Ukraine and the Historical Foundations of Modern Conflict Recap Part two

 Ukraine; Historical Foundations of Conflict Recap Part two

​ At Helsinki Accord Ukraine Was Part of Russia-What Changed? 

5 Sept. 2014

Western claims to have honestly expropriated Ukraine from Russia have used a few historical whoppers for pseudo-legalistic assertions of a right-of-annexation of Ukraine and Crimea to independent/western-affiliated status. The 1975 Helsinki accord that included the agreement between N.A.T.O. and the Soviet Union to not change national borders through force is an example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helsinki_Accords#Signatory_states

When the Helsinki Accord was signed Crimea and Ukraine were Russian as they had been with a few intervals for centuries. After decades of sanctions and Star Wars the Soviet Communist government bit the dust. All were glad that President Gorbachev’s glasnost and Perestroika started a cascade of commercial and political changes to end the Stalinist variety of communism that most hated everywhere except for select establishment organizational persons benefiting from the power of tyranny, and the end of the Evil Empire occurred mostly bloodlessly, yet the transition to a post-Soviet new-Russian order was difficult with uncertain course.

Governing institutions and establishments affiliated are generally reluctant to change modus operandi or modus vivendi. The cold war establishment roles were well known-the west found it easier to return to a cold war role model inherited from prior generations than to evolve a good working relationship with Russia. After digesting the eastern European nations that were given up at the end of the Soviet Union the west’s appetite for more of weakened Russia looked toward Ukraine and Crimea. 

It is an historical point that gaining a Pyrrhic victory that ends up costing more than staying out of conflict is better avoided. Conflict with Russia over Ukraine-especially Eastern Ukraine and Russia’s vital Dnepr River barge traffic corridor for transport of commodities (one barge is worth 200 truckloads)-can harm the west’s commercial and security interests significantly. Finding new ways to have mutual peace and prosperity is a political method the west avoids to its monomaniacal drive for litigation and conflict as litigation through other means.

Another fiction used by the west is that of Soviet or Russian history in occupation of Eastern Europe and the Baltic states at the end of the Second World War. The false impression is commonly given that naked Soviet aggression took those states through force-and that is a perfect lie. The Soviet Union captured Eastern Europe in counterattacking against the Nazis who had invaded Russia/the Soviet Union. The Russians/Soviets kicked the Nazi butts all the way to the Baltic-all the way to Berlin and it cost them tens of millions of dead Russians. The Russians liberated the Balkans from the Nazis to in long, bloody war. The battles of Stalingrad and Leningrad were famously epic, bloody things of which innumerable movies and documentaries have been made. If the United States had experienced that sort of conflict, how soon would the United States give back those captured territories and trust their former enemies or their political cohabitants?

It took the Soviets/Russians about 50 years to give back Eastern Europe and let it become independent. The United States had built up a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons with multiple reentry warheads with a slight advantage over the more numerous Soviet-Russian warheads in quality though the Soviets had more ICBMs overall. After the Helsinki Accords and S.A.L.T. tacks the United States continued on development of new weapons technology debatably flanking the A.B.M. treaty that limited anti-ballistic missile development to basically just Moscow and Washington D.C. (we should have selected Pittsburgh instead). That was a lot of force to apply to the Evil Empire to change its borders.

When the cold war ended with the Soviet Empire disappearing by a signature of Boris Yeltsin there was no lawful government following it up. There probably should have been some sort of conservatorship applied by an international power to secure integral Russian lands such as Ukraine and Crimea in order to plainly differentiate them from lands that formerly were independent powers and not part of the Soviet sphere of influence until 1945 or later. It is notable that the Soviet Union never formerly annexed those Warsaw Pact nations it had captured from the Nazis in 1944-45.

Plainly promulgating confusion and historical falsehood putting Ukraine and Crimea into the same political category as Poland and Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia and Czechoslovakia in order to justify the expropriation of formerly integral parts of Russia is disingenuous. With such ordinary ignorance of history in America and perhaps Europe of Russian history the inertial characteristic of incapability of viewing historically objectively-contemporary history included, is strong. That ignorance seriously damages western political veracity and competence in addressing real political issues that would find a righteous settlement to contentious issues, such as Ukraine.

Assuring Russian right to navigate the Dnepr River and have barge access from its heartland farmlands to the world is a basic, non-negotiable point. It is also well known that Britain has had a problem with Russia since Ivan the Terrible kicked out Sir Hugh Willoughby and Richard Chancellor after they sailed to Murmansk in the first British voyage around the Kola Peninsula. John Paul Jones worked for the Russian-not the British navy, after the American Revolutionary War.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Chancellor

Muslim fundamentalism, Market fundamentalism and Socialist fundamentalism are all threats to democracy and free enterprise globally. Each ism seeks global power. Capitalism differs from democracy as royalty differs from Islam’s dar al Islam. Cessationism is another point to consider-I acknowledge it has good and bad connotations regardless of one’s opinion about it. 

