The Future Of The USA, Russia, And The New World Order

I randomly came across a fascinating document called The USA And The New World Order: A Debate Between Olavo de Carvalho And Aleksandr Dugin (PDF download). It has done more for me to clarify modern geopolitics than any other work I’ve read.

Before we review its contents, let’s first introduce the two debaters. Olavo de Carvalho is a conservative Brazilian philosopher and writer who created the Inter American Institute, which focuses on philosophical and social issues. Aleksandr Dugin is a Russian thinker and strategist who is an independent adviser to Vladimir Putin. His grand vision is to create a Eurasian sphere that eliminates the unipolarity of the United States.

I’m first struck by what a clear understanding Carvalho, who I hadn’t heard of before reading the debate, has of the globalist establishment. Here he is defining globalism and its aims:

…liberal globalism is the project in progress that aims to establish throughout the world the Popperian model of the “open society,” necessarily destroying on its way national sovereignties and every metaphysical or moral principle that aspires to be superior to individual rationality. It is the end of nations and of all traditional spirituality, the former being replaced by a global scientific-technocratic administration, and the latter by a mix of scientism, materialism and relativistic subjectivism that inspires the globalist elites of the West.

He then makes the claim that globalists are in control of the United States and are enacting policies to bring it to heel:

The United States are not the command center of the globalist project, but on the contrary, its prime victim, marked for death. The globalist elite is not an enemy of Russia, China or the Islamic countries potentially associated with the Eurasian project, but, rather it is their collaborator and accomplice in the effort to destroy the sovereignty, the politico-military power and the economy of the United States.

Why is the USA marked for death? Because its patriotic and Christian people are the last obstacle to ushering in a truly global world order controlled by a state-less group of elites who rule over three 1984-style domains: Western empire (the merchant), Russian-Chinese empire (the warrior), and Islamic empire (the priest).

Dugin bristles at the suggestion that Russia is already a pawn of the world order that is being used as a device to bring down the USA. In fact, he says there is no world order at all besides American hegemony.

There is no definitive World Order of any kind at present. There is a Transition from the World Order we knew in XX century to the some other paradigm whose full features rest to define. Will the future be really global? Or the regionalist tendencies will win? Will there be a unique Order? Or there will be different local or regional Orders? Or may be we are going to deal with World Chaos? It is not clear yet, the Transition is not accomplished. We are living in the middle of it.

Dugin states that the transition can proceed in one of three ways:

1. A stable “Imperial Core” that generates policies that cause chaos and mayhem in the world for the purpose of controlling other nations.

2. Cooperating with friendly powers while putting pressure on rogue countries.

3. Achieving true globalization by trading sovereignty for world government, ruled by the likes of George Soros and organizations such as the Council On Foreign Relations.

It seems that USA tries to go by these three ways simultaneously promoting all three strategies at the same time. This three directions strategy of USA creates the global context in International Relations, USA being the key actor on the global scale.

Globalist-sponsored commentator Francis Fukuyama wrote in his book The End Of History And The Last Man that liberal democracy (the platform that globalists herald) is the best political system ever created, and it will bring about the end of historical movements and revolutions, but only if it is allowed to envelop the world by “exporting democracy,” a euphemism for subversion through propaganda, covert CIA operations, or overt military action. As Dugin points out, it’s the USA way or death.

The history is considered to be univocal (monotone) process of technological and social progress, the way of growing liberation of individuals from all kind of collective identities. The tradition and conservatism are regarded as the obstacles for the freedom and should be rejected. The USA is in vanguard of this historical progress and has the right and obligation (mission!) to move the history further and further. The historical existence of USA coincides with the course of the human history. So “American” means “universal.” The other cultures have only an American future or no future at all.

God must be killed and replaced with “rational” thinking, where the rationale of the day is guided into your brain through scientific, political, and academic experts who are controlled by the elites. Technology is but another means to speed this along, as everything becomes centered around the individual and its needs instead of the tribe and family. The end goal is transhumanism, creating something “better” than human nature on the neverending march towards perfection, stability, and order for the top 0.01%.

…the fragmentation and atomization of society included in the technology (internet, mobile phones and so on) where the principle actor is strictly individual and excerpt from the natural and social context.


After the accomplishing the full fragmentation of the societies to the individual atoms there will begin the second phase: the division of the individuals themselves on the parts and new (genetic, for example) combinations of the elements in the way of post-human creativity.

What “liberal democracy” really means is a fractured society of atomized individuals who are either culturally and biologically sterile (white nations) or constantly chaotic (non-white nations). Your society will be inverted to make it easy to be controlled and dominated by a USA-led hegemon, which Dugin insists is the height of world power. If you do not allow liberal democracy to penetrate your nation “peacefully,” you will be targeted for chaos. If you are a Syrian, Iraqi, Russian, Indian, or African, and hear warm buzzwords from the American president that you deserve “liberal democracy,” get ready for subversion at best, war at worst.

Dugin is triggered at Carvalho’s assertion that Russia is part of the new world order instead of being its target:

The globalization of the world and the installation everywhere of the American control, including the direct intrusion in the nominally sovereign countries, the promotion of American way of life and the uniformization of the different human societies, accomplished by USA, is considered by the professor as “nothing”, being ignored and forgotten. The contamination of Russian society by decadent consumerist individualist patterns, the support for the anti-Russian regimes in the post-soviet space is nothing.

The USA is an absolute plague for the mankind. And the globalist elite is the quintessence of USA, it rules USA and through it in the rest of the world. The globalist elite of the USA is the absolute enemy of the Russia, China and Islamic countries, it corrupts our political elite, the society, the country. For us it is obvious. “The sovereignty, the political-military power and the economy of the United States” are no more than the instruments in the hand of this elite, its accomplices, voluntary or not.

From this point, the debate becomes about whether Russia is part of the globalist system or not. Carvalho insists that the “contamination” of Russia society was done by its own hand starting with the Bolshevik revolution, which implemented anti-traditional policies such as feminism, easy divorce, and godlessness before Stalin scaled them back. Dugin insists that a level of elites above that of nation states is a “conspiracy theory” (he uses that exact phrase), and the tit-for-tat games you see in the mainstream news is real, that there are no transnational elites who meet in Davos, Brussels, and so on.

This distinction is important because if Russia and the United States are dialectical forces under the same controlling power, the Russia vs USA tension is theater and being used to create the justification for a war that benefits a pre-determined victor. If on the other hand they are truly independent entities, USA is bumbling its war to World War 3 by provoking Russia (at least up until Trump’s victory), which is all too ready to take advantage of those blunders by re-asserting its power in Eastern Europe and Asia.

Dugin’s position that there are no transnational elites, with the insinuation that world leaders are at the top of the pyramid, was wholly unconvincing. Carvalho found an opening and laid down heavy fire.

The globalist elite is not only a vague social class of capitalists and bankers. It is an organized entity, with continuous existence for over a century, which meets periodically to ensure the unity of its plans and the continuity of their implementation, with the minuteness and scientific precision with which an engineer controls the transmutation of his blueprint into a building.


The Syndicate is an organization of big capitalists and international bankers committed to establishing a worldwide socialist dictatorship. There are so many documents and studies that meticulously depict its origin, history, membership, and modus operandi that no excuse can be accepted for ignorance in this matter, most of all from people who intend to opine about it. No, this is not an insinuation against Professor Dugin. He is perfectly informed about it, and if he commits errors in the conclusions he presents, it is not due to ignorance. It is because the essentially bellicose nature of his approach impels him to divide the panorama into two symmetrically opposed halves, falsifying the whole picture and sending to the limbo of non-existence all the facts that refute this Manichean simplification.

As I’ve written before, socialism is but a tool of the elites to centralize their power by increasing the size and reach of government while weakening social bonds through Marxist poison. Here it is explained more elegantly by Carvalho:

If the Medieval system lasted ten centuries, Absolutism did not last more than three. Even shorter will be the reign of liberal bourgeoisie. One century of economic and political freedom was enough to make some capitalists so formidably rich that they no longer wish to submit to the whims of the markets that made them rich. They want to control them, and there are three instruments for this: dominion of the State, in order to enact the statist policies necessary to make the oligopoly eternal; stimulus to socialist and communist movements that invariably favor the growth of state power; and the drafting of an army of intellectuals who prepare public opinion to bid farewell to bourgeois freedoms and happily step into a world of omnipresent and obsessive repression (extending itself to the last details of private life and everyday speech), presented as a paradise adorned both with the abundance of capitalism and the “social justice” of communism.

