This Is When You Know What Real Music Is!

When Russian official Ria.Ru (in Russian) runs news that the new clip of Freddy Mercury was just posted on YouTube, one has to appreciate what Freddy and Queen meant not just for rock-music, but culture in general. That is how it is important, and deservedly so, because it is a cultural event. It is also a painfully nostalgic trip back in time when the music was damn good, because it was created by people who were damn good at it. Exactly the type of music which formed tastes and preferences of very many in my generation around the globe. 

The video has been up for 12 hours and already has 33, 000 likes. I guess it is a good start and it is not even Friday yet, but still--I couldn't miss that.

Fareed Zakaria Woke Up?

Fareed Zakaria is a demagogue and a typical talking head contemporary American pundit--talkative, shallow and not really cultured. Yet, when even this poster-boy for pop-geopolitics (after all, he was a Sam Huntington's student), a fig leaf covering general ignorance, arrives to such conclusions, it means it is getting really hot down (or up) there, in the corridors of the American temple of geopolitical "thought": 

Sometime in the last two years, American hegemony died. The age of U.S. dominance was a brief, heady era, about three decades marked by two moments, each a breakdown of sorts. It was born amid the collapse of the Berlin Wall, in 1989. The end, or really the beginning of the end, was another collapse, that of Iraq in 2003, and the slow unraveling since. But was the death of the United States’ extraordinary status a result of external causes, or did Washington accelerate its own demise through bad habits and bad behavior? That is a question that will be debated by historians for years to come. But at this point, we have enough time and perspective to make some preliminary observations. As with most deaths, many factors contributed to this one. There were deep structural forces in the international system that inexorably worked against any one nation that accumulated so much power. In the American case, however, one is struck by the ways in which Washington—from an unprecedented position—mishandled its hegemony and abused its power, losing allies and emboldening enemies.

Well, Fareed, while your whole piece in Foreign Affairs is behind the pay-wall, allow me to give a brief review of those factors which precipitated this death. 

1. While the United States, in the wake of the Soviet collapse, remained the sole superpower, it somehow escaped the attention of all those "analysts" that Russia which emerged from the rubble of the Soviet Union still remained a nuclear superpower herself capable even in 1990s to obliterate the United States. Nor ACTUAL US military power, the only element which dominates completely ignorant minds of American geopolitical "academe" was as great as it was heralded after the Gulf War. It was akin to the situation of throwing an undesirable tenant from the room and trying to shut the door after this tenant, only to see this tenant's foot still in the door not allowing to shut it. 

2. United States, its political class, almost exclusively, do not grasp the nature and application of the modern military power within the framework of real economy, not some BS credit driven monetary indexes which hid so well a catastrophe of American de-industrialization, hailed, including by you, Fareed, as a development and proof of American power, while in reality being an exact opposite. In reality, few humanities educated people have a good grasp of the world-class hi-tech military being a first derivative of advanced and large economies. They simply do not understand this connection.

3. Yes, I agree--NO power on this planet has the ability to control this whole planet, especially with some contenders capable to defeat the United States in their vicinity, which, accidentally happen to be in Eurasia--the main prize of this whole game. So much for "hyper-power". Once military issue is settled, the institutional one follows, with American tools of control, from currency to international organizations, to moronic financial rating agencies, being dismantled or discredited as I type this. Davos "civilization" is going down, Fareed, for a simple reason--it has few resources, it is being raped into the multiculturalism and decay and militarily it can only threaten third-rate armies of underdeveloped states. It still can built skyscraper here and there, it still can produce one or the other piece of wonderful technology, but that is about it--it reached its full moral collapse stage and it is facing down into the abyss of social and economic upheaval--a direct result of suicidal economic and social policies of the last 30+ years. 

4. Ah, yes, American elites in general are second rate, not well-educated, hardly cultured and you, Fareed, is one of their best representatives. Lawyers, philosophers and political "scientists" do not make good statesmen. Not to mention that political science is not a science. 

So, it is a healthy process then, when Zakaria begins to recognize a reality, which he for so long tried, very publicly, to deny, or hide. Will he, and his ilk, recognize REAL factors behind the death of unipolarity is yet to be seen. Considering, in general, a dismal American political scientists' record of correctly predicting or forecasting anything, the forecast is...ahem...not good. But who knows. But in general, the United States, in the wake of Soviet collapse and Russia truly desiring great relations between the two, humiliated Russia by unceremoniously shoving her to the curb and unleashed, starting from the rape of Yugoslavia, a sequence of mindless and criminal military aggressions and color "revolutions'. Well, folks, what do you do when you learn that there is a loony armed with the kitchen knife running amok in your neighborhood with police doing nothing about it? Right, you earn money and buy a shotgun, or two. Just in case. Same applies to geopolitics, always did. And especially so to Russia, who knows a thing or two about dealing with bullies. So, here we are.

