Honesty is not allowed by the Deep State... This is a surprisingly hopeful announcement--one I never thought I'd see. I thought the Neocons would blow all of us up before admitting "it's over."
"Diplomacy under unipolarity also came to an end. Diplomacy no longer meant to recognise mutual security concerns to find solutions for indivisible security. Rather, diplomacy was replaced with the language of ultimatums and threats as other states would have to accept unilateral concessions."
It's really bizarre to see less 'hegemonic' rhetoric coming from the Trump admin on security topics while simultaneously pushing economic ultimatums when it comes to the hegemony of the USD as the world reserve currency, especially given that the US economy is relatively even weaker that the US military as compared to its nominated 'adversaries'.
You can't recognise security multi-polarity while failing to recognise economic multi-polarity. It's not surprising though, the US empire managers aren't known for being coherent or competent, after all. They will be taught an economic lesson, just like the Ukraine war has taught them a military lesson about what the West is really worth as compared to its delusional view of self.
Very good point…it’s as though this administration is simply dropping one tactic to maintain unipolarity that clearly failed (militarism) for one they think has had and will continue to have success…financial dominance. The world needs BRICS to succeed now more than ever.
I can't remember who said it but they pointed out that the US doesn't have diplomats, they have empire managers. From a personal perspective, they aren't even particularly good at that.
When the only tool you have left is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail, and the US military is still one helluva big hammer, they will 'not go quietly into this good night'.
As he's a reasonably clever politician, I wouldn't expect him to speak the "W" word. I recently mentioned it on antisocial media and immediately was derided sarcastically as a pseudo-intellectual by the usual flood of pro-Ukraine propagandists. Speaking of which, it's good to see all the propagandists posing as "independent media" in Ukraine screaming because Trump cut off the funds on which they've self-evidently been dependent! 😃
I hope you're right! If so, I'll take the win: taking good advice is a definite victory. Remember, recently Trump tweeted Jeffrey Sachs' Cambridge Union speech Q&A description of Netanyahu as "a deep dark son of a bitch". Ok, these might be just straws in the wind... or they may be long-overdue cracks in the dam wall? :)
I agree. It’s more likely that Rubio wore a tie dye T shirt and an eye patch as the guy who played the maracas in a rock band on its way to Haight Ashbury in a beat up old red Westphalia than someone who knows any seventeenth century European history.
Did the US ever assumed responsibility for anything other than its own self interest? This idea that the US sought to foster global governance for the good of the world is … simply self-serving hypocrisy. Apologies if this seems cynical and perhaps for a brief post war period the US was really admirable. But I doubt it, just look at how the US meddled in Italy to prevent the communist party winning power.
Only to the extent that it might facilitate the penetration of US capital. When that reached the end of its effectiveness, plan B- attempted (and failed) penetration by military means.
Mostly true, with the exception of American policy on Israel. That one (unconditional support of Israel at any cost) hasn't been in America's self interest for decades.
I don't know how you manage to churn out these brilliant articles almost daily together with interviews almost daily, besides a job as a professor! I do hope you continue on, as your work together with Jeffrey Sachs is worth a Nobel Peace price! You will literally have saved millions, if not billions of lives by avoiding a nuclear war, by educating the world, and never giving up showing the truth.
He's drafting his classes, lectures, speeches and book chapters here. And refining existing ones. A great arena to float ideas, fine-tune, get feedback.
Certainly it's part of his job, but it's still commemorable, especially when he's been going upstream as far as common consensus for almost three years now.
It is great big plus mark on the ledger of 'real democracy' that it was/is NOT the "elites" who have seen this writing on the wall, but the normal folk crying in pain from the cost of maintaining this unipolar empire.
Ironically, if the Western "elites" were not so greedy as to literally starve their own population to make themselves richer, they might have convinced the Publics to go along with the Unipolar wars. But then if they weren't that greedy, they wouldn't have wanted the inevitable plunder OF the Unipolar empire to begin with.
It was almost a stroke of genius for Trump (He can apparently thank Adelson) to hire Rubio for this role. It's like hiring Lyndsy Graham to say Iran has a right to develop their nuclear industry.
Or chubby-face Nuland to admit Russia has won.
(Or even Rand Paul to explain how Russia's state-owned MIC vastly outperforms the US's private profit system).
Well, however it came about, the World can be grateful for this sudden Illumination in DC.