Carvalho then discusses historical philosophy and how only an entity that spans generations can be an agent that affect the change that we come to see as “history.” We like to think of nation states as drivers of history, but it’s really the groups that hold power within those states who are the true drivers. This is often described as the “conspiratorial view of history.”


Who can be an agent of a historical action? States? Nations? Empires? Of course not. These entities result from the combination of heterogeneous forces which struggle to dominate them from within. They do not have their own will, but they reflect, at each moment, the will of a dominant group, which may be replaced by another in the next moment. A state, nation or empire is an apparent agent, manipulated by other, more durable, more stable agents, capable of dominating it and using it for their objectives, which frequently transcend even the duration of the national, state and imperial formations which they utilized.

To be a historical agent, the group or entity must:

(a) Nurture permanent or long-term objectives.

(b) Be capable of continuing the pursuit of these objectives beyond the lifespan of its individual agents, beyond the duration of the present state of affairs, and beyond the duration of even the states, nations and empires involved.

(c) Be capable, therefore, of reproducing individual agents able to continue the action through the centuries and to adapt the original plans to the different situations that may emerge without losing view of the initial goals.

Only the following entities fulfill these conditions:

(1) The great universal religions.
(2) Initiatory and esoteric organizations.
(3) Royal and noble dynasties and similar entities.
(4) Ideologically revolutionary movements and parties.
(5) Spiritual agents: God, angels, and demons.

Everything, absolutely everything that happens in the historical scene either comes from one of these forces, or is the result of an uncontrolled combination of forces.

Ideas by themselves do not act on history unless they are used by groups that meet the above conditions that Carvalho lays out. Otherwise it’s just a frustrated exertion or power grab that fails and relinquishes power back to the true agents in charge.

For example, now that Donald Trump has won the Presidency, it will be up to him and those around him to create a lasting nationalist movement that outlives him. Otherwise, it may blowback spectacularly and crush nationalism for generations. One only need to look at Adolph Hitler to see how a failed nationalist uprising becomes manna from heaven to globalist interests because of how quickly a foolhardy war can accelerate a world order that was planned all along.

And yet in a single stroke, Dugin brushes away Carvalho’s assertions by stating that this is all merely a simple matter of good versus evil, as if we were in a Hollywood movie whose plot was inspired by Joseph Campbell, and that the world must join Russia in its honorable crusade against the West.

Therefore, I invite all the rest to join the camp and fight Globalism, Modernity/Hypermodernity, Imperialism Yankee, liberalism, free market religion and unipolar world. These phenomena are the ultimate point of the Western path to the abyss, the final station of the evil and the almost transparent image of the antichrist/ad-dadjal/erev rav. So the West is the center of kali-yuga, its motor, its heart.

While I don’t agree with Dugin on the denial of a global syndicate, and am deeply suspicious of his reasoning for doing so, he does understand the decline of the West.

Once the West had its own tradition. Partly it has lost it. Partly this tradition has given the poisonous germs. The West should search in its deep ancient roots. But these roots lead to the common indo-european Eurasian past, the glorious past of the Scyths, Celts, Sarmats, Germans, Slavs, Hindus, Persians, Greeks, Romans and their holistic societies, warrior style hierarchical culture and spiritual mystic values that had nothing in common with present day Western mercantile capitalist degenerated civilization.

To return to the Tradition we need to accomplish the revolt against modern world and against modern West—absolute revolt—spiritual (traditionalist) and social (socialist). The West is in agony. We need to save the world from this agony and may be to save the West from itself. The Modern (and Post-Modern) West must die. And if there were the real traditional values in its foundations (and they certainly were) we will save them only in the process of the global destruction of the Modernity/Hypermodernity.

Carvalho snaps back and methodically breaks down Dugin’s arguments (or lack thereof), especially his “conspiracy theory” reply about elite groups possessing long-term plans.

Without continuity over generations, there is no historical action, and only a few types of human groups have the means to fulfill this requirement. If among those means the control over the flow of information is included, this is only due to a trite observation, actually a commonplace in historical methodology, according to which the dissemination of facts produces new facts; therefore, the control over the flow of information is absolutely essential to any group or entity that plans long-term historical actions. The Council on Foreign Relations, for example, managed to remain totally secret and unknown for fifty years, even though its membership included practically all the owners of the major media outlets of the West. Once the period of obligatory discretion was over, David Rockefeller publicly thanked journalists for their five-decade old silence. Should we hide this fact only out of a yokelish fear of being called “conspiracy theorists”?

He makes the important claim that a Eurasian empire is merely a competitor to Western globalism, concealed by a seemingly traditional and moral facade.

Karl Marx himself defined [ideology as] just a “dress of ideas” concealing a scheme of political power. The scheme of political power in Russia has changed its dress, but continues to be the same—maintaining the same people in the same positions, performing the same functions, with the same totalitarian ambitions as ever.


But as Nietzsche used to say, one cannot completely destroy a thing except when one substitutes it. It is not enough to cut the West off from its roots and then accuse it of not having roots: it is necessary to insert a Eurasian graft into it and persuade the West that Eurasianism is its true roots.

If Russia wins, Putin would merely replace Western globalism with his own vision that is also globalist. Carvalho doesn’t trust Russia because of the untold dead and mass repression that occurred during the Soviet Empire, and implies that he rather live under Western hegemony.

The question we have to ask ourselves is this: if we were allowed to pick our globalist master, the USA or Russia, which would be better for us and our interests? Based on how the West methodically attacks men and the traditional family while Russia does not, I presume that it would be Russia, but we are not Russian and cannot assume that Putin would treat his American vassal citizen the same as a Russian one. There is no way to be certain that our living conditions would improve under Russian hegemony, and lessons from history lean towards a more turbulent conclusion.

Losing his patience against a tenacious Carvalho, Dugin removes intellectual pretense and proclaims what his heart desires most.

…we have a kind of the global dictatorship. We should fight against it. If someone deprives us from our freedom we have to react. And we will. The American Empire should be destroyed. And at one point it will be.

Destroyed from within or destroyed by Russian nuclear bombs when they sense the time is right to establish the Eurasian empire? Dugin leaves that for our imagination, but gives hints as to what the future Eurasian empire would be like.

…the communism doctrine is Modern, atheist, materialist and cosmopolite. That should be thrown out. On the contrary, the social solidarity, social justice, the socialism and general holistic attitude to the society are good in themselves. So we need to separate the materialist and Modernist aspect and reject them. On the other hand in the theories of Third way (dear up to certain point to some traditionalists as Julius Evola) there were some unacceptable elements—first of all racism, xenophobia and chauvinism.

Don’t we already have social solidarity, social justice, and anti-racism in the West? Dugin calls us to join arms with Russia to replace a progressive West with a progressive Russian empire. We can only hope that Dugin is confusing his definitions on what social justice and racism are, since those features include the very atheist and cosmopolitan features that he rejects, but it’s easy to look at Russia, with a 6.5% Muslim population and a host of other ethic groups to understand that the Eurasian empire will at the minimum be a multicultural empire. Sorry, white nationalists, but Russia will never cater to your demands of a purely white state.

He explains that the future Eurasian empire will be ruled by the Fourth Political Theory, which seems awfully similar to what the United States uses today, but with a traditional veneer that is nowhere close to true traditionalism. Nationalism is, unsurprisingly, excluded from the program.

We call it Fourth Political Theory (first being the liberalism, that we essentially challenge, the second the classical form of communism, the third the national-socialism and the fascism). Its elaboration starts from the point of intersection between different anti-liberal political theories of the past (the communism and the Third way theories). So we arrive to the nationalbolshevism that represents the socialism without materialism, atheism, progressism and Modernism and the Third way theories without racism and nationalism.

The Fourth Political Theory wants to unite all the people of the world in a world struggle against an evil empire. One-hundred years ago the evil enemy was the bourgeoisie and their class oppression. Today the evil enemy is the United States and their world oppression. The enemy has been identified and it will be used as part of the “dress of ideas” to restore Russian power once again.

So we need to unite the right, the left and the religions in the common struggle against common enemy. The social justice, the national sovereignty and the Traditional values are three principles of such ideology. It is not easy to put all this together. But we should try if we want to overcome the foe.

Dugin wants us to trade one master for another. For that reason, I have to reject Dugin’s call for me to join him in replacing our current cabal of globalist oppressors with another cabal who will in all likelihood end up as globalist oppressors. Neither entity offers me anything to fight for.

