, my main expectation from Trump's presidency is not some kind of Russian-American "friendship", my expectations are on several orders of magnitude less optimistic:

I am a realist and I do not hope for too much. But we may finally exhale understanding that US and Russia, while not becoming friends in any meaningful way, may actually not get embroiled in a global conflict. 

D.C. establishment, whose mental faculties are fading, only now begins to grasp the scale of limitations of American resources, which have been dramatically reduced by US insane foreign policy based on mythology and delusion. I think Trump does understand this, in the end, being that damn convincing during his cmpaign could have been a result of only two, mutually exclusive, things:

1) Trump being a cynical con-man and an actor of a Sir Lawrence Olivier caliber or...

2) Trump being, however peculiar, a true American patriot who struggles with internal pressures. 

At this stage pp.2 is becoming more likely, especially when one begins to consider FBI Director Comey's firing and, however required to be taken with a huge grain of salt, Bloomberg's piece on the situation with National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster. I readily admit--I was fooled initially by McMaster's alleged "scholarship", him being a maverick and his Ph.D. All of it turned out to be a mythology which was dispelled quite fast and squarely placed McMaster in the corner of globalists and war-mongers, the same type of people who presided or, rather, created current American situation which in geopolitical terms can only be described as a disaster. But in the end, US is being forced by the circumstances to deal with reality (the other option is to unleash the global war) and reality is such that, objectively, grand bargain is inevitable in one form or another. Lavrov's words seem to underscore Trump Administration's understanding of that. As long as understanding of impossibility of resolution of American conundrum through military conflict exists, the rest becomes the matter of "next step" and meeting of Presidents of Russia and United States in July has been confirmed. 

The roll call of both Russia's and USA's real (not ideological) national interests must take place before US and Russia will move forward with a number of issues they, indeed, can solve together but for that Trump needs to tame D.C.--a task akin to Heracles 5th Labor, but can US and the world afford things the way they are going now (and in the last 25 years)? I don't think so.  It seems that there is such understanding in the White House. Under today's circumstances this is worth a lot. Small steps...

 

More:
http://tass.com/politics/945302

"At present, our dialogue is not as politicized as it used to be during Obama’s presidency. The Trump administration, including the president himself and the secretary of state, are people of action who are willing to negotiate,"

More:
http://tass.com/politics/945302

New National Security Adviser.

President Trump surely knows from what pool to pick his National Security Advisers. Just in: General H.R. McMaster was appointed new National Security Adviser instead of recently resigned General Flynn. McMaster, apart from being a combat veteran, holds Ph.D. At this stage, apart from passing, again, this extremely important appointment over the head of a militant necocon John Bolton, Trump's propensity for choosing to this position US Armed Forces senior military officers looks very healthy. The reason for this is very simple: US "diplomacy", "academe" and spooks are so discredited by now that any alternative such as people who actually dealt all their lives with serious and very particular tasks is a good change. Moreover, US Armed Forces by now are probably the only organization left in US which is capable of sober and coherent assessment of the world outside and knows what is going on on the inside with American power. Consider this: US JCS and Russian Chief Of General Staff just met in Baku several days ago and the meeting was cordial and very substantive. This is what happens when, without being overly idealistic and overplaying the significance, real professionals begin to talk. In the end, this is how one deescalate things--militaries are simply better at that.

At this stage, placing non-spooks and other "deep state" operatives on such important positions is a right choice. I admit, I am being biased towards military people, but then again, I have a very good understanding of how normal military professionals, not some political appointees in epaulets, think. So, good choice, I think, at this stage. By this appointment President Trump really shows that he views US Armed Forces as a very important part of his political agenda. They are also his really serious insurance against any stupid moves by the (I am just following a fad here) "Deep State". This appointment boosts system's stability.  Not bad, not bad. 

UPDATE: greatly respected, albeit not always agreed to, by me Andrew J. Bacevich wrote today a wonderful review of General McMaster. Worth reading.  

    

On The Issue Of "Moral Equivalency".

It seems that at this stage the only thing which worries US political and media class is the issue of (self)righteousness or, if to put it in "scientific" term--the issue of moral equivalency. Bullshitters such as Bill O'Reilly of FOX News Channel just cannot exist in the world where they and the United States are perceived less than holy and infinitely righteous. Since such world view is preposterous, especially against the background of US unleashing hell, which resulted in millions innocent people dead, maimed, displaced, in the Middle East and supporting jihadists for decades, the only thing which remains for these lowlifes is to start lashing against others. Who is the prime subject among these "others" for such an exercise? Of course, it is Russia. In the case of O'Reilly's interview with US President Trump it was Russia's President Vladimir Putin.  President Putin was called by the sewer which is US media and most of political class many things: a thug, a war criminal, what have you. Now, O'Reilly found another definition for Russia's President--he is a killer now. 

