47 Comments

The problem that I see with your analysis is that even taking the oligarch as “homo economicus” they have all the reasons to fight to death.

The US cannot emerge as one more world power within equals because the moment the US will loose its empire its possibilities of implosion in a SU style became enormous.

The decay of dollar will bankrupt America, and the end of a world with their rules (around patents, property rights, financial dominance…) will cause infinite poverty there. EEUU has the natural resources but not the man power to sustain a first world country.

It has less engineers than Russia with twice the population. Most of US people work in profession associated with their empire. Once their empire is finished they loose their business and their works.

They will also loose the inflow of engineers /scientist from 3rd world country.

The social unrest due to economic factor be enormous , and will be used by local elites wanting their piece of cake instead of sharing with Washington, New York elites.

And the social division of the US is unsolvable.

I am pretty sure that the US “homo economicus” elites know this.

For them the choice is either total victory either to become something like Spanish aristocracy today. Families that once rule tremendous fortunes and army throughout Europe, America and Asia being just average rich people of a secondary/tertiary country.

They can be very incline to bet the destiny of the world even if the probabilities of ending the world are 10 to 1

Expand full comment

I understand very well what you mean. In fact, my next large strategic article, Economics and Empires 5, will deal exactly with these issues. I'll release it in August. Most likely... :)

I didn't want to mix these thoughts into this rather small update.

I agree with a lot what you said and I will discuss it in detail soon.

Nevertheless, I'm less pesimistic than you and I will explain why. In Economics and Empires 6 (October).

Good comment by the way.

Expand full comment

Looking forward for your 2 upcoming articles about Empire and economy.

Hopefully you will be correct being optimistic

Expand full comment

Great article, but as an American, the “oligarchs” are Israel firsters. They also understand that when America learns that Israel and the CIA did 911 and JFK assassination, well, Israel will no longer exist.

Expand full comment

FFS it's lose, not loose. Agree with everything else.

Expand full comment

I disagree on two point of your analysis:

1. USA will not loose east Europe, at best western one, for a very simple reason: divide et imperat. Poland, the chihuahuas, Romania (and I hope we Italians) will never cow to the Germans and their french lapdogs. And the European draft treaty means a russo-german alliance, like the Molotov-Ribbentropp treaty. The USA will keep a foot in Europe as a power broker (WITH Russia, btw) between Berlin and it's enemies;

2. every society has a priest cast and the Americans chose the woke/neocon/neolib death cult: you must fear them and THEY have the red button.

Expand full comment

I see your point and I think our views do not differ too much :) Good discussion in the comments here. I like it.

I have a special view of what will happen with Europe but I can't communicate it yet. Until the end of the year you will know it.

Expand full comment

You are adding a lot of thing on your "to-do list before I nuke this substack": please do not forget anything!

Expand full comment

Haha good one :))

Well.. This Substack was primarily about my "Economics and Empires" series.. And then I started to do war updates and analysis :))

But all my points will be resolved with Econimics and Empire 5 and 6. Until October/November. In fact, that will be a draft for a book... All EaE parts together.

No worries Amico.

Expand full comment

Una promessa è una promessa, eh.

Kosovo je Srbija, go on!

Expand full comment

The problem about Germany is that Germany arguably does not want to leave the U.S. order.

It’s difficult to think in a country that has been more benefited by the U.S. system than Germany.

What can offer a triumphant Russia to Germany.

A triumphant Russia will have a far more efficient industry than Germany.

Since Russia has the natural resources and the know-how can produce almost everything cheaper than Germany.

A triumphant Russia would replace Germany as the industrial supplier to Europe.

Germany is a country that needs imperialism to survive. Without natural resources from third world countries or without sanctions to competitors like Russia or China German economy would be “in tatters “ :)

If I would be Russia/China my approach would be to attract the weakest points of the EU/NATO.

The Iberian peninsula. Algeria is already a pro Russia/China country. Morocco is a US total ally.

Spain is an ally of U.S. but probably a reluctant one. Kind of different from a civilisation point of view and arguably one of the biggest loosers in the current system.

Spanish people historically hated Anglosaxon.

It should not be so difficult to turn around things there, and get the country out of NATO and EU.