America’s Republican and Democrat parties are two sides of the coin of corporatism. Democrats take the queer, abortionist side of corporatism while Republicans are the military, fake conservative branch of corporatism. Neither are moral conservatives obviously, and the media including Rush Limbaugh fall into those two corporatist sects. Market fundamentalists are superficial and non-objective on historical reasoning while the Democrat branch thinks international relations are best accomplished with drone shots and queering things up. 

Britain has for hundreds of years been involved with European land battles to expand markets. That is as natural as breathing for them. British interest in the Ukraine would be antipathetic to any Russian sovereignty over it. President Bill Clinton-an Anglophile Rhodes Scholar who lived at Oxford with Hillary smoking dope but not inhaling, interacted substantially with Boris Yeltsin and in the year the U.S.A. was launching cruise missile and aircraft sorties on the former Yugoslavia got the weak Boris Yeltsin to sign away the Ukraine in a deal no subsequent Russian President would ever accept. It was a bridge to far-a part of Russia removed like it was a formerly independent nation of Eastern Europe that would be a bone of contention and a divisive wedge to destroy the peaceful development and trust between Russia and the West that would grow for decades. Allowing the wedge to develop, that rift to widen would harm the economy and security of the west for decades, especially as it could end the cooperation of Russia and the west in the battle to contain Muslin political expansion through terror-a fundamental component of the Mohammedan creed.

     ​ Why American Aggression against Russia's Dnepr Front is Unwise 

15 Feb. 2015

It is difficult to keep a nation or a family together. Abraham Lincoln did that for the U.S.A. when the threat to ordinary citizens of the first people's democracy seemed greater if the house was divided to let global aristocrats dismantle it entirely defeating America in economic detail. Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to keep traditional Russia together with the same degree of resistance from financially aristocratic leaders of the west.

The misinformed and bullying Obama administration policy of developing war upon Slavic Russians of Eastern Ukraine descended from Middle and Eastern Slavs is also a proxy tool for Anglo aggression against Russia. Ruling elites sometimes move inertially forward within a political bubble of social solipsism failing to comprehend the history and vital interests of others. A sycophantic broadcast media may blow the warm smoke of pomp and circumstance up a politician's ass.

Since the First World War England has been America's master to the U.S. blaster politically speaking when Thunderdome policies present to recover lost power of the British Empire. For the U.S.A. it is an irresponsible policy inimical to U.S. national security interests.

One may roll back the clock to find Brits attacking at Sevastopol or Chancellor being expelled from Russia and forget the Russian roll back of Nazis across the broad Eastern front of the second world war, yet one ought to remember that Grand Prince Oleg of Kievan Rus, after taking the title in 882, took co of the lower Dnepr. As the historian Melvin Wren commented-he cleared the water road from the Baltic to the Black Sea. The Dnepr remains a vital Russian interest in spite of Bill Clinton’s plundering of Ukraine from a drunken President Yeltsin.

In order for the Russian people to have given up their ancestral homeland in anything but a shyster's court fashion a referendum would have needed to have been held at least 7 years after the coercive pressures of regime change under external threat and pressure had been achieved and a new stability developed. As it was President Clinton took advantage of Russian disarray and of a drunk leader to accomplish what the Imperial German leadership accomplished with Vladimir Lenin during the first worlds war-relinquishment of the Ukraine under pressure and for support in taking over.

Russians will not for generations forget that Kiev is their ancestral homeland and the Dnepr River their first core commercial highway. Though the United States’ leadership may wish to battle upon Russians with proxies in the Ukraine that policy of dividing Europe will not be a satisfactory long-range policy and is likely to be abandoned by future U.S. Presidents, yet even if it were not a war and enmity for several generations of no necessity to gravity select Wall Street-Harvard financial insiders and 10 Downing Street is wrong. Consider the sentiment if Brits were forced to give up the Thames, Chinese the Yangtze River, Americans the Potomac or Mississippi. What if Massachusetts were backed into a corner, stripped of their dirty salmon deficient rivers and sold into wage slavery? Would they like that?

Like global warming Americans must have a change of heart to reach a righteous policy. If global warming may be compared to sin, the United States must not fool itself in believing that it will evolve away from sin over time because of the bad long-term effects. Instead it must have a complete change of heart and stop sinning today; tearing out heat-absorbing asphalt highways, building electric transport infrastructure without producing greenhouse gases and so forth. It must will itself with the providence of God to being a new energetic creation.

Oleg’s successor was Igor-a son of the Viking founder of the Rurik dynasty that ruled over the Slavs of the region at their request in the beginning to provide security for Slavic commercial establishments. Igor’s ancestors later ruled in Moscow too. Grand Prince Vladimir of Kiev, baptized in 988, fought in the Crimean Peninsula and brought Christianity to his empire. One of his sons; Yaroslav ruled in Novgorod at the northern end of the water road the United States seeks to expropriate entirely from the Rus. When Vladimir dies in 1005 the succession was unclear and conflict between brothers ensued. Yaroslav who came to be known as Yaroslav the Wise emerged to rule the Rus and Slavs of the Dnepr empire from Novgorod to the Crimean Peninsula. Yaroslav promulgated laws known as Russkaia Pravda- Russian Justice.

