This is one of those rare cases when some of assumptions are just wrong (I lived in Russia since 1972 when I was born, until 2014):
- There are three different kinds of Ukraine:
-- western part was annexed by Soviets as a part of Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, never really belonged to Russian Empire historically, and the population genuinely hates Russia as occupants;
-- eastern part & Crimea _was_ actually Russia before Soviets;
-- central part (think Kyiv) is 50/50, but mentally it's very different from Russia anyway.
- Ukrainian language is not in any way a 'peasant dialect' - it's very distinctive and different from Russian; maybe less different than Polish, but a typical Russian speaker will be able to comprehend a literary Ukrainian maybe only slightly better than Polish.
- Events of 2014, _regardless_ of State Department involvement, were quite real, genuine restoration of the national sovereignty.
- Ukrainians have a serious grudge for Russia, and reasonably so (Holodomor etc); the hybrid war in the eastern provinces didn't make it any better. They do recognize themselves as a different nation now.
- Putin as a reactionary leader is quite an overstatement - he doesn't have neither knowledge nor the vision for this role. If nazis were "Carlyle implemented by swine" - current Russian regime is "Carlyle implemented by a mini pig". Some of his guesses are intuitively correct, but they are not systematic, and his background (communist indoctrination + second-rate KGB officer job in Eastern Germany) doesn't do him any good.
Current Kremlin elite has a very special mythology, a strange mix of Soviet ideology and awe for pre-revolution Russian Empire. The problem is, they're borrowing worst parts from both, and corruption level in the elite is unimaginable by even very low Western standards.
I would say that expecting them to be some sort of a dedicated reactionary force is a wishful thinking.
«Literary Ukranian» implies some sort of literature; there isn’t any. As for your other points, yes, some regional differences do exist, but nothing a capable occupation/integration government can’t handle.
Ukranians can certainly be unruly, and have been left, due to Russia’s recent weakness, in a state of relative barbarism, but even they would mostly welcome a return of law and order. Russia is by no means rich, but it is certainly richer than Ukraine. It is also not a failed state 30 years in the making, and that does wonders to living standards.
Some people (a disproportionately small amount) will have to be hanged. Others (about 40 million, I’d say) will have to be clothed, fed and educated, which is certainly no walk in the park. But after that, pure bliss.
"State of relative barbarism" is gold. I mean, have you ever been to Kyiv? Also you may easily find out about Ukrainian literature by googling it.
I understand that for someone with imperial ideals it's hard to accept, but the Mighty Russian Empire is no more. It's gone to dust over 100 years ago.
Ukraine is less of a failed state than Russia is, and certainly much less of a failed nation (otherwise the hybrid war of 2014 would've consumed it completely).
Are we talking about the same country? The poorest or second-poorest in Europe depending on whether you ask the IMF or the World Bank? The one that had spent pretty much it’s whole short and miserable history in a state of political instability and economic stagnation?
I’ve been to Kiev, it’s Moscow circa 2005. I realise that as a Ukranian (ah, the -ko surnames) you have certain sympathies, but come on, let’s be real. Russian Empire might be gone, but reality is still here.
I'm Jewish, not Ukrainian. Last time I visited Kiev (2018) - it felt much better than Moscow, where I spent most of my life. Sure, they don't have oil, but at least they have a nation.
Ah, your point is understandable then – as a late-era Soviet Jew you’d probably give even Basaev a favourable mention in the House of Commons if he was fighting the Russians. An interesting, if unfortunate, cultural quirk. Not that I’m judging you in any way - one can only admire such strong and sensible convictions.
For the record, I'd support any genuine Russian nationalism any time of the day, for the same reason I support Zionism (I've been Sputnik & Pogrom subscriber until this whole debacle with "Novorossia").
The op in Ukraine has absolutely nothing to do with true reaction, or Russians as a nation. It's just what it is - a KGB sham.
I have to point out here that there already are multiple subjects of the Russian Federation that have a lot less in common with the ethnic Russian population than Ukraine. Also, given what you said, I'm sure you'll agree that given the ethnic makeup of Eastern Ukraine, their local uprising was also 'quite real', regardless of any 'hybrid warfare'.
Now regarding Putin - first of all, neither he nor the people around him have any real ideology besides empowering themselves and enjoying life. That itself is not really a problem - they are in power, and those in power cannot be corrupt because power is above the law. The problem is that their incentives are skewed by having to play at democracy. Russia already functions like a monarchy in many respects, the problem is that it's not formalized - and so Putin and his court have no reason to keep their money within the country(for example).
Now, if Putin were to unexpectedly discover that he has Rurikid ancestry, become a monarch and then ennoble his many friends - then suddenly, investing locally would become a much more attractive proposition for the Russian elite. The good news of course is that sanctions might push things in that direction anyway - at least the latter part.
