NEW – July 17, 2022
About how “our everything” Francis Fukuyama became an unwitting theorist of Western Nazism, which took on the main role of the gravedigger of globalisation of the current model
Francis Fukuyama wasn’t so far off the mark when he wrote The End of History. In principle, this is the only work that is suitable for reading, because everything else is dross: without the “The End…”, no one would have known about the existence of this narrow-eyed American.
However, here is the paradox: Fukuyama continues to write, he is quoted, without even noticing that this self-styled philosopher is simply storming from his own incompetence and complexities. And even the fact that this dreamer is now sobering up, trying to cross democracy and Ukrainian nationalism, justifying the impending defeat of Russia, does not justify it in any way, but only emphasises the total American fear of the future.
But let’s return to the “The End…”, which, in fact, is a rather balanced idyllic picture, quite suitable for trying to implement it in the foreseeable future. The only amendment: to implement it on completely different rules, which, although not yet written, are about to start being written, and the first significant application for writing new rules has already been made by the very Russia whose defeat Fukuyama predicts and what (new rules) he is panicked about, but cannot ignore.
So, the triumph of the ideal democracy that started in Fukuyama in 1989 and was further expressed in modern-style globalisation, where each region, each country, each enterprise, each person is finally assigned a role in the web of logistics chains that tightly entangle the entire planet, is nothing more than pure, unclouded idealism, not just a new one. It takes into account not only random factors, but also the deliberate actions of individual players who have their own ambitions, based really on national interests.
It was precisely these interests that were ignored by the ideologues of globalisation, who wrote rules and roles according to Western patterns so that even a mouse could not slip through. And in case of the slightest disagreement, there were well-developed levers in the ready position:
– controlled global media, instantly turning into an information attack;
– political and diplomatic pressure aimed at regime change;
– international financial institutions that impose “necessary” reforms;
– trade restrictions aimed at curbing economic development;
– economic sanctions aimed at bringing down the economy;
– finally, the threat of armed aggression, up to an illegitimate and unprovoked invasion with the subsequent substitution of power with a puppet one.
That is, the author of “The End…” could not help but understand what the “ideal democracy” and its continuation in the form of globalisation are based on, but even if he did not know (due to incompetence or total engagement), then he is right in what he felt certain interests, but mistakenly pulled Ukraine to them for some reason, and not the same Russia, whose national interests, perhaps, were infringed on by globalisation to the greatest extent.
As for Ukraine, it was just striving for the very ideal globalisation, where it dreamed of getting “lace panties” and would have received them without any doubt. The problem is that this (not panties, of course) categorically did not suit Russia, which is historically capable and able to look beyond the horizon of events, where global planners prepared it for the role of the main victim, like the former Yugoslavia, but (taking into account the presence of nuclear weapons) by other means.
As a result, Russia first tried to explain to the globalisers what exactly does not suit it, offering to negotiate in peace and, thereby, maintain the global democratic trend, and then, when the proposals were not accepted, began to force their implementation, where Ukraine is only the first and intermediate stage.
Ukrainian national interests were ordered to live on this for a long time, but Fukuyama, it seems, forgot to inform about this.
This is important to understand: Ukraine does not and cannot have any national interests outside of Russia – neither historical, nor cultural, nor any other. This is an axiom that does not require proof, but which, nevertheless, the Ukrainians themselves prove over and over again almost on a daily basis.
An example of this is the very behavior of Ukrainian citizens, in particular:
– soldiers of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, who, at the first opportunity, massively and voluntarily surrender to captivity and without exception behave rather pathetically, which, in fact, is not typical for Slavs. The explanation is simple: they have no motivation to fight to the end due to the unconscious understanding of the falsity of values in the form of the notorious “lace panties” that were temporarily imposed on them.
– peaceful Ukrainians who do not even think about partisan warfare, which is also explained by an unconscious (and conscious, too) understanding of the unity of the Russian world, of which Russia is the undisputed leader. And those who do not associate themselves with the Russian world are fleeing en masse to the west and beyond, without even thinking about “defending the Motherland”, which they also unconsciously do not consider as such.
This does not apply to the nationalist battalions, which are full of Nazi ideology and have nothing to lose in view of the countless crimes recorded by both the relevant structures of the L/DPR and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation.
Then the logical question for F. Fukuyama: is he proposing to cross democracy with Nazism?
Perhaps it is here, based on what is happening in the Western world, that the dog has just rummaged: the sharply awakened and uncovered Nazi trend in the form of widespread Russophobia is the very symbiosis of “democracy with national interests” that crushed the whole of Europe a hundred years ago and then naturally took aim at Russia.