Politicians of Washington D.C. find it acceptable these days to trample on the heritage of countless generations of peoples because they have the pure military power to do so. Yet in so doing they set back for generations the reputation of the United States for pursuing justice rather than power and the expropriation of lands and possessions. In failing to at least share the Dnepr with Russia U.S. leadership is establishing enmity and a wedge that will act to undermine U.S. security for generations. It does not simply need to achieve a short-term victory with superior military power and the little nation will hush up so homosexual marriage can be established and Christianity marginalized.

“This power of God is against the wicked. God's power will not be the sinner's shield to defend him, but a sword to wound him. God's power will bind the sinner in chains. His power serves to revenge the wrong done to his mercy. He will be Almighty to damn the sinner. Now, in what condition is every unbeliever? God's power is engaged against him,

and ‘it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.' Heb 10:31.”-Thomas Watson (Divinity page 78).

Russia has a history of principalities ruled by a central Grand Prince later evolving to become named a tsar. When Kievan domination evolved and gave way to rule in Novgorod in the 13th century and while Mongols were invading the Moskva River frontier had a fort-a kreml built on it that was initially sacked by Mongols, yet on the frontier Moscow emerged as a commercial center and was a better jumping off point to resist Mongol invaders. Eventually Alexander Nevsky appointed a son to rule in Moscow. In time the principality of Moscow became the power center over the principalities of Kiev, Novgorod and Lithuania.

Centuries of war to keep Russian lands free of Mongol invaders, Muslims, Germans, Poles and Brits followed to the present day more or less. Into that history President Obama boldly goes forth where no U.S. President was rash enough to go before and engage the U.S.A. on the wrong side of a millennium long battle for Slavs to be free of oppressors in the Eurasian conflict zone of striving and suffering for freedom.

It is quite possible that with the example of the American left entirely supporting what is in effect a war of conquest by the post-cold war west upon implicit Russian lands for the benefit of foreign financial aristocrats that the European left will take a turn to the right realizing what a lot of hypocritical killers the American left are supporting aggressive wars through other means to conquer historically Russian national lands. 

Wrong value theory and existential historical logic will not well-serve the American left. Europeans and others may learn that in order to force corrupt moral and political values on others a strong central government able to override the objections of affiliated states to homosexual marriage is undesirable. Too strong of a central government destroys the individual states as laboratories of democratic expression and compels them to submit to corrupting Federal judicial decisions or Chief Executive's will to wage unjust wars of expansion. New federations of nations of the future will learn from the tragic lessons of the United States I would think, yet of course foreign nations and states may be as gullible as those of the U.S.A. and repeat the failures of the past.

The political natural balance will not be achieved until Moscow at least shares the Dnepr River with whatever predators of the west are there at any given time.

       Restarting the Cold War (poem)

28 Jan.2015

Cold war enigma

a fuel cell power plant

silhouetted shadows deepen

concrete Soviet blocks built to the west

waterfront plots around dark pools

research firms mining dissident ideas

corporatists, communists, advanced telecommunications networks

ad hoc ideas for consolidating absolute power

without Stalin or delay

Ants scurry along networks of varicose pipelines

innumerable jobs working underground

exhausting reproductive economic cycles of guns and butter

working jobs of field crafts

attacking rotting fruit producing mountains of molehills

freely in trade

for dusty twits, trime and singularity

Raptor rime of ancient mariner

syncopated with blackened lips

parched through waves of verdant decline

expanses of revenutionary warps of the old school

with new tools of gathering power

where trillions of stealth drones lurk in dark space

like whirlwinds of logic sold as slaves to evolution

a doctrine for combat ops droning on

as corporals of industry deadveloping time

Clouds restoring defeat from victory's jaw

disappear while peaceful ice crystals melt away

quietly tickling down to silent spring's sanctions

in a non-renewable river flow breaking up empires

where deposits from borderlands build banks

​ Ukraine war phenomenon is old Democrat Party Business ​ Recap Part 1

            ​ Ukraine war phenomenon is old Democrat Party Business  

            ​ Recap Part 1

            ​ Maybe Ukraine’s decision to employ Hunter Biden during the Obama administration at $10,000 a month was a good war insurance investment since President Biden has billions and billions to Ukraine in its war to keep control of that country. The President Bill Von Clinton takeover plan for Ukraine made a sow’s ear of a silk purse. As Jesus changed water into wine, Democrats since 1994  hanged wine into piss. In 1994 Democrats broke a champagne bottle on the bow of an era of forced-based system of international rules; a Liberal World Order it turned out, with the nations with dominant military power making the rules. Domestically, with Ruby Ridge and Waco, and abroad in foreign wars, military and financial power forced liberal rules. In the United States The Supreme Court of Harvard made laws to reinforce corporatism’s Liberal World Order (also known as the S.W.O.- Satanic World Order since some would define slavery liberating-for-others depending on what the meaning of ‘is’ is).

