“He emphasized that the FBI has been his agency’s “top partner.” “ This does not seem to me to be a role for the FBI.. don’t they have enough US criminals to catch?
They call it "malinformation" -- true info but inconvenient for the establishment narrative. They actually created a word for it. You gotta hand it to these try-hard govt stooges -- they'd fill entire concentration camps with us wrong-thinkers if their masters ordered it. Of course they can't fix the electrical grid, but they are tireless at censorship.
If you really want to know why, read Michael Hudson. He explains the geo-economic forces at play that undergird the entire anti-Russia/anti-China exercise. The short version is the western global homogenization project of the past 80 years -- the plan was for financial monopolies to control world trade and function as a global rentier class, a sort of neo-feudalism. China was to be the world's cheap labor factory, but they had other plans -- Xi represents the final nail in the western project for China. Russia was to be broken up and plundered after the USSR collapsed but Putin came in, took control from the western-backed oligarchs and became a mortal enemy of the western capitalist class. When you hear western leaders use the word democracy what they mean is a government weak enough to be controlled by a small crew of oligarchs. When they call a nation an autocracy they mean a country with a strong enough central govt to keep the oligarchs from complete plunder. You can find Hudson's interviews all over the internet, on video and text. I highly recommend him if you want a deeper understanding of the underlying forces at play.
Very interesting piece. It's an uncomfortable truth we seem to be dealing with that falsehoods, bad actors and would-be heroes are all muddying the truth.
I think this is an interesting article that highlights the complexity of the role intelligence agencies play in society. It’s easy to point at them when they do horrible things, but imagine eliminating these agencies completely. How so do you think it would be before people were screaming for them to come back? The bottom line is we live in a world where we have to have agencies like CIA, FBI and DHS because even though they overstep their mandates, the threats are not imaginary and the war of spies won’t end just because we might decide to eliminate our agencies.
Unfortunately, the only curative is a dogged and unrelenting press coupled with clear laws and a trustworthy judiciary. This is ultimately what the real problem was with the Patriot Act and the various NDAA’s that erased meaningful boundaries between our enemies and our citizenry. It is this reality that galvanizes my support of people like Lee, Matt T and Glen G.
I don't buy that narrative. Secret police always get out of control and the CIA has been creating disasters and destruction around the world for 80 years now. Just look at the place. They control the media and lie all the time. They aren't protecting us, they're controlling us and frankly, putting us in great jeopardy. If the CIA was just an analysis agency, with no operational branch then fine -- but they are all operations now with analysis only to support their ops. Its a disaster and total contravention of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The FBI was founded ostensibly to route out communists and has functioned to crush labor unions and workers for a 100 years until their focus shifted to creating and "foiling" domestic terror plots. Of course that's not the entire FBI, its a big org and they do good work too. But you're correct -- we need an oppositional press and fair judicial process to guard against their power. But we have neither of those.
You miss my point. I’m not saying they’re good, saying that no matter what we have to deal eternally with spy agencies. You could get rid of them by they would come right back because there is a global information war that will never end.
I have read and listened to and corresponded with Michael Hudson. His is one point of view. So is yours. Every history has a multitude of possible relatively true points of view. Historians can think on multiple levels. There will always be an antithesis. In a higher court, your thesis of Putin as a fair minded leader would however easily be shot down.
For those who disapprove of U.S. hegemony, read the details of European wars in the multi-polar world of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries up to WWII. U.S. hegemony will continue in spite of the rise of China because of our resources. If you prefer a world constantly at horrific war with itself, keep talking with your endless ignorant criticisms. We are the world leader and cannot allow a Putin' dream of resurrected.empire to march in and take over a sovereign nation. Ukraine's corrupt leaders and history not change the equation. If you underestimate or misunderstand corruption in the U.S., see "What's the Matter with Delaware?"
Are you familiar with all the wars US hegemony ("our democracy") has caused? US troops, weapons, influence or cash are involved in just about every military conflict. Rather than preventing a world at war, it seems rather that the US incessantly instigates war, violence and destruction of untold amounts.
Also, let's not forget why Euro nations have jumped on the bandwagon to support Ukraine. They remember what Soviet rule did to Eastern Europe and they want none of the atheist authoritarian demagoguery under whichever of the flags that are flown in Moscow.