In related news: this drone, shot by Iran, thing is interesting in terms of dynamics of reactions. What is also important about this whole situation? A single Global Hawk's price tag is somewhere in the vicinity of $200 million and, yes, it is "stealthy". Make you own conclusions what this message is all about.           

A Needed Take?

Recall what I wrote (on a number of occasions, I merely refer to the latest one) about this whole Trump thing in May:

I resigned myself completely--it was a process--to the fact that Donald Trump is a hollow BSer once John Bolton entered Trump's Admin as National Security Adviser. I started to suspect that Trump was not what he tried to portray himself while running for the office even earlier. There were some signs, especially when one considers well documented emergence of "Mad Dog" Mattis as an "adult in the room". If Mattis was considered an adult in the room, one could only imagine who such a room was filled with. 

Bernhard of Moon of Alabama today posted an excellent range (well, the range having only two possibilities) of interpretations on Donald Trump and his national security (insanity?) team's idiocy around Iran. He refers to Alastair Crooke's opinion too.  

Trump is the president. He hired those people and is responsible for what they do. But does he know what they do? There are two possibilities. Trump wants a war with Iran and what we see is a good cop, bad cop strategy in which Trump plays the good guy for his voters until some 'grave incident' happens that lets him says that he has no choice but to 'hit back' at Iran. The other scenario is that Trump is a fool and that the war hawks use him as their tool to implement their preferred policies. Former MI6 agent Alastair Crooke says that the second scenario is the real one:

The consensus on ‘no conflict’ unfortunately, may turn out to have been overly sanguine. This is not because Trump consciously desires war, but because the hawks surrounding him, particularly Bolton, are painting him into a corner – from which he must either back down, or double down, if Iran does not first capitulate.And here is the point: the main Trump misconception may be that he does believe that Iran wants, and ultimately, ‘will seek a deal’.

Crooke describes how Bolton, and Netanyahoo behind him, outmaneuver the U.S. intelligence services over Iran. They stovepipe "intelligence" to the president and the media just like the crew of then Vice President Dick Cheney did in the run up to the war on Iraq:

Bolton chairs at the NSC, the regular and frequent strategic dialogue meetings with Israel – intended to develop a joint action plan, versus Iran. What this means is that the Israeli intelligence assessments are being stovepiped directly to Bolton (and therefore to Trump), without passing by the US intelligence services for assessment or comment on the credibility of the intelligence presented (shades of Cheney confronting the analysts down at Langley). And Bolton too, will represent Trump at the ‘security summit’ to be held later this month in Jerusalem with Russia and Israel. Yes, Bolton truly has all the reins in his hands: He is ‘Mr Iran’.

'Mr Anti-Iran' is a more precise moniker. Or one may just call him President Bolton.

It has to be understood very clearly that Bolton-Trump and Trump-Pompeo relations are symbiotic ones. If one recalls--Trump made his admiration for Bolton known even before Trump was considered a serious contender for the Oval Office. In the end, he DID hire Bolton. Both Trump and Bolton are frauds as statesmen: Bolton is a Beta-male and a coward who sublimates his complexes in aggressive rhetoric and behavior, this is not to speak of Bolton being an Israeli asset par-excellence.These are precisely the traits Trump recognizes in him because he is one himself. Recall his statement about his, Trump's, "military background" he received in a... boarding school for boys. Recall how Kevin Costner's character in undeservedly chastised The Postman, in the final battle with Will Patton's character, astutely notices how one fraud can recognize the other. This is exactly the situation. Trump is fool, but Bolton is merely an experienced bureaucrat, which testifies to the level of Trump's foolishness and incompetence. I doubt there is any Good Cop-Bad Cop dynamics there. 

The problem here is not with Trump, who by now paraded himself long enough as a person who is nothing more than NYC real estate shyster and one trick pony who ended up in Oval Office due to good reciting of speeches written for him by Stephen Miller. After all, one expects at least mediocre acting and diction from TV personality such as Trump. The issue is deeper--it is the fact that the person who formulates and drives US foreign policy, John Bolton that is, is himself a fraud who lacks, as did most US National Security Advisers, any serious background in what increasingly constitutes main drivers behind geopolitical balance. As Colonel Larry Wilkerson noted about his harsh encounter with John Bolton, Bolton stated "I do policy, you do war." How can anyone make policy without knowing war, especially against US dismal track record of both policy (so called) and military failures is beyond me, but it is what it is.  