While not an easy read, this debate (PDF) clarified a lot of conflicts in my mind about how to deal with our current situation. The most important thing I learned is that to replace a globalist hegemon, you will need to counter with a strategy that is also globalist is nature. Otherwise, patient historical agents will marshal their resources across several nation-states to effortlessly crush any non-globalist force.

It’s for this reason that nationalism will ultimately fail after its current resurgence after the present cycle plays itself out. How can individual nations and their leaders stand up in the long term (beyond a generation) against a host of individuals, corporations, NGOs, and other organizations that operate globally and across generations? To defeat globalists who operate around the world, you’ll have to be global yourself, which nationalism is not. For that reason, I have accepted that globalism is here to stay.

This article was originally published on Roosh V.

Read Next: Nationalism Is A Trap

186 thoughts on “The Future Of The USA, Russia, And The New World Order”

  1. “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – One World, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” – David Rockefeller, from his book, “Memoirs”, Pg. 405

    1. It’s pretty clear that GW Bush was brought in as a strawman to collapse the world economy and stop trading of oil in Euros. The so called Axis of Evil was Iraq, Iran and North Korea, hardly an axis at all, but all trading Oil in Euros. The USD and the US has it’s power through the petrodollar. Notice how once this goal was achieved the rhetoric suddenly changed in 2014 / 2015.
      There maybe some factions that support some global government, but it’s not happening in our life times – infact divide and conqueror is so much more convenient and it’s easier to maintain control of a nation’s currency and government than one world currency and govt – that will have far more oversight. It’s a BS game to keep you looking the other way.
      Trump has been put in to start a trade war with China and once again collapse the global economy, this time to stop China trading Oil in Yuan / Gold. Russia has been selling oil to the Chinese for Yuan and Gold and China has been setting up a futures exchange to trade oil in Yuan. THIS is why Russia has suddenly become the focus of rhetoric – NO OTHER REASON.
      It’s all about AND always about the petrodollar.
      All the BS about some global currency and global government is garbage.
      Notice how Iraq was invaded and left in a complete mess. No one wants global government and currency – they like it just the way it is thank you very much – USD rules and they will cause a global depression to keep that in place.

      1. And no wonder, when you consider that the US derives nearly all of its income by taxing everyone who uses the dollar.

        1. The US derives its income by working behind closed doors with private banking entities to ‘create wealth’ by ‘creating debt’. This makes taxation as a means of global control irrelevant, because reassigning the value of the dollar can send other nations into chaos for what most americans will see as barely noticeable inflation. Taxation is an attempt to keep materialism going. If you spend money, more than you make, you are given welfare. If you work too hard or make too much and save too much, you are forced to subsidize frivilous spending anyway through increased taxation. This is their control over their citizens. A system of global and local control. And if they can’t convince the majority of people to buy it, they force you to buy it via laws, like health insurance was made to be recently.

        2. Look, don’t buy into their frauds. Stuff is stuff, and everyone either makes it or takes it.

      2. You’re still talking about the effects: petrodollars, depopulation, even world domination are just means to their ultimate end – the anti christ kingdom. You don’t need to be Christian to see this. All discussions of globalism in a secular lense still ties in with biblical writings

  2. Why is the USA marked for death? Because its patriotic and Christian people are the last obstacle to ushering in a truly global world order controlled by a state-less group of elites. . .

    Some would say John answered the question of what will become of the future of the USA way back on the island of Patmos in 70 AD:
    “The woman whom you saw is the great city [“The City”, sovereign, one square mile, bankers HQ in London, England] , which reigns over the kings of the earth [Globalist politicians].” – Rev 17:18
    “After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illumined with his glory. And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great [Globalist banking world order]! She has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird. For all the nations have drunk of the wine of the passion of her immorality, and the kings [Globalist politicians] of the earth have committed acts of immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth [Globalist big business] have become rich by the wealth of her sensuality.”. . . “And the kings of the earth, who committed acts of immorality and lived sensuously with her, will weep and lament over her when they see the smoke of her burning, standing at a distance because of the fear of her torment, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, Babylon, the strong city! For in one hour your judgment has come.’ “And the merchants of the earth weep and mourn over her, because no one buys their cargoes any more—” – Rev 18
    Good article to read. Oh, and the “Jews” of today are not Israel. They are imposters and the anti-Christ:
    “I know your tribulation and your poverty (but you are rich), and the blasphemy by those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.” – Rev 2:9
    Behold, I will cause those of the synagogue of Satan, who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie—I will make them come and bow down at your feet, and make them know that I have loved you. – Rev 3:9
    He who has an ear, let him hear.

    1. This is too much for many people here. In truth the reason the bible predicted this fall is because its authors have seen empires fall from attempts of global control the same way even in ancient times. Human technology has evolved; the human mind has not.

      1. Great comment. Technology without the responsible morality to guide its use becomes a tool for wicked men. “There’s nothing new under the sun” as Solomon said. One of the biggest witnesses against the hypothesis of human evolution is sin. People still lie, cheat, steal, covet, murder, commit adultery, dishonor parents, and every other evil thing just like they always have. No “evolution” out of that even slightly.

  3. Olavo is a fake conservative. He is an occultist pretending to be a Catholic, but was a leading figure among astrologers in Brazil, dabbled into hinduism and was part of the guru Fritjoff Schuon’s tariqa (Sufi Islam) in Indiana. In that place, Schuon had rituals (called Primordial Gatherings) with naked people dancing in a circle for the Goddess. Since children were watching, Schuon was indicted as a pedophile and sex abuser.
    Olavo uses anti-marxist politics to draw people to his online courses on occultism, teaching things like Alchemy and promoting other esoterics like René Guenon, a disciple of the Satanist Papus. In Brazil, it is widely know that he has become the leader of a cult, using the strategies he learned from Schuon.
    Gnostic people who follow Perennial Philosophy, or Traditionalism, like him, hate modernity (they call it the Kali Yuga era) because they want to go back to a mythical era when magic (Atlantida, Shambala) ruled the Earth. They believe that the Luciferian light is behind all the religions of the world.
    We are talking cuckoo-land here.
    Most of his ideas are plagiarized from known sources in America, like Dr Stan Monteith, Alex Jones and Henry Makow. Since few people in Brazil know these sources, he achieved some reputation as an expert, even though his knowledge is very basic and he claims that Islam is the third center of power in the world. He never talks about Frankism, Sabbateism, Cabalists or the real Illuminati bankers. Maybe because Carvalho is a Jewish name.
    Stay away from him. His ideas are pure garbage. He starts with good anti-marxist rethorics and soon you will be studying how to be a witch.

    1. interesting post, though I can’t comment on Carvalho. Papus , as a martinist shrugged off the accusation of satanism, although I do find martinism puzzling – they are a strange bunch. Their symbol is an interlacing seal of solomon (apparently to be differentiated from the star of david) in a circle.
      It is my intention to read up on Evola, Guenon, and Dugin I Although you explain some of the thinking behind it I’m still not sure I quite get the concept of occultism in the context of traditionalism. I actually encountered Dugin interacting philosophically with some Sabbateans on the web, although he was just passing through.

      1. Traditionalism doesn’t mean a return to conservative or cultural traditions, as we may think at first sight. It is a return to a time when magic was powerful, like in Atlantida, according to them. What they call tradition is the teaching of the mystery schools preserved in secret societies and covens of witches.
        The “solution” to our current materialistic world would be to use more occult practices in the exoteric (with an X) religions, meaning everybody would become a witch. Most of these guys are fascists, since they regard marxism as a sign of modernity. Many are monarchists and promote the idea of a state religion.
        So, it is completely based on occultism. There is no other significant idea or philosophy beyond “practice occult rituals”.

        1. interesting comment. Apart from the Brazailian guy you mentioned you would include Evola, Guenon and Dugin in that list? This is not a tradition that I’m that familiar with. The mystery school tradition isn’t exactly under threat by progressivism is it? Kabbalah may also be referred to as ‘tradition’ yet it certainly has a progressive side – at least within its messianic stream.

    2. Olavo may have plagiarized his ideas from others, but he’s not necessarily wrong. He still made good points, and generally presented them well. What really caught my attention was Dugin’s claims, which indicated that there is a corresponding movement in Russia that is fundamentally equivalent to globalism.
      Make no mistake, Dugin’s views are far from those of SJWs. But I have been worried for a while that the new Left was really a pawn of the elite in a destabilizing move, and the fact that Russia is positioned to promote globalism without these poisonous tendencies seems to confirm this. Socialism, along with enough accommodations to human nature to allow a functional society, is essentially what we had during the cold war, which we can all admit is far from the best we can do.
      Olavo made his arguments, but in the end it was Dulgin who convinced me that Russia is the real tool of the globalists.