Little doubt London is going as bananas as Israel at these changes.
Is the world really heading towards multipolarity or could it be that the phrase “unipolarity” is simply given a new name, a new definition? Just like “peace means war”, “freedom means control”, “reality means artificial”, etc.
Multipolarity suggests a world order of multiple great powers of diverse systems and ideologies. The overall dominant global power today seems to be based upon one “ideology” and one only, administered in slightly different ways across the globe. This unipolar “ideology” is called “capitalism”, and the ruling powers are not the politicians, who are nothing but administrative managers, creating an illusion of multipolar ideological options and systems, when in fact they serve the very same. Catherine Austin Fitts and C.J. Hopkins have extensively addressed this unipolar one world order, which she calls “Mr. Global” and he calls “GloboCap”. it is easy to declare that unipolarity is over when what is happening is merely a meaningless rephrasing of the concept…
Diessen’s publication gave me peace of mind through the explanation that after the Cold War the Benign Bully took the arena …Hard to reach on time with elegance a humble stage of virtuous diplomacy with a gentle peaceful soul for a future good for all the others as well. Maybe if the society start seeing their merchant warrior mind as vicious and insecure and practice again a classical education with more arts and awareness. We can set the bases for next generation perhaps…
We live in a place called Reality, not Heaven. So we can only ever hope to make things optimal, not perfect.
What is good? Is it a defined bifurcation of the world into perfect good and evil, with all of reality forced to succumb, e.g., unipolarity, the rules-based order? Or instead, is it an empirical feedback system between ideals and reality, with the intent of optimizing the goodness of real world outcomes, e.g., multipolarity, spheres of influence (predefined good versus discovered good)?
Meanwhile those who live inside their heads with their predefined perfect ideals, try to tyrannize the rest of us into celebrating their moral narratives, or else DIE trying.
Trump and Rubio are supremacists, as are the entire spectrum of US two-party system politicians....and this is really fundamentally incompatible with multipolarity.
When they stop trying to impose the dollar on everyone, sanctions on half the world, and when they stop spending money on invading and occupying everyone and military bases around China.....then they might actually get it.
As for now they are simply talking like babies, and are still dangerously ignorant, which will lead to needless war and waste of resources and harm for both their own people and others.
Or better still stop billionaires donating millions to campaign funds and politicians pockets, register a park as an agent to a foreign power, insist that all potential Western politicians must sign a pledge of loyalty only to their own country and if they break that in any way by becoming a member of an organisation from another country then they're kicked out
All of that is moot, regardless of the politician or the party, NOTHING has changed in 70 years, Trump is more crude and vulgar than most of the others but it's a distinction without a difference.
The Wolfowitz doctrine had critics mirroring your words right from day one. But remember back then it felt like there was momentum (Tiannamin Square, Iraq, Yugoslavia...). It wasn't a fluke. It was a plan. Now the bodies of the innocents piled on that fire have burned to ash. So many long for the cursed unipolar period to pass.
Seems to me Trump-Rubio are accepting the concept of multipolarity with the plan to go full throttle rolling out a western hemisphere “pole” from Greenland, Canada, Mexico to all of Central and South America…..🧐
A superb evocation of the Big Picture. Bravo! This deserves to be widely seen.
I've watched many of your livestreams, but didn't realize you had a Substack. I suspect you're too modest to announce it. I found out about it in a comment on Sonar 21, Larry Johnson's site.
You can't trust a word that any US politician says and this has been the case for decades. Consider this excerpt from a speech 'The Chance for Peace' delivered by DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER 72 years ago in 1953. It is very similar in its multipolar tone and aspirations to the recent BRICS declaration made following the Kazan conference of 2024.
*****************
First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow nations.
Third: Any nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
This was all utter rubbish in historical context as even as Eisenhower was making this speech, as with his full approval, the CIA was fully engaged in the 1953 regime change operation removing Iran's democratically elected socialist leader who had dared to nationalize Iran's oil reserves. So much for "Any nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable."
My point being that we have been duped by this total BS from US politicians for over 7 decades now. Does anyone really think that Trump and Rubio are more trustworthy than Eisenhower who at least warned us about the dangers of the MIC and also told us that when JFK took power that he was bequeathing his successor a 'Legacy of Ashes' in respect to the CIA?
I don't have an argument with Eisenhower's points, or even whether some of the politicians agree with them, the problem is though, that the 'deep state', however you define it, doesn't take/accept direction from the politicians and certainly not from the general population.
