ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2019 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Saturday, April 13, 2019

From neoliberalism to nationalism

The Russians and the Chinese both understand that in keeping with the demographic and economic decline of the USA, the neoliberal world order is failing:
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov declared today that the Western, liberal model of society is dying, and a new world order is taking its place. Lavrov made the comments at his annual meeting with students and professors at the Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy, reported Russian state news agency TASS.

“The Western liberal model of development, which particularly stipulates a partial loss of national sovereignty – this is what our Western colleagues aimed at when they invented what they called globalization – is losing its attractiveness and is no more viewed as a perfect model for all. Moreover, many people in the very western countries are skeptical about it,” Lavrov said.

According to him, global development is guided “by processes aimed at boosting multipolarity and what we call a polycentric world order.”
This is why the neoliberals - and the wolves in sheep's clothing called the neoconservatives - are so terrified of nationalism and nationalists. Multipolarity is just another word for nationalism and "a polycentric world order" is synonymous with "a balance of power."

Labels: ,

35 Comments:

Blogger tublecane April 13, 2019 6:38 PM  

Used to be "globalization" was a bad word or some they were trying to teach us was a good thing. Now, I hear it less often. But whatever terms they're using to describe the same thing, they're not trying very hard to persuade anyone.

When the peak of your argument is "countries with McDonald's never go to war," I don't blame you. But for propriety's sake at least pretend you need to propagandize.

Blogger Yordan Yordanov April 13, 2019 6:40 PM  

When this world order finally goes the way of the dodo, I hope there is no "new world order". Just leave us be and fuck off.

Blogger ZhukovG April 13, 2019 6:51 PM  

In some ways it is a return to an 'Old World' order.

The height of Christian(Western) Civilization was a world ruled by several 'Great Powers'. All of them European(including the United States), with the notable exception of emerging great power, Japan.

I would welcome a return to such a world.

Blogger Ingemar April 13, 2019 7:09 PM  

"which particularly stipulates a partial loss of national sovereignty"

Partial? Someone ought to tell the Brexiters that.

Blogger Azimus April 13, 2019 7:54 PM  

1914 was a multipolar world order. I am concerned that the revival of nationalism not be perverted into the same self-immolating war.

Blogger CM April 13, 2019 8:12 PM  

This seems relevant, though a bit tangential.
https://economicprinciples.org/Why-and-How-Capitalism-Needs-To-Be-Reformed/?utm_medium=adwords&utm_source=GS&utm_content=341819909261&utm_campaign=60minutes-search

I was reading a criticism of it and am not sure how to respond to the critics who are pro-globalization.

Blogger Robert What? April 13, 2019 8:41 PM  

Was there ever any more brilliant product positioning than the NeoCons calling themselves Neo "Conservatives"? By adding the word "conservative" to the name of their movement they managed to fool millions of Americans ... and still do. Candidate Trump seemed to be wise to their game, but President Trump has inexplicably embraced them.

Blogger Jack Ward April 13, 2019 9:32 PM  

@7 Robert
I would respond with the old adage,'Keep your friends close; and, you enemies closer'
Thats what I hope Trump and company are up too. If not, I really don't need any more major disappointments from my politicians.

Blogger David Ray Milton April 13, 2019 9:34 PM  

People were never made to think on a global scale. You can’t love seven billion people. The love would be spread so thin that it would be meaningless. Every man needs a family, a tribe, and a nation. Any person who claims to care for others on a larger scale than that is simply being pretentious.

Blogger Rikko April 13, 2019 9:55 PM  

Imagine what the US could do were it to be led by a leader of the stature of Putin... Granted the political system is more deeply entrenched in Washington than it was in post Soviet Moscow but can anyone doubt the guile of the Russian President? He makes Trump look like a bumbling fool in contrast.

Blogger Gunnar Thalweg April 13, 2019 9:55 PM  

Nationalism is what finally defeated communism. The left will never forgive it for that.

Blogger tublecane April 13, 2019 10:37 PM  

@4- Partial loss of sovereignty would be like you have to give up control of Alsace-Lorraine. The way they're talking, it's like being partially blown up by a bomb.