  4. The US and Russia are both nuclear powers, it is no secret that a war between us would be devastating, to say the least. Other than the occasional proxy war in some third world country, nothing will happen.
    Two things I do fear though: 1) some terrorist group or third world country that manages to get a nuke and smuggles it into some city to detonate. and 2) the globalists manage to consolidate more and more power until we are one world united in poverty.

    1. Well, it looks like Iran will be getting the bomb, so #1 is certainly likely.
      Thanks, Obama…

      1. Oh man I so want Iran to get nukes. Then we can resurrect this gem

    2. Suitcase nukes really aren’t the size of suitcases, they’re really easy to detect and they are really hard to carry around out of sight.
      Now somebody doing some nasty stuff with black market uranium or plutonium that doesn’t require making it into a bomb, can be something to ponder.

      1. I could see them hiding one in a shipping container full of cheap shoes or something. Sure they are detectable, but there are so many holes in our security.

        1. Sure, and that’s where the danger is contained, at shipyards. There are people who scan those ships for rads, btw.

        2. Someone would eventually notice the sizeable lead container containing the Uranium.

    3. “some terrorist group or third world country that manages to get a nuke and smuggles it into some city to detonate”
      No doubt. Loose nukes are the #1 threat to national security. In 2006, new senator Barack Obama (D) worked with Senator Dick Lugar (R) to limit them. The Lugar-Obama bill got passed in 2007. As president, he continued that work.

      1. But yet Barry agreed, with cash, to advance Iran’s nuclear program. Bill Clinton did the same with North Korea in the 90’s. How did that work out?

  5. The change from a unipolar or bipolar world into a multi-polar structure doesn’t mean that the power and control is not centralized. It is, but it works behind the curtains.
    On the contrary, it shows that the elite’s power has become so strong that they have a web that covers the whole world and don’t even need things like the European Union to control it.
    That was the plan all along, US dominance was supposed to be temporary and circumstantial.

  6. “The most important thing I learned is that to replace a globalist
    hegemon, you will need to counter with a strategy that is also globalist
    is nature.”
    Not necessarily. You could fight for radical decentralization and local autonomy. That way, people in each region can have their own laws and cultures and defend their identity against outside influences if they choose to do so, unlike right now where people are fighting to enforce their values onto each other while globalism continues to spread unfettered.
    Also, I’m going to ruffle some feathers here, but it needs to be said: the West, led by the US, is the globalist cancer of the world that needs to be abolished. The Western “civilization” (which is now just a globalist entity rather than a civilization in the traditional sense) doesn’t need to be “saved” from anything. The West itself is the very threat that is spreading progressivism, materialist-consumerism, feminism, multiculturalism, globalist wars, technological slavery, Hollywood garbage, and all other forms of degeneracy to the rest of the world. Nationalists and traditionalists hope they could reverse all these woes, but they have yet to stop “progress” in any meaningful way. As I’ve said above, radical independence is the only way.

    1. But in order to achieve this independence, things like the control by the banks and participation in globalist organizations must be opposed. Nationalists have no chance while global banks print their money and the UN and WHO rule their lives.

      1. What is necessary is alliance, not globalism.
        The global organizations operate because it is difficult for one country to say “no.” If, say, the US were to pull away from global banking, the banks could simply refuse to exchange their currency for US currency and the movement fails. It’s much the same as when the Pope held power over the rulers of nations – if one were to oppose the Pope, the Pope would make him enemy of the entire Church. But the Reformation brought about a host of denominations and nations splitting away from the Catholic Church, and as a consequence its power necessarily faded.
        Seek solution in this. It is not necessary that everyone abandon the globalist unions, but if, say, Russia, China, and the US were to abandon the UN and all it entails, they’d have the collective power to force the globalist unions to capitulate. It would not be immediate, but I imagine the EU nations would hate losing access to all the fun toys the US would have sovereign claim to should it pull away.

        1. Dang it, why didn’t I read your post first before answering Roosh? Great minds…

        2. And this is what is happening. The UN acts big, but has failed to bring to heel its largest powers for five years now. Soon smaller states will disobey as well. The gig is up, everyone knows the real wizard of oz is behind the curtain.

      2. Good point – nationalism will not survive long with Global Banks its money. Whats the alternative to the current banking system?

      3. You’re precluding revolution as a possibility, where nationalists are the ideological driving force while the revolutionaries think they are fighting something else. This is common throughout history. Understand that just 15% of the population fighting in the US is such a large force that every military outfit on earth combined could not stop it, no matter what technology they had.

    2. So while you are locally autonomous and a globalist entity is building a massive army, you think you will be able to resist? It’s impossible. Local states will not able to resist empires. Never have and never will. “Going local” is quaint and nostalgic, but won’t work and can’t work in the modern age.

      1. But..what if the local autonomous entities spring up *inside* the globalist entity (for example, the U.S.)? They *might* be able to squash nationalist blisters that pop up in Europe, but here it’s really not easy to do at all, we out gun them. What if we split into 2-5 smaller nations, each with a radically different and maybe even nationalist agenda (for at least some of them)? There are movements afoot the last few decades to do just this and I think that they’re gaining more traction as time goes on. So if one of the major if not THE major motivator for globalism is flayed alive on the nationalist stage….then what?

        1. Nothing is inevitable. The same sentiment you’ve expressed could have been fronted about the Catholic church in the year 1100. Everything goes back to Rome, the Pope controls all the kings, and those that he doesn’t, he will in time. And then one day, the Renaissance happened and the Pope became a clown that people mocked.
          Globalism may well come to dominate in time, and then one day we have cities on the moon and Mars and suddenly it’s the Wild West again. Consolidated power suffers from a lack of creativity and vigor, eventually it collapses under its own weight. History has borne this out again and again. Given time, a global autocracy will do the same.
          Humans; we’re the easiest animal to lead into chains, and the hardest one to keep in them.

        2. It is true, especially due to technology that facilitates the dynamics of these entities, but total control is impossible. There will always be some kind of dialectical battle, and this same technology can be used to continuously expose the dangers of these same entities to people.

        3. Globalism may well come to dominate in time, and then one day we have cities on the moon and Mars and suddenly it’s the Wild West again. Consolidated power suffers from a lack of creativity and vigor, eventually it collapses under its own weight. History has borne this out again and again. Given time, a global autocracy will do the same.

          I think that’s why the elite has tried to halt all research in space exploration…at least many of them imho. Only time will tell if they are successful. They will try to cull the herd before any serious attempt to take off and colonize space is made.
          Btw Ellon Musk attempt doesn’t seem serious in case you were gonna ask.

        4. The elite relies on theatricality and deception to keep people locked from action due to fear. This is why the CIA pretends to be a god and hollywood backs them up with films pandering to this illusion. The truth is they are hopelessly outnumbered, possibly by 1000 to 1 with modern informational technology.
          The threshold for a successful revolution is 15% participating. Once people fear the future along the current path more than they fear institutional power, it will rapidly fall apart. Our thinking this is not inevitable in the modern age is hubris from having obtained technology.

      2. It would obviously have to coincide with or happen along with the collapse of the globalist system (or at least enough stress to destabilize the system). But also, something like GhostOfJefferson mentioned below could happen simultaneously or in number of stages. Seemingly invincible empires from the Mongols to the British broke apart in stages when the local regions fought for independence. As a further example, the entire NATO forces couldn’t eliminate the Taliban fighting with their primitive weapons, even though they only represent a part of Afghanistan (and Pakistan), after more than a decade of war.

      3. The irony is, the force behind the various cries for secession here in the USA is the globalist machine itself. The globalists encourage it and finance its organization. Smaller countries are much easier to control, which is something that is not lost on them…

        1. So if we become one world government, it’s the globalists, if we stay the same nation and are in charge or being lorded over, it’s the globalists and if we become independent nationalist states opposed to globalism, it’s the globalists.
          No group of human beings in history have ever been this competent. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar, mate.

        2. Let’s see how it works out down the road a ways…then it will be self-evident, whichever way it turns out.

        3. You are eternally optimistic about many things, which is why I like you. We could argue this round and round like dogs chasing their tails, but it wouldn’t change either of our minds. I grew up in a globalist/NWO family. I’m assuming you didn’t. So what each of us has seen, is vastly different. If a guy wants to think that no group of human beings in history has ever been competent enough to control the world, who am I to upset his apple cart. I am not going to proselytize, but in order for me to believe your position on this one, I would have to disavow everything I’ve learned and experienced in this vein, across my entire life, basically. And nobody will ever be able to convince me that what I know and have perceived, having lived it, is inaccurate. Short of receiving shock treatments or high dosages of medication. Heh.