Absolutely and it is sickening. Read Memoryhole on Substack. He covers all the CIA activity since Eisenhower's admin up to the overthrow of Allende. And so few people reading and commenting. He writes as if he'd been an insider. And what was it all for? To prevent communist takeover of the world? The tactics were assigning and horrific. Did you see the film The Killing Fields? The only reason we in America can condemn Hitler and the Nazi Holocaust while condoning and contributing to genocide is because of U.S. engagement in the Second World War. Check out Memoryhole on Substack. The hegemony of American capitalism is better than the constant wars of the 17th 18th and 19th centuries and capitalism that generates wealth is better than famine but there's no question of how ugly and stupid were the tactics of the Cold War. Now we have culture wars instead. The stupidity goes on ad nauseum. See Memoryhole.
Putin isn't the one with dreams of empire. That's the US. The globalist plan is a plan for total domination of the planet by international capital. Putin has been clear about what he wants: to have self-determination for Russia and to not have nuclear missiles 5 minutes from Moscow. Its the west that has wanted to plunder Russia since the collapse of the USSR. We almost succeeded too. Putin got in the way and that's why he's demonized by the western establishment. Xi also got in the way -- thanks to him China will not be the world's cheap labor factory controlled by western finance. The actual truth is Russia and China are saving the world from a dystopian global neo-feudalism, a/k/a the rules based international order. Read some Michael Hudson if you want to get a better understanding of the real war that's going on. Ukraine is the fulcrum of a much larger geopolitical struggle. The US as world leader is ending. Outside of Europe and our other vassals in the Pacific (Japan, Australia), the world is turning away from our predatory model. The US dollar as reserve currency is slowly disappearing along with the petrodollar. Neoliberal capitalism has been an utter disaster for the citizens of the US and the world -- well at least those outside the top 5-10%. We deindustrialized and now all the fictitious GDP (money transfers counted towards GDP that actual drain production from the real economy rather than add to it) based on rentier capitalist plunder will soon collapse. I wish it didn't have to be this way but that's what we've been led to.
I actually don't have Baltic ancestry though not far off. My family comes from the former Austro-Hungarian empire, pre-WWI -- what is now Ukraine. The SN I use is just a funny bit of falderal, at least that's what I thought anyway ;).
As to how smaller countries can maintain their sovereignty, that's a very good question I'm not sure I have a very happy answer for. Its always been the case that smaller nations have to play a dangerous game trying to balance their internal interests with the demands of their powerful neighbors. As an American, I have the luxury of watching my country fall apart without anyone to blame but ourselves ;). What I would say is that emotion is the enemy of making rational long-term decisions. During the cold war there was a "non-aligned" movement of nations that tried to refuse taking sides between the USSR and USA. It didn't go so well for them as both empires took the with us or against us view, thought not nearly as stridently, or recklessly, as the US does now. I remember in 2014 watching Ukraine's coup, and whatever your views on it, the deal the IMF was offering was far worse economically than the one on offer from Russia. Out of the frying pan into the fire I remember thinking, and I don't think I wound up being wrong. I honestly don't think Russia and Putin are anything like the former USSR. Putin does not want to reestablish an empire because the Russian lesson from the Soviet Union days is that when you essentially occupy foreign nations they won't thank you for it and realistically become a net drain, both ideologically and financially. I think Russia today just wants their own sovereignty and relatively fair trade with the world. Maybe I'm naive, but that's what I see from both Russia and China, at least for now. They are offering real benefits to their trade partners, like the USA did after WWII. But they also aren't using gunboat diplomacy the way the Anglo west has done for centuries and continues to do now. I see a lot of revisionist history going on in places like the Baltics and Poland -- many who worked hand in glove with the Nazis during WWII now recast as freedom fighters against the evil Russians. Now I'm not saying there isn't even some truth to this -- the enemy of your enemy may be your temporary friend. But many in the power structure in the Baltics and Poland were fervent communists in the 20th century and the Soviet Union was an international project to a large extent that eastern Europeans don't want to admit now -- some of the USSR's most famous leaders weren't even Russian (Stalin himself was Georgian). So its always a balancing act as I see it and from what I see the Baltics have thrown their lot completely with the west but as Kissinger said, to be an ally of the US is deadly.