The most delicious complication to the whole scenario is that the Ukrainian nationalist hard-line is pretty Nazi, while the pro-Russians are often Soviet nostalgics on the political left. In any case, my impression is that half of Ukraine at least would be perfectly content being part of a country that is not the second-poorest of Europe, and a dedicated exporter of whores.
If we think of Ukrainian hard-liners as followers of Bandera (more or less) - it's hardly any Nazi (that's another Soviet legend). Bandera did actually spend time in German concentration camp for an attempt to declare an independent Ukraine, and although he did leverage Germany's support later when they released him in hope he can be a deterrent for Soviet advancement at the end of the war, he didn't have anything in common with them (besides antisemitism, which is pretty common for all slavic nations).
I mean the true core: the Right Sector/Azov Battalion guys. Those who would fight the Russians to the death. They're few in numbers, relatively, but they're fundamental to the movement, as they were in Maidan.
I don't see any connection to Nazi there either (although RT will surely tell you otherwise). Around 2014 there were stories of orthodox Jews volunteered for Azov IIRC.
You seem to be a bit of a reality-denier, I'm afraid: we're talking of a country that is using a Nazi-era salutation as national standard ("Glory to Ukraine"), that has as its most effective fighting force a battalion made up of 1488-style Nazis who make Nazi salutes and use Nazi insignias and memorabilia (Azov), that holds regular celebrations and homages to Nazi heroes from the German occupation era, and that has deserved its own "Look how many Nazis there are here" report by Harper's https://harpers.org/archive/2021/01/the-armies-of-the-right-ukraine-militias/ Look, man, I covered the war in Donbass, I know what's going on there. Stop digging.
They're nationalists, of course. That doesn't directly connect them to NSDAP. Again their role model is Stepan Bandera, whose involvement with Germans is well documented (he used them to his own ends, not without some success).
To quote the old Reagan Republicans at Powerline: "I am a biased observer, but it seems likely to me that Russia’s aggressiveness is driven in part by the fact that the President of the United States suffers from senile dementia. If I were Putin (or Xi, but that is a matter for another post), I would view the Biden administration as a once-in-a-century opportunity to make strategic gains that will be difficult or impossible to reverse. I fear that is what we are seeing." We may soon see the downsides (upsides?) of Roman-style rule by courtier. There would be no such opening with Trump in the WH.
Cleaning up the streets is easy (comparatively). Creating wealth for the people is hard. You have to institute the rule of law and the sacredness (culturally) of contract. The problem with dictators (as opposed to Hoppe-oriented enlightened monarchs) is they don't really have any skin in the game. The Chinese are just being Chinese, as they've been for 3,000 years. The Russians are not the Chinese, and they can't be made to be Chinese even if Xi and his cohorts magically became the rulers of Russia. And Putin, while smarter than Western "leaders" (as if that was hard), is not China/Xi smart.
As you point out, the question of succession has plagued every non-monarchial dictatorship since Augustus. Xi desperately wants to displace the dollar as the reserve currency, and it seems like the Fed wants to help. But for the Renminbi/yuan to displace the dollar, it would have to be fully convertible to other currencies and businesses would have to be able to take the yuan out of the country and hold it in non-Chinese banks. You don't think the Saudis are going to accept yuan for oil if they have to have their deposits in a Chinese bank, do you? But if the yuan became convertible and exportable, the entire upper-middle class of China would leave for the Western Hemisphere. The oligarchs would stay--they own property. The poor and lower-middle class would stay--someone has to make iPhones. But the capital would flee. So Xi is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
The only way to destroy the United States in an afternoon (it might take a few years to build up credibility, but it would utterly destroy the US), is to ruthlessly tie the yuan to gold and then let the economic chips fall where they may when they demand all payments in gold (or gold-backed yuan). Obviously, the US financial house of cards would collapse basically instantly, as the Saudis would in fact take gold for oil. The Russians could join in and tie the ruble to gold too, just to stamp on our battered body.
But...but...but...doing this would remove forever the ability of the government to engage in graft and major-league corruption, which is the raison d'etre of both the Russian and Chinese governments. So they're in a bind. Destroying the hated United States while suffering zero casualties is literally minutes away, but the price to the leadership--honest governance with only a little skimming of tax money, rather than the wholesale death-defying level of corruption dominant in those countries--is too much. So until the Fed ruins the dollar all by itself, the US will remain the de facto leader of the world, financially and militarily.