        4. I grew up in a family that was once in the circle of the world Elite. And grew up being told this and knowing this for a long time. This is why I don’t put much faith in some cabal of elite familes that control everything who are never changing. It’s just a global version of Game of Thrones up there, and families come and go. The circle remains but hardly seems to control itself much, let alone us. They do get their little wars now and again, and clearly profit from chaos, but push comes to shove they do not and cannot control every action taken in every contingency.

        5. I think you are both right. Nationalism is not incompatible with globalism…at least not the right kind. Take for instance Spain the nation of my mother and her ancestors. Now nationalisms are all the rage. Whether its Catalunya, Basque Countries etc. there are all sorts of pro-independence movements. All are atheist, leftist (in comparison with them your democrats are far right ), ignorants of Spaniard history, pro-immigration (Catalunya favored Arabic and asian immigration against Spanish speaking immigrants because they wanted to strengthen the influence of their language and non-spanish speaking immigrants would be compelled to learn the localities language rather than spanish) and anti-christian to the bone. All of them profess publicly their hatred of Spain and its history while looking forward to recognition by the EU (and sucking from Spain’s tit. Bereft of any tradition they are easy pickings. Should they get their desired independence they are too small and poor to have any weight in international affairs and lack the ideological backbone to sustain a fight. Spain is a so so country but has potential. Ten small republics in its location; with disastrous economic and social policies in place IS the nationalism the elites would pay for.
          P.s sorry for the typos I am writing from a cellphone.

      4. Local states, if pushed too far, can become ideologically motivated to unite against an empire. That’s how many resistance movements were founded throughout history.
        Lethal force within an empire is maintained through a paycheque, not much ideological motivation. When the soldiers can’t be paid their dues, the power of the empire begins to fade away, giving ideologically united local groups a chance to take over. That’s the chink in their armor. That’s how the Mughal and British empires were dismantled.
        Unfortunately, for now it seems so that the elite cabal are getting richer and their collective power is increasing, but I think we’re approaching a cusp.
        Resistance starts from rejecting consumerism and rediscovering traditional values.
        The elites will screw themselves through their pathological greed. They’re simply incapable of drawing a line.

        1. We are in this stage. Ethno-nationalists, even being raging racists, have come to hate globalism more than they hate eachother.

      5. That’s why you use propaganda to get other groups to act for you. Destroy the empire before you set up your nation state. Have it tear itself apart. People who fight for themselves and their own will always prevail over those who fight for others, this is a hard evolutionary fact. This is more possible than ever with the internet.

    3. I would agree with your synopsis and would even say tradtional western men are fighting a rear-guard action. However the current existing, and growing, behemoth will eventually collapse under it’s own weight. It is just a matter of when.
      “As I’ve said above, radical independence is the only way.”
      That will be short lived (though some of us Gen Xers might accomplish it before we croaked). Your means of being independent (cash transactions, business dealings, purchases, transportation, communications, etc..) will eventually be wittled down along with your independence. To enjoy those comforts, you will give up independence and agree to conform (electronically identified and monitored all the way).

  7. Read Peter Zeihan’s latest book. You can get it at I read his previous book, which this new book is an expansion of.
    His argument is that North America is the place to be for the next 40 years. The fracking revolution combined with additive manufacturing and automation will create a U.S. that is both an energy exporter (Saudi America) as well as manufacturing giant (East Asian export country) all in one, while the most of the rest of the world slowly disintegrates politically and socially.
    The cool thing about it is that this North American energy and manufacturing renaissance will occur even if no protectionist legislation is passed, making the globaliist/nationalist political debate utterly irrelevant. Technology alone favors North American nationalism. Politics unnecessary.
    Zeihan’s vision dovetail’s nicely with Trump’s vision.

    1. Germany is net exporter and the strongest European economy and yet it has been deliberately destroyed again and again. It is being destroyed again now.

      1. Like three times man, two of those self inflicted injuries (the world wars). The last is now, the cultural and genetic destruction of the German people. Prior to 1871 there was no “Germany” to destroy “again and again”.

        1. Yes, self inflicted injuries. The first world war was semi-unintentional and brought about by treaty alliances (which were foolishly entered into) and WW2 is entirely on Germany. They could have kept that shit contained and procured “breathing room” and brought the ethnic Germans in other nations into the greater Reich without invading Poland, but chose instead to be power hungry idiots.

        2. Read the author I recommend and we’ll talk again.
          But … talking about Poland here’s a question for you.
          The United Kingdom and Poland signed an alliance to help each other in case of outside aggression. Both Germany (Sep 1, 1939) AND Russia (Sep 17, 1939) invaded Poland but the UK declared war ONLY on Germany. How do you explain that?

        3. You’re asking me to read the minds of leaders of a nation that thought appointing Neville Chaimberlain was a great coup for diplomacy?
          If I were to hazard a guess, it was because Russia was an ally and NOT a threat to the U.K. militarily nor technologically and had no ambitious plans to expand and swallow Europe, whereas Germany did on all counts and were quite proud to announce it to the world. Just a hunch.

        4. Hopefully. If not there, well, at least there’s still a lot of them in Pennsylvania and central Ohio. I guess.

        5. So you’re saying: the enemy of my ally has to be my ally to be my enemy.
          It doesn’t make sense.

        6. I’d guess the UK declared war only on Germany because they thought the USSR couldn’t be beaten – at least not without the US. Maybe they reckoned that Germany, even after ramping up war equipment production and drafts for its armed forces since the Nazis took office, could be detained.
          Besides, the “diplomacy” adopted by Hitler since 1937, annexating parts of Czechoslovakia, incorporating Austria and so on, was arguably much more aggressive to the UK, especially when compared to what was happening in the Russia – the equally heinous Moscow Trials.

        7. Not possible as Germany was way too stronger military than Russia which why they made such a quick advance towards Moscow.
          You think the British Intelligence did not know that?

        8. Australia and NZ from down under also declared war on Germany while being geographically closer to Russia.
          It does not work that way, amigo.

        9. “Australia isn’t a real place..”
          Alright here we go again more of my “proof” from the 80’s.

        10. if this is your proof that Australia is real you have a long way to do

        11. I’m saying that the Russians posed no real threat while the Germans did and were open about posing aforementioned threat. You deal with the pot boiling over first, not the water simmering on the back burner.

        12. The world wars were started by elites who wanted demand for the new products they were speculating in. Germany happened to be a convenient target, in WWI for its position and then in WWII because people still viewed them as the bogeyman for WWI propaganda. Look up Winston Churchill and the Anglo-Persian oil company for an example. Before WWI, he favored war and insisted it was inevitable. All so the navy would swith to refined oil for power, which so happened to be purchased from his little venture which was failing beforehand.

        13. Archduke Franz Ferdinand was an excuse concocted by the elite. Germany was goaded into attacking when Polish communists slaughtered 50,000 Germans in the Danzig corridor.
          The first world war happened because several powerful people wanted instantaneous demand for their new products. As a bonus, they could force Germany’s currency into a nosedive to devalue everything of real worth in the country and buy it all up. People revolted. The second happened because Germany dared to back their currency with labor and kicked out the banker. The elites weren’t going to give up their new ‘purchases’. They manipulated other countries into joining the war and then hung a permanent albatross around Germany’s national identity, making them permanently submissive lest anyone bring up the spectre of their past. The modern day German is a slave, and you are buying into the lie that justifies it.
          Kicking out the banker was also the real reason behind the recent conflict in Libya, and Syria and Iran are on the chopping block because they have no privatized central banks that can be controlled by international entities. The elite look down on us, which is why they use the same tactics.

  8. “It is necessary to have “watchers” at hand who will bear witness to the values of Tradition in ever more uncompromising and firm ways, as the anti-traditional forces grow in strength. Even though these values cannot be achieved, it does not mean that they amount to mere “ideas.” These are MEASURES…. Let people of our time talk about these things with condescension as if they were anachronistic and anti-historical; we know that this is an alibi for their defeat. Let us leave modern men to their “truths” and let us only be concerned about one thing: to keep standing amid a world of ruins.”
    ― Julius Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World

  9. Thucydides Trap: The geopolitical observation that a rising power and an established power usually end up in a fight to the death.
    The U.S. is the established power. Most experts believe that the rising power is China.
    Draw your own conclusions about what may happen.