            ​  I am reposting the following seven and eight year old comments on Democrat Party belligerence towards Russia just to keep things in perspective historically.  The Liberal World Order narrative is nearly entirely one-sided and reinforces revisionism about Russia’s relation to Ukraine. I prefer to enter notes for my blog so I can remember what an avalanche or tsunami of proprietary, self-interest, biased information emerged in this time of war. Failing to recognize that cutting the heart out of historical Russia and relocating it to western interests would not go unchallenged led to the present conflict. Politicians seldom can talk about select international affairs truthfully, accurately or objectively and must instead use a pejorative, one-sided, proprietary approach. In the case of Ukraine that resulted in War, Cold War, economic problems, inflation and numerous completely avoidable negative consequences. A rectification or adjustment of the Yelstin-Blair-Clinton Soviet Union termination agreement in regard to Ukraine should have occurred at some point during the Obama administration at least. The last President of the Soviet Union had a gun at his head of forced options in a manner of speaking. As he brought the saga of the red experiment in the Soviet Union to an end the gun was in the hands of imperialist opportunists instead of statesmen. Twenty-eight years later rhetoric about ‘the dictator’ and ‘the war criminal’ Putin flood the airwaves along with body bags and body counts in the real world. 

  I realize the U.S, administration is a locomotive racing at 290 m.p.h. on a narrative and am not trying to get on board nor in its way.  I just want to point out that total economic and political war against Russia may not be without deleterious consequences for the west, neither is it doomed to success. It is entirely disingenuous for the administration to express no awareness of the conservative Russian position, and dangerous to simply throw everything they have into economic and indirect war against Russia. War is terrible and  a common cause of it is that of aloof politicians chasing wealth needing or tolerating war to get what they want. Politicians owned by the rich are a sad fact of modern life. In modern war politician puppeteers live in ivory towers with a cell phone in their ear. British and Catholic imperialism drew in President Clinton and P.M. Blair who later joined the Catholic Church, to renew the historical war of the west to Eastward expansion. Ukraine was a battleground between Catholic and Orthodox faith spheres of influence in the feudalism era, and I suspect that the embers of that war have never gone out entirely. I doubt that John Paul II foresaw an expanded NATO presenting a sustainable threat to Russia. 

            ​  President Putin of Russia has a very tough line-up against him including the expanded N.A.T.O. war machine and vast U.S. military weapons supplies looming like ravenous mastiffs on chains eager to go for his throat to finish off Russian and Chinese resistance to Wall Street plutocratic values; held back perhaps simply by recalcitrance to risk of nuclear war. Putin was said to be a war criminal by President Biden. That is a matter for courts I suppose. I would think the United States killed hundreds of people in hospitals in Afghanistan, even one staffed by Doctors Without Borders, and killed hundreds or thousands of civilians in collateral damage, and in fact the entire Iraq war might have been a war crime since Iraq did not invade anyone nor have weapons of mass destruction  as President G.W. Bush claimed. What about the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution? Was the bogus attack on U.S. ships another excusable blunder justifying the war crime of fighting a war to kill communists? 

The U.S. government’s illegal war in Iraq, if indeed the war was illegal because there wasn’t much besides a very thin legal premise for the invasion based on Iraq’s non-compliance with sanctions presumably featuring WMDs they never had, started with the U.S. reportedly killing 100,000 hapless soldiers in trenches along the border with aerial bombardment- 100,000 souls murdered in effect, without the slightest mention of a war crime. Another trivial omission from popular history by the victors. Mass murder is a prerogative of politicians that needs only journalist apologetics and narratives to pass as water under the bridge of time.

   ​ If President Biden’s son Beau was a victim of burning chemical dumps in Iraq, weren’t thousands of Iraqi civilians too? There is no mention of war crimes for U.S. Presidents since they have consistently denied being subject to the International War Crimes courts. Why is President Putin different? The U.S. Government has no memory of its own war crimes history if just wars require more than a legal technicality to start. Was it o.k. to intentionally nuke civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki with hyper shock and awe just once for the U.S.A.’s convenience?  The truism that history is written by the victors seems to be especially meaningful in the context of war crimes. Victory in the present age seems to mean those with unlimited wealth and ownership of broadcast media, corporations and weapons of war. It would be refreshing to have intelligent politicians that speak with candor and objective understanding once in a while.

            ​ ​ Wars start and finish for more solid historical reasons of quantitative disputes and lack of alternative means of resolution . Legal technicalities are used as pretexts for war. The US and the Eurasian politics should be moving toward egalitarian, sustainable global economics. U.S. leadership is over-reliant on technological military supremacy, deficit spending, tax cuts for the rich and issuing no interest or low-interest loans to the richest banks so they can mint trillions of free e-dollars from thin air with which to buy the world’s business for its foreign and domestic policy of corporatism rather than a Republic’s principles of wise, well-balanced and historically informed statesmanship. Corporatism isn’t a democracy. War and Cold war and post cold-war enmity are not the right course except for incompetent, inefficient,  lunatic politicians.

