Explain it Like I’m Five

E.O Wilson had Richard Dawkins to explain his work to the masses. Apparently I have Skarn of the Razorforce to talk to the Bears, as he explains what the Tree of Woe and I have been pointing out about how the decline of the US military and NATO’s failure in Ukraine means the end of the USD-based Clown World economic system.

Can someone please explain to me like I am five as the real cause and effect of the recent TOW on VP? I can’t follow. It doesn’t make sense to a point where I can’t even ask a question.

Currencies have to be backed by something for them to be accepted. For the majority of history it has been precious metals. The US was on a gold standard but defaulted in 1933. WW2 gave the US the chance to become the global currency of choice due to holding the rest of the world’s gold. Thus Bretton woods agreement in 1944. However, the US continued to spend more than it earned, using credit to cover the difference. The rest of the world started asking for gold instead of dollars, coming to a head in 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window (ie no more exchanging foreigner held dollars for gold). To replace this, an agreement with the Saudis was reached to only allow the exchange of OPEC and Saudi oil in US Dollars, restoring the foreign demand for US dollars. The consequence was the US had to prevent oil from being traded in any other currency than USD.

However, between the constant USD printing and debt, making dollars less valuable to hold, the weaponization of the currency exchange and holdings system, and weakness of US is now allowing countries to bypass the USD, it’s all over but the tears, unless the US wins decisively in Ukraine and elsewhere, which doesn’t seem likely.

Thanks so much. it is the last part that I can’t follow, How is the weaponization of the currency allowing countries to bypass the USD?

The weaponization makes USD less valuable because foreign reserves held by countries can now be seized if the US doesn’t like your country’s policies. Such reserves are usually held in country of origin or close, aka Yen in Japan, to facilitate transactions. Or the SWIFT banking system. So stealing Russia’s USD and Euro reserves makes the carrot less attractive due to sovereign risk, at the same time the stick (US military interventions, sanctions, etc) is also weakening.

That’s a useful and reasonable summary that successfully gets the point across in a manner that most people should be able to understand despite the media’s best efforts to keep them in the dark. In support of these conclusions about the consequences of the US failure in Ukraine, it might be useful to read this recent observation by the Ayatollah Khamenei of Iran.

The US is no longer the power it once was, and has failed to rally the Arab world against Iran and curtail its nuclear program, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a speech to senior officials on Tuesday.

“Facts show that America was weaker under Obama’s administration than Bush’s administration. The US was weaker under Trump’s administration than the way it was under Obama’s administration. The US is weaker under [Joe Biden’s] administration than it was under Trump’s administration,” Khamenei proclaimed, according to Iran’s Tasnim news agency.

Khamenei noted that the US has failed to rally its Middle Eastern allies against Iran, declaring that “what has happened is the opposite.”

The Ayatollah went on to note the rise of several “anti-American” governments in Latin America, the declining importance of the dollar in global trade, the political chaos in Israel, and the diplomatic consequences of the EU “taking the brunt of the war” in Ukraine on Washington’s behalf as examples of the US’ waning influence.

By the way, the original Bear should be respected for doing the smart thing, and asking for a detailed explanation to help him understand the matter at hand rather than nodding, smiling, and pretending that he understood when he didn’t. Never forget that the difference between understanding a concept and having heard of its existence is greater than the difference between knowing about it and not knowing about it.

UPDATE: Nassim Nicholas Taleb isn’t too worried about the dollar’s status as the reserve currency… yet.

You will only start worrying about the dollar status as a reserve currency when you see long lines outside the Brazilian, Russian, Iranian, and Chinese consulates full of young professionals seeking immigration visas.

Of course, by then it will be too late. And there are already signs of smaller corporations establishing themselves in Russia and China, in particular, in preparation for the Great Bifurcation.

UPDATE: Start worrying.

About 300 German residents are ready to move to the Nizhny Novgorod region. By the end of 2023, this number of applicants can reach 1,000 people, said Olga Guseva, director of the department of external relations of the region. According to her, such activity is due to the fact that Germans see great potential in cooperation with the Nizhny Novgorod region in the automotive industry, construction, infrastructure development .Most of the people who want to relocate are specialists in the field of metalworking: welders, machine operators, technologists, as well as shipbuilding and the automotive industry.