    1. Well I don’t know about that, but the creators of Fallout were pretty clear that this was the future. If so, I look forward to the retro-high tech world that precedes the nuking in 2077. Like a 1950’s version of The Jetsons, with a whole ton of great music. Dibs on the T-60b power armor!

      1. not looking forward to the deathclaws and rad scorpions though. Though i will join the brotherhood Ad victorium

  10. Putin hacked melania’s emails and released them to wikileaks. Trump can’t sue wikileaks. This is going to get nasty. lol

    1. Cite proof please (story links aren’t proof, I mean actual verifiable proof that the Russians did what you claim, and also, some “intelligence agency” claiming it without offering proof, is still not proof).

        1. I’m actually asking for proof. Something nobody anywhere has as of yet provided regarding “Russian hacking”. Not one little shred of evidence, we’re just supposed to take their word on it.
          Taking somebody’s word on it in a position of power, yeah, that’s real red pill.

    1. give him a chance before you formulate an opinion. At the same time, there are plenty here that think he is God’s gift to America before the gate is even open.

      1. He doesn’t give chances. Everything is rigged and every outcome is pre-planned and pre-ordained by nefarious powers beyond our control. Every event is a false flag, every law a devious plot and every person who ever runs for an office even as lowly as dogcatcher is in on the conspiracy.
        Sometimes he makes a good point here or there, but generally, you have to take him with a big ol’ cake of salt.

        1. I don’t remember appointing you as my speaker?
          Anyway, what’s your salary expectations? LOL

      2. To expect Trump to be working class men’s champion is like to expect the Pope to give up his palaces to the poor.
        So in that respect, there’s no room for a chance.

  11. So, with this in mind, does Roosh now believe there is no hope. Was Nationalism our only hope, or is there another (Skywalker)?
    And if there’s not another, does this mean Roosh will go back to partying and nailing hot ass, or will he close himself up somewhere hermit style to ponder life and the universe until the end?
    My vote, I like Roosh a lot and respect what he’s done. I think he’s slowly headed the hermit way. Poor guy has been bearing a heavy load.

    1. The hermit way is the only for a truly intelligent person. Intelligence is a blessing and a curse.

  12. When our first batch of Trumpobtainium ore is turned into the first liberal beating hammer this country will move forward at light speed and we will resist this tyranny they have vomited into our world.
    We are a nation of scouts, warriors, inventors, and baby makers and the liberals are dinosaurs our future offspring will burn in their off-world farm equipment.

      1. no. When Gozer the Traveler comes. He will come in one of the pre-chosen forms. During the rectification of the Vuldrini, the traveler came as a large and moving Torg! Then, during the third reconciliation of the last of the McKetrick supplicants, they chose a new form for him: that of a giant Slor! Many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day, I can tell you!

        1. I have used this line every time a woman over the age of 40 has walked into a bar

        2. Girls under 40 have almost no memory retention at all, and also don’t even understand that a world existed prior to their birth, so using recycled movie lines is great on them too. They’re so original! (smh) Turns out, quoting Fletch can get you laid in 2017.

        3. I don’t need to quote Fletch to get the chicks. Chicks dig me, because I rarely wear underwear and when I do it’s usually something unusual.

        4. Well if you can get laid with Stripes then sir, you are at Master level of Game.

        5. I patiently await the day when I encounter a strange beautiful woman I don’t know who is wrapped in nothing more or less than a bath towel, and nothing else. Then I can whip out:
          “My car just hit a water buffalo and I need to borrow your towel to clean it up”

        6. I find her interesting because she’s a client and because she sleeps above her covers. Four feet above her covers!
          Always wondered why pete had sodium pentothal on him. He was showing up for their first date.

  13. Anybody here watch Trumps press conference today? I didn’t, wish I had, he told some CNN reporter that they (CNN) are fake news. Owned.

      1. I love it. For years republicans have thought “if I’m nice to the press they will like me”, and the press rags them unmercifully anyway. Trump won’t take crap from them and they have no idea what to do. It’s great.

      1. yeah, but what do you think of the Al Jazeera video? Is this allegory? Does Bugs Bunny stand for Israel or the Palestians / BDS. Is Elmer Fudd the US?

        1. Elmer Fudd is the US of A
          Daffy Duck is BDS / Palestine
          Bugs Bunny is Israel
          Mickey Mouse is that guy from the Israeli Embassy trying to bring down the British minister

        1. Don’t you find is difficult to live in such fear. You always remind me of Billy Shakes when he says “A coward dies a thousand times before his death, but the valiant taste of death but once. It seems to me most strange that men should fear, seeing that death, a necessary end, will come when it will come” in Julius Caesar. I imagine that being a coward is a terrible fate worse than hell. Let me ask you, is it physically painful? Can you feel your own cowardice in your chest? Does it keep you up at night?

        2. Why do you fear anything critical of Israel, Zionism and the Jews?
          The Al Jazeera investigative piece raises some serious questions. Why are you compelled to misdirect or downplay the incriminating facts.
          Your ad hominem holds no weight and only reflects the projection of your apparent fear of the truth.

        3. I don’t. Criticize away. Also, it isn’t “ad hominem” You should learn what that word means. An ad hominem is an argument where I use personal attacks rather than addressing the point. What I am doing is mocking you. There is no argument. You are an assclown and I am simply having fun making you the butt of my jokes.

    1. Stop Everything You Do and Watch This!!!

      I’ve called work and informed them that I quit.
      I’ve rescinded my driver’s license.
      I’ve turned in my CHL.
      I’ve torn up and thrown away my flight log book.
      I’ve sold all of my firearms and ammunition.
      I’ve divested myself of an entire workshop full of leatherworking supplies
      I’ve sold all of the tools in my garage, and sold my bike.
      I’ve literally stopped everything I do. This video better fucking be worth it…

    2. I am related to king David but I am definitely not with all the stupids of either side.

    3. This is pretty damning evidence of Zionism infiltrating, bribing and corrupting foreign politics. Not to mention manipulating its international perception and cover its crimes.
      Yet the MSM feeds us ‘real news’ stories of ‘Russian hackers’ conspiring to have Trump elected.

      1. True, but the Jews you really have to look out for are the ones who don’t need a state. You see the Israel lobby, but you don’t see the Palestine lobby, which is certainly more powerful because the PLO uses every tool at its disposal, while the Israelis could conquer the entire region in two months if the world looked away.

        1. The Palestinian lobby more powerful? In what universe.
          As you say, the day the world looks away which they are most certainly working towards the Zionists will finish the job they started in the 40’s. Eradicating the Palestinians.
          For now apartheid Israel will continue to oppress, murder and confiscate more land in the long march.

        2. Why wait, why not eradicate the Palestinians now? They have the strength, they’re sovereign, so why not just do it? If they have the strength to do it, then the only explanation is that pro Palestinian diplomatic efforts must be more effective than pro israeli efforts. After all, what has israel ever gotten from diplomacy that it couldn’t have taken with a couple odd good soldiers. They had to fake losing the six day war just so that a ceasefore wouldn’t be called.

        3. Because if they move too fast without everyone onboard the holocaust mythology free victim pass they’ve been riding will become null and void.
          They will bide their time until Palestine is neatly placed in the history dustbin.
          I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a future ‘greater Israel’ expansion that was proposed in the 80’s take effect on the middle east they are so hellbent on destabilizing.

        4. Consider the perspective of the Israeli state. You have two options 1. the status quo, where existential threats to the nation are a given, but the entire world looks at you like victims (and therefore like you are weak) or 2. you eliminate existential threats, expand your influence to cover most of the region, humanely suppress all opposition from the arab communities, and all that happens is that the world stops looking at you like you’re victims. Any reasonable state would choose the latter. The problem is that diplomatically, Israel would be declared a rogue state, simply for securing its own position. Meanwhile they’re barely allowed to retaliate when the Palestinians throws everything they have at them. The only reasonable explanation is that Israel is under such diplomatic pressure, that they can’t even police their own territory. And how is that possible if the Israel lobby is weaker than the palestine lobby?

        5. The Miko Peled video covered these ‘existential threat’ myths and what you allude to if you cared to watch.
          He was the son of a Zionist general and had access to Israeli war documents so I think he knows what he is talking about.

        6. Palestine doesn’t want a two-state solution. Israel wants palestinian land. They are actively fighting over it. Palestine may have no chance of defeating Israel, but they are a particularly nasty thorn in its side that could be removed without very much difficulty. The fact that Israel has not done so is solely due to international diplomatic intervention on the palestinian side.

