54 Comments

Yes, and now the EU leaders are panicking. Through their media they urgently try to persuade the public that with Trump, the world and European security is now at stake - because they probably can not go on escalating the war against Russia. God, how unscrupulous and disintegrated beings they have.

Expand full comment

By ill-conceived loyalty and the preposterous idea that only backward people victim of the most abject propaganda could refuse to join their European Utopia, our European leaders and bureaucrats let themself being dragged in a war they didn't really understand and that was detrimental to their countries' own interests.

And now the US don't have that much left to gain by protracting the war, they realise they will be left to dry with a gutted economy and a deeply antagonized and stronger than ever Russia at their door. Good enough reason for a little panic....

Expand full comment

and I would add: an increasingly angry citizenry. The European misleadership class has been living in a bubble which is about to be popped in a very unpleasant way.

Expand full comment

"Let themselves get dragged into war “ That's the lady thing I'd say about the facist living supporters of the EU. You don't remember the speeches made at the EU parliament in 2022 or the atitude of these idealogs. They were drink on euphoria announcing their record illegal sanctions against Russia. They were clearly Euphoric. They weren't dragged into anything. They were chomping at the bit, they've never cared or even thought about EU citizens. Same as all Western globalist leaders. They have their policies dictated to them. By the dark forces (Soros & his friends). They take their rewards & f**k the people. Von De Leyen the EU dictator, might as well say she's Adolf's secret bastard love child.

Expand full comment

Yes... Indeed, some of the most stupid politicians in Europe didn't need a big push. And most of the others choose to stay quiet as they would have pilloried by the MSM if ever they had voiced the slightest criticism...

Expand full comment

They will, one by one, be voted out of office. The clowns at the EU, who we don't vote for, will gradually become irrelevant.

Expand full comment

It cannot happen soon enough...

Expand full comment

It has to happen that way. The German government collapsed just hours after Trump's victory. Crazy.

Expand full comment

and now all over Europe, in France most of all the comments…Trump and his conspiracy and antivaxx team, his misogyny, the denial of his stolen election in 2020 and most of all his assault on democracy 6th January 21…less or not mentioned that he won the presidential campaign, this shows the real conspiracy the real censorship, the real propagandists, the real vitriol.

Expand full comment

Thank you for writing this piece. Excellent!

Expand full comment

Once again, Dr. Diesen speaks with succinctness and clarity.

Expand full comment

Thank you for the optimistic point of view. Unfortunately, from what been reported yesterday, Mike Pompeo and other neocons are being contacted by Trump to form his team. The swamp is still the swamp.

Expand full comment

I cannot name one single person affiliated with Trump who criticizes the brutal ZioGenocide in IsraHell. THAT is a problem. I'll be delighted if Trump can prevent a war with Russia and/or fix some of our horrific domestic problems, etc. But there is NOTHING Trump can do to overcome his support of a Genocide - NOTHING!

Expand full comment

Ronnie was "The Great Communicator!"

Expand full comment

Sure an excellent salesman but he would have taken flack for that. A bit of ChatGPT "Reagan's relationship with Israel and his administration's policies on the Lebanon war emerged primarily during and after Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon, which occurred over a year after the 1981 assassination attempt. Reagan did face significant pressure and was involved in diplomatic efforts to mitigate conflicts in the Middle East, including trying to limit Israeli actions during the Lebanon conflict. However, there were no known assassination attempts on him specifically linked to his policies or statements regarding Israel or the Lebanon war.

Any suggestion that Reagan was targeted by subsequent assassination attempts due to his stance on Israel or Lebanon is not supported by ... "

Expand full comment

Glenn, I'm a huge fan and I watch you on The Duran and other sites. I'm glad that Jeffrey Sachs was able to help get you back on YouTube!