DISCUSS ON SG


Contemplating De-dollarization

The Tree of Woe takes a victory lap concerning his prediction about the end of the US dollar hegemony:

In his novel Goldfinger, Ian Fleming famously said “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.” We’re well past three events. This is not a “trend”. This is a globally coordinated action against the petrodollar and there’s no mistaking what it means.

It means the Petrodollar System that has served as the bedrock of world finance since the 1970s is over.

It means I’ve been proven right even faster than I expected.

What is altogether depressing, yet not at all surprising, is how the press coverage of these shocking events has (a) utterly misunderstood their causality and (b) grossly underestimated their gravity. I’m going to use article over at VisualCapitalist.com as my punching bag because it so perfectly captures everything that’s wrong with our mainstream elite… Being either ignorant of or unwilling to acknowledge the petro-military basis of our financial order, VisualCapitalist.com then proceeds to misdiagnose the reason for the dollar’s precipitous decline, writing:

Concerned about America’s dominance over the global financial system and the country’s ability to ‘weaponize’ it, other nations have been testing alternatives to reduce the dollar’s hegemony…

They have entirely confused cause and effect. Other nations have been testing alternatives to reduce the dollar’s hegemony since, well, since the dollar has been hegemonic. All prior “tests” have resulted in the destructing of whichever regime was performing the test. Ask Muammar Gaddafi how his gold dinar worked out.

As I documented in Running on Empty (now available as a book!), since 1971 America’s dominance over the global financial system has been based on America’s military dominance over the Middle East. Now that America’s military dominance has declined, athe country’s dominance over global finance has declined, too. Therefore, the honest way to report the news would be to say:

Unconcerned about America’s purported military dominance and tired of the country’s increasingly punitive attempts to ‘weaponize’ the dollar to make up for it, nations have been testing alternatives to reduce the dollar’s hegemony…

Because that is what is actually happening. Of course no one will say that.

And what will be the consequences of this global event? Our friends at VisualCapitalist.com assert:

Despite these movements, few expect to see the end of the dollar’s global sovereign status anytime soon.

And they’re right. Very few experts expect to see the end of the dollar’s global sovereign status anytime soon. That’s because the majority of experts are too stupid to realize it’s already ended.

He’s absolutely right. It’s already over, and every single day, we’re seeing more countries taking steps to free themselves of the economic chains imposed by the petrodollar. The key, as the Tree of Woe repeatedly points out, is that the decline of the US military combined with the rise of the Chinese and Russian militaries, means that the nations of the world are free agents for the first time in seven decades.

As I pointed out in a recent Darkstream, the reason all the Clown World intellectuals declared the absolute necessity of winning the war in Ukraine, much to the confusion of the people of the USA and Europe who don’t understand why Ukraine matters when Afghanistan didn’t, is because Ukraine clearly shows the limits of US military power. And the whole system rested on the idea that any nation that attempted to evade the dollar tax would be punished with military invasion and regime change.

But the global superpower is no more. Everyone can see that the Empire has no army. Which means the nations are now free to buy and sell as they choose, in whatever medium of exchange they choose, rather than having to pay a tax to the US bankers on every single transaction. And the rapidity with which each of the steps taken by countries from Argentina to India, and from Brazil to Malaysia, indicates the eagerness with which the peoples of the world seek to free themselves from their dollar chains.

DISCUSS ON SG


Mailvox: Day One Interest

A Libraria subscriber inquires as to the reception of the new Castalia History series.

What has the day 1 interest been? Lots of subscribers?

I would say the first-day interest has been very encouraging. We are currently at 108 subscribers, which is very good because we estimate that the series will need least 120 on an ongoing basis in order to support itself going forward. This number is relatively small because we are piggybacking on the infrastructure necessary for operating the Library, but it’s good that the series will be able to support itself, and eventually, become a net contributor toward building the infrastructure for future projects.