So, Bolton, who is a coward and, hence, is obsessed with some kind of institutional violence which, in his opinion, may give him some relief from him understanding that he is a beta-male and a cuckold (literally) loser, and Pompeo who is a full blown Christian Zionist--they are essentially in charge of US foreign policy. They, plus, of course, as was stated not for once--Bibi. Phil Giraldi gives additional insight into Trump Administration's "foreign policy" cadres, so at issue here now is WHAT IS IT GOING TO BE? Most likely it will be repetition of April 2018 Syria's strike with "very smart missiles" (most of them intercepted). In the same time, considering an appalling lack of any expertise in the US top echelon of power and personalities who operate there--there is some, however insignificant now, chance that Trump could be manipulated (on the account of dick measuring contest) into more serious actions against Iran and then, well--good luck to those who are deployed in the Middle East. 

Trump Administration is the most Zionist, Israeli-first administration in the US history. It is a scale of corruption and real collusion with foreign power unprecedented in the existence of the American Republic, or, rather, whatever remains of it. There are many ways to explain how this happened, but as I stated in the previous post--top echelon simply has nobody better out there, period. US elites can not produce statesmen anymore, and even this mechanism which is in place in a shape of Ivy League universities teaching all kind of "humanities" crap, supposedly to future American "leadership", can only produce semi-literate doctrine-mongers who are only good for contriving false narratives and selling themselves out to a highest bidder, be that done on purpose or "accidentally".  

In related news, Russia issued a warning.

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia told the United States on Tuesday to drop what it called provocative plans to deploy more troops to the Middle East and to cease actions that looked like a conscious attempt to provoke war with Iran.

I guess we'll see soon where it is all going, but I would have given up a lot to learn what Moscow and Tehran are actually discussing between them. Or are they?   

Is There Anybody (Else) Out There? (c)

By now we have to learn one simple fact, which, evidently neither Daniel Larison (for all his valiant effort) nor Andrew Bacevich understand, when they call out warmongers in present American media-political establishment. Most of them are warmongers, including in Congress, and this can not be changed. Sure, I get it and I respect Bacevich, but what is the point when he singles out yet another political "scientist" turned journo calling for war on Iran? 

The teaser for a recent Bret Stephens column in The New York Times accurately summarizes its contents: “If Iran won’t change its behavior we should sink its navy.” We’ve done it before and, by golly, we can do it again. Stephens offers his readers this sanitized version of history to make his case: “On April 14, 1988, the U.S.S. Samuel B. Roberts, a frigate, hit an Iranian naval mine while sailing in the Persian Gulf. The explosion injured 10 of her crew and nearly sank the ship. Four days later, the U.S. Navy destroyed half the Iranian fleet in a matter of hours. Iran did not molest the Navy or international shipping for many years thereafter.” Stripped bare of context, that paragraph is factually correct. But stripping it of context, as Stephens does, transforms it into a form of untruth, not a blatant lie perhaps, but an exercise in sleight of hand. Indeed, the very purpose of his column is not to enlighten, but to deceive and manipulate.

I have news for Bacevich (I am sure he knows it)--there is NO context in US history of 20th and, especially, 21st century. There never was--did Andrew Bacevich look at the American historiography, bar some few superb exceptions of note such as Glantz and House, of World War Two lately? A DEFINING feature of an American political class and punditry, apart from utter lack of professionalism, is an astounding ability to exist in causality-free world. The fact that cause precedes the effect is a concept many American pundits may find intolerable.

Enter this comparative politics educated political philosopher Stephens--what can possibly this neocon boy write about other than some delusional BS on US "foreign policy", which long ago became the foreign policy by and for Israel. Apart from having zero tools required for any competent opinion of foreign policy, the way it is formed and conducted by competent people, including this tricky teeny-weeny military part, what can possibly neocon shill from New York write? I long ago stated, that you cannot argue with these people--they exist in their fake universe and are not configured to argue as in using knowledge and reason--they have neither. Most of them are humanities "educated" journos with zero military-academic and operational experiences who live off NYC media-Parnassus and Israeli interest groups in US. No, arguing, debating them is useless. The only way to deal with them is to do what they only can do, in the breaks between writing their sophomoric crap on US "foreign policy", personal (sophisticated) attacks. Most of them are cowards who wouldn't enlist to fight, nor will their children. None of them have any clue nor credentials (this is important) to competently speak on any tactical, operational or strategic issue. In the end, they have no clue about weapons. 

