The US bloc speaks explicitly of its national interest but tends to adopt multilateralism in military strategy. The European Union bloc seeks expansionism in order to continue its project to stretch from the Atlantic to the Urals and quite possibly extend via Turkey into the Middle East. Its current concerns for expanding the Eurozone requires an economic model of continued expansion for growth as the differing GDPs of its member states are being forced into a political equalisation that is causing stagnation. Thus, the Bush regimes and the Obama regime, being of the Left, can ally happily to further global governance and further their individual projects in turn, as their common objective is a one world, Socialist government.
It shirks the globalist idea of the merging into one Euro-US-Anglosphere power bloc controlled by a Corporate Socialist elite. It favours the strengthening of nation state democracy. It sees the Corporate Socialist progression more generally as anti-Constitutional in terms of the US and anti-democratic in respect to nation state democracy in Europe. The Corporate Socialist progression, more generally, is best viewed as seeking to establish a totalitarian technocracy, largely through the implementation of UN mandates in the US and in Europe. An imperative the current Trump administration would not support to Make America great again.
Concerning the Islamic bloc, conflicts of interest between national governments and the overarching goal of a global caliphate are always ultimately resolved in favour of the supremacy of the faith. Dhimmitude for those that refuse this ethos is tantamount to enslavement without the due recognition of equal rights for non-believers. Sharia law is tantamount to the imposition of a retributive and not a reformative penology.
Chain of Deceit Series
A Russian-Chinese alliance emphasises geopolitical and military concerns, whilst justifying and glossing over these with a proclaimed peaceful economic agenda; the Western alliance emphasises the economic and liberal progressive view, whilst not being entirely unconscious of the military advantages; while Islam stresses politico-theocratic concerns, whilst yet funding these in the military arena.
There is overlap in the arms respect that denotes a tendency to conflict and hot war. The distinctive groups reflect this common characteristic, but in turn a different ruling class. Their positions were granted only with the approval of the Communist party of each country or region. Later developments in Trotsky's theories, notably Tony Cliff's theory of State Capitalism, refers to the nomenklatura as a new class.
Saudi Arabians with Salafist influence whilst proposing opposition to the Islamic terrorists of Isis or Al Qaeda for example, too often are revealed as covertly supporting these very terrorist organisations themselves and originating their concerns ideologically as well as financially. In the long term, however, it seems unlikely that clashes between Sunni and Shia will abate, even with the successful achievement of a global caliphate. Internal conflict greatly undermines their efficacy to rule the planet in anything other than demographic terms. Some common characteristics that help form the current three temporary Projects The three current power projects formed by the blocs are temporary, as they ultimately have their own desire to rule and achieve hegemony.
Conflicting and competing ideas of what constitute these blocs might even result in small scale disputes and local battles within themselves.
Presently, however, these three projects form temporary alliances which can be generally classified. Their powers being limited respectively by the ideological, economic and the technical capabilities they possess.
Broadly speaking, as Professor Olavo de Carvalho has similarly expressed op. In this preference, the elite power structures of the former Communist Russia and the present Communist China are effectively unchanged and have been ever since their respective revolutions. By contrast, the Western globalist elite projects a unipolar and multipolar strategy. This is susceptible to a dialectic characterisation in its unipolar universalism and multi-lateralism. However, US unipolar hegemonic concerns are clearly to the fore in initiating action. Furthermore, it tends to manipulate its partners to maintain its own agenda as the presiding super power.
This imbalance will most likely lead to the demise of temporary alliances in the future. The increased likelihood of conflict to maintain one or other power. This has already been apparent in the first part of the 21 st century in respect to the US and the overseas wars waged for vital resources and to further geopolitical advantage in the Middle East, as well as to stimulate its production of arms by the corporate-military complex.
Get A Copy
As a rule of thumb, if corporate interests collide with those of a nation, it does not hesitate to turn against that nation for its own interests. This is the case too even in respect to its allies, and in respect even to the United States and its relations with the West. Corporations are prepared to subjugate and manipulate any one nation in order to achieve and further their own interests, usually cast in profit margin terms and an extension of power, which gives the impression of being increasingly fascistic.