Once it’s done Italy and the Balkans become a very strain point of the American empire, because the Gibraltar strait would be controlled by Russia China.

In that moment you can kick the US out of Italy and Greece.

And once the Mediterranean Europe is outside of the American empire Germany is a ready fruit since the country by itself will have loose half of its markets in Europe and will not be able to sustain the occupational U.S. forces.

I decided to play to be Mackinder here :)

But I really think that to end the U.S. empire in Europe from a frontal clash will be difficult.

You need to attack the weak points, and make their position untenable from a economic and military perspective

Expand full comment

If I may, from a Italian point of view, don't forget that we are sadly mostly a London colony... and that Germany could prosper mostly because within the Euro system: no Euro... no export for them.

Expand full comment

Totally agree with you.

Germany was very benefited from the EU system that basically created for them a huge market step by step.

So the industry of each new country in the EU could never compete and was erased or bought by a German industry that was having a bigger market from previous additions.

Also I agree about Italy. However if UK/US would loose control of the Gibraltar strait they would have a harder time maintaining their control of Italy.

Expand full comment

Never related Gibraltar with Italy... I learned something new, thanks Sir!

But from a strategic point of view I dissent... if they lose gibraltar strait control they cannot afford to lose italian central mediterranean control or they're out, so they have to double down. Sigonella base?

Wish, but not sure... it's mainly a cultural domination, like tv news about uk royalties... why should we care?

And... returning to how to survive the situation... our host pointed about dollar status losing consequences... I agree with him, but being euro only a dollar derivative paper currency, so? how we can survive? a Gold backed gambit? I don't forget that euro national central banks own more gold that fort knox (if they really have it...) together... and the word here is together... will europe stay together? with such a low level of germans politicians?

So... I'm banging my head to try and see a future...

Expand full comment

Sadly, "european" gold is in USers caveaus: say bye to it. And I have already discussed with Aleks that i do not belive the BRICS will succesfully resolve the "Bretton Woods dilemma" as he hopes. I am scared they will do something stupid like a yuan-standard or worse a CBDC yuan-standard.

That said, I think you miss a point: in a multipolar world, italian better policy is the old, hunchback "friends with Russia, allied with USA". As i stated above, in the short-medium term, a USA retreat means a German (russian-gas-supercharged) dominate €U, that is a nightmare for Italy (PD traitors excluded, ofc). In the long term...we will all be dead anyway.

Expand full comment

I supposed "our" gold was 1/3 in italy, 1/3 in London and 1/3 in Fed caveaus... so 800-800-800 tons.

I also supposed a Brics gold weight standard... an ounce is an ounce...

I dream about a silver standard, more down to earth for the little guys...

Fully agree with old policy, and quite sadly the better friendly guy just died... quite unexpectedly....

PD... 110% agree, they are but davos/soros shysters... Remember the old list of soros payed/corrupted eu politicians? The dubai connection exploded because he doesn't like competition????

Again fully agree, in the long term, but I would like to die naturally and old and not young, cold and hungry because of some idiot ursulas, olafs and annalenas...

Expand full comment

Pardon my french, but these are "utterly bullshit" (i am not french-speaker, so sorry for mispelling and the likes).

"The problem about Germany is that Germany arguably does not want to leave the U.S. order."

Wrong: North Stream I and II are like the Treaty of Rapallo: a German attemp to trick the Peace Treaty. The difference with the First Interbellum is that the USers are not the Anglo-French and stroke when Germany was too weak to counterattack.

"It’s difficult to think in a country that has been more benefited by the U.S. system than Germany."

I do not concur with your point at 100% (the USA wanted a wage-led Germany, not an export-led one) but i concur that Germany is the proverbial scorpion on the frog (not those frogs) back.

"What can offer a triumphant Russia to Germany.

A triumphant Russia will have a far more efficient industry than Germany.

Since Russia has the natural resources and the know-how can produce almost everything cheaper than Germany.

A triumphant Russia would replace Germany as the industrial supplier to Europe."

Again, wrong: Russia will invest all those mighty industrial resources in building Ukraine back: re-read Aleks. In the short-medium term Russia will rebuild NS I and II, Germany will get its cheap gas back and proceed to crush Southern Europe.