You see, even if the US *wanted* to get out of Europe, it couldn't. All of European banking is also at its root based on the dollar. Bretton Woods may be "overthrown", but its ghost is still there guiding the remains of the Second World War. You talk about Putin supporting elements of reaction. Fine. I wish him well. But given how meekly and voluntarily that the peoples in Europe--all of Europe, not just the West--have submitted themselves to the absurd and unworkable (not to mention idiotic) covidtalitarianism of the last two years, the idea that there is any popular mandate in favor of the cultural/political sanity a good dose of reaction would bring is not supported by the data. Sure, people protest mandatory vaccines, everyone will protest state-mandated poisoning of children, but even when given a chance, they won't even cast their votes against these Branch Covidian dictators.
The people of Poland, Czechia, and Hungary have shown a boldness in protesting the giant amorphous blob of governance that is the EU, and good for them. But have any of these governments shown even a quarter of the initiative against Faucism that Governor DeSantis has shown in Florida? Not a one. These leaders may have gotten off the train to Crazytown when it comes to the ridiculous gay/trans agenda, but if they can't even see that masks don't actually do anything and that the vaccines do very little and only temporarily, even when these facts are staring them in the face at less than the required six-foot social distance, I doubt the people even have the gumption to say "men aren't women" and make it stick.
So, all hail your idea. Let Putin try being the leader of the free world for a while. Certainly the sociopathic demented pedophile nominally in that position isn't going to be doing any leading. But Putin wouldn't know what to do with Ukraine if he did invade, much less Poland or Hungary--or Germany. It'd be a bloodbath of civil war and the US would be dragged back in AGAIN, and like the last time, the US Army would sort things out and then the US State Department would royally fuck things up again like they did after the last three European Wars came to an end. So maybe the status quo isn't so bad after all.
South Sudan may be a joke because of its corruption, but not because it is an inorganic construct. The South Sudanese are totally different from the Sudanese, since they are mostly Christian, speak English and are Nilotic blacks. Folks from Sudan proper are Muslim, speak Arabic and are Saharan browns. Had you said the name is a joke, sure, but that can be easily rectified (actually Sudan proper should change its name to Nubia). The fact that the State Department happened to be on the side of ethno-statism is a nice broken clock-is-right moment.
Bilbo Baggins, Equity Lord and CEO-monarch of the new American Operating Company peers over a map of Europe. "And why shouldn't I?" He mutters to himself. "Why shouldn't I keep it?" Why shouldn't he, indeed.
Your original handle's mentor advised those seeking wisdom to call things by their proper names. Your own Formalism echoes this. Should we treat France like a sovereign and independent country? Well, to answer that, shouldn't we first ask, "is it?"
In the case of France, I think the answer is pretty clearly, "no." On questions of defense, it must defer to State. And if their defense doesn't come from the sovereign region of France, it isn't sovereignty. It's just sparkling suzerainty.
So, as it's sole provider of hemispheric defense services, France ought to be paying us tribute. It currently isn't, and so the first thing that needs to be done is to turn this nonpaying consumer of sovereignty services into a paying customer. Paying in what? Why, paying in dollar of course. The French will work making wine and cheese which we will then buy and they will take those dollars and pay their defense fees. Think of it like MMT, except based.
As an aside, no discussion of a coup no matter how cozy is complete without discussing the MIC. Yes, there would have to be a MIC in the new regime. It can be a leaner and meaner one, producing the minimum viable defense products, but it will still be there, turning butter into tanks.
Coming back to Europe, there's no reason why they can't be given plenty of local autonomy under your leanest and meanest possible defensive posture. You can make it obivous to everyone in Europe what a sweet deal being your tributary is by simply crunching the numbers and figuring out exactly what it would take for them to start defending their own continent.
If they still aren't willing to pay, well, I suppose they might prefer rule from Moscow, and your plan serves as a fine option B for them.
There do seem to be some open questions about borders in the East. It seems to me that the best course of action there is to sit down with old Vlad and just work out where the lines should be. I would expect Russia, who is in fact an independent military peer, to be amenable to this. This alone would be a refreshing change of pace from current State policy.
CY: “Liberal ideas are not indigenous to the region. They are Anglo-American ideas.”
– I guess “liberal ideas” boil down to the slogan “People should do whatever they please”, as opposed to the French slogan “People should rationally coordinate their activities”, the German slogan “People should channel the nature-gods”, the Italian slogan “People should be beautiful” and the Spanish slogan “People should be noble”? And the “People should do whatever they please” slogan results in interesting hobbies on the one hand and in irresponsible decentralized oligarchy on the other hand – resulting in irresponsible decentralized oligarchy because what a lot of people naturally want to do is to dominate other people?
So libertarian dictatorship (monarchy) would be good for us AngloAmericans because it would let interesting people pursue their interesting hobbies while preventing boring jerks from dominating everyone else in unofficial irresponsible ways?