Regarding this column you wrote regarding Trump and his pals, I will cheer on anything Trump does that prevents nuclear war. If he can disengage from the EU, WEF and others, I'll be delighted. If he happens to correct our horrendous domestic and immigration problems, I'll support that. But, and this is a HUGE BUT, I will have no respect for him or his administration if they continue to support the barbaric Genocide of IsraHell. Trump, Vance, Musk, Gabbard and Kennedy have all turned their backs on the Palestinians; they're either true believers or have been somehow compromised. AIPAC Terrorist ZioNazi Miriam Adelson contributed $100MILLION to Trump's campaign. Peter Thiel OWNS Vance. Little Ben Shitpiro is the personal AIPAC handler of Musk. And on and on and on. It's rumored that RFK Jr's sex addiction caused him to be compromised by Mossad. I have nothing but disdain for these people. If they manage to somehow straighten out serious problems both foreign and domestic, fine. But there is NOTHING they can do to overcome their criminal support of an inhuman GENOCIDE!

Remember Glenn, the same people who back Trump and his pals are the same ones who censored you and banned you from YouTube. Your reporting on IsraHell's Genocide and the failure in Ukraine put you in their sights. Make no mistake, it can and will happen to you and MANY others who dare to expose the War Criminals.

Expand full comment

Glenn,

You write: “The liberal hegemony is no longer liberal”.

That implies that it once was liberal.

In what sense was it once liberal? What is your meaning of ‘liberal’ where you write “no longer liberal”?

My angle here: If you would elaborate what you mean by 'liberal' where you write "no longer liberal," that would give me an opening to press the claim that you should stop using 'liberal' in your reviling of the hegemists and hegemism. I am not asking you to declare yourself an exponent of liberalism; I am asking you only to stop using 'liberal' to hate on certain things we both deem hateworthy.

/Dan

Expand full comment

The liberals proved themselves a bunch of liar losers when they put my ass in jail .

He means liar losers like ScKamala, not the definition of liberal the dictatorsionary claims

Expand full comment

Liberal by comparison?

Makes sense to me

Expand full comment

A good article and thank you for your thoughts.

I find myself being a bit schizophrenic here. Whilst I am certainly glad that Harris did not manage to get elected, I am not at all sure that another Trump term will dramatically change enough of the key foreign policies that effect the ROW. Macron was correct when he said that Europe should not be reliant on a few thousand voters in Wisconsin, and though one man can make a difference, it will take a couple of generations to change the deep seated problems created since [say] 1980 in the west and its relationships with those outside "the golden billion". I have argued that history has major shift changes and does not necessarily develop in predictable ways. So I am arguing against myself to the extent that a man or movement cannot effect fundamental change. We could be seeing a paradigm shift. I don't know. I live in hope that Trump is a sign of change in the world (not necessarily a driver but a symptom) but I have my doubts. Big ones. Let's see his team. However after Trump we will still be reliant aka macron for a small minority of the US electorate to choose a sensible POTUS for the USA's world role. And we know that most are pretty well brainwashed by the MSM, and in any event vote for their interests not mine. And the unwinding of the globalist agenda and woke mind virus has a long way to go yet. So this may be a road bump, or a real shift.

Expand full comment

I think change is coming, not because of a great messiah or charlatan. It is coming because the places where narrative went too far in replacing reality are now the coyote who has run off the cliff chasing the road runner. Debt and currency, as well as the finger wagging self justifying media are too far away from the underpinning physical world. Things like energy, food, manufactured goods, clean environment, population demographics and functioning legal systems are needed eventually. This is a compressed spring that Trump has unleashed. Trump is not the spring. Many mistakes will be made, and hubris and overreliance on narrative will continue to be a problem. The constraints of the real world can only be ignored so long.

Expand full comment

I can buy into that argument.

Expand full comment

The only thing lacking, Glenn, was an accurate labelling of the "Illiberal liberals". In fact, if they are neolib, they are fash. If they are taking identity politics too far, but are not neolibs, they are Leftists in search of a vision.

There are very, very few authentic Liberals, and extremely few in any positions of power and authority, at least in the West. When elite liberals such as Ken Clarke MP are considerably to the left of the Kid Starver Labour Party (Let alone what remains of the Tories, his former party), it makes little sense to call us "Liberal democracies". Liberalism is long gone.

Expand full comment

If "the left" hates the poor and working class, isn't it "the right"?

Expand full comment

And they hate them virulently, so its the "Far-right" AND Feudalists. The far-right imagine the elites that look like them hold them in any better regard than they do the 'migrants'. But the far-right have never been known for intelligence.

