ICBM Missile Shield Test

https://johnyorks.tumblr.com/post/161282580058/us-says-test-shows-missile-defenses-outpacing

Politics is done in the darkness audio for 5/19/17

https://johnyorks.tumblr.com/post/160891307813/j-politics-is-done-in-the-darkness-51917

Politics is done in the darkness for 5/4/17

https://johnyorks.tumblr.com/post/160301280858/like-to-do-things-different-ways-sometimes-so-for

Rethinking "Globalism"

With the attack on Syria, the sending of ships to DPRK waters, and the recent upsurge in the success of "nationalist" parties, I have perhaps done my own 180 (or perhaps not, being a Gemini, and thus capable of holding opposing opinions at the same time). Globalism likely could serve sinister purposes, but it doesn't have to.

It seems that in many ways, the nation-state is too strong, and the money wasted on military"defense" of these states in some cases is astronomical. Some commentators claim we are headed for a "New World Order" of "Global Government." Perhaps a case is to be made for such. However, simply in the case of the supposed "North American Union" flaws in logic can be detected.

How is it that this "North American Union" is being created, yet it is actually more difficult (since the 9/11 attacks) to cross borders in North America? Surely, that would be a sign of less integration rather than more. When I was young, no passport was needed to cross from the US into Canada. Now, for the most part, one is required.

At any rate, yes, a "Global Government" could be a tyranny upon every resident of planet earth. But it doesn't have to be. And more to the point, it could end war once and for all. Revolution, being a different matter, might not be ended - unless this government was designed well. I wouldn't have all the answers on how to design it, nor would I presume that should.

But this is part of my point. This government would have to not be a government of the corporations only, would have to take into consideration the concerns of the many over the few, and would certainly have to be very democratic. It would have to be stronger than the UN, but weaker than most national governments. Perhaps the US Articles of Confederation could serve as a guide. Or, perhaps some other system that allows for local-ism, but insists on the unity of the human race, as well as peace and security (including economic security) for all.

Or, perhaps it is just another one of my bad ideas....

Did Trump avert war with Russia to start war with Iran?

From the American Conservative: Link

politics is done in the darkness 1/27/17

From CounterPunch on Syria

"It is a flagrant and ubiquitous omission to talk about the Russian military intervention in Syria without mentioning the American threat that preceded it." link

(S)election 2016 briefly

Haven't posted here in a while, and thought this was the place for a brief post about the upcoming elections. We are in big trouble. And, in spite of the overwhelming conventional wisdom that has Clinton as the lesser evil, that likely is not the case. As Assange stated, "A vote for Hillary is a vote for endless, stupid war." While Trump at least wants to get along with Russia, Clinton wants to establish a no fly zone over Syria, which will mean direct confrontation with Russia. This is very dangerous.

And Trump is a disaster in every other way..... We the people, no matter the outcome, have already lost this election.

James Corbet on R2p

This one was really good. And it is true that both Amy Goodman and Chomsky were terrible on the Libyan war....

On Carroll Quigley

Good overview of Quigley's very big book.

x22 report on the continuing war agenda

Very good x22 report podcast with plausible analysis on the latest events in Belgium, and the war in Syria.

Politics is done in the Darkness podcast # 6

I've decided to continue my "Politics is Done in the Darkness" podcast/ audio-cast, but as audio only, so not something with an accompanying YouTube video. I will still be making the "My Two Cents" videos, which I think of as specifically for YouTube, and also via blogs and such.

This latest covers topics such as the peace agreement in Syria, the ongoing tragedy of what the west did to Libya, and some open-ended thoughts on the level to which our votes count, or do not count.

Strange Geopolitical Relationships Continue To Unfold

Iran and Turkey call for joint efforts against terrorism Press TV tells us. What? Wait, were they not on opposite sides of the fence regarding the situation in Syria?