I have learned that Easton acquired two of the other Landmark books besides The Landmark Caesar, which is a pity, but I have already acquired several works that are strong candidates for books 2, 3, and 4. One important question that requires contemplation is when the right time to introduce the first two-book series will be, because some of the better and more important works I have in mind will require two, or in some cases, even three books. It’s just not practical – or even possible – to publish Gibbon in a single volume, for example.

But those longer works can wait. We already have a plethora of historical riches from which to choose, and we’re fortunate to be able to begin the series with such an excellent edition of Thucydides.

DISCUSS ON SG


Never Trust the Science

You’d literally be better off just flipping a coin at this point. And that’s a conclusion based on statements by some of the most reputable scientists in history of the United States.

  • The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. —Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet
  • lt is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine. —Dr. Marcia Angell, physician and editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine
  • The medical profession is being bought by the pharmaceutical industry, not only in terms of the practice of medicine, but also in terms of teaching and research. The academic institutions of this country are allowing themselves to be the paid agents of the pharmaceutical industry. I think it’s disgraceful. —Arnold Seymour Reiman (died 2014), Professor of Medicine at Harvard University and former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine
  • Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud, and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them. —Dr. Linus Pauling, (died 1994), two-time Nobel Prize winner in chemistry

Remember this when people tell you to “trust the science”. You cannot. You simply cannot trust a profession that is filled with liars, grifters, and propagandists, in addition to many otherwise honest men and women whose careers are being held hostage by the interests that control their scientific field with an iron fist.

The New Atheists could not have gotten it more wrong. Not only is science not inherently in opposition to Christianity, science requires Christianity in order to operate freely, honestly, and openly. And it is the construction of a false concept of intrinsic conflict between Revealed Truth and Reliable Falsification that has permitted science to be corrupted and rendered unreliable.

Let reason be silent when observation and history directly contradict its theoretical conclusions constructed in the complete absence of relevant information.

DISCUSS ON SG


Castalia History Series

Castalia House is delighted to present its second leather book series, the Castalia History subscription. Join the Castalia History Book Club and you will receive a deluxe leatherbound book published by Castalia Library four times per year. Subscribers will also receive significant discounts on non-subscription Castalia History books.

The first History Book Club book (April-May-June, #1) is THE LANDMARK THUCYDIDES edited by Robert B. Strassler. It is the comprehensive guide to the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta and is correctly considered to be one of the first and most important classics of history. Both monthly and annual subscriptions are available.

Castalia Library subscribers should note that they will be able to purchase Castalia History books at the subscriber’s price if there are any books remaining after the History subscribers receive their books.

THE HISTORY OF THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR
By Thucydides, 431 BC

The city of Epidamnus stands on the right of the entrance of the Ionic Gulf. Its vicinity is inhabited by the Taulantians, an Illyrian people. The place is a colony from Corcyra, founded by Phalius, son of Eratocleides, of the family of the Heraclids, who had according to ancient usage been summoned for the purpose from Corinth, the mother country. The colonists were joined by some Corinthians, and others of the Dorian race. Now, as time went on, the city of Epidamnus became great and populous; but falling a prey to factions arising, it is said, from a war with her neighbours the barbarians, she became much enfeebled, and lost a considerable amount of her power. The last act before the war was the expulsion of the nobles by the people. The exiled party joined the barbarians, and proceeded to plunder those in the city by sea and land; and the Epidamnians, finding themselves hard pressed, sent ambassadors to Corcyra beseeching their mother country not to allow them to perish, but to make up matters between them and the exiles, and to rid them of the war with the barbarians. The ambassadors seated themselves in the temple of Hera as suppliants, and made the above requests to the Corcyraeans. But the Corcyraeans refused to accept their supplication, and they were dismissed without having effected anything.

