Summary
Transcript
Well, Jim Tucker has a question about democracies. He says, I recently read an article comparing Ukraine with the errors that democracies made in the mid 1930s. Article maintains that parallel between the ukrainian efforts to stand up to Russia and the Rhineland in 1936 and Czechoslovakia in 1938. Is this a fair assessment? Is there anywhere one can find a clear, honest assessment of the Ukraine situation? Perhaps a timeline of relevant events? I’ll be back.
That’s right, gang. He’s back. It is time to show our support and celebrate the great return by clicking on that link below and getting your very own Trumpinator 2024 bobblehead, in preparation for Donald Trump’s glorious reassendence to the United States presidency, this collectible bobblehead from proud patriots is made with the highest quality material and really is a musthave for any Trump fan who wants to send some energy towards what’s shaping up to be the single most glorious political comeback ever.
Now, don’t wait. They’re just a limited number of these collectibles. You don’t want to be caught paying way more later on on eBay from someone who bought one right now. So whatever you do, don’t wait. Click on that link below and show your support for Trump 2024 today. It’s a good question. I don’t know the answer to that. Specifically, historically, mid 20th century eastern european histories. I’m totally ignorant of that.
In terms of the assessment of what’s really happening, I do tend to recommend to people John Mearsheimer’s lecture on YouTube that he gave before hostilities broke out, before tanks were on their border, where he predicted there was going to be a massive, hot war that would erupt in Ukraine. And it’s because of great power. Just the gist of this thesis is very simple. All states amass power. They have to amass power because they don’t know what the other state is going to do.
The other state might end up invading them or trying to cheat them and trade or what have you. So all states have to amass a certain amount of power, and then eventually what happens is that as they’re amassing amount of power, there’s going to be one state that rises up and becomes a great power, means, in other words, it’s going to have all the resources it needs to be the power that stands over all the other powers.
And then by its nature, what a great power does is it protects what’s known as its hegemon, its region of influence, because that region of influence guarantees its protection. And then generally, you have states that are going to enter into different kind of treaties and alliances with this great power. And this great power will never, ever tolerate a competitor within its sphere, within its region, because that throws the whole thing out of whack.
So just think of what John F. Kennedy did with Khrushchev back in the Bay of Pigs and cuban missile crisis. He will not allow soviet missiles in our sphere. Great power, hegemonic sphere of influence. That’s just the nature of international relations. After the fall of the Soviet Union Union, 1991, the United States became the sole superpower, the sole hegemon, the sole great power on the planet. China was still relatively developing, still relatively poor.
Russia was completely dismembered. Middle East, Africa, Europe. There was no other world power that can even come close to the United States. We, our neocon, neoliberal establishment, use that as an opportunity to begin to reconfigure all the rules, all of the international institutions, IMF, WTO, World bank, and all that, all in such a way that guarantees american hegemony over the planet, basically. So that’s what a rules based order is, is a international order that siphons through these institutions that give us the rules by which an order emerges, WTO, IMF, and the World bank and the like.
What Mirstheimer argued is that in that process, what we were doing is we were using NATO as a way of sort of isolating Russia, because we noticed that Russia wasn’t playing by those rules. Russia was, particularly under Putin. And starting around 2000, Russia wasn’t joining up with the program. And so what we did with Hungary, and if I recall, the Czech Republic Clinton did in 1998, brought them into NATO.
We started to do with all the nations, Poland, all the eastern european nations, all the former Warsaw pact nations, all those nations started coming into NATO. The problem is that as that was happening, Russia was rising and returning to its position as a eurasian hegemon. It was becoming a great power, a military power, as was China, as was India. And so what Mirstheimer warned the west was stop encroaching NATO eastward towards Russia’s borders, stop doing that because Russia under Putin has become, for all practical purposes, a great power, a hegemon over that region.
It has literally a eurasian alliance of all of its former, know, Georgia and armenian satellite states, Azerbaijan. So. And the more you creep into the sphere, the more they are going to be forced to push you out, just like John Kennedy did to Khrushchev. And if you so much as think of going into Ukraine, that’s it. I can guarantee you the attempt to bring Ukraine into NATO will be the powder keg that blows up a hot war with Russia and Russia will invade Ukraine.
Russia will not allow Ukraine to disrupt its hegemon. And that’s exactly in effect what has nothing to do with democracy. Nothing. Obviously Zelensky is a thug. He’s a dictator. He doesn’t have a democratic bone in his body. It’s got nothing to do with democracy. It’s got nothing to do with Russia being this bad know, dictator, Putin and all that sort of. It has everything to do with bumbling Biden trying to hold on to a unipolar rules based order that doesn’t exist anymore.
It’s that simple. I hope you enjoyed that clip of my Monday night Insiders club livestream. Join us live next week by clicking on the link in the description below and joining the coalition of Patriots worldwide, building a parallel economy to return to our roots of faith, family and freedom. Click below right now close. .