  14. Even if the globalist power theory – which indeed at least partly is true – is correct in its facts and premises, I think that the globalists cannot and will not rule the entire world. It would like to “invite” all nations and populations, but might have to accept that some smaller and richer nations want to take their own routes. It’s like a cost-benefit analysis for those in power. However, this will likely have consequences for those diverging countries, I think, not unlike when Swiss people have made direct-democratic decisions and the EU technocrats (regional globalists) have opposed them since they do not conform to the regionalist-globalist agenda.
    Additionally, the smaller and poorer countries might be left behind because the globalists might regard them as lost cases, too hard to integrate in the global-economic power structure. Partly because of Realpolitik pragmatics; partly because they know that Mozambique is not a threat anyway.
    Conclusively, global means most of the world, not the entire world.

    1. Why would they take anything less than 100% dominance I know I would not if I wanted to run this brick.
      Once the global drone networks are up and running and they can drop ground robots into key areas a nation has no choice but to submit.
      I have an open mind though so I say we collectively reject their rule and make something better than their childish models where they control all the legos.

    2. I had to reflect on the second point regarding smaller and poorer countries as my mind narrows to the middle east, west Asia and Africa. I don’t have an answer, but I have a theory of how these countries are planned out and it would be interesting to hear peoples views.
      For poor, undeveloped nations charity organisations and volunteers rebuild the baseline of the country through donations. It is a long and difficult process, but people persist in philanthropy which also provides the opportunity to introduce western values. Once there is greater stability and the country can be a ‘democracy’ the country looks to improve living standards which requires resources and create jobs. Large resources projects are occurring in Africa (Mozambique, Angola etc.)
      China recently was a ‘working class’ country and the recent boom in China has seen more people move into the middle class. With greater income they start seeking out consumerist products as well as demanding higher quality products (Australian shares for vitamin companies, milk and baby formula significantly increased from new demand in China).
      The next country ready for the type of growth China went through is considered India and after that economists do not consider another country is viable for that level of growth that props up resource industry profits through expansion.
      I am curious if the capitalist globalist outlook for expansion is: creating a baseline standard with a segment of Western culture, expand the country through significant investment and establish a new middle class who then seek consumerism all while lining resources companies bank accounts, .
      Long term if the bar is raised in society people want to perform knowledge work and countries become knowledge based economies as manufacturing becomes to costly for first world countries and profit margins are too thin for farming and agriculture. By creating a higher global standard with a middle class wanting higher quality food, demand outstrips supply for basic food and we need to look to alternative sources or become vegans.
      I don’t think they have given up on poorer countries, just it is a work in progress and all cannot be achieved at once, so they start sowing the seeds of western ideals and creating the opportunity now for when the country is ready to be cultivated.
      I could be way off the mark, but wanted to float it as a thought process in how the poorer countries could be controlled?

      1. Good comment. I might have to get back on some points. However, my idea is that although globalists intend to integrate all or at least most countries into the very same power structure, they might realize that some are lost cases. Like I said, a kind of cost-benefit analysis. So they might leave some smaller states out, and even larger, if they appear to be non-threatening.
        For instance, Nigeria is chaotic and something that virtually no one wants to deal with, but due to the oil resources and a large potential consumerist base, the globalists cannot leave it to its own destiny. Like Roosh said, de-stabilization is an option for those who oppose, but places that already are chaotic, the globalists might overlook – at least for ‘now’. If drones become a reality, then they can safely be in control anyway. Jihadists like Boko Haram would not even be a regional threat.
        But, like some pointed out, a hegemony is never totally constituted. Perhaps not even with complex mass-destructing weapons and global-technological control mechanisms at the powers’ disposal. History is partially an open case.

        1. I completely agree that hegemony is never entirely constituted and do not think is attainable.
          Having countries as outliers to the status quo is a great tactic to retain control over the majority as it provides a common enemy for people to focus against. That and warfare is a method for employment as well as having an economy operate at full GDP and it also unites society. There needs to an enemy to rally against and distract.
          I also do not think that control could be achieved on such a grand scale as governance is such a hard thing to retain. People will desire power and scheme coups to climb in status as exemplified throughout history and in any large corporation. The level of delegation would be too complex.
          It just interesting to look at a potential template of how progression could potentially be made in other countries as force cannot be used so economic means are great ways of control and I respect the ROK readership to bounce ideas and engage in debate.

  15. ” Dugin insists that a level of elites above that of nation states is a “conspiracy theory” (he uses that exact phrase), and the tit-for-tat games you see in the mainstream news is real, that there are no transnational elites who meet in Davos, Brussels, and so on.
    This distinction is important because if Russia and the United States are dialectical forces under the same controlling power, the Russia vs USA tension is theater and being used to create the justification for a war that benefits a pre-determined victor. If on the other hand they are truly independent entities, USA is bumbling its war to World War 3 by provoking Russia (at least up until Trump’s victory), which is all too ready to take advantage of those blunders by re-asserting its power in Eastern Europe and Asia.”
    Interesting Press Release from the United Kingdom Russian Embassy yesterday reported on in today’s Thunderer.
    word of the day: outsource
    Russian embassy on the talk of impending official anti-Russian witch hunt in Britain
    Judging by media reports (The Sunday Times is particular), the British authorities are planning to emulate the Obama Administration and launch an official campaign to counter presumed “concerted drive by Russia to undermine the UK”. It follows the EU summit and the successful humanitarian evacuation from Eastern Aleppo, brokered by Russia, Iran and Turkey, which helped save lives of thousands people and separate bona fide Syrian opposition from foreign terrorists/jihadists, and the adoption of the UN Security Council resolution 2328 on Syria. Now there is a ceasefire in place endorsed by another UNSC resolution. HMG is also widely suspected of and expected to brief the incoming US Administration against Russia.
    1. Why now? Is it, like in the US, to provide grounds for a rerun of the June referendum, now assumed to be tainted by “Russian influence”? Or is it to help save the status quo in Europe, under siege by the electorate demanding change? The British experience of this sort includes jingoism of the media at the time of the Crimean War, when Sidney Herbert was hounded for being a relation of Russia’s governor of Novorossiya.
    2. It seems that the Western elites will go to great lengths to save their own world with its Washington consensus, Davos and austerity, even if it does no longer benefit anybody else. Its demise is presented as the end of the world, another twilight of Europe. This panic and hysterics is a response to the overall loss of control, which brought about war a hundred years ago. It is also a loss of control over the public debate, exercised by way of the Orwellian newspeak of political correctness. Will the elite protect its vested interest with taxpayers’ money and that of TV licences?
    3. Unfortunately, as always, British special services are all too willing to oblige. There exists a longstanding tradition of giving them the benefit of the doubt, partly because ever since Elizabethan age literati and established authors moonlight for the intelligence. As John Le Carre put it, intelligence services are a spiritual home of the political elites. Does it mean that now the Government want the British people to worship in this church? We are surprised by Richard Dearlove’s taking part in this game.
    4. Sir Richard, as former MI6 Director, knows as nobody else, that for example, most of the damage to America and its place in the world was done by the George W.Bush Administration. No foreign agents could have accomplished that much. The same is true for former British Governments, although in a less spectacular fashion and on a smaller scale, mostly through inaction. Stephen Hadley recently said that globalisation had been a mistake for its destructive impact on Western society. Lionel Barber writes that the Globalisation 2.0 period is over. Why blame Russia for that?
    5. What is untrue about Syria? That the Western intervention in Libya misled both the Government and the opposition? That in 2012, when, by the way, the first convoy of jihadists arrived in Aleppo from Turkey, the US outsourced regime change to its regional allies? That “Islamic State” was born about the same time? That the US-led coalition didn’t bother about “Nusra”, affiliated to “Al-Qaeda”? That the cause of the opposition, whatever it was, has been hijacked by terrorists? That the West was anticipating a fall of Damascus to Isis in October 2015 and didn’t mind? That the British Government’s harsh rhetoric on Syria is meant to cover up its complicity in the deliberate obliteration of Yemen to make it dependent on outside financial assistance in reconstruction?
    6. And, of course, history matters. Max Hastings reminded us (in The Spectator) that the appeasement of Hitler was caused by the fact that upper classes had been frightened out of their mind by the Russian revolution. In fact, they decided to outsource resolution of the “problem” of the Soviet Union to the Nazis. It meant experimenting with fascism, the Cliveden Set, Munich, all the way to the Phoney War and Dunkirk. It is worth remembering that Sir Winston Churchill was considered a maverick at the time. Ultimately, defeating Nazi Germany was “outsourced” to the Soviet Union. In Syria, overlooking Isis and then “Nusra”, both proscribed by the UN, means pretty much the same. The latest developments prove precisely that. If we weed the terrorists out of the Syrian landscape, the pro-Syrian opposition and the Government will find middle ground. The next in Syria is a restart of intra-Syrian talks in Kazakhstan.
    We don’t expect HMG to win this argument in an open and reasoned debate. We also think that it is plainly wrong for one UNSC permanent member to brief against another. And we challenge the mainstream British media to publish this comment.”
    The above is very revealing of the Russian position. Forget golden showers, the Russians are threatening the west with something bigger than the sex lives of politicians, they’re threatening to reveal (or suggest or lie about?) the secret history of the modern world, or at least that part of it which serves their purpose
    If there puppet-masters controlling everything then they really must be above it all, because there’s a great deal alluded to in that statement which (true or false) I’d say would not have been mentioned under any circumstances were there not a genuine conflict of interests in play.
    Russia has it’s elites, and central bank etc. Until Obama came along Russia appeared to be part of the international order, albeit it on the perimeter, and always slightly rogue (Litvinenko, oligarchs etc) but nothing like the above would have been conceivable prior to the Ukraine and Syria.
    Regardless of what happens next – whether things get better or worse, it’s hard not to think that Obama and the western elites overplayed their hand