Just look at what we did to our "ally" German in blowing up NordStream -- yes I believe the Seymour Hersh version as it was obvious to me who did it from the start, given our leaders had been promising to end that pipeline one way or another for years, and all Russia had to do was turn off the flow if they wanted to strangle Germany's economy. And that fig leaf story of a few people on a sailing yacht carrying out such a sophisticated operation is laughable.
So all that said, it would be wonderful if larger neighbors always respected the sovereignty of smaller nations and if I was in such a situation I would try to maintain a balanced position as much as possible between much larger opposing forces, not letting old grudges blind me to current realities. I fear that many in Europe think the US is far stronger than it is -- our industry is hollowed out, we're in massive debt, the dollar is slowly fading as the world reserve currency and the bill is coming due soon. Our military is nowhere near what it was, which might amaze some since we spend so much on it. But the vast majority of that money just goes down the drain to defense contractors that get huge profits even when they don't produce anything, or produce weapons that are incredibly expensive and just don't perform in the field, and without the necessary production capacity to sustain a true industrial war as we're seeing in Ukraine. For all the US spends, we can't provide them with enough artillery and shells to keep up with a fraction of what the Russians can produce and deploy. But expensive, small batch weapons are very profitable. The entire US economy is like that now -- high cost, low production, over-financialized and failing. Our allies may soon find themselves all on their own, and the only thing that will stop them from being overrun by larger nations is that those other nations have no interest in expansion.
I think I've made it clear that I don't want to take sides in this Ukraine thing, but from what I've seen since 2014, Ukraine has been acting atrociously to its ethnic Russian population, and when they started threatening Russia with putting US nukes just a 5 minute flight from Moscow that was the last straw. I don't condone war but the Russians did try every other means to get Ukraine to maintain its neutrality and they refused. Perhaps that is a lesson for the Baltics, if they wish to take it. In geopolitics might makes right more often than not and its simply the reality we live with. Siding too strongly with one "great" power over another can be deadly.
As to who to read further on such topics, Michael Hudson has sort of staked out his own terrain but there are other "hetrerodox" economists and geopolitical thinkers that are very good. The site I found Hudson and many others on originally is nakedcapitalism.com. I found them during the 2008 financial crisis and they helped explain a lot of what's going on. Their opinion, or the opinion of the pseudonymous host Yves Smith, is that de-dollarization will take a long time because there is no currency to take its place. I'm not sure I agree exactly, but if you learn one thing about economics, its that a lot happens "on the margins" as they say, meaning small changes in patterns of investment/money moves can quickly lead to much larger effects. There is a fascinating series on youtube betwen Hudson and Radhika Desai, another interesting economist, that discusses a wide range of geo-economic topics I highly recommend. Guys like Bill Black, former federal prosecutor during the S&L crisis in the early 90s is great, as are many of the economists banished from our elite institutions who reside at the University of Kansas in Missouri. One who is still at an elite institution is Scottish economist Mark Blythe but he doesn't strive as hard as the others to make himself understood to lay audiences. Steve Keen is great -- he has a substack. As for the more geopolitical side of things, I also follow The Duran on youtube and locals.com. Mercouris and Christoforou host a fascinating daily show together and also do separate daily videos. Alistair Crooke who publishes at the strategic-culture foundation is brilliant. Larry Johnson at sonar21.com, Douglas Macgregor and Scot Ritter, frequent quests on Judge Napolitano's youtube show Judging Freedom are great on the Ukraine war and its effects. But honestly, none of them takes the global historical view as fully as Hudson. He has series of books he's working on now, here's his site: https://michael-hudson.com/2023/03/the-collapse-of-antiquity-release/. If I think of any others that might fit more in the vein of your original question above I'll make an addendum to this way too long post ;). Good luck and peace to all.
I started writing a response but want to take my time as its still a bit of a mess. I like your question and want to do it justice. Maybe it'll be my first actual substack piece.