When the Epidamnians found that no help could be expected from Corcyra, they were in a strait what to do next. So they sent to Delphi and inquired of the God whether they should deliver their city to the Corinthians and endeavour to obtain some assistance from their founders. The answer he gave them was to deliver the city and place themselves under Corinthian protection. So the Epidamnians went to Corinth and delivered over the colony in obedience to the commands of the oracle. They showed that their founder came from Corinth, and revealed the answer of the god; and they begged them not to allow them to perish, but to assist them. This the Corinthians consented to do. Believing the colony to belong as much to themselves as to the Corcyraeans, they felt it to be a kind of duty to undertake their protection. Besides, they hated the Corcyraeans for their contempt of the mother country. Instead of meeting with the usual honours accorded to the parent city by every other colony at public assemblies, such as precedence at sacrifices, Corinth found herself treated with contempt by a power which in point of wealth could stand comparison with any even of the richest communities in Hellas, which possessed great military strength, and which sometimes could not repress a pride in the high naval position of an island whose nautical renown dated from the days of its old inhabitants, the Phaeacians. This was one reason of the care that they lavished on their fleet, which became very efficient; indeed they began the war with a force of a hundred and twenty galleys.

All these grievances made Corinth eager to send the promised aid to Epidamnus. Advertisement was made for volunteer settlers, and a force of Ambraciots, Leucadians, and Corinthians was dispatched. They marched by land to Apollonia, a Corinthian colony, the route by sea being avoided from fear of Corcyraean interruption. When the Corcyraeans heard of the arrival of the settlers and troops in Epidamnus, and the surrender of the colony to Corinth, they took fire. Instantly putting to sea with five-and-twenty ships, which were quickly followed by others, they insolently commanded the Epidamnians to receive back the banished nobles—(it must be premised that the Epidamnian exiles had come to Corcyra and, pointing to the sepulchres of their ancestors, had appealed to their kindred to restore them)—and to dismiss the Corinthian garrison and settlers. But to all this the Epidamnians turned a deaf ear. Upon this the Corcyraeans commenced operations against them with a fleet of forty sail. They took with them the exiles, with a view to their restoration, and also secured the services of the Illyrians. Sitting down before the city, they issued a proclamation to the effect that any of the natives that chose, and the foreigners, might depart unharmed, with the alternative of being treated as enemies. On their refusal the Corcyraeans proceeded to besiege the city, which stands on an isthmus; and the Corinthians, receiving intelligence of the investment of Epidamnus, got together an armament and proclaimed a colony to Epidamnus, perfect political equality being guaranteed to all who chose to go. Any who were not prepared to sail at once might, by paying down the sum of fifty Corinthian drachmae, have a share in the colony without leaving Corinth. Great numbers took advantage of this proclamation, some being ready to start directly, others paying the requisite forfeit. In case of their passage being disputed by the Corcyraeans, several cities were asked to lend them a convoy. Megara prepared to accompany them with eight ships, Pale in Cephallonia with four; Epidaurus furnished five, Hermione one, Troezen two, Leucas ten, and Ambracia eight. The Thebans and Phliasians were asked for money, the Eleans for hulls as well; while Corinth herself furnished thirty ships and three thousand heavy infantry.

When the Corcyraeans heard of their preparations they came to Corinth with envoys from Lacedaemon and Sicyon, whom they persuaded to accompany them, and bade her recall the garrison and settlers, as she had nothing to do with Epidamnus. If, however, she had any claims to make, they were willing to submit the matter to the arbitration of such of the cities in Peloponnese as should be chosen by mutual agreement, and that the colony should remain with the city to whom the arbitrators might assign it. They were also willing to refer the matter to the oracle at Delphi. If, in defiance of their protestations, war was appealed to, they should be themselves compelled by this violence to seek friends in quarters where they had no desire to seek them, and to make even old ties give way to the necessity of assistance. The answer they got from Corinth was that, if they would withdraw their fleet and the barbarians from Epidamnus, negotiation might be possible; but, while the town was still being besieged, going before arbitrators was out of the question. The Corcyraeans retorted that if Corinth would withdraw her troops from Epidamnus they would withdraw theirs, or they were ready to let both parties remain in statu quo, an armistice being concluded till judgment could be given.