"If I would be Russia/China my approach would be to attract the weakest points of the EU/NATO.

The Iberian peninsula. Algeria is already a pro Russia/China country. Morocco is a US total ally.

Spain is an ally of U.S. but probably a reluctant one. Kind of different from a civilisation point of view and arguably one of the biggest loosers in the current system.

Spanish people historically hated Anglosaxon.

It should not be so difficult to turn around things there, and get the country out of NATO and EU."

Utterly wrong: Spain is an ironclad Anglo and German vassal: why do you think they (you?) built all those re-gassificator for American LNG instead of a pipeline to Africe? Why do you think they (you?) always side with Germany inside €U institution? Why do you think they (you?) adopted so well German export-led-austerity-empowered economic model, included a staggering unemployment, mini-jobs and midi-jobs?

"Once it’s done Italy and the Balkans become a very strain point of the American empire, because the Gibraltar strait would be controlled by Russia China.

In that moment you can kick the US out of Italy and Greece."

And being a German slave? No, thanks: better an ally of a weaker American state than a vassal of a German one.

"And once the Mediterranean Europe is outside of the American empire Germany is a ready fruit since the country by itself will have loose half of its markets in Europe and will not be able to sustain the occupational U.S. forces.

I decided to play to be Mackinder here :)

But I really think that to end the U.S. empire in Europe from a frontal clash will be difficult.

You need to attack the weak points, and make their position untenable from a economic and military perspective"

I think I found the core of the problem: "you have" who? I am sorry but i am an italian patriot, not a russian or a chinese one. I do not need to kick the Americans out because I know that in the short-medium term this would mean German slavery, a worse one than the actual @marco zzz spoke about. I crave for Russia (and more for Serbia) from a personal point of view, but from a geopolitical one i need them as an "icebreaker" (pun intended, iykwim) of Unipolar world only.

Expand full comment

Agree totally with Your last paragraph, same here, maybe I'm a little more libertarian than You... and what I fear most are the nazi davos clown guys and girls compelling and compressing our liberty, and all the idiots following them.

Expand full comment

NATO is a Dead Clown Walking; Ukraine their Sacrificial Lamb.

💕Wage Peace,

⭐️Keep the Faith,

#DeNazthePlanet!

Expand full comment

I'm with you.

The USA needs to assume a defensive posture. We have over 800 bases surrounding Russia and China and that's expensive. We should close them and get out of Germany and South Korea. Cut the building of obsolete Aircraft Carriers and Attack Submarines. Build Diesel/AIP Submarines to defend our coasts. Our military doesn't exist to defend us but for profit to enrich the Oligarchs. Our weapons are designed to line pockets instead winning. We are incapable of building Hypersonic Maneuverable Missiles. We can't even make Supersonic Cruise Missiles. The F-35 is junk, only 35% are airworthy at any given time.

Do Russia or China have based surrounding the USA? Are they aggressive? No! They've always been on a defensive footing! The USA was consumed with fear of the Bogeyman Communism. Where did that attitude come from? It began in earnest in 1945 and was inculcated into us by the defeated German Nazis. Right after the war we picked up where the German Nazis left off and even adopted their tactics. The Oligarch Rulers of the USA have a Nazi mindset as exemplified by the Neocons like Nuland and her husband Kagan.

If we assumed a Defensive Posture and did the aforementioned we can the savings to pay our debts and rebuild our crumbling infrastructure.

I'm sick of this crap.

Expand full comment

I believe it correct that all NATO Sec. Generals from 1953 to 1983 were Ex Nazi SS. We defeated Germany Military, however Nazi’s won politically; just change of cloths and window dressing on right and left neocons and rainbow dildos.

Expand full comment

The Neocon politicians here in the good old USA are all fighting Communism. I'd love to send them all letters telling them that the problem isn't Communism but Naziism. We have Neocon Nazis, Neolib Nazis, Femi-Nazis and Zio-Nazis.

Expand full comment

Bolchevics were the first neocons and 1917 the first colour revolution (except if we consider Bastille in 1789 the real thing?)