Your story and perspective sound fascinating. I spent a brief period in the UK in the 90s but have been in the US, living in Wisconsin, Florida but mainly New York most of my life. I have never visited Russia or any of Eastern Europe but always wanted to. I found myself strongly drawn to the cultures, especially the music and literature of the region, from a young age perhaps because that's where my ancestors come from, though I didn't really learn much about where we came from until I was much older. We're about the same age so may have had a lot of similar formative experiences growing up in the US in the 1980s. If I may ask, what made you make such a move at 21?
As to my analysis, I read a lot and I think I have a good eye for useful perspectives but am really only a generalist on these topics. My main vocation is writing software which appealed to me because its nice to build things, even if they are just "virtual" and the US has been deindustrializing so much that I didn't see much opportunity in that. My grandfather, who worked in manufacturing on Long Island for most of his life, was a master craftsman and I marveled at his proficiency in fixing and maintaining complex equipment. One of the most prescient things he told me was that it was very bad that the US was moving its factories to China and Mexico because once such knowledge is lost its very hard to get back. People who work in finance and yes, software, often look down at those who make real things which I find incredibly foolish, arrogant and short-sighted. Contrary to all the propaganda of the last 25 years economies and humanity does not flourish on financial speculation and information. The US is learning this too late unfortunately and I foresee rough times ahead for us. Perhaps nations that have not gone so far down the path of financialization, that still make things people need to live, will do better as this house of cards collapses.
The FBI and disinformation are two sides of the same coin.
“He emphasized that the FBI has been his agency’s “top partner.” “ This does not seem to me to be a role for the FBI.. don’t they have enough US criminals to catch?
After the next school shooting, remember the Ukrainians needed help more.
..."he is a proponent of free speech".
..."everything against our country, consider it a fake, even if it's not"
I keep reading these two statements, and simply cannot wrap my head around the guy saying this.
Maybe it's just me...
It’s not you. It’s doublespeak.
They call it "malinformation" -- true info but inconvenient for the establishment narrative. They actually created a word for it. You gotta hand it to these try-hard govt stooges -- they'd fill entire concentration camps with us wrong-thinkers if their masters ordered it. Of course they can't fix the electrical grid, but they are tireless at censorship.
You have to admit: it's helpful when they finally say it plainly.
Hey Lee, do we subscribers need to begin putting together a bailout fund for when the FBI comes for you?
😬
It's ridiculous the lengths to which our government will go to protect this obviously corrupt Ukrainian regime. I would love to know why?
If you really want to know why, read Michael Hudson. He explains the geo-economic forces at play that undergird the entire anti-Russia/anti-China exercise. The short version is the western global homogenization project of the past 80 years -- the plan was for financial monopolies to control world trade and function as a global rentier class, a sort of neo-feudalism. China was to be the world's cheap labor factory, but they had other plans -- Xi represents the final nail in the western project for China. Russia was to be broken up and plundered after the USSR collapsed but Putin came in, took control from the western-backed oligarchs and became a mortal enemy of the western capitalist class. When you hear western leaders use the word democracy what they mean is a government weak enough to be controlled by a small crew of oligarchs. When they call a nation an autocracy they mean a country with a strong enough central govt to keep the oligarchs from complete plunder. You can find Hudson's interviews all over the internet, on video and text. I highly recommend him if you want a deeper understanding of the underlying forces at play.
Thank you for this, I appreciate it
Just subscribed. Thank you for your hard work and diligence to bring all of this to light.
Thank you
Yes I did too. Been reading your work for years. Glad to see you on substack and away from the intercept.
Very interesting piece. It's an uncomfortable truth we seem to be dealing with that falsehoods, bad actors and would-be heroes are all muddying the truth.
They’re all bad guys, in truth.
“My country right or wrong” is absolutely stupid no matter the country or situation.
End this war before these idiots make it worse.
We need to make this stop.
Great summary that needs to be shared widely with people most panicked over First Amendment rights of journalists
I think this is an interesting article that highlights the complexity of the role intelligence agencies play in society. It’s easy to point at them when they do horrible things, but imagine eliminating these agencies completely. How so do you think it would be before people were screaming for them to come back? The bottom line is we live in a world where we have to have agencies like CIA, FBI and DHS because even though they overstep their mandates, the threats are not imaginary and the war of spies won’t end just because we might decide to eliminate our agencies.
