Somebody, Please Expain...

... to even well-wishing people, that before writing anything on Russia and China they better study the subject. Michael Warren Davies, for all his well-wishing and do-gooding, doesn't know the subject of Russo-Chinese relations, when in his attempt to detach China from Russia and attach Russia to the US writes:

A Chinese-Russian alliance poses a major threat to the United States and its allies. Most observers consider China and Russia to be the second- and third-most powerful countries in the world. More than that, it would serve as the basis for a global anti-NATO alliance, a new Eastern Bloc. The U.S. should be doing everything in its power to draw Russia away from China. The good news is that—again—Putin doesn’t want a protracted conflict with the West, even (or especially) with Xi watching his back. The only thing he dreads more is the thought of Ukraine joining NATO and allowing the U.S. Armed Forces to set up shop within its borders. 

1. Russia not only is NOT afraid of a protracted conflict, but it increasingly becomes a consensus that protracted conflict serves Russia's interests the best, since damages and weakens the West profoundly. Even deniers begin to admit this. 

2. And what's wrong with China watching Russia's back, especially after an overwhelming record of the combined West led by the US lying to Russian non-stop for the last 30+ years? But here comes the other thing what Davies misunderstands. 

In Russia-Chinese emerging alliance, militarily China is a junior partner, while Russia, continuing with SMO, serves Chinese strategic interests, as is true vice-versa, and provides her the time to get ready for a possible conflict with the US and its lapdogs in the Pacific. The US (forget about NATO) is facing a horrible reality of a Hollow Force, of which I warned since 2014, pointing to the inability to recognize it on its own (and the US failed miserably at that due to its hubris) this state of the affairs as a MAIN danger which will lead the US into a geopolitical catastrophe, which we all observe today. 

The tempo of SMO and the economy of force pattern fits Russia perfectly, as is economic dynamics in the Asian market, with US Dollar literally dying in a front of our very own eyes. So, I think Davies' conclusion that:

If we could, we’d see that the U.S. and Russia have far more to gain from each other than to lose. And believe it or not, such a partnership would also be in China’s best interests. Xi Jinping is badly overextending his country, both economically and militarily. The Chinese people need someone to gently check their government’s ambitions. Again, for the U.S. and Russia to confront China would be disastrous. But if we could achieve some sort of rapprochement, it would send a clear signal to Beijing: We’re taking a break from the hunger games…and so are you.

Is nothing more than a wishful thinking of Eddie from A Million Ways To Die in the West where his "girlfriend" Sarah Silverman "saves herself for the marriage" (virginity, evidently))), while working as a prostitute. 

Russia is surely not Eddie, while the rest of it doesn't even require additional elaboration. Hey, at least they know only two genders in China.

Ha, Something To Talk About.

I don't read Rod Dreher, nor do I care much what he has to say on any issue and, of course, I can never forget his cowardly smearing of Phil Giraldi after Phil's famous article on Jews for which Phil, who spends his life fighting debilitating influence of Israeli groups on US foreign policy, was banished from The American Conservative. I do not agree with everything Phil writes on the Jewish issue in the US but Dreher is nobody when it comes, however controversial it might be, to life-long service, sometimes very dangerous service, to the United States Phil Giraldi provided. So, in general, Dreher is not a person I would find pleasant to communicate, which is expected when talking to a "writer" without any serious education, profession (B.A. in Journalism is not an education) or experiences, which Dreher's writing proves beyond the shadow of a doubt. Yet, in a surprising move, Dreher posted in his blog at TAC this piece, or rather a letter to him: 

               Cultural Marxism: Enemy Of Real Marxism?

The letter of some Marxist makes some crucial observations and they are dealing with Frankfurt School which is as Marxist as I am Chinese. So, I thought it may interest some of you in trying to figure out what real Marxism is and why it is good only as analytical tool and will never work as intended, inevitably morphing into economic fusionism, but it may also give some ideas of why most "cultural Marxists" would have been and would be beaten in Russia as post-modernist perverts and why many who would be kicking their asses would be those nasty Russian "communists" or Marxists. So, take a look...