At present, they are revealed not as nationalists, as of old, but as a global force that transcends national politics, they yet seek to influence and control particular governments to further their specific concerns. Divergences arising from clashes of national interest for example, between Iran and Saudi Arabia have not ultimately undermined the unity of the long-term theocratic project, nor the world mission to convert all to Islam.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a political unifier and facilitator of the process. It is a global organisation, which governs some countries, and in others provides opposition. The extent of its influence is far reaching in the Islamic world and stands as a bridge between the ethos of the faith and the political sphere. It is also a propagator of Islamic terrorism itself and has consequently been determined as a terrorist organisation in particular 38The US dollar is presently the global reserve currency and has much to do with the present corporations and powerful institutions advantaging US political concerns on the international stage.
Corporate interests inevitably will curtail its influence in the future if they continue to favour a Chinese market and continue to pursue in their search for increased profits a policy of shipping jobs and manufacturing overseas. The common characteristic they share purveys a rather hypocritical deceit The three temporary projects reflect a rather hypocritical self-projection in their negative propaganda speeches: an attitude suggesting that the fate of the world in any opposing camp is in great peril and run by power mad ideologues bent on world domination.
The dialectic debates, arguments and rhetoric to justify their positions are continuously shifting and evolving. Russian Eurasianism: a quasi- fascistic, neo Imperialism that has territorial ambitions realised by primarily militaristic means and curtailed presently by exerting economic sanctions on Russia. This is particularly so in respect to oil rich and powerful countries such as Salafist influenced Saudi Arabia, even when its own human rights record is poor.
This is a rather hypocritical stance when the West generally proclaims it has a concern for human rights, and often invokes this ethos in order to distinguish it as a more moral and beneficent agent. In this, then, the West seeks an artificial distinction. It distinguishes Islam from Islamism for pragmatic purposes, deeming the former as a peaceful friend and the latter as a perversion of Islamic beliefs on the way to extinction.
- Full text of "Zygmund Dobbs The Great Deceit".
- Dangerously Erotic Stories: 30 Sex Stories (350+ Pages)?
- Some Literary Criticism quotes;
These distinctions, however, do not stand up to stringent examination. In this, they hypocritically claim, the latter is just as perverse as the former, because it too is a kind of religious fascism, when in fact Christianity is chiefly one of its main victims. They facilitate in this support continued immigration of Muslims to strengthen the alliance. This is done in the name of open borders and the supposed virtues of multi-culturalism.
They blur the distinction between Islam and Islamism in this and propagate the virtues of unending immigration with a no borders ideal to further their own egalitarian, no borders, revolutionary cause. A cause once steeped in the values of the globalist Communist cause, which sought to trigger revolutionary uprisings in nation states. They do this in the name of tolerance and diversity and a concern with equal rights that seeks to shame or shout down opposition, even if sharia is antithetical to human rights and liberal democracy in turn.
This is viewed as being part of an ongoing deception in a struggle for global control, due to sympathetic and still live ideological leanings.
The more popular view, however, presently focuses on Russia alone; perceiving it as a danger due to its increasingly nationalistic, neo- Imperialistic stance. The view is also widely supported amongst foreign delegates and Commission officials in the European Union hierarchy. China, on the other hand specifically since the Nixon era is generally presented as an ally of the West.
This is for the same economic and financial reasons the West tolerates Saudi Arabia. In the worst case, China is usually portrayed as a somewhat dangerous free trade competitor.
It presents the enemy as the natural heir to the Crusades and sometimes as the personification of modern materialism, immorality, perversion and hedonism. This way, irreconcilable theoretical incompatibilities are circumvented. It enables also a covert temporary alliance to be discerned in both Neo-Eurasian and Islamic circles to work against the West. The current claims of Russia to be attacking Isis appear to be born more out of the fact that these terrorists were largely funded by the Obama administration in an attempt to expunge Assad in Syria.
More generally, the alliance between the Left and Islam has been justified by some theoreticians of the Caliphate, who allege that Socialism, once triumphant in the world, will need a religion.konnbu.xsrv.jp/cache/156-hydroxychloroquine-buy.php
Retribution: Chain of Deceit, Book 2 (Unabridged) on Apple Books
This religion will be Islam. Whereas Islam will need an economic model and this will be found in Socialism. This appears to be a banner taken up by the Western Socialists, rather than the Russians or the Chinese Communists, at least overtly.