Pointing this out, as did Phil Giraldi in 2011:

“Neoconservatives are characteristically better versed in reading and writing about battles than actually fighting them, though that deficiency has not inhibited their initiation of vast schemes to remake half the world through force of arms.”

Statecraft, especially military craft today, is the realm for truly gifted and exquisitely educated, cultured and experienced--what could possibly some second-rate journo from totally discredited and corrupt US establishment media offer of value on the issue of war remains a puzzle. Until these warmongers and ignoramuses begin to be called for what they are--people who must have their mouths shut on any American war due to them being utterly unqualified, until all their "educational" credentials be exposed for what they are--useless concoction of a humanities' abstracts and glorified English degrees, until they are called out as Israeli shills and until they are forced into debate, which they will lose, on actual military art--until then these SOBs will continue to act as people whose useless opinions matter. But we also have to understand that this type of arrogance and ignorance is what dominates today corridors of US media-political power because it is a demand by the system. In the end, there is simply nobody else out there who could have seriously challenged this state of the affairs--the experience of the last 27 years provides an overwhelming empirical evidence of that. But that is the whole other story.   

Time For Suicide Watch?

I often, when speaking about a baneful influence of financial capitalism on real economy, use Boeing's example as an impossibility to kill the company which is more, way more, than a money machine for its shareholders--it is a national treasure. Well, I might have been very premature in my conclusions. Evidently, somebody desperately tries to do just that--to make sure that Boeing never recovers from the failure of its B-737 Max aircraft. Now, get this:

PARIS (Reuters) - Boeing Co engineers are reducing the scope and duration of certain costly physical tests used to certify the planemaker’s new aircraft, according to industry sources and regulatory officials. But the strategy could be at risk if regulators and U.S. lawmakers probing two deadly Boeing plane crashes require even more rigorous safety tests before certifying new aircraft as passenger-worthy.As Boeing kicks off the year-long flight testing process on its new 777X, its engineers will cut hours off airborne testing by using computer models to simulate flight conditions, and then present the results to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as part of the basis for certification, according to two people with direct knowledge of the strategy. 

My first question is--what kind of sick joke is that? It is sick especially against the background of a catastrophic loss of contracts for Boeing due to 737 Max and 787 issues. The inevitable question thus is: are they doing it on purpose? I can imagine how Airbus is joyfully rubbing its hands and Russia, certainly, has a laugh, especially when one sees how MC-21 several test beds do not leave the sky while conducting an extremely vigorous flight testing. One is literally forced to wonder what is going on there? No computer modelling will ever substitute realistic flight testing and will be able to completely predict all contingencies which may arise in such a complex machine as aircraft, especially with the relatively short historic record of composites becoming crucial load-bearing parts such as wings--see B-787 and MC-21 who have carbon-fiber wings. I can only shake my head in disbelief. Is it time for putting Boeing and its commercial aircraft division on suicide watch? But, I guess profit, in the end, trumps safety, as long as shareholders are happy. 

In related news, European Commission, who operates, as most Western bureaucracies, outside causalities-driven universe, are complaining that some Import Substitution (a euphemism for Re-industrialization of Russia) measures by Russia "contradict" Russia's international "obligations" (in Russian). Russia is close second after China in EC's report as a country with the most trade barriers. Well, I think Russia certainly does a shitty job here because she should not follow but lead China as the nation with the highest number of trade barriers for European goods, many of which have been already pushed out of Russian market and have no future on it, due to Russian manufacturers enjoying those commercial benefits. What did those maroons (c) in Brussels, or Strasbourg, or wherever they exist, expect? That Russia, being assaulted by European sanctions non-stop, will beg? Again, Europe decided to play this game in 2013 in Ukraine and now whines that it is hurting her? I feel it is just the start. As I stated for years: Russian-European relations should be reduced economically only to the most basic trade: such as hydrocarbons from Russia, if Europe decides to buy them, plus very few other, mostly high-tech fields, while culturally--new Iron Curtain looks increasingly desirable. European "values" smell with decay and death of a culture, a real one. That is why I always said that Russia should not return to useless BS chamber of Parliament Assembly of Europe. Europe wanted Ukraine and Poland drive the agenda there (naturally a psychotically Russophobic one), let Europe deal with that. Ah, financial contributions--well, why should Russia pay a single Euro to this chamber of imbeciles. Stopping payments was a good step for Russia. Modern Europe and Russia are incompatible on a fundamental level. 

So, this is my short take on some Monday's headlines. But, Boeing certainly takes the prize--it is both technological, economic and, in the end, political suicide in progress. But then again, it is a microcosm of modern America--self-destructing, ungovernable and desperate. Living in a computer generated world.  