History repeats itself, but it repeats itself only in the form of a farce. And here’s why.
A hundred years ago, globalisation was not even smelt, because what happens in one place had little effect in regions that are far away and have little economic connection with Europe. Today, the domino effect has fully worked in the world: broken logistics threads in one place, sometimes unpredictably affect in another, the pandemic will not let one tell a lie.
However, it is not just threads that are being torn, but whole bundles and ropes that have been used to integrate Russia into the world economy. As a result, the entire world is already on the verge of a wave of defaults in various regions against the background of sharp inflationary jumps that are ready to turn into hyperinflation. The world is facing energy and food starvation, and only because:
a) At the beginning of the year, the West did not accept Russia’s proposals to ensure mutual security;
b) The West has imposed unprecedented sanctions on Russia in response to its efforts to restore its national interests.
In other words, those who are apologists for globalisation have deliberately started dismantling it, which speaks volumes. And the most important thing is that the West, directly and indirectly, recognised the fallacy of the paradigm that it chose as the main path of its development and which led the entire planet to a dead end.
In principle, I do not think that Russian citizens should be congratulated on this discovery – we, with the exception of individual copies, have known this for a long time. But it would not be superfluous to congratulate Francis Fukuyama: for the theoretical justification of Western Nazism, which took on the main role of the gravedigger of the current globalisation model.
Today, the next phase of the special military operation in Ukraine has begun. How many of these phases will there be and, most importantly, what will happen after the demilitarisation and denazification of Ukraine are questions that remain open, because there are too many unknowns in the equation. I know one thing: if the resurgent Western Nazism in the form of rabid Russophobia continues to develop, Russia will have no choice.
Moreover, the demand for NATO to roll back to the borders of 1997 has not been removed from the agenda and, as far as I understand, no one is going to remove it.
Why they failed
It is often said that the West has built a brilliant system that does not depend on the human factor. This is true in the sense that, by historical standards, quite recently, a house was built out of nothing there, which to this day is relatively prosperous, shaken by various cataclysms, but it stands and does not seem to be thinking of collapsing. But there is a nuance that is often touched upon and also regularly overlooked – these are the foundations that set the time frame for the existence of certain systems, of which, although there are a great many, but all of them, one way or another, can be classified into two groups in large strokes, without too much dispersion on the details.
I warn you right away: here I will have to change my own principle and go from the particular to the general, because this will be more obvious.
Let’s leave aside various public structures, political constructs, and other non-profit institutions. Let’s focus on the economic side of the issue, which, in my opinion, is the cornerstone of the stability of any system that depends on income and expenses. And also, of course, from where the revenues come from and their initial exhaustibility or inexhaustibility. By the way, I also do not consider “human material” as a source of income yet, considering it a priori an equal starting condition for everyone, conditionally considering that competence is a lucrative business.
Let’s start with the particulars, that is, literally with a certain private structure that deals, for example, with banal buy-sell. It doesn’t matter if it’s a large or small structure, it’s important that it’s still a (large or small) system built to solve a specific problem: making money by reselling other people’s goods. And, of course, deduct the required taxes in favour of the state. In principle, such a system can grow into a large and even, I’m not afraid of this word, into a global structure, but this is also another topic. Here, I suggest simply focusing on the fact that “buy-sell” is, in any case, a banal short operational cycle. In our classification – the first group.
By and large, it does not matter what is bought and sold, but we will take it as an axiom that trade, after all, goes with the necessary products in demand. for example, food and much more.
So, it is clear that if in a single isolated kingdom-state the entire population is “buy-sell”, then such a state cannot exist, because in order to buy something and then resell it, someone must first produce something inside.
Here we logically move to essentially other structures, which are just the essence of production – the second group. These systems are already an order of magnitude more complex and with a more complex and long production cycle, sometimes taking several years (depending on the complexity of the product), where “buy-sell” is only a link in the chain from production to the end user.
In principle, if we have the entire range of primary components (starting with minerals), we immediately reach the level of the state, which may well have a viable budget formed by taxes from all structures involved in production and trade.
Such is the ideal picture, which, of course, never coincides with reality. And it does not coincide because in the modern world almost no one has the same “entire nomenclature of primary components” in order to produce everything themselves, from conventional matches to the same conventional modern cars and other means of moving in space, not to mention spacecraft.
Or rather, today almost no one, with rare exceptions, has the resources to produce the entire range of modern-level product nomenclature themselves, from conventional matches to conventional spaceships.