Expand full comment

What degenerate right do not understand is that Marx was controlled and inspired by F Engels, who was straight out of London Intel; which controls both elements to this day; gang counter gang; Synarchism. Operation NATO Gladio with respect to Ukraine today is testament to continued existence to this day. Therefore: 💕Wage Peace, ⭐️Keep the Faith, #DeNazthePlanet!

Expand full comment

Oh yes! That's why I'm subscribed to Scott Ritter.

Expand full comment

I Follow Scott closely and support him and VIPS. My go to for geopolitical and historical analysis is Matt Ehret at CanadianPatriot.org . Worthwhile to check out.

Expand full comment

😂 Good one!

Expand full comment

Thank You, Aleks (and Piquet). The oligarchs who own the west may be ore diversified than we know. I think they see economy as contracting, and want to force to contraction on "others", through war to destroy countries, as with Libya and Iraq.

They may be well diversified to take losses in one arena, even if it is North America. The American constitutional model remains a threat to them, as Americans see it as true.

Expand full comment

Thanks John.

Yes... I see similar possibilities.

I'm in the research phase for my next article about the owners of the USA.

Let's see what comes out of this 😁

Expand full comment

I would not assume that Oligarchs are anchored to any specific geography or location. To become an Oligarch they had to « go global » with their capital and that of their investors. Yes their investments might be concentrated in certain places but those can be rebuilt. The key thing is for them to be amongst the survivors. They will be sure to position themselves accordingly.

Expand full comment

A very plausible explanation for the manifest (and always surprising) indifference of Ukraine's leaders to the genocide of their people and the destruction of their country.

Let's hope that Russia will nevertheless be able to develop a presence in the multipolar world in the making, and not just as a military power or a "service station".

As for Homo economicus, one day we'll have to learn how to civilize them. I'd tend to fear their puppets more...

Expand full comment

I agree that nuclear war is unlikely. That said, extinction because of a nuclear war is unlikely. Most of Earth would not be damaged. One risk is that the very people that may trigger a nuclear war have nice bunkers in remote regions and are not afraid of dying.

Expand full comment

Well ... my cents, if I may.

a) Sad to understand that in reality James Bond always was working for Spectre.. now Jane Bond... :( How to kill a franchise, but the London Olympics scene was huge!!!! The old lady.... was another level.

b) You wrote of American Oligarchs... what about the Europeans ones? Let's call them... Gstaad ones??? :) :) Will they let them be sacrificed together with us little minions? Or they have another agenda? Seriously, they are the ones I fear most... old wounded beasts... and they master their Us minions....

c) You wrote of markets dominance... ok, agree with your idea but... which kind of products can US really makes? They are no more in the '50.. and their cultural/ethical work level isn't the same for their same admission... no industrial base to occupy markets.

d) are we in europe scr....? Yes, until we follow blindly the anglosphere masters orders, but I feel that the REAL masters are in europe, so? A conundrum...

e) I don't think Nudelman and al. follow american oligarchs orders... more Gstaad orders...

f) wish to be a jedi.... :)

Expand full comment

I'm of the opinion that there will not be any widespread nuclear devastation if only because, as you pointed out, TPTB have a vested interest in acquiring (more) wealth & power. That said, the age-old way of dealing with a bully is to call their bluff and strike unexpectedly hard. Since the West seemingly cannot refrain from poking the Bear--and loves to double/triple down on stupidity--a red line will indeed be crossed, and Mr. Kinzhal (nuke-capable, but not for this example) will come a-callin' on a NATO base such as Ramstein or the large one in Sofia....to say, "See what we can do? No hypersonics AD? AWww, what a shame." Note the restraint here: No DC/London target nor civilians; just the "expendable" EU ones from which the trouble flows. My $.02.

Expand full comment

Straussians ideology (aka neocons) is eschatologic. Nuland said she is looking for Armagedon (not the general), as then her Messiah will arrive, create for her tribe, Israel 2.0 (or will relocate actual fake one) from Odessa to the Caucase, as former Khazars (today called ashkenazes), believe they own both Russia and Ukraine, Crimea being the new Jerusalem. Even Zelensky said: Ukraine will be a second Israel as he is let's say at best a light jew and not really a neocon. She even said during a think tank meeting (aipac maybe or another one less known ?), that if the US would lose between 10 and 15 millions in a RU counter strike after a first US strike on Russia, that it would be an ''acceptable price'' to pay in exchange for the destruction of Russia.