What you have to understand is the difference between exoteric public statements such as those ideas found in Eisenhower's speech and the esoteric private and secret workings of the CIA behind the scenes which is the reality of how the US & UK secret services actually operate and what it means to the world. My point is that Eisenhower didn't actually stand by or believe in a single thing he says in that speech and he was fully aware of what the CIA was hypocritically doing behind the scenes which directly countered everything he said and that has been the history of US geopolitical manipulation and global regime change operations ever since.
Thank you for bringing up this topic which, for all its causative predictive power, is ignored even here on substack. Fortunately the intellectual battle is in full sway at Unz Report.
Great news and great article. I'm a bit shocked at Rubio's honesty.
Honesty is not allowed by the Deep State... This is a surprisingly hopeful announcement--one I never thought I'd see. I thought the Neocons would blow all of us up before admitting "it's over."
I'm not so sure that can be all put on the neocons, nasty as they are, neoliberalism has done as much damage.
"Diplomacy under unipolarity also came to an end. Diplomacy no longer meant to recognise mutual security concerns to find solutions for indivisible security. Rather, diplomacy was replaced with the language of ultimatums and threats as other states would have to accept unilateral concessions."
It's really bizarre to see less 'hegemonic' rhetoric coming from the Trump admin on security topics while simultaneously pushing economic ultimatums when it comes to the hegemony of the USD as the world reserve currency, especially given that the US economy is relatively even weaker that the US military as compared to its nominated 'adversaries'.
You can't recognise security multi-polarity while failing to recognise economic multi-polarity. It's not surprising though, the US empire managers aren't known for being coherent or competent, after all. They will be taught an economic lesson, just like the Ukraine war has taught them a military lesson about what the West is really worth as compared to its delusional view of self.
Very good point…it’s as though this administration is simply dropping one tactic to maintain unipolarity that clearly failed (militarism) for one they think has had and will continue to have success…financial dominance. The world needs BRICS to succeed now more than ever.
Spot on!
I can't remember who said it but they pointed out that the US doesn't have diplomats, they have empire managers. From a personal perspective, they aren't even particularly good at that.
We'll see if these people can let go.
When the only tool you have left is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail, and the US military is still one helluva big hammer, they will 'not go quietly into this good night'.
I tend to agree. Appointing hawks is not encouraging.
I’m stunned that Marco Rubio knew of Westphalia. But then, I’m stunned that Marco Rubio knew that 1648 happened.
"Westpfalien" is part of Professor Diesen's comment and not of Rubio's statement :-)
Well said. But I hope the effect is the same!
As he's a reasonably clever politician, I wouldn't expect him to speak the "W" word. I recently mentioned it on antisocial media and immediately was derided sarcastically as a pseudo-intellectual by the usual flood of pro-Ukraine propagandists. Speaking of which, it's good to see all the propagandists posing as "independent media" in Ukraine screaming because Trump cut off the funds on which they've self-evidently been dependent! 😃
I confess. I gave Rubio more credit than he deserved even while being dismissive of him… 🤔😂
Evidently State still has some people who studied history. Now let's see if it has anyone left who knows diplomacy. ;)
I doubt it…someone probably sent him some Diesen articles 😃
I hope you're right! If so, I'll take the win: taking good advice is a definite victory. Remember, recently Trump tweeted Jeffrey Sachs' Cambridge Union speech Q&A description of Netanyahu as "a deep dark son of a bitch". Ok, these might be just straws in the wind... or they may be long-overdue cracks in the dam wall? :)
Me too…at the very least it indicates someone in the inner circle has their ear to the ground.
Empire mangers don't do diplomacy!
Andrew Anglin has been more accurate about Rubio — for several years now — than anyone else.
Avowed positions, political or otherwise, cannot affect the Kantian intelligible character.
Marco Rubio might know of the VW Westphalia but even that I doubt it. History in another century, though? Nah. He doesn't know.
I agree. It’s more likely that Rubio wore a tie dye T shirt and an eye patch as the guy who played the maracas in a rock band on its way to Haight Ashbury in a beat up old red Westphalia than someone who knows any seventeenth century European history.
“guy who played the maracas” 🤣🤣🤣 you conjured up such vivid imagery!
But you’re visualizing it too, amirite?
Oh yeah!