Turning a deaf ear to all these proposals, when their ships were manned and their allies had come in, the Corinthians sent a herald before them to declare war and, getting under way with seventy-five ships and two thousand heavy infantry, sailed for Epidamnus to give battle to the Corcyraeans. The fleet was under the command of Aristeus, son of Pellichas, Callicrates, son of Callias, and Timanor, son of Timanthes; the troops under that of Archetimus, son of Eurytimus, and Isarchidas, son of Isarchus. When they had reached Actium in the territory of Anactorium, at the mouth of the mouth of the Gulf of Ambracia, where the temple of Apollo stands, the Corcyraeans sent on a herald in a light boat to warn them not to sail against them. Meanwhile they proceeded to man their ships, all of which had been equipped for action, the old vessels being undergirded to make them seaworthy. On the return of the herald without any peaceful answer from the Corinthians, their ships being now manned, they put out to sea to meet the enemy with a fleet of eighty sail (forty were engaged in the siege of Epidamnus), formed line, and went into action, and gained a decisive victory, and destroyed fifteen of the Corinthian vessels. The same day had seen Epidamnus compelled by its besiegers to capitulate; the conditions being that the foreigners should be sold, and the Corinthians kept as prisoners of war, till their fate should be otherwise decided.

After the engagement the Corcyraeans set up a trophy on Leukimme, a headland of Corcyra, and slew all their captives except the Corinthians, whom they kept as prisoners of war. Defeated at sea, the Corinthians and their allies repaired home, and left the Corcyraeans masters of all the sea about those parts. Sailing to Leucas, a Corinthian colony, they ravaged their territory, and burnt Cyllene, the harbour of the Eleans, because they had furnished ships and money to Corinth. For almost the whole of the period that followed the battle they remained masters of the sea, and the allies of Corinth were harassed by Corcyraean cruisers. At last Corinth, roused by the sufferings of her allies, sent out ships and troops in the fall of the summer, who formed an encampment at Actium and about Chimerium, in Thesprotis, for the protection of Leucas and the rest of the friendly cities. The Corcyraeans on their part formed a similar station on Leukimme. Neither party made any movement, but they remained confronting each other till the end of the summer, and winter was at hand before either of them returned home.

Corinth, exasperated by the war with the Corcyraeans, spent the whole of the year after the engagement and that succeeding it in building ships, and in straining every nerve to form an efficient fleet; rowers being drawn from Peloponnese and the rest of Hellas by the inducement of large bounties. The Corcyraeans, alarmed at the news of their preparations, being without a single ally in Hellas (for they had not enrolled themselves either in the Athenian or in the Lacedaemonian confederacy), decided to repair to Athens in order to enter into alliance and to endeavour to procure support from her. Corinth also, hearing of their intentions, sent an embassy to Athens to prevent the Corcyraean navy being joined by the Athenian, and her prospect of ordering the war according to her wishes being thus impeded.

And no, this is not an April Fool’s joke. This is something that has been in the making for more than 18 months. If you have any questions, please pose them on SG at the following link.

DISCUSS ON SG


Demonic Disaccord

Many people, myself included, believe that Dolly had braces in the Moonraker movie, and that the disappearance of those braces is a Mandela Effect. It’s significant enough that it is included among the various effects “debunked” by the self-proclaimed debunkers.

Moonraker is a 1979 spy film and the eleventh movie in the James Bond franchise. It features Roger Moore as James Bond and is the fourth time he played the role in the series. In it, James Bond investigates the theft of a space shuttle which leads him to several locations. From California, to Venice, Rio de Janeiro, the Amazon rainforest, and eventually to outer space to ultimately prevent a plot to wipe out the world’s population in an attempt to recreate humanity with a master race.

It also features the actress, Blanche Ravalec playing “Dolly”, and the star of this Mandela Effect. She is the love interest of “Jaws” (played by Richard Kiel), a tall and burly metal-teethed protagonist and villain in the movie.

Many people recall Dolly having braces, when it fact she does not.

And yet, an a reader emailed yesterday with the fascinating results of his inquiry of ChatGPT concerning the subject.

Did Dolly have braces in Moonraker?

Yes, the character Dolly, who is the love interest of the villain Jaws in the 1979 James Bond film “Moonraker,” is depicted wearing braces on her teeth. The character was played by French actress Blanche Ravalec, who actually wore braces in real life at the time of filming. The braces are notable because they are seen as a key factor in the romance between Dolly and Jaws, as they bond over their shared dental hardware.