I think that we should figure out what’s good about us and focus on how to protect and promote that good thing rather than on what’s bad about us and how mean we are to other people such as the poor Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, and Spanish whose wonderful diverse vibrancies we’ve messed up.
Will the gap between real and ideal Putin that's resulted in Crimea being a "half-ruined backwater ruled by some petty local thug" rather than "California with Police", result in a Russia centered Europe being some broken remake of the Warsaw Pact rather than glittering hub of restored order?
As to if that's better or worse than Europe's current trajectory, I have no good answers.
I'm not particularly knowledgeable about current Russian politics, because it's hard to find sources that don't have a bias you can basically cut with a machete.
Mostly first-hand experience being a tracksuited snow-ape in question (who also does some consulting work for the government now and then). Soviet people (and Putin is a Soviet man through and through) are problematic. Even the best of them (one of which Putin is not) grew up in the Soviet mirror world where many things, often the most basic ones (nature of social conflict, national and ethnic identity, ways of acquiring and holding property etc) were warped beyond recognition. The toughest Soviets (one of which Putin certainly is) can adapt and function outside the planned economy zoo, but even they rarely excel. Wait until the new gen, ones who grew up in the primal wilderness of the Russian 1990s, come to power. Time is almost up.
That said, I doubt any sane Russian regime would want to interact with the world beyond the Curzon line, let alone save it. It’s a “fool me twice” type of situation. By all means, do keep stewing in your gay, you’ve earned it.
Fair enough, even going that far means defeating NATO, and some very strong national spirits in the Baltic, at least according to the people I've talked to in that part of the world. I don't blame Russia for aspiring to reclaim it's old possessions, but I try not to whitewash the likely results of it either.
I agree with you though, the West has most certainly made it's bed, and expecting another civilization to save it is foolish.
The Baltics are rapidly depopulating as it is, and we can wait 10, 15, 20 years – there’s nothing there except sentimental value, some operational depth and an ungodly amount of beavers.
Annexing Ukraine and Belorussia, on the other hand, is a humane thing to do. Whitewashing aside, no other power needs them, wants them or has reasons to care enough to save them from the degrading mess their independencies are - certainly not the State Dept and not the IMF.
Are they depopulating faster than Russia, or is there a plan for that?
As for Belorussia, it's certainly unlikely that Putin could do a worse job than local authorities. As for Ukriane, it seems that at least the western half of it is some kind of distinct national group.
The links might look sketchy, but they're just Stratfor write-ups on Russia back from when George Friedman was still running the company. They're impartial and very very good.
Okay, I’m sorry for being harsh. It’s just I would advise to never listen to certain kinds of Americans on Russia, and East Block Jewish immigrants fall firmly into that category. It’s unavoidably all cossacks, snow and impending doom for them. Must be something cultural. The result of the warped perception is often even weirder than the usual think tank drivel.
The neo Westphalian Europa is probably a fantasy but think about how cool it would be. Imagine the uniforms! The re-channeling of Teutonic autism into the revived Prussia. One can dream
Dear Curtis Yarvin, have you seen the new Amanda Milius interview on Tucker Carlson Today, the same Tucker show where I first heard about you? She made the popular documentary about the Lee Smith book of how the Deep State sabotaged the Trump administration. It's a much better interview than her self-centered (and drunken) recent appearance on Timcast IRL (and Timcast Members Only pay wall, for the worst drunken section). Her dad wrote the film Apocalypse Now and also Red Dawn. You two should interview each other on a Malice podcast. You two might keep up with each other pretty well, talking politics, etc. I'm not sure if you should encourage alcohol until you have established that you can get along sober first. She might be annoying when drunk, unless you are equally inebriated, but I don't know.
One of the most entertaining parts of any GM post is the Talk page of the Wikipedia articles he links to. Always funny seeing nationalist nerd fights about something that happened in Eastern Southwest Slimeymudholestan in 1708.
This is one of those rare cases when some of assumptions are just wrong (I lived in Russia since 1972 when I was born, until 2014):
- There are three different kinds of Ukraine:
-- western part was annexed by Soviets as a part of Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, never really belonged to Russian Empire historically, and the population genuinely hates Russia as occupants;
-- eastern part & Crimea _was_ actually Russia before Soviets;
-- central part (think Kyiv) is 50/50, but mentally it's very different from Russia anyway.
- Ukrainian language is not in any way a 'peasant dialect' - it's very distinctive and different from Russian; maybe less different than Polish, but a typical Russian speaker will be able to comprehend a literary Ukrainian maybe only slightly better than Polish.
- Events of 2014, _regardless_ of State Department involvement, were quite real, genuine restoration of the national sovereignty.