Did the US ever assumed responsibility for anything other than its own self interest? This idea that the US sought to foster global governance for the good of the world is … simply self-serving hypocrisy. Apologies if this seems cynical and perhaps for a brief post war period the US was really admirable. But I doubt it, just look at how the US meddled in Italy to prevent the communist party winning power.
Only to the extent that it might facilitate the penetration of US capital. When that reached the end of its effectiveness, plan B- attempted (and failed) penetration by military means.
Project 2025 is not for isolationism nor intervention, which is to say it is for both when in the US corporate interest.
Mostly true, with the exception of American policy on Israel. That one (unconditional support of Israel at any cost) hasn't been in America's self interest for decades.
I think you're pretty much spot on; simply self-serving hypocrisy.
I don't know how you manage to churn out these brilliant articles almost daily together with interviews almost daily, besides a job as a professor! I do hope you continue on, as your work together with Jeffrey Sachs is worth a Nobel Peace price! You will literally have saved millions, if not billions of lives by avoiding a nuclear war, by educating the world, and never giving up showing the truth.
He's drafting his classes, lectures, speeches and book chapters here. And refining existing ones. A great arena to float ideas, fine-tune, get feedback.
So totally compatible with professorship.
Certainly it's part of his job, but it's still commemorable, especially when he's been going upstream as far as common consensus for almost three years now.
It is great big plus mark on the ledger of 'real democracy' that it was/is NOT the "elites" who have seen this writing on the wall, but the normal folk crying in pain from the cost of maintaining this unipolar empire.
Ironically, if the Western "elites" were not so greedy as to literally starve their own population to make themselves richer, they might have convinced the Publics to go along with the Unipolar wars. But then if they weren't that greedy, they wouldn't have wanted the inevitable plunder OF the Unipolar empire to begin with.
It was almost a stroke of genius for Trump (He can apparently thank Adelson) to hire Rubio for this role. It's like hiring Lyndsy Graham to say Iran has a right to develop their nuclear industry.
Or chubby-face Nuland to admit Russia has won.
(Or even Rand Paul to explain how Russia's state-owned MIC vastly outperforms the US's private profit system).
Well, however it came about, the World can be grateful for this sudden Illumination in DC.
Little doubt London is going as bananas as Israel at these changes.
Could multipolarity be unipolarity in disguise?
Is the world really heading towards multipolarity or could it be that the phrase “unipolarity” is simply given a new name, a new definition? Just like “peace means war”, “freedom means control”, “reality means artificial”, etc.
Multipolarity suggests a world order of multiple great powers of diverse systems and ideologies. The overall dominant global power today seems to be based upon one “ideology” and one only, administered in slightly different ways across the globe. This unipolar “ideology” is called “capitalism”, and the ruling powers are not the politicians, who are nothing but administrative managers, creating an illusion of multipolar ideological options and systems, when in fact they serve the very same. Catherine Austin Fitts and C.J. Hopkins have extensively addressed this unipolar one world order, which she calls “Mr. Global” and he calls “GloboCap”. it is easy to declare that unipolarity is over when what is happening is merely a meaningless rephrasing of the concept…
I disagree. Rephrasing your last sentence,
“ it is easy to declare that >capitalism< is what is happening >when the throwaway use of the term< is merely a meaningless rephrasing of the concept…
Diessen’s publication gave me peace of mind through the explanation that after the Cold War the Benign Bully took the arena …Hard to reach on time with elegance a humble stage of virtuous diplomacy with a gentle peaceful soul for a future good for all the others as well. Maybe if the society start seeing their merchant warrior mind as vicious and insecure and practice again a classical education with more arts and awareness. We can set the bases for next generation perhaps…
We live in a place called Reality, not Heaven. So we can only ever hope to make things optimal, not perfect.
What is good? Is it a defined bifurcation of the world into perfect good and evil, with all of reality forced to succumb, e.g., unipolarity, the rules-based order? Or instead, is it an empirical feedback system between ideals and reality, with the intent of optimizing the goodness of real world outcomes, e.g., multipolarity, spheres of influence (predefined good versus discovered good)?
Meanwhile those who live inside their heads with their predefined perfect ideals, try to tyrannize the rest of us into celebrating their moral narratives, or else DIE trying.
Trump and Rubio are supremacists, as are the entire spectrum of US two-party system politicians....and this is really fundamentally incompatible with multipolarity.