Unfortunately, the only curative is a dogged and unrelenting press coupled with clear laws and a trustworthy judiciary. This is ultimately what the real problem was with the Patriot Act and the various NDAA’s that erased meaningful boundaries between our enemies and our citizenry. It is this reality that galvanizes my support of people like Lee, Matt T and Glen G.
I don't buy that narrative. Secret police always get out of control and the CIA has been creating disasters and destruction around the world for 80 years now. Just look at the place. They control the media and lie all the time. They aren't protecting us, they're controlling us and frankly, putting us in great jeopardy. If the CIA was just an analysis agency, with no operational branch then fine -- but they are all operations now with analysis only to support their ops. Its a disaster and total contravention of the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. The FBI was founded ostensibly to route out communists and has functioned to crush labor unions and workers for a 100 years until their focus shifted to creating and "foiling" domestic terror plots. Of course that's not the entire FBI, its a big org and they do good work too. But you're correct -- we need an oppositional press and fair judicial process to guard against their power. But we have neither of those.
You miss my point. I’m not saying they’re good, saying that no matter what we have to deal eternally with spy agencies. You could get rid of them by they would come right back because there is a global information war that will never end.
I cant think of a single thing the US intelligence agencies have succeeded at. I really can't... anyone?
I have read and listened to and corresponded with Michael Hudson. His is one point of view. So is yours. Every history has a multitude of possible relatively true points of view. Historians can think on multiple levels. There will always be an antithesis. In a higher court, your thesis of Putin as a fair minded leader would however easily be shot down.
Thank you -- are you really leaving Sub-stack?
Remaining on Substack, just changing the website domain to make it easier to find me, hopefully.
Either way works but I guess its good to have your own frame like Taibbi does. But you need a catchy slogan or something -- like "The Golden Fang" ;).
Greenwald’s system update - Brazil’s Lula internet slapdown https://rumble.com/v2looka-system-update-79.html
For those who disapprove of U.S. hegemony, read the details of European wars in the multi-polar world of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries up to WWII. U.S. hegemony will continue in spite of the rise of China because of our resources. If you prefer a world constantly at horrific war with itself, keep talking with your endless ignorant criticisms. We are the world leader and cannot allow a Putin' dream of resurrected.empire to march in and take over a sovereign nation. Ukraine's corrupt leaders and history not change the equation. If you underestimate or misunderstand corruption in the U.S., see "What's the Matter with Delaware?"
Are you familiar with all the wars US hegemony ("our democracy") has caused? US troops, weapons, influence or cash are involved in just about every military conflict. Rather than preventing a world at war, it seems rather that the US incessantly instigates war, violence and destruction of untold amounts.
Also, let's not forget why Euro nations have jumped on the bandwagon to support Ukraine. They remember what Soviet rule did to Eastern Europe and they want none of the atheist authoritarian demagoguery under whichever of the flags that are flown in Moscow.
Absolutely and it is sickening. Read Memoryhole on Substack. He covers all the CIA activity since Eisenhower's admin up to the overthrow of Allende. And so few people reading and commenting. He writes as if he'd been an insider. And what was it all for? To prevent communist takeover of the world? The tactics were assigning and horrific. Did you see the film The Killing Fields? The only reason we in America can condemn Hitler and the Nazi Holocaust while condoning and contributing to genocide is because of U.S. engagement in the Second World War. Check out Memoryhole on Substack. The hegemony of American capitalism is better than the constant wars of the 17th 18th and 19th centuries and capitalism that generates wealth is better than famine but there's no question of how ugly and stupid were the tactics of the Cold War. Now we have culture wars instead. The stupidity goes on ad nauseum. See Memoryhole.
Putin isn't the one with dreams of empire. That's the US. The globalist plan is a plan for total domination of the planet by international capital. Putin has been clear about what he wants: to have self-determination for Russia and to not have nuclear missiles 5 minutes from Moscow. Its the west that has wanted to plunder Russia since the collapse of the USSR. We almost succeeded too. Putin got in the way and that's why he's demonized by the western establishment. Xi also got in the way -- thanks to him China will not be the world's cheap labor factory controlled by western finance. The actual truth is Russia and China are saving the world from a dystopian global neo-feudalism, a/k/a the rules based international order. Read some Michael Hudson if you want to get a better understanding of the real war that's going on. Ukraine is the fulcrum of a much larger geopolitical struggle. The US as world leader is ending. Outside of Europe and our other vassals in the Pacific (Japan, Australia), the world is turning away from our predatory model. The US dollar as reserve currency is slowly disappearing along with the petrodollar. Neoliberal capitalism has been an utter disaster for the citizens of the US and the world -- well at least those outside the top 5-10%. We deindustrialized and now all the fictitious GDP (money transfers counted towards GDP that actual drain production from the real economy rather than add to it) based on rentier capitalist plunder will soon collapse. I wish it didn't have to be this way but that's what we've been led to.