ChatGPT, 27 March 2023

It might be a good idea for those with AI accounts to ask the various AI’s similar questions about other Mandela Effects such as the Berenstein/Berenstain Bears, as it would appear that the scrubbing of the past is not only incomplete, but has left enough traces behind that they are being picked up on by the AI datamining.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Mistakes of Empire

I’ve repeatedly observed that both Russia and China have learned from the mistakes of previous regimes, as well as from those of the imperial USA. Here is evidence that Russia’s current leadership is actively aware of the mistakes made in their Soviet past:

Russia’s economy will not be reduced to the defense industry alone, despite the conflict with Ukraine and Western sanctions, former President Dmitry Medvedev told journalists on Sunday. Imbalances in the economy will not be allowed to develop, he said, adding that the country is unlikely to suffer the fate of the Soviet Union.

“There is currently no threat of economic militarization in a way, in which it existed [in the USSR] in the 1970s and 1980s,” Medvedev said. The former president argued that the Soviet Union gave too much priority to the defense industry. To avoid an imbalance, “priorities just need to be set correctly and major macroeconomic indicators monitored,” he added.

Russia does actually need to boost its defense industry, he said, adding that it is necessary to “lay the groundwork for the future” even after the Ukraine conflict ends. However, taking these steps will not affect other economic sectors, he believes.

The USSR lacked a market system and also the strong consumer goods sector that modern Russia has, Medvedev said, adding that had the West imposed sanctions on the USSR at that time, “we would have had a hard time.”

Now, Russia’s “market does not feel any colossal downturns even despite the sanctions,” the former president said. He lauded Russia’s agriculture sector, saying not only does it allow Russia to meet its own food supply needs, but also enables it to “feed others.”

And they’re clearly also acutely aware of the vulnerabilities created by blindly adopting the false “free trade” doctrine of Western liberalism: China and Russia top list of states with largest trade surplus – study

DISCUSS ON SG


America is not Byzantium

VDH contemplates the similarities between two dying empires:

The last generations of Byzantines had inherited a global reputation and standard of living that they themselves no longer earned. They neglected their former civic values and fought endless battles over obscure religious texts, doctrines, and vocabulary.

They did not expand their anemic army and navy. They did not reunite their scattered, Greek-speaking empire. They did not properly maintain their once life-giving walls.

Instead of earning money through their accustomed nonstop trade, the Byzantines inflated their currency and were forced to melt down the city’s inherited gold and silver fixtures.

The once canny and shrewd Byzantines grew smug and naive. Childlessness became common. Most now preferred to live outside of what had become a half-empty, often dirty, and poorly maintained city.

The difference is that America was conquered from within by foreigners who have ruled over the natives, and ruled disastrously, in their own short-sighted and self-perceived interests. But America was always doomed due to its foolish, though understandable in the circumstances, adoption of civic nationalism in the place of the real thing.

If there is one lesson to be learned from the decline and fall of the United States, it is that a nation cannot be artificially manufactured from diverse elements. There was never any need to “divide and conquer” the USA because division was built into the USA from the very start. “Show up and conquer” was sufficient.

DISCUSS ON SG


Barbarossa

Big Serge has a detailed article on Operation Barbarossa which is well-researched, insightful, and very long. Anyone interested in WWII history, and anyone who hopes to make any sense of what is happening in Ukraine, would do well to read the entire thing.

Soviet preparation for war had focused on material factors – the sheer size of tank, artillery, and aircraft inventories – while neglecting the professional aspects of command, communications, and coordination. Consequentially, despite adequate equipment and weaponry, the Red Army was, very simply, outmatched by the nimbler and more responsive Wehrmacht.

In the first place, the performance of the Red Army cannot be separated from the fact that Stalin had conducted a widespread purge of his own officer corps only a few years prior to the outbreak of war. This appalling churn in the command hierarchy had occurred at the same time that the Red Army was expanding; as a result, Soviet officers tended to be rapidly promoted and were for the most part in over their heads early in the war, fighting a highly trained, experienced, coolly competent German officer corps, which had by now successfully undertaken two large campaigns in France and Poland, along with a variety of other specialized operations from Norway to Greece. The basic factors of experience and training were thus hilariously disposed in Germany’s favor.