- Ukrainians have a serious grudge for Russia, and reasonably so (Holodomor etc); the hybrid war in the eastern provinces didn't make it any better. They do recognize themselves as a different nation now.
- Putin as a reactionary leader is quite an overstatement - he doesn't have neither knowledge nor the vision for this role. If nazis were "Carlyle implemented by swine" - current Russian regime is "Carlyle implemented by a mini pig". Some of his guesses are intuitively correct, but they are not systematic, and his background (communist indoctrination + second-rate KGB officer job in Eastern Germany) doesn't do him any good.
Current Kremlin elite has a very special mythology, a strange mix of Soviet ideology and awe for pre-revolution Russian Empire. The problem is, they're borrowing worst parts from both, and corruption level in the elite is unimaginable by even very low Western standards.
I would say that expecting them to be some sort of a dedicated reactionary force is a wishful thinking.
«Literary Ukranian» implies some sort of literature; there isn’t any. As for your other points, yes, some regional differences do exist, but nothing a capable occupation/integration government can’t handle.
Ukranians can certainly be unruly, and have been left, due to Russia’s recent weakness, in a state of relative barbarism, but even they would mostly welcome a return of law and order. Russia is by no means rich, but it is certainly richer than Ukraine. It is also not a failed state 30 years in the making, and that does wonders to living standards.
Some people (a disproportionately small amount) will have to be hanged. Others (about 40 million, I’d say) will have to be clothed, fed and educated, which is certainly no walk in the park. But after that, pure bliss.
"State of relative barbarism" is gold. I mean, have you ever been to Kyiv? Also you may easily find out about Ukrainian literature by googling it.
I understand that for someone with imperial ideals it's hard to accept, but the Mighty Russian Empire is no more. It's gone to dust over 100 years ago.
Ukraine is less of a failed state than Russia is, and certainly much less of a failed nation (otherwise the hybrid war of 2014 would've consumed it completely).
Are we talking about the same country? The poorest or second-poorest in Europe depending on whether you ask the IMF or the World Bank? The one that had spent pretty much it’s whole short and miserable history in a state of political instability and economic stagnation?
I’ve been to Kiev, it’s Moscow circa 2005. I realise that as a Ukranian (ah, the -ko surnames) you have certain sympathies, but come on, let’s be real. Russian Empire might be gone, but reality is still here.
I'm Jewish, not Ukrainian. Last time I visited Kiev (2018) - it felt much better than Moscow, where I spent most of my life. Sure, they don't have oil, but at least they have a nation.
Ah, your point is understandable then – as a late-era Soviet Jew you’d probably give even Basaev a favourable mention in the House of Commons if he was fighting the Russians. An interesting, if unfortunate, cultural quirk. Not that I’m judging you in any way - one can only admire such strong and sensible convictions.
Good that we have a mutual understanding.
For the record, I'd support any genuine Russian nationalism any time of the day, for the same reason I support Zionism (I've been Sputnik & Pogrom subscriber until this whole debacle with "Novorossia").
The op in Ukraine has absolutely nothing to do with true reaction, or Russians as a nation. It's just what it is - a KGB sham.
I have to point out here that there already are multiple subjects of the Russian Federation that have a lot less in common with the ethnic Russian population than Ukraine. Also, given what you said, I'm sure you'll agree that given the ethnic makeup of Eastern Ukraine, their local uprising was also 'quite real', regardless of any 'hybrid warfare'.
Now regarding Putin - first of all, neither he nor the people around him have any real ideology besides empowering themselves and enjoying life. That itself is not really a problem - they are in power, and those in power cannot be corrupt because power is above the law. The problem is that their incentives are skewed by having to play at democracy. Russia already functions like a monarchy in many respects, the problem is that it's not formalized - and so Putin and his court have no reason to keep their money within the country(for example).
Now, if Putin were to unexpectedly discover that he has Rurikid ancestry, become a monarch and then ennoble his many friends - then suddenly, investing locally would become a much more attractive proposition for the Russian elite. The good news of course is that sanctions might push things in that direction anyway - at least the latter part.
The most delicious complication to the whole scenario is that the Ukrainian nationalist hard-line is pretty Nazi, while the pro-Russians are often Soviet nostalgics on the political left. In any case, my impression is that half of Ukraine at least would be perfectly content being part of a country that is not the second-poorest of Europe, and a dedicated exporter of whores.
If we think of Ukrainian hard-liners as followers of Bandera (more or less) - it's hardly any Nazi (that's another Soviet legend). Bandera did actually spend time in German concentration camp for an attempt to declare an independent Ukraine, and although he did leverage Germany's support later when they released him in hope he can be a deterrent for Soviet advancement at the end of the war, he didn't have anything in common with them (besides antisemitism, which is pretty common for all slavic nations).