Expand full comment

The use of nuclear weapons will not cause global extinction, or nuclear winter. Nearly 2,000 have already been detonated in tests, a third of those above ground.

Second, there has been a change in the nature and reason for using such weapons. In the cold war the ICBMs were quite inaccurate, so the bombs were geared up to very high power in order to make up for the inaccuracy. Today the missiles that deliver the warheads are very accurate, so much lower power is needed to achieve the strategic goals.

Another question is whether Russia and the USA have the same objectives for the use of their nuclear weapons. Is the goal to annihilate the enemy population, or is the goal to paralyze the enemy's ability to retaliate and to prosecute a war?

The first would be expected as retaliation, while the second might be a first strike decapitation attack scenario.

Another issue is that Mutual Assured Destruction relies upon the assumption that both parties are rational actors. The problem is that the seven deadly sins in human beings lead us to commit irrational actions routinely.

Pride leads to hubris. And hubris is a form of arrogance that does not recognize its own weaknesses. I believe that the Anglo-Zionist Hegemon is currently blinded by the hubris of pride. They may be expected to take irrational actions. Therefore, I would not assume that MAD will successfully deter them from attempting a nuclear first strike.

The Anglo-Zionist Empire will only be defanged by one of two methods:

* destroy the dollar

* nuclear first strike

Since 2014 if not earlier, Mr. Putin has been working diligently toward ending the USD hegemony, which is the better of the two methods.

Expand full comment

Their goal is to steal all RU UKR ressources, though they would probably strike big cities as ressources and industry, mines, oil, gas, gold etc are not located near big cities, though bomb bomb bomb Moscow but not Ural or Siberia please Victoria...capito?

Expand full comment

I don't see any homo economicus behaviour among the West's big oligarchs. Money is a proxy for wealth/power (not just economic) and once there is enough of economic power some develop a God complex, they want to decide the number of people on earth, the climate of planet Earth, the structure and values of societies (society) etc. Therefore, the West is, at the moment, even more ideologically driven than the communist bloc used to be.

Expand full comment

The point about US oligarch being Homo economicus is a valid one. Doesn't any one remeber how unhappy was Wall Street when Biden's admin declared expulsion of RUS from SWIFT and froze RUS assets? When Trump started pushing Chinese back in 2017? What about all legal actions around 2010 when both Obama and Bush junior had to change legislation so that they prevented escape of US multinational companies from the US to countries which had less international conflicts and softer regulations and lower taxation? How much of US profits returned to the US when Bush junior and Trump announced corporate tax amnesty on US corporate profits hiding abroad? 1/3 or so only. CFR fellow Brad Settser (OK CFR is a bit strange organization but this guy is a good economist) wrote many articles on how US companies smuggle profits out of the US and keep them abroad. Funny thing is that this is what was happening in countries of so called Warsaw pact in 1980s and that was one the key elements of fast fall of communist regimes - there was a group of business people who kept their money on the other side of Iron curtain.

Expand full comment

The risk that the US would use nukes can be brought back to zero with a single declaration from Putin: If we are attacked with nukes, we will glaze over Israel first.

Expand full comment

I believe NOT in global extinction in case of no-klear war.

Since I am not alone I believe that likelihood increases.

Therefore I am inclined to believe 50/50 chances of seeing nucular use before Christmas.

Happy holidays.

Expand full comment

[Nuclear weapons can be used by Russia ...]

... "In case of a nuclear attack (WMDs in general) on Russia, its armed forces, or allies."

Tick. Shelling the ZNPP was a form of nuclear attack, the same will be the case once they start using DU munitions, and the Russian MoD says it foiled several attempts by Ukraine to build a nuclear dirty bomb, which surely would have been used against Russia. Further, blowing up the Karkhova dam was equivalent to WMD use, as is seeking out ethnic minorities to send them as cannon fodder to the front.

... "If the existence of the Russian state is at risk during a large-scale conventional conflict."

Tick. The entire West openly says that it wants to destroy Russia. Given the resources that the West has, that certainly puts Russia at risk regardless of how the war currently goes.

Expand full comment