            ​ Why Compromise and Innovation are better than Confrontation for Ukraine 

24 Sept. 2014

Compromise rather than conflict is the better course for Ukraine. Sanctions and bellicose Washington D.C. rhetoric about Russian aggression accompanied with sanctions dividing Russian and European trade and commerce ought to be replaced with realpolitik. It is better to integrate Russian-European economics rather than segregate. It is better to make closer security and trade ties trilaterally with Russia, Europe and the U.S.A. instead of increasing isolation and sanctions. When it is possible with intelligent leadership to innovate progress instead of regressing to primitive cold war posturing one should choose the smart way rather than the dumb.

Ukraine is unlikely to be harmed by making of itself something of a political laboratory for creative political merger accentuating positive, closer ties with Russia and the west simultaneously. Creative political thought did not need to die with the passing of Reagan-Gorbachev era.

Obama administration sycophants complain about the European economy slowing U.S. economic growth as if the sanctions hurting European and Russian economies haven’t anything to do with Europe’s stagnant recovery from the 2008 banking and mortgage crash largely developed through Wall Street and British, D.C. and London deregulation and failure to govern high-speed quantitative trading and packaging of bad debt for sale.

The Obama administration’s failure to comprehend Russia’s 1200 year patrimony of the Ukraine and the unlikely circumstance of a complete acceptance of de-Russification of Ukraine means that the economic and security stumbling block will continue indefinitely even if with a cold war level of simmering maneuver. That is quite different from warm and innovative relations between Europe, the United States and Russia-and that is bad for the economy of the three regions.

The reality of Ukraine permits far more real interaction and adjustment of political formality than the abstract ideological and partisan positions that Washington and its puppet politicians believe possible. 

The confrontational Washington attitude does not save Ukraine from a return to the evil empire of the Soviet Union. It is quite possible for Ukrainian pluralism to include Russian interests and Ukrainian politicians with very close ties to Russia as well as the west. Ukrainian interests are in drawing benefits from east and west rather than just the west or the east. They have no need of an exclusive relationship to one side or the other beyond its borders, and neither need Ukrainian independence mean being free of affiliations and treaties with anyone beyond its borders.

Ukraine might sight trade agreements with Russia and the west simultaneously-even some of those free trade agreements that Washington leaped into as if they were the opulent new designer economic drug. Ukraine can be the state where synthetic development and inclusion of Russian-leaning separatist regions in their own Ukrainian community of independent state can satisfy the real desire for many to be more Russian culturally than western while west leaning interests can be confident of free trade, freedom of religion and security interests not being taken over by a Russian mafia or onerous policies repressing civil rights.

It is often said that most Ukrainians want democracy and a free economy, yet so do many Russians and Europeans. Realpolitik of history shows that tribal and cultural wars are right up there with wars and conflicts created by aristocracy and royalty over land. Keeping the ordinary citizen free of class caste systems isn’t easy-even the power of concentrated wealth and their media pets make it challenging for some to recognize their loss of earnings power and degradation of comparative social advantage.

Ukraine should seek its own balance in Fullerian social synthetic integration-syntegrity between Russia and Europe innovating new political structures to bring in closer Russian economic and cultural participation while drawing in the west as well. The major sticking point in getting the sanction repealed swiftly is the need for political change away from confrontationism and bellicosity with stark, de trop, black-white us and them paradigmata for ultimatums. Moving through a variety of Ukrainian political evolutions toward a realpolitik of mergism is not only possible, it is a necessary way to move economic progress forward, reduce European tension in the region and return the focus of Europe toward rebuilding the economic malaise that is still severe in several members of the EC.

            ​ Pyrrhic Victory in West's Land Grab of Formerly Russian Ukraine 

April 1, 2014

The late Boris Yeltsin had dubious authority to give away the historically Russian Ukraine to independents. We are reminded of the deal Vladimir Illyich Lenin cut with the Kaiser in 1918 giving up the Ukraine to Germany in return for support in taking over Russia. Yeltsin might have expected support from the west. At the time he was not yet President of the Russian Federation, he was only President of the R.S.F.R., one of just 15 Soviet Republics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Yeltsin

Yeltsin was elected Chairman of the Supreme Soviet in 1990 and oversaw its dissolution. It is difficult to say what kind of relationship Yeltsin had with Bill Clinton and the west. Perhaps they were soul brothers. In 1999 Yeltsin was 'found drunk in his underpants outside the White House'. Obviously Yeltsin power as the symbolic mirror of Yekaterinburg' termination of the Tsar/Soviet Union emerged from a stressful life in communist society trying to liberate the Russian people from Stalinism. It is worth recollecting that in a famous photo of the Bolshevik Revolutionary leaders just Stalin and Trotsky remained alive not long after Stalin took power. Trotsky of course and his family were murdered by Stalin's political rival liquidators later.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1215101/Drunk-Boris-Yeltsin-outside-White-House-underpants-trying-hail-cab-wanted-pizza.html