Blogger Babydoc April 13, 2019 10:48 PM  

Globalization was a ridiculous idea from inception, as the cultural differences among the multitude of nations/tribes was doomed from the get go to be less effective than Quixote tilting at windmills.

Blogger doctrev April 14, 2019 1:17 AM  

CM wrote:This seems relevant, though a bit tangential.

https://economicprinciples.org/Why-and-How-Capitalism-Needs-To-Be-Reformed/?utm_medium=adwords&utm_source=GS&utm_content=341819909261&utm_campaign=60minutes-search

I was reading a criticism of it and am not sure how to respond to the critics who are pro-globalization.


"If your plan is a 'listening tour' which mostly consists of patronizing white voters/ telling them how stupid they are, that's just re-warmed Hillary 2016."

Otherwise, just tell them they're whistling past the graveyard. Past their own graves. Trump allies are coming to power everywhere, and the obviously Trump-phobic are collapsing rapidly. Public-private partnerships, increased education funding- if you must devise a solution, don't just re-imagine the Clinton Global Initiative.

Blogger NO GOOGLES April 14, 2019 1:25 AM  

@5
On the contrary, it was globalism that caused what would have been a relatively minor conflict in the Balkans to escalate into the charnel house that was WWI. The major powers in WWI didn't go to war because of their own national concerns being in conflict - they went to war because of their entangled alliances and because it was assumed that because of the technological advances since the last major European conflict that the "first mover" would have an overwhelming advantage. No country thought it could survive waiting to mobilize its forces if any of its enemies where already mobilizing theirs.

It's one of the big lies that was "taught" when I was in school that the cause of WWI was "nationalism". In reality the surge of nationalist sentiment in most countries was AFTER the start of the war, not before.

Blogger M.S. April 14, 2019 1:51 AM  

One good consequence of the decline of Modern Western Liberalism and the re-ascencion of Russia: the chance to build much of the world on God-Tier Eastern Orthodox Christianity and not the bleah-tier Contemporary Nondenominational Evangelical Protestant system that rules Christianity in America.

Blogger John Rockwell April 14, 2019 3:21 AM  

Bureaucrats tell their stories in Trump admin:
https://www.washingtonian.com/2019/04/07/18-federal-workers-what-its-really-like-to-work-for-the-trump-administration/

Blogger John Rockwell April 14, 2019 3:22 AM  

''1914 was a multipolar world order. I am concerned that the revival of nationalism not be perverted into the same self-immolating war.''

Globalist forces will definitely try to make that happen.

Blogger Gettimothy April 14, 2019 4:47 AM  


"Was there ever any more brilliant product positioning than the NeoCons calling themselves Neo "Conservatives"? "


Once you see the lies, their tactics and strategy are quite redundant. "Judeo-Christian" meet Neo Consevative meet Neo Liberal.

For a model of the attenpted coup here in u.s, their success in Russia is the model.

The key to understanding them is Bobby Fisher's maxim:"They lie"

Blogger Mark Stoval April 14, 2019 5:30 AM  

David Ray Milton wrote:People were never made to think on a global scale. You can’t love seven billion people. The love would be spread so thin that it would be meaningless. Every man needs a family, a tribe, and a nation. Any person who claims to care for others on a larger scale than that is simply being pretentious.

Thomas Aquinas said that love was to "will the good of the other." I do hope people in far away lands do well for themselves --- and that they stay where they are at.

Like you, I can only love my God, family, and tribe/nation. We need separation from the other. I think the Africans would have been much better off if they had no contact with the outside world and lived their primitive life that they were obviously build for.

The question now is: will we separate into various nations or will there be bloody war. Give a state to the various minorities or genocide? What will it be? I don't think we are smart enough to avoid war. MPAI

Blogger Sterling Pilgrim April 14, 2019 6:00 AM  

With a diminishing number of Christians, is this possible? I don’t mean to sound skeptical, for I, too, wish for a Christendom to return.

Blogger Stilicho April 14, 2019 6:42 AM  

And a complete rejection of the one world govt pursued by east and west across the political spectrum throughout the 20th century.