Expand full comment

Liberal with jails for us all

Expand full comment

Feudalists, and we are "serfs" - at best.

Expand full comment

Further classifications should be useful. Here's Gemini AI

"Here are 10 political positions, including neoconservatism, ranging from far-right to far-left:

Far Right:

* Monarchism: Rule by a single family or individual with absolute power, often passed down through hereditary succession.

* Fascism: Extreme right-wing ideology characterized by authoritarian ultranationalism, centralized autocracy, militarism, and often a corporatist economic policy.

* National Socialism (Nazism): A specific form of fascism that emphasizes racial purity and the supremacy of a particular nation.

* Neoconservatism: A political movement that advocates for the promotion of democracy and American national interest in international affairs, often through military intervention.

Center-Right:

* Conservatism: Generally supports traditional values, limited government intervention, and individual responsibility.

Center:

* Liberalism: Emphasizes individual rights, limited government, and free markets.

* Centrism: Moderate political views that balance elements of both left and right ideologies.

Center-Left:

* Social Liberalism: A political ideology that promotes individual liberty and social justice.

Far Left:

* Socialism: Economic system advocating for public ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods.

* Communism: A socioeconomic system structured upon common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.

Please note that this is a simplified representation and doesn't capture the full complexity of political ideologies. The placement of some ideologies can be debated, and there's no single, definitive answer. Many political positions are nuanced and don't fit neatly into a simple left-right spectrum.

Expand full comment

While there's much there that is bread and butter PolSci, there's one 'definition' that highlights the problem of treating AI as reliable.

"Neoconservatism: A political movement that advocates for the promotion of democracy and American national interest in international affairs, often through military intervention."

On NO LEVEL are neocons pro Democracy. The absolute opposite. They are promoting Imperial Hegemony. Bremer did not in the *slightest* "promote Iraqi Democracy", he undermined and outright prevented any civil society forming, and ruled by absolute fiat.

An Imperial Gauleiter the German Nazis, or other European Imperial Powers, would have recognised instantly.

This article the AI obviously did not scan: https://rense.com/general39/meets.htm

Expand full comment

Iraq etc voted after being almost obliterated.

It what people define as democracy.

A debate on the definition of Neocon?

Just get the l for and right wing AI Chatbots to have it for us via Google AI Notebook scripted AI podcasts. Saves so much time and suffering if open source and from all general perspective.

_____

ChatGPT free version

"The article "NeoConservatism - Where Trotsky Meets Stalin & Hitler" by Srdja Trifkovic in Chronicles Magazine offers a critical and historical examination of neoconservatism. It describes neoconservatives as former Trotskyites who evolved ideologically over time but retained a certain Manichean worldview. The piece argues that despite the transition, neoconservatism shares commonalities with both Stalinist and National Socialist ideologies. These include a fixation on state power, international imperialism, and the use of propaganda for public manipulation. Trifkovic juxtaposes this with classical conservatism's commitment to limited government and non-interventionism, positioning neoconservatives as more statist and militarist in nature. The article suggests that neoconservative leaders are driven by an eschatological drive for power and dominance, with rhetoric that often masks a deeper authoritarian impulse.

Summary Comparison to Other Sources:

1. Roots in Leftist Ideology: Other sources also acknowledge the neoconservatives' roots in leftist or Trotskyite movements, noting figures like Irving Kristol's past affiliations. This idea aligns with Hofstadter's view of the ideological shift from "paranoid left to paranoid right," suggesting the continuity of an absolutist mindset.

2. Statism and Authoritarianism: The claim that neoconservatives favor strong state control and militarism shares similarities with critical literature on their advocacy for assertive U.S. foreign policy. This aligns with studies pointing to their preference for interventionism and the use of state power.

3. Imperialism and Nationalism: The article's comparison to Stalinist and Nazi beliefs, emphasizing imperialism and the centralization of power, is echoed in works that critique neoconservative foreign policy as being driven by hegemonic aspirations. However, the stark parallels drawn between neoconservatism and Nazi totalitarianism are more polemic than typically found in mainstream critiques.