When the Gorbachev-Yeltsin succession liberated Russia with the help of President Ronald Reagan something of an historical miracle transpired. American airhead ideologues though saw it as an opportunity to plunder the world for a corrupt high-tech derivative and resources swindling, bank frauds and hostile takeover acquisitions. Corporatism ensued to gut America's development of democracy. Americans were left eventually holding the bag of 18 trillion dollars of public debt, high unemployment and emasculation of practical sovereignty. Investment occurred in China and Mexico and globalism replaced nationalism to the detriment of all except the top 5% of Americans.

At the end of the First World War an unwise armistice and peace placed high demands on Germany leading inevitably to the second world war. Subsequently America learned to be generous with its peace terms in war. Germany was a good example as well as Japan-each nation prospered and became allies rather than subversive malcontents. The United States seems to have forgotten that lesson in the Ukraine.

President Gorbachev freely withdrew his forces from European nations occupied by the Soviets gained rolling up the Third Reich. It was the 50th anniversary of D-Day in fact, and it was historical grace that the transition occurred peacefully. Yet some viewed the liberation of Europe from Soviet communist totalitarianism as a surrender for Russia and a victory for capitalism. They consider it right to take everything possible from formerly communist countries and perpetrate a kind of forced reparations to Wall Street from the Russian Ukraine. In the long run that may be a Pyrrhic victory. In the meantime it is very disruptive economic policy for the entire world. Regressive and unjust at best that policy has potential for developing numerous worst case scenarios.

    ​ The Abstract Form of Monarchy, Corporatism, Hierarchy and Sectarian Conflict 

7 May 2014

This is a starter (like Windows 7 starter I suppose) on the abstract form of hierarchical power precipitating social conflict inclusive of sectarian war. Perhaps I will write more on the issue later. One finds the U.S. Government bureaucracy stimulating wars in Syria, conflict in Egypt and strife in Ukraine with sectarianism being an issue in each instance. There are other parties involved of course, and the assignment of blame isn’t plain and simple or evens my intention here. The purpose of this post is to not the action of social hierarchy as the causative agent for religious conflict.

The philosopher Thomas Hobbes’ wrote a brilliant conservative thesis named The Leviathan describing the right of the absolute monarch to be in effect the only real individual around whom every citizen receives light. That is an extreme representation of the nature of hierarchy manifesting in imperial, corporate and ecclesiastic power. As power and wealth are concentrated dissent is increasingly eliminated. Absolute power tolerates no dissent. Free expression and political independence dies. In the Orwellian state thought is for-itself usurped by hierarchical programming of citizens. The nature of bloody religious wars is inextricably linked to hierarchical government and church structures. Especially in Erastian or government rule of religion, yet also in established hierarchical bureaucracy doctrine is all-important. Free thought and reform are verboten. Absolute hierarchies are intolerant of doctrinal differences and any sort of pluralism politically or ecclesiastically. Thus Martin Luther’s world-changing concept of justification by faith rather than doled out by bishops.

Luther, a monk, learned of the problems of monastic life and the corruption of Rome and the papacy after visiting Rome himself. He found the sale of indulgences and more church practices that weren’t justified by Biblical guidance. Various Popes had become too powerful believing that had a right to rule not only Christians but government too. This isn’t then place for a critique of the troubles of the papal form of church government with a more equal than other bishops primate-they were at war with themselves too now and then even with as many as three rival popes at once. The issue is the hierarchical structure of the church. Pope Hildebrand thought it best for priests to be celibate in order that they would be more like an international collection of soldiers (of a spiritual sort). A Pope would be something like an Eisenhower. Pope John Paul II-just canonized, was a Polish Catholic, and Polish catholic historical efforts to take over Ukraine for Poland resulted in the formation of a half-catholic, half-orthodox Uniate Church as well as an Orthodox Church in Ukraine. Today there are Protestants in Ukraine too.      

‘Bloody’ Mary Queen of Scots and England executed nearly 300 Protestants and other Catholic persecutions of Protestants occurred. She died in 1578 and with her the brief Catholic restoration. In 1572 Catholics massacred Protestants across France and Ireland in the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. The back and forth 16th and 17th century reprisals against the reformation of the Christian Church probably was a probably reason that the Puritan Cromwell invaded Ireland and treated them so badly in 1649. John Milton-the author of Paradise Lost was a member of Cromwell’s government. Puritans were founders of the U.S.A. too.

The Bishop’s war of 1639 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bishops%27_Wars 

It is said to have been a prelude to the English civil war. Charles I wanted an Episcopal church form (with Bishops) instead of that of a Presbyterian (elders) structure. There are innumerable historical examples of church hierarchies ruled by government as well as of governments ruled by religious hierarchy. The problem is not religion-at least not Christian religion-as a source for conflict, but the sociological structure of hierarchies exerting the taught controlling power over citizens.

