Tag: League of Nations

Cuckold Europe, prop up dictators: Trump’s global plot laid bare

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Cuckold Europe, prop up dictators: Trump’s global plot laid bare

A month after Donald Trump’s second inauguration and the geopolitical global upheaval that may be unprecedented, one thing is clear: The president is an American sovereigntist, not an isolationist. Once this is understood, Trump’s seemingly wild upturning of the geopolitical order actually makes sense.

Sovereigntists are illiberal internationalists. They came of age after World War I, preventing the US from joining the League of Nations (the predecessor of the United Nations). At the time, American sovereigntists regarded the league as a stalking horse for global governance, anti-colonial independence movements, black internationalists, left-wing political movements and liberal Christians.

Today’s sovereigntists aim to weaken non-Western international associations that seek a more democratic international order. They make common cause with similar forces; Giorgia Meloni of Italy and Hungary’s Viktor Orban, for example. Their aim is an illiberal international geopolitical order where domestic political systems resemble “competitive authoritarianism” – multi-party elections embedded in a rigged legal and political environment. Under this model, the media and the machinery of government are used to attack opponents and co-opt critics.

Trump wants the US, not China, to write the technical standards of the global economy. Control over these standards creates lock-in effects in finance, telecommunications, space, robotics, bioengineering, nanotechnologies, and advanced materials and manufacturing methods. That means full-spectrum rivalry with China. If economic control is not possible, the plan B goal is global economic separation from China.

For Trump to achieve these goals, there are three key frontlines: Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Taiwan.

The Fascist Mimicry of Anti-Imperialism

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

A little more than a century ago the world’s superpower was the British Empire. Despite being a constitutional monarchy where the aristocracy and monarchy still retained significant power, the British Empire was arguably the birthplace of the industrial revolution and it played a significant role in spreading capitalism around the world through colonialism. From around the 19th century until the early 20th century, many saw the British Empire as quite possibly the most affluent and powerful capitalist-colonial empire in the world. The British Empire as the capitalist-colonial hegemon extracts resources from its colonies, transforms them into commodities, and sells them for a profit that would go into the pockets of capitalists and royal colonizers alike. There were other competing colonizers such as France, The Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Japan, and the U.S., but none of them (except the U.S. in the late 20th century) could quite surpass the British Empire. The British Empire was the largest epicenter of world capitalist imperialism and being an anti-imperialist was almost (though not quite) synonymous with being against the British Empire. The geopolitical status of the British Empire is roughly or loosely analogous to the geopolitical status that the U.S. enjoyed since the late 20th century. Both the British Empire and the U.S. enjoy the status of being a hegemonic empire due to their overwhelmingly powerful military (especially their navy) and almost unparalleled economic power.

The Fascist Mimicry of Anti-Imperialism

American Paranoia: How the First World War triggered a wave of xenophobia and a Red Scare

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

In 1912 Woodrow Wilson was an unlikely Democratic candidate for the presidency, a sometime law professor and president of Princeton who had only served in public office for two years, as governor of New Jersey. But then it would be an unusual election, with a three-way fight. When the incumbent, William Howard Taft, defeated Theodore Roosevelt, his predecessor in the White House, for the Republican nomination, Roosevelt ran as a “Progressive”, splitting the Republican vote and allowing Wilson to win the presidency with little more than two-fifths of the popular vote.

American Paranoia: How the First World War triggered a wave of xenophobia and a Red Scare

Why Does Humanity Still Tolerate the Tragedy of Wars in the 21st Century? The Big Picture

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Since the end of the Second World War (1939-1945), there have been many civil wars and several important regional military conflicts between two or more countries, but none has evolved into a general world war involving all the most heavily armed countries. The most serious regional wars were the Korean War (1950-1953), the Vietnam War (1955-1975), the Iraq War (2003-2011), the Syria War (2011- ), and the Ukraine War (2022- ).

Why Does Humanity Still Tolerate the Tragedy of Wars in the 21st Century? The Big Picture

H/T: Der Friedensstifter

Political West mulls reshaping UN and what’s left of international law

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

By Drago Bosnic | April 27, 2022

In order to understand the prelude to World War 2, one cannot ignore the failures of the long-defunct League of Nations, which was a UN-like structure aimed at being a forum of countries resolving disputes through dialogue rather than war. Although just another noble idea before World War 1, in the immediate aftermath of the sheer death and destruction resulting from that conflict, it became an urgent necessity. The League of Nations was supposed to make sure nothing of sorts ever happened again.

Political West mulls reshaping UN and what’s left of international law

Related:

UNGA adopts Veto resolution by consensus, India voices serious concerns

Poland signs humiliating surrender agreement with the US

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Poland signs humiliating surrender agreement with the US

The Poland-US agreement has turned out to be a cover for the rescinding of Polish sovereignty. Under the agreement’s terms, Poland will no longer be allowed to inspect American vehicles and aircraft, will allow American commanders to restrict access to new US bases at will, and will allow unrestricted temporary on-demand access to both state and privately-owned land and buildings.

And for this privilege, Poland will graciously foot the bill.

Related:

Stalin ‘planned to send a million troops to stop Hitler if Britain and France agreed pact’