When they stop trying to impose the dollar on everyone, sanctions on half the world, and when they stop spending money on invading and occupying everyone and military bases around China.....then they might actually get it.
As for now they are simply talking like babies, and are still dangerously ignorant, which will lead to needless war and waste of resources and harm for both their own people and others.
Or better still stop billionaires donating millions to campaign funds and politicians pockets, register a park as an agent to a foreign power, insist that all potential Western politicians must sign a pledge of loyalty only to their own country and if they break that in any way by becoming a member of an organisation from another country then they're kicked out
All of that is moot, regardless of the politician or the party, NOTHING has changed in 70 years, Trump is more crude and vulgar than most of the others but it's a distinction without a difference.
"a park" AIPAC
The Wolfowitz doctrine had critics mirroring your words right from day one. But remember back then it felt like there was momentum (Tiannamin Square, Iraq, Yugoslavia...). It wasn't a fluke. It was a plan. Now the bodies of the innocents piled on that fire have burned to ash. So many long for the cursed unipolar period to pass.
Seems to me Trump-Rubio are accepting the concept of multipolarity with the plan to go full throttle rolling out a western hemisphere “pole” from Greenland, Canada, Mexico to all of Central and South America…..🧐
There are about 6 million dead people who were 'saved' by the US, that would agree with you if they could.
A superb evocation of the Big Picture. Bravo! This deserves to be widely seen.
I've watched many of your livestreams, but didn't realize you had a Substack. I suspect you're too modest to announce it. I found out about it in a comment on Sonar 21, Larry Johnson's site.
You can't trust a word that any US politician says and this has been the case for decades. Consider this excerpt from a speech 'The Chance for Peace' delivered by DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER 72 years ago in 1953. It is very similar in its multipolar tone and aspirations to the recent BRICS declaration made following the Kazan conference of 2024.
*****************
First: No people on earth can be held, as a people, to be an enemy, for all humanity shares the common hunger for peace and fellowship and justice.
Second: No nation's security and well-being can be lastingly achieved in isolation but only in effective cooperation with fellow nations.
Third: Any nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable.
Fourth: Any nation's attempt to dictate to other nations their form of government is indefensible.
And fifth: A nation's hope of lasting peace cannot be firmly based upon any race in armaments but rather upon just relations and honest understanding with all other nations.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-chance-for-peace-delivered-before-the-american-society-newspaper-editors
*****************
This was all utter rubbish in historical context as even as Eisenhower was making this speech, as with his full approval, the CIA was fully engaged in the 1953 regime change operation removing Iran's democratically elected socialist leader who had dared to nationalize Iran's oil reserves. So much for "Any nation's right to a form of government and an economic system of its own choosing is inalienable."
My point being that we have been duped by this total BS from US politicians for over 7 decades now. Does anyone really think that Trump and Rubio are more trustworthy than Eisenhower who at least warned us about the dangers of the MIC and also told us that when JFK took power that he was bequeathing his successor a 'Legacy of Ashes' in respect to the CIA?
I don't have an argument with Eisenhower's points, or even whether some of the politicians agree with them, the problem is though, that the 'deep state', however you define it, doesn't take/accept direction from the politicians and certainly not from the general population.
I think you could benefit from studying the history of the CIA. This is a very good playlist on youtube that will fill in the blanks.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzmYhqF9BgKPJSNcbIAHj7HSPIsuT_PTW
What you have to understand is the difference between exoteric public statements such as those ideas found in Eisenhower's speech and the esoteric private and secret workings of the CIA behind the scenes which is the reality of how the US & UK secret services actually operate and what it means to the world. My point is that Eisenhower didn't actually stand by or believe in a single thing he says in that speech and he was fully aware of what the CIA was hypocritically doing behind the scenes which directly countered everything he said and that has been the history of US geopolitical manipulation and global regime change operations ever since.
"Unipolarity was celebrated after the Cold War as it was premised on some 'good intentions"
However at that moment in history Jewish power over American politics reigned supreme and they dont do 'good intentions' for goyim
Rabbi Ovadia Yosef “Goyim were born only to serve us. Without that, they have no place in the world – only to serve the People of Israel.”
https://www.timesofisrael.com/5-of-ovadia-yosefs-most-controversial-quotations/
Thank you for bringing up this topic which, for all its causative predictive power, is ignored even here on substack. Fortunately the intellectual battle is in full sway at Unz Report.