I mean the true core: the Right Sector/Azov Battalion guys. Those who would fight the Russians to the death. They're few in numbers, relatively, but they're fundamental to the movement, as they were in Maidan.
I don't see any connection to Nazi there either (although RT will surely tell you otherwise). Around 2014 there were stories of orthodox Jews volunteered for Azov IIRC.
You seem to be a bit of a reality-denier, I'm afraid: we're talking of a country that is using a Nazi-era salutation as national standard ("Glory to Ukraine"), that has as its most effective fighting force a battalion made up of 1488-style Nazis who make Nazi salutes and use Nazi insignias and memorabilia (Azov), that holds regular celebrations and homages to Nazi heroes from the German occupation era, and that has deserved its own "Look how many Nazis there are here" report by Harper's https://harpers.org/archive/2021/01/the-armies-of-the-right-ukraine-militias/ Look, man, I covered the war in Donbass, I know what's going on there. Stop digging.
They're nationalists, of course. That doesn't directly connect them to NSDAP. Again their role model is Stepan Bandera, whose involvement with Germans is well documented (he used them to his own ends, not without some success).
To quote the old Reagan Republicans at Powerline: "I am a biased observer, but it seems likely to me that Russia’s aggressiveness is driven in part by the fact that the President of the United States suffers from senile dementia. If I were Putin (or Xi, but that is a matter for another post), I would view the Biden administration as a once-in-a-century opportunity to make strategic gains that will be difficult or impossible to reverse. I fear that is what we are seeing." We may soon see the downsides (upsides?) of Roman-style rule by courtier. There would be no such opening with Trump in the WH.
Cleaning up the streets is easy (comparatively). Creating wealth for the people is hard. You have to institute the rule of law and the sacredness (culturally) of contract. The problem with dictators (as opposed to Hoppe-oriented enlightened monarchs) is they don't really have any skin in the game. The Chinese are just being Chinese, as they've been for 3,000 years. The Russians are not the Chinese, and they can't be made to be Chinese even if Xi and his cohorts magically became the rulers of Russia. And Putin, while smarter than Western "leaders" (as if that was hard), is not China/Xi smart.
As you point out, the question of succession has plagued every non-monarchial dictatorship since Augustus. Xi desperately wants to displace the dollar as the reserve currency, and it seems like the Fed wants to help. But for the Renminbi/yuan to displace the dollar, it would have to be fully convertible to other currencies and businesses would have to be able to take the yuan out of the country and hold it in non-Chinese banks. You don't think the Saudis are going to accept yuan for oil if they have to have their deposits in a Chinese bank, do you? But if the yuan became convertible and exportable, the entire upper-middle class of China would leave for the Western Hemisphere. The oligarchs would stay--they own property. The poor and lower-middle class would stay--someone has to make iPhones. But the capital would flee. So Xi is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
The only way to destroy the United States in an afternoon (it might take a few years to build up credibility, but it would utterly destroy the US), is to ruthlessly tie the yuan to gold and then let the economic chips fall where they may when they demand all payments in gold (or gold-backed yuan). Obviously, the US financial house of cards would collapse basically instantly, as the Saudis would in fact take gold for oil. The Russians could join in and tie the ruble to gold too, just to stamp on our battered body.
But...but...but...doing this would remove forever the ability of the government to engage in graft and major-league corruption, which is the raison d'etre of both the Russian and Chinese governments. So they're in a bind. Destroying the hated United States while suffering zero casualties is literally minutes away, but the price to the leadership--honest governance with only a little skimming of tax money, rather than the wholesale death-defying level of corruption dominant in those countries--is too much. So until the Fed ruins the dollar all by itself, the US will remain the de facto leader of the world, financially and militarily.
You see, even if the US *wanted* to get out of Europe, it couldn't. All of European banking is also at its root based on the dollar. Bretton Woods may be "overthrown", but its ghost is still there guiding the remains of the Second World War. You talk about Putin supporting elements of reaction. Fine. I wish him well. But given how meekly and voluntarily that the peoples in Europe--all of Europe, not just the West--have submitted themselves to the absurd and unworkable (not to mention idiotic) covidtalitarianism of the last two years, the idea that there is any popular mandate in favor of the cultural/political sanity a good dose of reaction would bring is not supported by the data. Sure, people protest mandatory vaccines, everyone will protest state-mandated poisoning of children, but even when given a chance, they won't even cast their votes against these Branch Covidian dictators.