As an aside, but still relevant to the point,we are constantly told that Russia and Iran are, more or less, allies of of a sort. But is this true? After all, there were several times it was reported that Russia would sell the s-300 anti-aircraft system to Iran, but then didn't. It has recently been reported that the Russians will now fulfill the contract to provide the s-300 to Iran. Or, depending on which story one is to believe, perhaps they already have.  These things are hard to know with any certainty. The point is, the Russians had been dragging their feet regarding the s-300 sale to Iran for a very long time. Would they do this if they were such great allies?

Does it make sense that at the time Turkey is literally sending artillery shells into Syria, an ally of Iran, and Russia is at odds with Turkey as a result of the Turkish government's decision to down a Russian military plane several weeks ago, that Iran would discuss "joint efforts against terrorism?"

But maybe it does make sense in a way, as both Iran and Turkey, at various times and to various degrees, have had conflict with the Kurds.  After all, the Syrian Kurds are the ones that Turkey is mainly shelling.

But wait, now we see we must put Azerbaijan into the mix. Azerbaijan? It is a tangled web that is weaved as politics make strange bedfellows during the age of declining American power, and the rise of the multi-polar world. Who is on the side of whom?

(*note: This article captures what I tried to convey about the s-300 deal.)

Election analysis from WSWS

Here is another article about the  perceived chaos within the US political establishment, and the dangers of the rise of Trump. This one is also based on an historical perspective, but from a different point of view. It is a paradox, as how can a candidate that is like a wrecking ball to the Republican Party be entirely bad.

Analysis from David Stockman

Although I am not a supporter of the Trump, this article makes a lot of sense. And it was worth it for the historical background alone. Link here.

Politics is done in the darkness audios merged into vlog

I've decided to merge my two political audio/video series together. So, from now on, the "politics is done in the darkness" audio/video will be merged into "my two cents" political vlog videos. Here is the link.

On the"refugee crisis"

In one of his essays, I seem to recall that Gore Vidal pointed out that to really solve a political problem, one has to get to the root of the problem. In fact, if memory serves, he had a really clever definition of the word "root," which went back to either the Greek or Latin, well, root. I can't remember the definition well enough right now to summarize it here.

At any rate, what is at the root of the so- called, "refugee crisis," is the fact that the US and some other countries decided that "Assad must go" and attempted to overthrow his government, using mainly the same methods they used to overthrow the government of Libya. As an aside, notice how they now have to send military aviation into Libya again to wreck the lives of those poor people even further. This suggests that perhaps they did not get the outcome in Libya that was desired from the first military operation, a military operation, by the way, which was disguised as the "Arab Spring."

So, to solve the so-called "refugee crisis" the US must decide it isn't really intent on overthrowing Assad, and then, at the very least, allow the Russians, Syrians, and Iranians to rebuild the country, which will allow refugees to return home. Very simple, except the US, for some reason, can not let go of the idea that "Assad must go." This, even after it would seem that they must not have gotten what they wanted out of their Libya project, as evidenced by the fact that they have to send military aviation into Libya again.

The real question(s) is/are: Why does Assad have to go? Why did Qaddafi have to go? And, even, why did they believe Saddam Hussein had to go? (Even I think Saddam was far worse than either of the other two.) The "refugee crisis" could not exist if the west stopped creating refugees.

more on plan "b"

This is from the WSWS. So, the question remains, why would the Russians agree to(and even be a party to the initiation of) this ceasefire agreement? On the other hand, perhaps those that say the agreement will be interpreted properly, that is in a way that permits the Russians and Syrians to continue the air campaign (and even ground campaign) against certain specified groups within Syria if those groups insist on continuing the fight, are correct. I would tend to doubt it though.

plan b in Syria

This was speculation before, but apparently, if the report is correct, John Kerry has come out and said there is a plan "b" for Syria. Plan "b" looks suspiciously like what some have considered to be the larger plan for the region all along.

politics is done in the darkness #5

I hope I'm right about the number. I think this is the 5th audio-cast.