This!
I actually don't have Baltic ancestry though not far off. My family comes from the former Austro-Hungarian empire, pre-WWI -- what is now Ukraine. The SN I use is just a funny bit of falderal, at least that's what I thought anyway ;).
As to how smaller countries can maintain their sovereignty, that's a very good question I'm not sure I have a very happy answer for. Its always been the case that smaller nations have to play a dangerous game trying to balance their internal interests with the demands of their powerful neighbors. As an American, I have the luxury of watching my country fall apart without anyone to blame but ourselves ;). What I would say is that emotion is the enemy of making rational long-term decisions. During the cold war there was a "non-aligned" movement of nations that tried to refuse taking sides between the USSR and USA. It didn't go so well for them as both empires took the with us or against us view, thought not nearly as stridently, or recklessly, as the US does now. I remember in 2014 watching Ukraine's coup, and whatever your views on it, the deal the IMF was offering was far worse economically than the one on offer from Russia. Out of the frying pan into the fire I remember thinking, and I don't think I wound up being wrong. I honestly don't think Russia and Putin are anything like the former USSR. Putin does not want to reestablish an empire because the Russian lesson from the Soviet Union days is that when you essentially occupy foreign nations they won't thank you for it and realistically become a net drain, both ideologically and financially. I think Russia today just wants their own sovereignty and relatively fair trade with the world. Maybe I'm naive, but that's what I see from both Russia and China, at least for now. They are offering real benefits to their trade partners, like the USA did after WWII. But they also aren't using gunboat diplomacy the way the Anglo west has done for centuries and continues to do now. I see a lot of revisionist history going on in places like the Baltics and Poland -- many who worked hand in glove with the Nazis during WWII now recast as freedom fighters against the evil Russians. Now I'm not saying there isn't even some truth to this -- the enemy of your enemy may be your temporary friend. But many in the power structure in the Baltics and Poland were fervent communists in the 20th century and the Soviet Union was an international project to a large extent that eastern Europeans don't want to admit now -- some of the USSR's most famous leaders weren't even Russian (Stalin himself was Georgian). So its always a balancing act as I see it and from what I see the Baltics have thrown their lot completely with the west but as Kissinger said, to be an ally of the US is deadly.
Just look at what we did to our "ally" German in blowing up NordStream -- yes I believe the Seymour Hersh version as it was obvious to me who did it from the start, given our leaders had been promising to end that pipeline one way or another for years, and all Russia had to do was turn off the flow if they wanted to strangle Germany's economy. And that fig leaf story of a few people on a sailing yacht carrying out such a sophisticated operation is laughable.
So all that said, it would be wonderful if larger neighbors always respected the sovereignty of smaller nations and if I was in such a situation I would try to maintain a balanced position as much as possible between much larger opposing forces, not letting old grudges blind me to current realities. I fear that many in Europe think the US is far stronger than it is -- our industry is hollowed out, we're in massive debt, the dollar is slowly fading as the world reserve currency and the bill is coming due soon. Our military is nowhere near what it was, which might amaze some since we spend so much on it. But the vast majority of that money just goes down the drain to defense contractors that get huge profits even when they don't produce anything, or produce weapons that are incredibly expensive and just don't perform in the field, and without the necessary production capacity to sustain a true industrial war as we're seeing in Ukraine. For all the US spends, we can't provide them with enough artillery and shells to keep up with a fraction of what the Russians can produce and deploy. But expensive, small batch weapons are very profitable. The entire US economy is like that now -- high cost, low production, over-financialized and failing. Our allies may soon find themselves all on their own, and the only thing that will stop them from being overrun by larger nations is that those other nations have no interest in expansion.