Hierarchy cannot tolerate doctrinal dissent and political free thought. The Inquisition and other government and church executions of individuals killed far more people of faith than scientifically inclined people, yet of course moderns would almost have one think that the church was a great repressor of science generally rather than its sponsor. The church with the benefit of modern science and technology ought easily move toward a priesthood of believers egalitarian structure with three ranks-beginner, intermediate and elder reading standardized with room for improve liturgies in role sharing groups. That might help the ecumenical movement, support real rather than corporate democracy and reduce international conflict.

            ​ 

End to Ends (a poem)

 

It may seem easy to make social lies
and broadcast manure up to the skies
natural fracture of objective truth
uses cancel culture so old world dies

Evil seeks to end all good spirit
send hope to hell and all good with it
erase knowledge of God, promote itself
wealth in banks of power; leaders bit

Transport more rage of morpheme word puns
exporting crates of levolution
full circle contradictions implicit
fit duel end where mend stark key guns.

Gentle Goodnight (a poem)

  Deep night with a thousand points of light
myriad empty silos in sight
all seems right every blasted thing wrong
rockets fly so high to win the fight

  Expanse of ocean, life within dies 
molecules spin, warm liquids rise
constant sea slurps, gurgles slack tracks waves  flip
drip echos fusion ships over size

  Politics bars theonomous poor
cult of ill reason can sell the wars
alternative season could escape cost
lost original sin does win more.

Partnerships in Peace (a poem)

 

Green is more valuable than gold
in partnership that is very old
ecospheric product made good by God
odd, ignorance makes saving it bold

  To kill natural wealth; humans do
push it aside with bull dozers too
or add it together to make something work
lurking distractions flowing right through

Partnerships of peace merge hostile sides
end blinders and blunders of ill tides
optimal salvation may rise and win
in the wink of an eye, futures guide.

New Waves are Born (poem)

All of the flies
on thermals rise
each old one dies
new waves are born

Practical ones
fly to the sun
when day’s begun
new waves are born

Repent with dreams
salvation scheme
flood tides may seem
new waves are born

Survive in Arks
debark with quarks
to Noah’s park
new waves are born

Dead spirits end
what life did lend
break last not bend
new waves are born.

Watching the Cold War Wake Up from History

 Writing a somewhat historically accurate account of the background to the war in Ukraine, or more specifically deeper historical background leading up to the conflict seems useful to me. I would rather be one guy with a true account while 99% of the government have it wrong if that were the case, then be in sycophantic agreement with a majority as a mindless minion of  media/government/Wall Street/London Ukraine dibbery. With the reporting of post-modern liberalism stories; godless. queer leprechaun Sasquatch finally getting membership at the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Baseballs or whatever (hyperbole), it is useful to have a plain and simple perspective on the lineal championship contest for the age old battle to posess Ukraine. Radio reporting does allow a high percent of illogic to pass through unchecked. Evaluating verbal reports with formal logical and historical tools is not as easy as when reading written reports since radio verbiage flows on like water under a bridge and for most listeners without extensive taping archives, disappears like morning dew. People accurately recall about 30% of what they hear, said a language coach, if I remember correctly.

With the severance of Russian oil imports to the U.S.A. Cold War version 2.0 has officially commenced. That will bring on many changes and memories to veterans of Cold War 1.0 The United States spent a great deal of time, money and lives in the history of bringing the Cold War to an end. Yet there were many jobs created, many proxy wars fought in the chess game that is not a game. Sober people and the good luck of Ronald Reagan concluded the matter peacefully. Lawyers rather than realists have rekindled the conflict, and it may demand new jobs and new alignments. Clinton, Biden and Putin are/were lawyers litigating the theft of Ukraine from Russia to the west. Germany tried to wrest that plum from Russia for the better part of the 20th century. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MznHdJReoeo

 President Clinton and the Brits administered the coup de grace in 1994 (too busy to be troubled by the genocide in Rwanda in that year) with a weak Yeltsin and Russia in disarray. The Soviets withdrew from Warsaw pact nations beginning in December 1988. President Reagan invited Russian participation in the free world economy and the sentiments of Russians and others behind the Iron Curtain responded with a modicum of trust; they evolved letting down their guard against N.A.T.O. and transitioned to a post-Soviet new world order. When Soviet Russian leadership released occupied Eastern European nations from custody fifty years after the war against NAZI Germany the west was restrained in violating that trust until President Clinton and British political leadership violated that trust in 1994 reversing the Russian reconquista of Ukraine in 1945 and in effect taking up where NAZI Germany left off. For Democrats law is about forcing rival parties and people to do what they don’t want to do. They call that democracy.