  16. Roosh was more fun when he was interested in game. Now almost all he does is talk about alt-right or increasingly tin-foil-hat style politics.

    1. Gaming women is just the prelude to gaming society. Once you game society, gaming women loses its excitement. Why game a woman when you can game all women, and all men?
      REMEMBER when Roosh trolled an entire continent? Australia?

    2. Well, you were likely never fun, so your opinion will be quickly forgotten. Whiner.

  17. I’m a globalist because imported girls are better than the local trash. Honestly, nationalism is for dumb fucking retards

  18. >> “…the fragmentation and atomization of society included in the technology (internet, mobile phones and so on) where the principle actor is strictly individual and excerpt from the natural and social context.” >>
    Consider the multitudes of people focused on creating and maintaining a self aggrandizing Facebeek or other social media profile versus the the culture vanguards who champion Disqus or WordPress.

  19. How about we set up our own secret global multigenerational organization with the mission of sabotaging the other globalist agendas. We can call it the Fissures of Babel, and it can be like the assassins in Assassins Creed.

    1. You don’t need an organization to oppose, just a list of the Elite, and individuals with rifles. I suggest we kill the elites in suicide killings with the cry “Jesus loves you”.
      It’s time for Christians to start fighting back, using Elites own weapons and tactics of terror against them!
      Pol Pot was ahead of his time.

      1. Do you have a list like that? There would be far easier ways of taking power than compiling that list. Nonetheless, gathering information like that would be a solid start, I recommend going to work for a local newspaper, since that seems to be a reasonable way to take power.

  20. This ‘power hungry’ entity of globalist globulins is constantly agitating to usurp the compass of healthy nations in pursuit of an end they never can meet. The recurring’globalist’ subversion campaigns are driven by pathologically dissatisfied despots, constantly rocking the national houses, belittling their constitutions and foundations, constantly wanting to scrap the near complete fruition of tribal/national pax and forment a blood bath or just trash it all, burn it and cry . . . like Lucille Ball (“waaaa”). Who would do that to their own house or to any house for that matter? A SCORNED WOMAN with no beard on her face that’s who. A collective BIG BITCH force is behind NWO globalism and this insideous ‘shebitch’ snuck herself into the councils and war rooms when the fellows and leaders went beardless and butt chinned.
    Of course it’s a bitch behind the incessant undermining of national order whenever that nation evolves near perfection. Even at the micro level in a typical household for instance, WHO scratches all plans when the project is 90% completed and then has a temper tantrum? Hmm? Bingo. A FUCKING BITCH who is not properly managed by true bearded ones. When THE GREAT BITCH nears her goal of ‘global’ hegemony, we’ve seen time and time again how the stupid dingbat part of her eeks through the pores in her skin. Her BITCHFACE comes out and to the surface. Her ‘hegemony’ is never realised.
    History sees recurring periods of shaven men, destroying or temporarily abandoning their bearded tradition. During these times we see the withdrawal of the bearded legions. THE BITCH then shows her influence bare too, but only among other bare ones. THE BITCH is truly directionless, but she still continues her pursuit, only as a hamster chasing a bright imaginary ball. No woman can lead because no woman can have a beard. From the beginning she was only chasing the light and direction of the bearded masters but when they went ‘boy chinned’, she was left to run the course guided by her pussy compass, the spinning devil’s triangle compass that never worked right anyway. BITCHES have no beards and can never have beards. And the beardless men cannot follow or even see the direction of their bearded predecessors. Thus they form a pack and follow the nearest source of gravity eminating from something they can neither have as well, a pussy.
    A sort of paradox of sexes pursuing their own direction based on what they cannot have. You cannot ever out pussy a beard but likewise you cannot ever out chin or ‘baremug’ a pussy whether it’s shaved or not. Men, noblemen, motherfuckers, assholes and clowns – ALL MEN get your beards on. POWERBEARDS will outpatriarch the NWO pussy. Keep your beards always. A beard remains in your tomb for millennia, long after you’re buried. Think about it. With beard, MAN will return to the throne and finally complete his building plans once and for all. The housebitch won’t pussy things up this time!!–/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9MTI4MDtoPTk2MDtpbD1wbGFuZQ–/
    Turn on the ‘HG’ channel some night. There’s always some dissatisfied bitch who wants to tear down a perfectly good house on a whim and have some clean shaven sucker man start over for her and build her a new one. No bearded man puts up with that shit. Neither should we let our Earthly civilization and order be scrapped by some cantancerous bitch or bitchforce.
    Geez, “hey barechins, let’s all become transhuman squeaking machines now”. Really. What degree of BITCH on the brain would posess a globalist to pussify such an idea?? Bitch needed clobbered with a big dick and reamed you know it.

  21. I have been worried for a while that the elite was deliberately provoking the right into attacking, and now I know it. Nationalism is indeed a trap, and we need to tread carefully.
    Our only way out is to follow Moldbug’s rule of right-wing activism: we must acquire power without using it, because we will lose if we start this fight now.
    If we want to oppose globalism, we need to establish local power bases that are more stable and competent. The weakness of globalism is that it is oversized, and is thus slower and more confused than a more agile state. Even Frederick the Great had an easier job than we do.

  22. Good to see this great debate between Carvalho and Dugin getting attention here. Carvalho is a Brazilian national treasure, so it will not surprise anyone he’s fled the country and had been living in West Virginia for several years. Very little of his work has been translated into English, which is a shame.
    Roosh, if you read Portuguese, you owe it to yourself to get Carvalho’s book “O Jardim das Aflições”. It gives his view of the world-historical process and deepens the positions he has defended in the debate. It was originally published in the 1990s, but a new edition (the third) has recently been published in Brazil. I can’t recommend it enough; it is both erudite and easy to read, and truly mind-blowing.
    Regarding the conclusion that only a global endeavor can decisively defeat the globalists, I also recommend Adam K. Webb’s “Beyond the Global Culture War”. Put it on google together with “gnxp” and you’ll find a summary of the argument on Razib Khan’s old website.

  23. “(5) Spiritual agents: God, angels, and demons.” “For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens.” – Ephesians 6:12. The one and only church (Catholic stands for universal) has been fighting these powers for over 2 millennia even through persecution, lies and mockery. We do not fear about the end of the church because the Christ himself is the head of it, we fear that mankind will be thrown at the lake of fire for it’s immorality when he returns to fulfill his promise…

  24. There is absolutely nothing standing in the way of a global confederation of nationalists, and in-fact this is likely to be the most natural, organic, and ultimately stable forms of organization.

  25. Nationalism does not preclude acting with others who are nationalist for other nations, and with the internet not only making this possible but also the most viable method of attack, this is what is happening. The blunder that CNN made about Trump the other day with buzzfeed originated as disinformation from such a collective.

  26. Russia will have no say in Eastern Europe, no matter how much Russias fanboys and wanabe political experts would like them to.

  27. In my line of research and studying – it’s been clear consensus that America is not the obstacle (the pockets of traditional American people are), but the great experiment of world globalism. The Baconian New Atlantis; the aspirations of all the rosicrucians and masons (which the globalist elite number many in their ranks). To tie it into eschatology – this new Atlantis is the the one and the same as Mystery Babylon the great, the whiore of Babylon. We are the last empire.

Comments are closed.