At the same time, the Red Army lacked a dedicated communications system and relied on civilian telephone and telegraph lines, many of which were quickly cut by the Germans. It was not uncommon during the early phases of the war for Soviet officers to have to inquire with local communist party officials (the party did have access to wireless communications) as to where the Germans were and how far they had advanced.

The Red Army fought bravely but was unprepared for war at Germany’s pace
These two factors – an overwhelmed officer corps and a broken communications system – had a particularly deadly synergy. Different levels of the command hierarchy were cut off from each other and blind, while at the unit level, commanders were simply unable or unwilling to take initiative. Furthermore, the… shall we say peculiarities of the Stalinist system left the officer corps with instincts that were oriented towards political survival, rather than military exigency, and this meant not making drastic unilateral decisions.

This was an absolutely central aspect of war making that Stalin and the communists simply did not grasp; they had focused on churning out tanks, guns, and shells, while neglecting the command and control functions of the army. The Germans, quite simply, were prepared to fight war at a different pace than the Soviets: German commanders were more experienced, more decisive, more precise, more willing to act independently, and more level headed. The Red Army consequentially resembled an enormous, muscle bound fighter, but with a diseased nervous system and bad eyesight.

These vulnerabilities made the Red Army particularly susceptible to the Wehrmacht’s approach to warfighting, which brought overwhelming firepower and violence at the point of attack to allow rapid penetration and movement, creating an encircled pocket, or what the Germans called a kessel, for cauldron – which could then be liquidated. By fighting multiple kesselschlachts, or encirclement battles, the Wehrmacht planned to annihilate the Red Army and destroy the Soviet Union’s capacity to resist by the autumn of 1941. The objective was very clear: destroy Soviet fighting power. Annihilating the Red Army took absolute priority over capturing any specific geographic markers. Hitler himself had remarked that even Moscow was “of no great importance.” Rather, the objective of Barbarossa was to destroy Soviet manpower: “The mass of the army”, read the Barbarossa directive, “is to be destroyed in bold operations involving deep penetrations by armored spearheads, and the withdrawal of elements capable of combat into the extensive Russian land spaces is to be prevented.”

This last portion is the key to the concept of Barbarossa, but we shall return to this later.

The first shots fired in the cataclysmic Nazi-Soviet war came in the form of an aerial bombardment by the Luftwaffe, which attacked over 60 frontline Soviet air bases early on June 22. The Red Air Force lost over 1200 aircraft on the first morning of the war, ensuring German control of the air all along the line of contact. On June 24, literally two days into the war, Soviet western front headquarters informed Moscow that “Enemy aviation has complete air dominance.” The wholesale destruction of the Red Air Force’s frontline units was one of the most remarkable events in the history of warfare, yet it occurred so quickly that it receives scant mention in much of the war’s historiography; it is as if the Soviet air force simply vanished into thin air. Meanwhile, German advance teams managed to cut many civilian telephone and telegraph lines, throwing the Red Army’s command and control system into disarray and forcing the NKVD (which operated a wireless radio communication system) to act as middlemen to relay orders to the army. With the Red Army severely disoriented and bereft of air support, on came the fearsome German mechanized package.

The Soviet response was woefully inadequate. 1941 would be a year of terrible mistakes, but above all, what high level Soviet leadership – including and especially Stalin – did not understand was just how much could be won or loss in the opening moments of the war. By neglecting to put the Red Army on full combat alert, the regime allowed the Wehrmacht to achieve tactical, but not strategic surprise. Years later, one Soviet Marshal, Andrei Grechko, would make the tongue in cheek remark that the government and senior commanders were fully prepared for the outbreak of war, and the only people surprised by the German attack were the Red Army soldiers on the front line. What Stalin’s team did not comprehend was that tactical surprise, mixed with Germany’s particularly aggressive and mobile approach to war and the Soviet Union’s sclerotic command system, could produce a total catastrophe.