Previous Inclusion in Answers:

While I have discussed aspects of neoconservative ideology, including its historical and political roots, in my prior responses, I haven't specifically cited or drawn from Trifkovic's article or Chronicles Magazine. This source provides a more pointed and critical perspective than most academic or moderate analyses.

Expand full comment
Nov 10·edited Nov 10

There's just 1 item I take issue with. The US Govt can run out of many things. It can run out of educated, healthy, we'll-housed citizens free from ever-increasing private financial debt worries, for example.

One thing it can never run out of, for as long as it remains a sovereign currency issuer (unlike euro countries) is the US Dollar.

As long as its debt is not foreign currency debt, the US is fine. That's why the World Bank & IMF 'lend' in USD$. Foreign countries are trapped in foreign currency debt, with US enforced loan conditions attached which primarily benefit the US corporations.

The myth of the unsustainable US National Debt (which by accounting definition == Non-Govt Savings) is easily demonstrated by searching through newspaper cartoons goings back over 100 years at least! The theme is always the same. The numbers continually get revised upwards. If the direct Govt contribution to the Economy is constrained, then money for the economy to grow has to come indirectly via private banks who can charge interest.

As private banks don't like risk, the economic stimulus from their lending tends to focus on Real Estate. The key element in what is called the FIRE sector economy. As opposed to a productive manufacturing economy.

Footnote: So the constraints on govt spending are political constraints. Political forces have always sought to ensure spending that goes to them, in the way of government contracts, tax-cuts for the already-rich etc. And to deny spending to others. Forcing others to incur private household debt to pay for healthcare insurance, education etc to companies often paying out dividends to the former political group.

Governments are perfectly capable, if they were to choose to, of conducting proper Inflation Analysis of govt fiscal impact on the economy. Something Western governments avoid.

Expand full comment

Great writing! Europe has become so hateful of Russia that I don’t even follow European news anymore. As a Swede I’m baffled and ashamed over Sweden's cow turn into the Atlantic club. Interesting to see how van der Leyen will move now.

Expand full comment

Excellent summation, Dr. Diesen. Looking forward to you covering the next 4 years as objectively as you have the disaster of the last 4 years. I don’t have much hope that Trump will “save” America from all its messes, but less ideology and more pragmatism would be great.

Expand full comment

Trump and his cohort may very well continue to give Israel unconditional support and maintain a hostile stance towards its perceived adversaries, but I do think that Trump the pragmatist will stop short of allowing that mad dog Netanyahu drag the US into war against Iran. Trump the transactional businessman will know that if Iran comes under attack and closes the Straights of Hormuz, the price of oil will go through the roof and Western economies will collapse. He will not want to have that as part of his legacy.

Expand full comment

Thanks Glenn, that's a really good summary of my thoughts when I'm in an optimistic frame of mind. I don't think Trump will be worse than Biden/Harris as there is not much short of nuclear war to which he can escalate. Here's hoping anyway.

Expand full comment

Except that also Trump appoints old neo-con cold warriors to high posts in his administration, see https://responsiblestatecraft.org/rubio-trump/.

Perhaps the demands for No more wars at the republican nomination caucus were just for show? Elected, he didn't have any needs for support. Next election he will be too old and senile to run...

Expand full comment

1973 is seminal to the decline of America. It was the point when Israel became the favored child of US government and citizens were forced to wait in line for gasoline due to the oil embargo. It was the manifestation of deep state Bush CIA NWO and empire. It was when our government sold its soul to Israel guided by war criminals like Kissinger, the true face of America and 911. The deep state is Jewish Soviet. Putin on the other hand is choosing sovereignty of nations and free trade. History will repeat itself with the final pogrom of the self chosen if a soccer game in Amsterdam is any indication of where the world stands when faced with true evil.

Expand full comment

“The nonsuburban electorate will decide that the system has failed and start looking around for a strongman to vote for—someone willing to assure them that, once he is elected, the smug bureaucrats, tricky lawyers, overpaid bond salesmen, and POSTMODERNIST PROFESSORS will no longer be calling the shots… Once the strongman takes office, no one can predict what will happen”

—Richard Rorty, Postmodernist Philosopher.

Expand full comment