Blogger Sherlock April 14, 2019 8:10 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Gregory the Great April 14, 2019 8:11 AM  

When Lavrov says something it is usually spot on. I listened to quite a few of his speeches in the past and could never find anything wrong with them.

Blogger Avalanche April 14, 2019 8:55 AM  

@10 "can anyone doubt the guile of the Russian President? He makes Trump look like a bumbling fool in contrast."

Do you think guile only appears in the form of smooth, suave, perhaps secretly violent, uncommunicative masculinity? Does it never appear as a hail-fellow- well-met, common-man speaking style, apparently stymied, seemingly obstinate masculinity?

Each leader is addressing and attempting to herd or at least urge very different peoples toward, say, national health and stability. The Russian "peoples" of their various sorts, never did -- and never would -- come up with a political system such as the Euro-derived, Greco-Roman based, Christian peoples did. And they still haven't.

Or come at it from the other side: my ill-educated impression of the Russian peoples, NOT including, say, the Uighurs or Siberians or whatever their version of Lapps would be; is of a people either uninterested in politics and steering the country, or having been formed -- should I write domesticated? -- into learned helplessness and "yah can't fight city hall." As against: the U.S. people: INCLUDING say all those horrifically foreign legals and illegals; our long-time-here, but still very foreign overlords with their hands and bank accounts on our levers of power; alllllll the MPAI of any group; as well as the remaining posterity -- since all these groups and more seem active in working to turn our ship of state to their ends by whatever means necessary.

What possible single version of guile could be used on these two vastly different herds of animals? Why would there not be two vastly different types/forms/appearances of guile being used against the two herds? You don't herd chickens and cattle the same way. Or perhaps it should be: you don't herd domesticated cattle and buffalo the same way. Underlying fact base in case of lack of info: Buffalo are NOT domesticated -- ask any buffalo farmer!


Question for extra credit: Is the remaining posterity in the U.S. not ALSO "formed -- should I write domesticated?! -- into learned helplessness and 'yah can't fight city hall.'"?

Blogger Avalanche April 14, 2019 8:57 AM  

@13 "Globalization was a ridiculous idea from inception, as the cultural differences among the multitude of nations/tribes was doomed from the get go to be less effective than Quixote tilting at windmills."

Or building a tower to reach the sky/Heaven/God....

Blogger JG April 14, 2019 9:03 AM  

Neoliberalism is not only dead, but the corpse is starting to stink.

Blogger Right Republican April 14, 2019 9:13 AM  

#17 that Washingtonian article link is great. Thank you for posting it. I read about half and to me the general consensus are complaints along the lines of "the Trump administration officials don't like trust us and don't like what we do". Well, no shiite people, don't you understand that you are part of the swamp?!? One does had to sympathize with the simple shuffling around of personnel for no reason, though. Trump's new people should either fire people and reorganize the whole operation, or just leave people alone. Bureaucrats like upward movement, accept downward, but everyone hates lateral movement, especially when understood just as a means of spite.

Blogger The Masked Menace April 14, 2019 9:21 AM  

@5 Azimus "1914 was a multipolar world order. I am concerned that the revival of nationalism not be perverted into the same self-immolating war."


I see it differently. I see WWI as the precursor to globalism. WWI was the Anglo-American axis and their backers in international banking preventing the rise of Germany and the threat Germany's economic rise specifically posed to British dominance. Furthermore, and just as importantly, it was the opportunity for them to strike the final blow against the Old World Order.

It is not a coincidence that ALL the members of the old Holy Alliance - Russia, Austria, and Germany - were destroyed by the end of the war. The key member of the alliance, the Russian imperial monarchy, had foolishly let the alliance falter in the 1880s. Once it faltered, the die was cast. << Too bad Nicholas II wasn't of the same mind as Nicholas I.>>

WWII was simply the final act. It was Germany's attempt to rise from the ashes and reestablish itself. A rise that the Anglo-American axis and their international banking supporters would NEVER allow (note: there are still US troops in Germany to this day). Adolf Hitler was baited in Poland. He perpetrated possibly one of the greatest blunders in recorded history by attacking and destroying the buffer state (i.e. Poland) between his nation and the greatest military threat on the continent, the Soviet Union. << Someone should have put a bullet in that moron's head in '38. >>

Blogger The Masked Menace April 14, 2019 11:13 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger The Masked Menace April 14, 2019 11:25 AM  

The United States Enters WWI in April 1917. Trotsky arrives in Russia in May 1917.