Irish Have A... Hm...Whiskey In The Jar.

I was driving home today from work and listened to Thin Lizzy with Phil Lynott delivering with a raspy wonderful voice Whiskey In The Jar. Phil, who was half-black, would beat the shit out of anyone in a bar if they didn't call him Irish. Sadly, he died from drugs--what a waste of an artistic genius. But it brought me back to a more Irish way to die prematurely and no--I am not talking about Gary Moore who had no fvcking business leaving us so early. Among Irish genius alcoholics Rory is one of the most underappreciated music geniuses and, probably, being a blues player from God he had many people who wouldn't like to concede to his sheer brilliance, but, after the Whiskey In The Jar on the radio today, I somehow want to remember a guitar firebrand from Cork (how appropriate).

Those who wonder what whiskey in the jar is, Russians, in the best tradition of pickling in the 3 liter, well, jars, have the answer:

Ah, yes, it is Friday...

So, Michael Hudson Calls It.

Hudson, who, by my primitive criteria, is one of the best (true) economics and economic history brains of our time doesn't mince the words and calls it as he sees it (correctly): Trump’s Trade Threats Are Really Cold War 2.0. Hudson correctly identifies the issue:

He opens negotiations with a threat. That costs nothing, and you never know (or at least, he never knows) whether he can get a freebee. His threat is that the U.S. can hurt its adversary unless that country agrees to abide by America’s wish-list. But in this case the list is so unrealistic that the media are embarrassed to talk about it. The US is making impossible demands for economic surrender – that no country could accept. What appears on the surface to be only a trade war is really a full-fledged Cold War 2.0.

Let's see: by now Trump and his gang of misfits and chicken-hawks headed by knightly Bolton and sophisticated Pompeo threatened pretty much most of the economically viable world. The issue here (for Trump and, by implication, the United States) is that nobody really is quaking, as Pat Buchanan put it, in their boots. Here, Hudson gives some really good rationale for this lack of quaking:

Trump’s trade tantrum is that other countries are simply following the same economic strategy that once made America great, but which neoliberals have destroyed here and in much of Europe. U.S. negotiators are unwilling to acknowledge that the United States has lost its competitive industrial advantage and become a high-cost rentier economy. Its GDP is “empty,” consisting mainly of the Finance, Insurance and Real Estate (FIRE) rents, profits and capital gains while the nation’s infrastructure decays and its labor is reduced to a part-time “gig” economy. Under these conditions the effect of trade threats can only be to speed up the drive by other countries to become economically self-reliant.  

I am sincerely happy that my diagnosis of the United States, of which I am writing  for years now, follows so closely  Michael Hudson's. In fact, we still do not know the true scale of the loss of the key enclosed technological cycles in the US. We all know it is bad, as this terrifying report to this very same Donald Trump testifies to. Did Trump even read it? Did he get the gist of it? I am beginning to believe he didn't. Someone in his Administration did, but not him. With each passing day I only reinforce my opinion on him as one trick pony fed on a steady diet of American exceptionalism and values of New York's shady real estate business--this is not enough for trying to save such country as the United States, let alone declare and win Cold War 2.0. One really has to know the real battlefield, be that economic or, which is a whole other story in the US, military one. 

The trick, however, is to explain it to the cabal of "political scientists", sociologists and other foreign relations "experts" infesting fat remuneration greased  corridors of Establishment, that they know shit about either battlefields. Those who know, or understood  finally, however few of them, they are out of ideas precisely for being those proverbial one trick ponies--US establishment can not produce anymore someone different. Delusion still abounds, though, with professors in basically nothing continuing to wax strategic and military when having zero qualifications for that. The world is complex, it is getting even more complex with astonishing acceleration and new ideas are needed to preserve it peaceful, even if relatively, and with some hope for the future. Current American political class cannot do it and will increasingly find itself at the curb of the humanity's highway. So, it will be left with only one thing to do, as one trick ponies know, to threaten until, as Hudson points out, they self-destruct and take the country with them. I have no problem with this cabal going down, the country? We may need to discuss that separately--I know some prescriptions are out there, the main question--WHO is going to implement them. 

P.S. In a wonderful news: sue their asses into utter financial destruction! Somebody started doing this. Read excellent piece by real left-wing American:

Campus Wokesters with boundary problems got “woke” for real on Thursday when an Ohio jury laid an additional $33-million for punitive damages on top of $11-million in compensatory damages already awarded against Oberlin College for running a “social justice” campaign to ruin the business of a four-generation small-town bakery that followed the shoplifting arrest of three black Oberlin College students there in 2016.

About fvcking time.