The people of Poland, Czechia, and Hungary have shown a boldness in protesting the giant amorphous blob of governance that is the EU, and good for them. But have any of these governments shown even a quarter of the initiative against Faucism that Governor DeSantis has shown in Florida? Not a one. These leaders may have gotten off the train to Crazytown when it comes to the ridiculous gay/trans agenda, but if they can't even see that masks don't actually do anything and that the vaccines do very little and only temporarily, even when these facts are staring them in the face at less than the required six-foot social distance, I doubt the people even have the gumption to say "men aren't women" and make it stick.
So, all hail your idea. Let Putin try being the leader of the free world for a while. Certainly the sociopathic demented pedophile nominally in that position isn't going to be doing any leading. But Putin wouldn't know what to do with Ukraine if he did invade, much less Poland or Hungary--or Germany. It'd be a bloodbath of civil war and the US would be dragged back in AGAIN, and like the last time, the US Army would sort things out and then the US State Department would royally fuck things up again like they did after the last three European Wars came to an end. So maybe the status quo isn't so bad after all.
South Sudan may be a joke because of its corruption, but not because it is an inorganic construct. The South Sudanese are totally different from the Sudanese, since they are mostly Christian, speak English and are Nilotic blacks. Folks from Sudan proper are Muslim, speak Arabic and are Saharan browns. Had you said the name is a joke, sure, but that can be easily rectified (actually Sudan proper should change its name to Nubia). The fact that the State Department happened to be on the side of ethno-statism is a nice broken clock-is-right moment.
Bilbo Baggins, Equity Lord and CEO-monarch of the new American Operating Company peers over a map of Europe. "And why shouldn't I?" He mutters to himself. "Why shouldn't I keep it?" Why shouldn't he, indeed.
Your original handle's mentor advised those seeking wisdom to call things by their proper names. Your own Formalism echoes this. Should we treat France like a sovereign and independent country? Well, to answer that, shouldn't we first ask, "is it?"
In the case of France, I think the answer is pretty clearly, "no." On questions of defense, it must defer to State. And if their defense doesn't come from the sovereign region of France, it isn't sovereignty. It's just sparkling suzerainty.
So, as it's sole provider of hemispheric defense services, France ought to be paying us tribute. It currently isn't, and so the first thing that needs to be done is to turn this nonpaying consumer of sovereignty services into a paying customer. Paying in what? Why, paying in dollar of course. The French will work making wine and cheese which we will then buy and they will take those dollars and pay their defense fees. Think of it like MMT, except based.
As an aside, no discussion of a coup no matter how cozy is complete without discussing the MIC. Yes, there would have to be a MIC in the new regime. It can be a leaner and meaner one, producing the minimum viable defense products, but it will still be there, turning butter into tanks.
Coming back to Europe, there's no reason why they can't be given plenty of local autonomy under your leanest and meanest possible defensive posture. You can make it obivous to everyone in Europe what a sweet deal being your tributary is by simply crunching the numbers and figuring out exactly what it would take for them to start defending their own continent.
If they still aren't willing to pay, well, I suppose they might prefer rule from Moscow, and your plan serves as a fine option B for them.
There do seem to be some open questions about borders in the East. It seems to me that the best course of action there is to sit down with old Vlad and just work out where the lines should be. I would expect Russia, who is in fact an independent military peer, to be amenable to this. This alone would be a refreshing change of pace from current State policy.
"but without porn, K-pop or the gay". I read this on a Blue Monday and worth the price of admission alone
I'm assuming you meant "safe, clean streets without no-go areas," not "safe, clean streets with no-go areas" as written.
CY: “Liberal ideas are not indigenous to the region. They are Anglo-American ideas.”
– I guess “liberal ideas” boil down to the slogan “People should do whatever they please”, as opposed to the French slogan “People should rationally coordinate their activities”, the German slogan “People should channel the nature-gods”, the Italian slogan “People should be beautiful” and the Spanish slogan “People should be noble”? And the “People should do whatever they please” slogan results in interesting hobbies on the one hand and in irresponsible decentralized oligarchy on the other hand – resulting in irresponsible decentralized oligarchy because what a lot of people naturally want to do is to dominate other people?
So libertarian dictatorship (monarchy) would be good for us AngloAmericans because it would let interesting people pursue their interesting hobbies while preventing boring jerks from dominating everyone else in unofficial irresponsible ways?
I think that we should figure out what’s good about us and focus on how to protect and promote that good thing rather than on what’s bad about us and how mean we are to other people such as the poor Frenchmen, Germans, Italians, and Spanish whose wonderful diverse vibrancies we’ve messed up.
Why only to the English channel?
Because the An*los deserve to stew in the gay they brought upon the world.
I want to be made King of Bavaria under the new order. I will resume the important work of Mad King Ludwig!