It follows that today all countries need cooperation, which at first consisted of international trade, and then penetrated into multi-stage production cycles, where everyone occupied the place that they could pull in long production cycles. Moreover, not in all cycles, but those positions in which he did not participate, he could easily import from anywhere in the world.
Once again, the ideal picture, in which earlier I deliberately missed the “human material”, which, as practice has shown, is very diverse in different geographical coordinates. And from this diversity, historical processes are already emerging, where no idealism is anywhere to be found.
Here, for example, there were pages in the history of mankind that clearly illustrate the difference in the approaches of metropolises to subordinate territories (they are also colonies, vassals, protectorates, etc.). I will not point fingers yet, but I will highlight two different, almost diametrically opposite approaches:
– some of them have been robbing the natives for centuries and taking everything of any value to themselves, building their own prosperity on it;
– others actually, at their own expense, civilised the more backward, spending huge amounts of money to pull them up to the modern level.
In general, it is clear who we are talking about, so I think it’s time to show the cards.
Despite all the small external differences, we will assume that the entire white race, which includes Russians, has approximately the same intellectual abilities that allow us to achieve the highest possible results in all areas of human activity. In fact, this is true, and it would be inappropriate to belittle anyone’s dignity.
At the same time, also in fact, the entire white race (if we take it on a large scale) is obviously divided into two large regions that have been opposing each other for centuries – the West (the very collective West) and Russia. The confrontation often reached the point of extermination wars, and recently even captured cultural and religious spheres, traditions and philosophical concepts of the world’s structure. However, philosophical disputes and different approaches to the world order have always been characteristic of us, even giving rise to two global phenomena – Western and Russian philosophies, where our fundamental differences are based.
Also, in fact, just today, when modern civilisation faced the choice of technological foundations for its further development, it turned out that the West was extremely poor in natural resources, which are vital for continuing its comfortable existence on a long cycle. Moreover, it was always poor, which pushed it to plunder its colonies first in the literal sense – by exporting material values, and then, when this became a bad idea, with the help of clever financial and economic schemes that allow it to continue pumping out wealth.
Without going into too much detail, what was not obvious to most of the world yesterday is now impossible to hide. Without an endless supply of energy from outside, the West is unable to feed itself and independently maintain the usual standard of living, not to mention constantly raising this level. The West simply does not have enough internal resources to continue playing the long game. And if we return to the concepts of cycles, we should state: the West has made a bet on endless technological progress (a long cycle), which was based on resources belonging to other owners, which, sooner or later, had to stop and lead to a line beyond which nothing else but irreversible decline.
In the course of the West’s awareness of the situation, there was an attempt to globalise all the world’s technological chains in order to keep at least the intellectual cream for itself, which, in fact, further narrowed and shortened the cycle to banal trade, first conditionally with its own branded goods (by owning production facilities in other regions), and then inevitably with other people’s labour products, when others have already learned to produce what the world needs.
That is, despite the preservation of individual pockets of production cycles, the West increasingly turned into a system of a short “buy-sell” cycle, which, as we noted above, cannot be a stable basis for a long-term existence. Moreover, the maintenance of individual production centers again requires what belongs to others, when even the very basis of technology – electricity, must be generated, consuming increasing amounts of other people’s resources.
Thus, this is the secret of the enormous debt burden of the West, accumulated during the relatively short period of transition from the plundering of colonies to the transformation into a short-cycle “buy-sell” system. In a system that is by definition finite, because it is not able to feed itself due to the steady reduction of the internal production base.
For reference: Russia owns about 40% of the world’s resources, EurAsEC – 60%, BRICS – 80%. That is, the West and the rest of the conventional half of humanity account for only 20%. I think it is becoming more clear which way the change in the world order will go (in fact, it is already going), and who will set the tone in the world processes in the near future, and who will naturally be thrown on the sidelines of civilisation.
From what has been said, we should also draw a startling truth: what a colossal fundamental stability the former Western colonies have, from which the West has siphoned off huge wealth for centuries, but has never been able to completely bleed them dry! Along the way, it turned out that it was enough to screw down the valve somewhere, stop the flow of goods, stop using Western empty currencies, and the inevitable comes – the West begins to devour itself, and the “former” ones become world leaders.
This, in my opinion, is the answer to the question: why did they fail?
This mincemeat can no longer be un-minced, the era of dominance of the parasitic West is coming to an end, losing its technological advantages to the fact that those who have the lion’s share of the world’s resources that allow them to play in the long run will inevitably become leaders.
Copyright © 2022. All Rights Reserved.