The phenomenon of this anti-Russian and anti-Putin campaign is not even in the fact of an extremely low intellectual and, especially so, cultural level of people who claim to be American political and intellectual "elite"--this is a well known fact by now. The same goes for visceral Russophobia of US "elites", especially of the so called "conservative" (cuckservative) strata of this elite. It is, for example, very easy to understand why US so called "left" hates Russia. The reasons for this hate are in the open and pretty much well-defined. With people like O'Reilly, however, it is a bit different. What is remarkable in this Russophobic desperate hysteria is the fact of how it is difficult to contain racial and cultural hatred towards Russian people because these were Russia's actions which in the last 20 years really helped, however unintentionally, to expose already crumbling "holier than thou" edifice of US status as a "shining city on the hill". There is also a barely hidden and barely contained complex of inferiority which has its roots in history. A Major one of them is the fact that US never had an actual nobility. Yeah, yeah I heard this all before, such as that George Patton was descendant of some nobles, well, there is one problem with US faux-nobility, United States never had a monarch and the court which are the two main prerequisites for a genuine nobility. US political founding is antithesis to all that. 

For many power and influence (and money) are very desirable objects but once attained, many develop an urge to get a step "higher", to become noble. Well, this is impossible in the United States unless someone is wedded or married into the nobility, such as was the case with Grace Kelly. But then again, this was a nobility of not American descent, which simply doesn't exist, no matter how one tries to twist facts with all kinds of simulacra such as "New Aristocracy", "Old Money" and even such preposterous meme as Camelot etc. Emulating nobility? Sure! Becoming one? Absolutely not, unless married or wedded into it. And here is the deal, Russian nobility which arose in 14th Century, while disrupted by Bolshevik Revolution of 1917, never stopped being a part of Russian history even during Soviet times. It is difficult to completely disrupt an immense political and cultural influence of nobility among which are Count Leo Tolstoy or noblest of nobles Czar Peter The Great, just to name a few. Yours truly, himself being of poor Russian nobility's lineage (mother's side) studied in the same naval academy and later served with a direct descendant of one of the huge Russia's noble military names. I cannot divulge his name for pure PerSec and ethical reasons but it is suffice to say that his noble relative is a major historic figure and features prominently from Wikipedia to Encyclopedia Britannica and even Viscount Bernard Montgomery admitted him being the world's "ablest single commander" between...well, I leave you with a puzzle if one wants to solve it. In other words, Russian history to a very large extent was formed by Russian nobility, US history was not. The idiosyncrasies of Russian Noblese Oblige never disappeared even in the Soviet times, which is easy to understand when even the regular Soviet (and now Russian) public school Russian Literature curriculum was dominated by Russia's nobles from Pushkin, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky to Turgenev, to name a few, whose object of study were Russian people and  nobility, and the way they interacted. Those idiosyncrasies, modes of communication, behavioral matrices of nobility not only did not disappear but were re-appropriated and endured both in USSR and Russia. Generations of Soviet  (and even many contemporary Russian) girls would associate themselves with Natasha Rostova or even Anna Karenina and that is a part of the explanation for well known femininity of Russian women. In his 1961 (I have an original edition)  What Ivan Knows That Johnny Doesn't, Arthur Trace (a graduate of West-Point himself) went on to compare "humanities" curricula of Soviet and American public schools and showed a startling abyss which separated Soviet and American education systems. As short review of his book states:

This profoundly disturbing book is a comparison of American and Soviet school curricula and textbooks. It proves that the sciences and mathematics are not the only subjects in which our children lag behind. By the time the American fourth grader has learned to read 1500 words from his typical classroom reader, a Soviet student in fourth grade will be expected to read at least 10,000 words and will be ready to plunge into history, geography and science. Why does Ivan at the age of nine have a reading vocabulary so much larger than Johnny's? Could it have anything to do with the fact that from his first reader on, Ivan reads Tolstoy and Pushkin and Gogol while Johnny follows the adventures of Jerry and the little rabbit that goes hop, hop, hop? If a Soviet student undertakes to learn English as his foreign language - as 45 per cent of those in the regular school do - he will study it for six consecutive years starting in the fifth grade, and he may well have read more literature in English by the Tenth grade than an American student will have been assigned by the twelfth grade.  