It is interesting to note that Big Serge tends to support Suvorov’s Icebreaker hypothesis, which is that Stalin was preparing to invade Central and Western Europe, but was taken by surprise by the timing and effectiveness of the German offensive. And indeed, the most convincing aspect of the hypothesis is the extreme forward placement of the 60 Soviet air bases, which led to the incredible destruction of the Soviet air forces.

it occurred so quickly that it receives scant mention in much of the war’s historiography

I would argue that it receives scant mention because it destroys the narrative that the German attack on the Soviet Union was unprovoked and took place solely as a consequence of Hitler’s vast imperial ambitions.

DISCUSS ON SG


Secular Blindness and Post-Ideology

This post by Z-Man usefully illustrates why he, and all the other secular commentators of the Right, are now past their use dates. Because they are totally blind to the moral and religious elements of the observable globalism vs nationalism conflict, which is far less the philosophical Aristotle vs Plato than Satanic imperialism aka The Empire of Lies vs truth, anything they say is only going to be tangentially relevant to the present situation at best, and usually by sheer accident.

The old language is either inadequate or loaded with moral connotations. Calling the Biden people fascist is not entirely wrong, but not entirely accurate either. That and the word fascist comes with so much baggage that its descriptive value is completely lost.

The same can be said for words like communist and authoritarian. Even the term managerialism has been abused to the point where it often just means “bad” rather than a specific sort of organizational outlook. One of the weird parts about being trapped in the 20th century, as is the case with the West, is we are left to use moral language that no longer works in this century.

The term “Biological Leninism” is a good example. While the NRx people have accurately described some aspects of the current system, this is mostly an accident of trying to jam the current system into old models. The term itself is just a way to anathematize the current ideology by associating it with an ideology of the last century which is universally reviled.

What needs doing is a fresh look at the 20th century from an objective, historical perspective that avoids the old moral language.

To the contrary, we don’t need a fresh, objective, historical secular perspective. That’s the very outdated sort of thinking that has placed humanity in its current peril. We need to return to the old moral language, and specifically, the historical Christian perspective upon which Western civilization was built and by which humanity advanced intellectually, morally, and technologically to heights it had never seen before.

All ideology is deception. Whether it is an ideology of the Right, such as free trade, free speech, libertarianism, Objectivism, or conservatism, or an ideology of the Left, such as socialism, communism, feminism, anti-racialism, or social justice, it is a deception and a distraction from the true and ancient conflict.

Satan is real. He rules this fallen world. And he is determined to root out every last vestige of the truth, because the truth inevitably leads to the Truth, which is Jesus Christ. That’s why the satanic imperialists lie about everything from economics to race, from science to sex, and from math to phonics. It is the essence of the truth they fear, not the specific fact in question.

We are living in a post-ideological time in a manner that exceeds mere identity politics, because every single identifiable ideology is poisoned with falsehoods in its core axioms. None of them are built on the truth, indeed, they are literally designed to deflect their adherents from the truth. And all of them observably lead to the exact same evil destination, as we are seeing take place in real time with “capitalism”, “democracy”, and “free market economies”.

Here is a specific example of how a secular perspective literally prevents the analyst from recognizing an observable and reliable historical pattern.

Throughout history whenever a society has accepted women leadership (matriarchy), or worshipped a female Deity, this has been followed by the acceptance of homosexuality and transgenderism. Without fail. It is a remarkable convergence, especially considering that this is observed in cultures that had nothing to do with each other and could not have influenced each other, because they were separated by centuries and continents. What people, including Mark, commonly call the Jezebel spirit is really the goddess Astarte, Ashtoreth, Ishtar, Aphrodite, Artemis, etc. In other words an active demon or demons that shows up in a consistent pattern throughout history, in every continent, in unconnected cultures, but always with the same tricks.

How can the secularist account for the repetitive historical consequences of demonic activity? He simply can’t. He can’t even take the historical facts into consideration. His intellectual framework specifically excludes the causal factor, and therefore he is forced to resort to obvious and increasingly ridiculous falsehoods in an inept attempt to explain away the observable truth.

DISCUSS ON SG