I guess the real question here is:
Will the gap between real and ideal Putin that's resulted in Crimea being a "half-ruined backwater ruled by some petty local thug" rather than "California with Police", result in a Russia centered Europe being some broken remake of the Warsaw Pact rather than glittering hub of restored order?
As to if that's better or worse than Europe's current trajectory, I have no good answers.
Putin is one political generation away from being the ideal Putin. His generation you can’t fix, but the next one is rather promising.
What makes you think that?
I'm not particularly knowledgeable about current Russian politics, because it's hard to find sources that don't have a bias you can basically cut with a machete.
Mostly first-hand experience being a tracksuited snow-ape in question (who also does some consulting work for the government now and then). Soviet people (and Putin is a Soviet man through and through) are problematic. Even the best of them (one of which Putin is not) grew up in the Soviet mirror world where many things, often the most basic ones (nature of social conflict, national and ethnic identity, ways of acquiring and holding property etc) were warped beyond recognition. The toughest Soviets (one of which Putin certainly is) can adapt and function outside the planned economy zoo, but even they rarely excel. Wait until the new gen, ones who grew up in the primal wilderness of the Russian 1990s, come to power. Time is almost up.
That said, I doubt any sane Russian regime would want to interact with the world beyond the Curzon line, let alone save it. It’s a “fool me twice” type of situation. By all means, do keep stewing in your gay, you’ve earned it.
Fair enough, even going that far means defeating NATO, and some very strong national spirits in the Baltic, at least according to the people I've talked to in that part of the world. I don't blame Russia for aspiring to reclaim it's old possessions, but I try not to whitewash the likely results of it either.
I agree with you though, the West has most certainly made it's bed, and expecting another civilization to save it is foolish.
The Baltics are rapidly depopulating as it is, and we can wait 10, 15, 20 years – there’s nothing there except sentimental value, some operational depth and an ungodly amount of beavers.
Annexing Ukraine and Belorussia, on the other hand, is a humane thing to do. Whitewashing aside, no other power needs them, wants them or has reasons to care enough to save them from the degrading mess their independencies are - certainly not the State Dept and not the IMF.
Are they depopulating faster than Russia, or is there a plan for that?
As for Belorussia, it's certainly unlikely that Putin could do a worse job than local authorities. As for Ukriane, it seems that at least the western half of it is some kind of distinct national group.
My time has come! If you want to learn about Russia from an unbiased source, read these:
https://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/515194/B2C_content/B2CWF2/Kremlinology_-_ebook_final.pdf
https://flavioufabc.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/stratfor-the-geopolitics-of-russia.pdf
The links might look sketchy, but they're just Stratfor write-ups on Russia back from when George Friedman was still running the company. They're impartial and very very good.
>Friedman
>Good writeups on Russia
>Unbiased source
I’d like to express a modicum of doubt. And by that I mean, good God.
Well, could you please elaborate?
How’s that second US-Japanese war going?
Okay, I’m sorry for being harsh. It’s just I would advise to never listen to certain kinds of Americans on Russia, and East Block Jewish immigrants fall firmly into that category. It’s unavoidably all cossacks, snow and impending doom for them. Must be something cultural. The result of the warped perception is often even weirder than the usual think tank drivel.
That certainly looks worth reading, even if our mutual Slavic acquaintance thinks they're awful. I'll keep the salt on hand.
The neo Westphalian Europa is probably a fantasy but think about how cool it would be. Imagine the uniforms! The re-channeling of Teutonic autism into the revived Prussia. One can dream
Dear Curtis Yarvin, have you seen the new Amanda Milius interview on Tucker Carlson Today, the same Tucker show where I first heard about you? She made the popular documentary about the Lee Smith book of how the Deep State sabotaged the Trump administration. It's a much better interview than her self-centered (and drunken) recent appearance on Timcast IRL (and Timcast Members Only pay wall, for the worst drunken section). Her dad wrote the film Apocalypse Now and also Red Dawn. You two should interview each other on a Malice podcast. You two might keep up with each other pretty well, talking politics, etc. I'm not sure if you should encourage alcohol until you have established that you can get along sober first. She might be annoying when drunk, unless you are equally inebriated, but I don't know.
https://twitter.com/AmandaMilius/status/1442603886078873602
Hi all, if you're on Urbit, join the group! ~tonwyn-moslev/gray-mirror
can you accept my join please?
It should be an open group and it says you're a member on my end?
All I know is that it is time the US stopped occupying Germany. Bring the troops home.
One of the most entertaining parts of any GM post is the Talk page of the Wikipedia articles he links to. Always funny seeing nationalist nerd fights about something that happened in Eastern Southwest Slimeymudholestan in 1708.