From 1940s through 1980s Soviet and especially today's Russian students were and are educated within the framework of continuous, uninterrupted Russian history in which names of Marshal Zhukov and Yuri Gagarin not only coexist with the names of Prince Kutuzov or General Raevsky of an ancient noble line but complement each-other. In the end, many strategic operations of the Red Army in WW II were named after great Russian generals of 1812 Patriotic War all of whom were, well, nobility. Such as famous Operation Bagration named after Prince Bagration.  Even in Soviet times Russian people were afforded a deep look into the splendor of Russian Court. Visiting State Hermitage could be a life changing experience for anyone, once the scale of achievement is grasped. Even in the radical times of early Soviet Russia a lot what was accumulated and created by Russian nobility  has been preserved. A lot has been restored later. It is incredibly difficult to  explain to the average Joe how come that those barbaric Russians derive from the country which even today leads US in public education, is the home to Bolshoy and Mariinsky Theaters, exhibits art collections which occupy the very top of fine arts' world. Those "barbarians" come from still one of the best read nations on the earth, very many of them actively visit theaters, and classic music concerts. It is difficult to explain, indeed. The same as it is difficult to explain, to those who have very little knowledge of Russia, the grace with which many Russians, from average people to the political top take a barrage of insults hurled at them by US "elites". As I stated before, it is inconceivable to see any rank, even retired, Russian officer calling for "killing Americans". Or Russian politician calling US President a thug. All that is the result of many centuries long cultural conditioning, which, of course, has been overlooked (deliberately or not) by US resident Russia "scholars".              

As Alexis De Tocqueville wrote in 1837 about Russia and United States: There are now two great nations in the world which, starting from different points, seem to be advancing toward the same goal: the Russians and the Anglo-Americans. Both have grown in obscurity, and while the world’s attention was occupied elsewhere, they have suddenly taken their place among the leading nations, making the world take note of their birth and of their greatness almost at the same instant. All other peoples seem to have nearly reached their natural limits and to need nothing but to preserve them; but these two are growing…. The American fights against natural obstacles; the Russian is at grips with men. The former combats the wilderness and barbarism; the latter, civilization with all its arms. America’s conquests are made with the plowshare, Russia’s with the sword. To attain their aims, the former relies on personal interest and gives free scope to the unguided strength and common sense of individuals. The latter in a sense concentrates the whole power of society in one man. One has freedom as the principal means of action; the other has servitude. Their point of departure is different and their paths diverse; nevertheless, each seems called by some secret desire of Providence one day to hold in its hands the destinies of half the world.

However wrong Tocqueville's assessment is from our today's vantage point, he predicted one thing right--a geopolitical rivalry based on seemingly vast eschatological differences between Russia and the United States. The rivalry which was not initiated by historic Russia. The message has not been lost on American elites. The results are in, the same as a jury--"a shining city on the hill" today shines no more being itself in a deep trouble of carefully designed narrative of own superiority being destroyed in a front of our eyes when facing a reality. "Democratic Ideals" mutated today into the regimes change by a subversion and a sword, into the war crimes, into dramatic economic and cultural decline domestically. While things were going well it was possible to pretend that "End Of History", including in a moral sense, is near, and that real morality could be substituted with ideological memes for mob's consumption. It didn't work out this way and once the sense of self-proclaimed moral superiority began to escape the American media and political class, whose ethos Richard Pipes described as "commercial", a thin veneer of culture was peeled back and the plebeian nature of  American political milieu has been revealed completely. There is nothing noble there, be it the spread of atrocious lies about new US President or calling foreign leader a killer or a thug. American obsession with Solzhenitsyn, as an example, is easily explained from this point of view--he gave US Russia which is a perfect fit for self-proclaimed moral superiority. Money can not buy class and that is what almost completely (with some notable exceptions) is lacking in modern American "elites". Russia has it and she can back it up with an incredibly rich, however difficult, and powerful culture, as in behavioral matrix, which is not to insult anyone unless you are ready to back it up with actions--this is a noble thing. Tocqueville's reference to America of 1837 reads:

           One has freedom as the principal means of action

Today, when one observes a behavior of people like Bill O'Reilly or Mitch McConnel, or John McCain one can easily expand Tocqueville's statement with "freedom from decency, culture and truth" a precise combination of factors (or lack thereof) which brought about a situation in which United States can not claim any moral high ground. I applaud President Trump for having a decency and courage to point this out to the face of a professional BSer with the psychology of a bellicose small man who feels, if not grasps, his moral inadequacy and a background in which there is nothing noble.   

UPDATE: two real American patriots weighted today (02/07/17) on the issue I raised in this post yesterday. 

Pat Buchanan and Philip Giraldi. Worth reading.