They should have known that a stronger Russia would one day litigate the matter through other means if necessary. Ukraine was stare decisis to the Anglo-American legal team though the matter was not res judicata. The strong N.A.T.O. position pulverizing Serbia might have brought President Yeltsin to sign some sort of relinquishing agreement with President Clinton like V.I. Lenin had signed with German Minister Molotov to get Germany to stop war on Russia. N.A.T.O. supremacy was seen as a tool for advancing the ‘Liberal World Order ‘ (pragmatically defined as an order for queer marriage, teaching of homosexuality to schoolkids, abortions, legal dope. concentrating wealth and no religion too). Probably there should have been a Russian plebiscite- an election, rather than British direction, concerning Russian freedom to choose what to do with  Ukraine. The Anglo-American posture of 1994 bears a resemblance to that of Britain following the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East in 1918 drawing up international borders with the French.

At the level of international, state vs. state legal disputes the ultima ratio; the logic of kings, is historically, war. Those leaders that appeal to law to decide international issues may refer to their sovereign internal authority. Brits and U.S. leaders recently have expressed the opinion that rule of law- their own authority, has ruled since 1945. In 1994 the Anglo-American legal team regarded themselves as the ultimate legal authority of the Earth. Obviously they dismiss Russian authority and law in regard to Ukraine, as one expects from partisan lawyers in corporate disputes who invariably say the opposition arguments have no merit. The western position relies upon their own perception of superior power rather than of an impartial, objective regard for history. Meaningful history for the western legal team for the present dispute only extends to 1994 and 1945, dismissing inconvenient affairs before and during those periods. 

  Interestingly Russian efforts to retake the Ukraine seem to occur at approximate thirty year intervals. The leveraged Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was followed approximately thirty years later by the German occupation of Ukraine with a proximal Russian reconquista toward the end of W.W. 2. The leveraged relinquishment of Ukraine to President Clinton and the British legal team was followed approximately thirty years later by the new Russian effort for reconquista of Ukraine. That reminds me somewhat of the time that elapsed following the Dred Scott decision or Plessy vs Ferguson and Brown vs Board of Education. Correcting historical disputes isn’t always swift or final.

Cold Wars bring on economic changes; even new songs need to be written that are pro-war and of course de rigeur anti-war anthems. ”There’s no place I’d rather be, watching the world wake up from history.” Massachusetts could consider passing a law requiring school children grades 1-3 to take a knee beneath their desks in case of  atomic attack. The C.D.C . may open an investigation into political decisions leading to the brink of nuclear war to determine if they are a danger to public health. T-shirts could be sold that say Remember 1994! and Viva Oxford!

  While it may be too early for The Final Countdown version 2.0, or Alan Alda kinds of nuclear holocaust flicks, the time may be right for action-packed espionage films even though James Bond died in the last denouement. Cold War business start-ups may boom. I’ve wondered what could go into Cold War II espionage kits that could be sold on eBay for maybe $100, like maps to Russian forts, James Bond videos, disguises, miniature cameras and drones.  The kit should have a useful phrasebook for spies with phrases like; ‘My llama is Boris, I live in Soyuz Square. I like see-through blouse Natasha. Zil is parked at Bolshoi. Where are nuclear triggers?’

The total economic war of the west ion Russia presents the ironic western policy of forcing Russia to nationalize foreign business investments in their country that may be substantial. If for example someone bought a European manufactured Ford car in Russia they can no longer make payments on it and it won’t be repo’d, so in effect they own the stuff. McDonalds or whatever else was built by foreigners in Russia may begin to be operated by Cossacks or renamed McBoris'.  In the past, nationalization usually was a move communists made, hence the irony. Booking Cold War tours to Siberia via China with tour bus itineraries that could feature famous Gulags of the Evil Empire and how they kept inmates imprisoned for decades without anything besides torture and quick show trials, time share condos with fully stocked refrigerators and free, complimentary espionage kits oil at home.

Russian gasoline prices may drop to the equivalent of fifty cents per gallon as they keep their fuel at home. Cheap fuel prices and self-reliance on food production may allow vigorous economic activity to continue for a year or two during the sanctions regime and that may create jobs for rogue manufacturers to relocate production to Siberia. Taking advantage of cheap energy and easy access to Chinese markets. It may be wrong to misunderestimate the effect of gifting to President Von Putin free nationalization of foreign investment in Russia. The Lawyer’s  War of Ukraine may generate unusual collateral business evolutions.

  In the old days Americans sometimes laid across railroad tracks to stop transport of nuclear weapons and got legs cut off for the trouble. Nowadays they get government stimulus checks, pile up public debt and buy mint frappe lattes wondering if bitcoin bites off more than it can chew at foreign owned mid-west mining server  farms. It is good that oil prices may reach $200 per barrel as that will stimulate Chinese solar panel construction, and if the Von Biden administration ends Chinese tariffs, end inflationary spirals so recession could halt mid-flight. At the macro-economic plain, prospects for a burgeoning legal industry look good; lawsuits easily replace statesmanship as they can replace navigation on air and sea dealing with any negative consequences to randomly evolving destinations, punitively.