I think I've made it clear that I don't want to take sides in this Ukraine thing, but from what I've seen since 2014, Ukraine has been acting atrociously to its ethnic Russian population, and when they started threatening Russia with putting US nukes just a 5 minute flight from Moscow that was the last straw. I don't condone war but the Russians did try every other means to get Ukraine to maintain its neutrality and they refused. Perhaps that is a lesson for the Baltics, if they wish to take it. In geopolitics might makes right more often than not and its simply the reality we live with. Siding too strongly with one "great" power over another can be deadly.
As to who to read further on such topics, Michael Hudson has sort of staked out his own terrain but there are other "hetrerodox" economists and geopolitical thinkers that are very good. The site I found Hudson and many others on originally is nakedcapitalism.com. I found them during the 2008 financial crisis and they helped explain a lot of what's going on. Their opinion, or the opinion of the pseudonymous host Yves Smith, is that de-dollarization will take a long time because there is no currency to take its place. I'm not sure I agree exactly, but if you learn one thing about economics, its that a lot happens "on the margins" as they say, meaning small changes in patterns of investment/money moves can quickly lead to much larger effects. There is a fascinating series on youtube betwen Hudson and Radhika Desai, another interesting economist, that discusses a wide range of geo-economic topics I highly recommend. Guys like Bill Black, former federal prosecutor during the S&L crisis in the early 90s is great, as are many of the economists banished from our elite institutions who reside at the University of Kansas in Missouri. One who is still at an elite institution is Scottish economist Mark Blythe but he doesn't strive as hard as the others to make himself understood to lay audiences. Steve Keen is great -- he has a substack. As for the more geopolitical side of things, I also follow The Duran on youtube and locals.com. Mercouris and Christoforou host a fascinating daily show together and also do separate daily videos. Alistair Crooke who publishes at the strategic-culture foundation is brilliant. Larry Johnson at sonar21.com, Douglas Macgregor and Scot Ritter, frequent quests on Judge Napolitano's youtube show Judging Freedom are great on the Ukraine war and its effects. But honestly, none of them takes the global historical view as fully as Hudson. He has series of books he's working on now, here's his site: https://michael-hudson.com/2023/03/the-collapse-of-antiquity-release/. If I think of any others that might fit more in the vein of your original question above I'll make an addendum to this way too long post ;). Good luck and peace to all.
I just need to say, Excellent Post!
Well explained, and beautifully written.
Kudos!
I started writing a response but want to take my time as its still a bit of a mess. I like your question and want to do it justice. Maybe it'll be my first actual substack piece.
Your story and perspective sound fascinating. I spent a brief period in the UK in the 90s but have been in the US, living in Wisconsin, Florida but mainly New York most of my life. I have never visited Russia or any of Eastern Europe but always wanted to. I found myself strongly drawn to the cultures, especially the music and literature of the region, from a young age perhaps because that's where my ancestors come from, though I didn't really learn much about where we came from until I was much older. We're about the same age so may have had a lot of similar formative experiences growing up in the US in the 1980s. If I may ask, what made you make such a move at 21?
As to my analysis, I read a lot and I think I have a good eye for useful perspectives but am really only a generalist on these topics. My main vocation is writing software which appealed to me because its nice to build things, even if they are just "virtual" and the US has been deindustrializing so much that I didn't see much opportunity in that. My grandfather, who worked in manufacturing on Long Island for most of his life, was a master craftsman and I marveled at his proficiency in fixing and maintaining complex equipment. One of the most prescient things he told me was that it was very bad that the US was moving its factories to China and Mexico because once such knowledge is lost its very hard to get back. People who work in finance and yes, software, often look down at those who make real things which I find incredibly foolish, arrogant and short-sighted. Contrary to all the propaganda of the last 25 years economies and humanity does not flourish on financial speculation and information. The US is learning this too late unfortunately and I foresee rough times ahead for us. Perhaps nations that have not gone so far down the path of financialization, that still make things people need to live, will do better as this house of cards collapses.
I thought the facts of the twitter files were clear? In the USA the government is not allowed to censor directly or indirectly, and they clearly are.
Of course here in canada we have no such protections, the government can and will do what ever it chooses