That's a little suspicious don't you think?

Blogger Damn the torpedos April 14, 2019 1:47 PM  

I for one welcome our Slavic overlords.

I think part of why Russians hate the neo con/lib elite is that they’ve been ruled by these people once before. After the nightmare that was the USSR the Ruskies better know a Trotskite when they see one.

Blogger DonReynolds April 14, 2019 1:52 PM  

For almost a century, the Liberal order was challenged and confronted by Communism. Aside from occasional small-nation squabbles between the two world orders, the contest was confined to the arms race, political rivalry, and economic power. Both sides hoped and expected to win over the other, and the non-aligned countries, by proving the superiority of their model of society. Both Liberalism and Communism were built on the bones of feudal Monarchy, both in WWI and WWII. (Hitler was an uncrowned Monarch, not much different from the Kaiser.)

What has been brought into sharp focus in the rivalry between the two world orders is humanism (and human rights) and the environment (including climate change). Liberal capitalism has proven itself superior to Communism in creating economic wealth, so the contest has shifted to human rights and the environment. Communism has never had much to offer the world in either area, except secularism and the command economy, yet it is exactly these two elements that the Liberal order is focused on duplicating. Thus we see the Liberal order shedding their own religious traditions in favor of Islam and restraining national economies with free trade.

Islam is the prize of the future and it is difficult to predict whether the Islamic world will become part of Communism or the Liberal order. Islam is the last of the feudal Monarchist societies. The lack of a Middle Class would seem to suggest Islam will tilt toward Communism, but Islam is incompatible with secularism, so we see both Liberal society and Communism becoming more accommodating to Islamic traditions.

The long-term prognosis for Communism and the Liberal order are not good. The Liberal order has exported Capitalism to Communist countries and they have only become stronger by it. The Communist order has exported elements of egalitarianism and secularism to the Liberal West and they have only become weaker by it. Individual Freedom, long the hallmark of Liberal society, is being constantly eroded and constrained, while at the same time Individual Freedom is expanding under Communism. The religious freedoms of Liberal society are in steady retreat, while the suppressed religious freedoms under Communism are being restored. Rivalry has enabled both Communism and the Liberal order to selectively adopt or imitate "useful" elements of the other.

Blogger DonReynolds April 14, 2019 3:12 PM  

The Masked Menace wrote:The United States Enters WWI in April 1917. Trotsky arrives in Russia in May 1917.

That's a little suspicious don't you think?


The first Russian Revolution was in March 1917. Trotsky was living in NYC and Lenin was in Switzerland at the time.

Trotsky left NYC to return to Russia at the end of March aboard a neutral ship but was detained by the British Navy at Nova Scotia and put in a POW camp with German prisoners. The foreign minister of the new Kerensky government demanded his release as a Russian citizen and the British released him at the end of April. Less than three weeks later, Trotsky was in Russia.

Much is made of the fact that Lenin was conducted from Switzerland to Finland by train, arriving back in Russia in April 1917. Certainly, that was the biggest mistake of the German government with regard to Russia during WWI. But the biggest mistake of the British government with regard to Russia during WWI, was the release of Trotsky from POW camp the same month.

Both combined in Russia to overthrow the Kerensky government (after 4 months) and take Russia out of the war (the truce was the next month) and free up the German armies for the Western Front by formal treaty by the middle of March 1918.

Blogger JMS April 14, 2019 3:27 PM  

"1914 was a multipolar world order. I am concerned that the revival of nationalism not be perverted into the same self-immolating war."

The existence of nuclear weapons and the MAD doctrine will hopefully tamp down on Globalist Elite war-mongering.

Then again the Samson Option (as written of my Seymour Hirsch) exists as well.

Populists may need another Curtis Lemay, a crazy White man with a lot of nukes to ward off the Globalists.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts