I have pondered for a long time whether to publish this
note or not. In any case, I write only about what interests
me. Therefore, I will risk offering my commentary on the
current international political situation. And as is obvious
to all of us, there are different dimensions to the global
situation. Events can be viewed as a conflict between
"globalist elites and clans," or based on the geopolitical
interests of nations, or from a religious conflict, or
civilizational confrontation. In any case, this will be just
another interpretation of our social reality. The catalyst
for this reflection was the complaints of American arms
manufacturers about Europe's refusal to allow their
participation in the continent's rearmament. This economic
conflict, in my view, clearly indicates a trend toward the
fragmentation of Western civilization. Just as the Roman
Empire once split into Eastern and Western parts, today
the United States and the European Union are increasingly
diverging mentally and economically. I believe this process
was initiated by the Obama administration in 2011, gradually
drifting toward the idea of Realpolitik in relations with
the world - especially after Europe's refusal to sign the
transatlantic trade agreement aimed at unifying markets.
Subsequently, the Biden administration only intensified
these tendencies with an openly infantile foreign policy.
One could endlessly list American geopolitical failures
under Trump and Biden, but their essence boils down
to the idea that the U.S. needs nothing from the world
(paradoxically) except money. This belief unites both
Democrats and Republicans - what might be called a
"brilliant isolation" akin to the British Empire.
Historically, the British, leveraging their island status,
supported different nations in their conflicts, playing a
role of a distant power that provided protection for pay.
Realpolitik ultimately led the world into the First World
War and nearly destroyed the British Empire. But who
cares about that today? If a united Europe views modern
wars as a matter of values, ideas, and politics, Americans
see these conflicts as simplified gangland disputes and dirty
capitalist dealings - where strong guys take money and
property from weaker ones. Based on this logic, to prevent
the weak from ending up in such situations, they should
respect the strong gang leaders, pay tribute, and not oppose
them. I believe this is precisely how U.S. geopolitics under
Biden and Trump perceives global issues. Therefore,
Americans are unlikely to resolve conflicts involving Russia
and Ukraine, China and Taiwan, Iran and Israel, Indonesia
and China, and so forth. While the European value-based
approach is generally understandable and logical from the
standpoint of bourgeois socialism's dogma, American logic
appears overly simplistic and contradictory. When General
Driscoll was scaring Europe and Ukraine that they would
lose the war to Russia, he forgot to mention that it was the
United States that lost the war in Afghanistan to 12,000
barefoot people on motorcycles. They fled from South
Vietnam, Lebanon, and so on. The Americans also too often
turned off their long-range smart weapons to the Europeans,
Ukrainians, and Israelis, doing everything so that Russia
or Iran would not lose completely. This fits into the logic
of gangsters drug-related shootouts on the streets, but
unfortunately in the rest of the world, it spoils the
already bad reputation of the United States as an unreliable
ally and partner, seller of promises with a very short shelf
life. As some European journalists joke: It's only a matter
of time before the Americans start selling weapons to Iran
and Russia. But it's true. Most likely it will be. Rome
should not help Constantinople and vice versa. Why is this?
In my view, the answer lies in America's new worldview.
Since the U.S. is far from the old centers of civilization,
processes of island mentality have begun to dominate there,
as in Australia. Military conflicts are seen as simplified
gang disputes, with Americans playing the role of yet
another group offering protection for pay to featherheaded
allies. All this happens "over there," across the "beautiful
ocean," and thus has no direct connection to domestic
politics, say Democrats and Republicans. Simultaneously,
the U.S. displays blatant disregard for Europe, believing -
according to the administration - that the EU is weak and
refuses to submit to the rules of stronger gangsters. The
paradox is that the rules of gentlemen apply only to
gentlemen and are written solely for them. It's unclear why
Europe should listen to or obey American gangsters. All this
creates a profound value and ideological conflict, centered
on a simple question: what is the true understanding
of Western civilization? Americans confidence in the
infallibility of their gangster-style "deals" only
demonstrates their helplessness and lack of understanding
of the planet they live on. How can they make deals when
the conflicts they speak of have existed longer than the U.S.
itself? These conflicts are rooted in religious, colonial,
and mental contradictions. Modern experience shows that
treaties signed with the U.S. last at most 3-4 years before
a new administration comes in. That's why Europeans no
longer trust the bipolar American foreign policy. The U.S.
is no longer part of a single transatlantic civilizational
space and cannot bring anything to a logical conclusion.
Europeans have recognized and accepted this fact. America
is a different version of the West, with different values and
a different geopolitical moral paradigm. From this new
reality, it appears that the U.S. simply mirrors the
external world without any coherent strategy. During the
"Cold War," the U.S. mirrored the conflict of "values."
During the globalization of markets, it mirrored
"globalization" and liberal values. With the rise of
dictatorships and autocracies, the U.S. mirrors autocracies.
Therefore, I dare suggest that the fundamental
civilizational difference between the "American West"
and the "European West" lies in their understanding of the
very essence and role of Western civilization in the world.
Europeans believe that Western civilization is rooted in
bourgeois-communist values and ideals, while Americans
believe it is about "free markets" without institutions and
with private interests as the raison d'etre. In any case, an
internal conflict of values, goals, and ideas is evident. I
believe it's only a matter of time before this confrontation
escalates into a more acute phase - akin to the wars between
Rome and Constantinople, or between "dealmakers" and
"socialists." These two worlds, these two centers of power,
are increasingly drifting apart. Too many civilizational
contradictions have accumulated between them. I am
genuinely convinced that there are now two Western
civilizations: a "Western" and an "Eastern" version.

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A48 (Linux/64)
* Origin: Shipwrecks & Shibboleths [San Francisco, CA - USA] (700:100/72)