Hugh Johnson
Member
Aurelien keeps posting great stuff.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
The behaviour of western and especially European, leaders during the crisis is exactly what we would expect from this kind of political culture. In particular, there is a total incapacity to relate the various elements and consequences to each other. So at some level, western politicians must understand that the game is over, and they will have to deal with a strong and angry Russia quite soon. But this co-exists with a belief that somehow the West is going to win, if we only keep doing the same things, based largely on derivative thinking: surely all those experts and all the national leaders I meet can’t be wrong? Their lack of any actual knowledge about anything, including such mundanities as energy supplies, global supply chains, military production and procurement and for that matter war itself, means that the “debate” itself is at a derivative level, about who said what when and whether it was anti-Russian enough. Whether the political system is actually capable of accepting reality, and what will happen if it can’t, are things we need to start thinking about now.
Ironically, critics of the war and similar adventures fall into the same errors, through desperate attempts to impose a rational, left-brain interpretation on something which is an incoherent mess brought about by a political system that has gone mad. Once you give up the attempt to interpret the behaviour of western leaders as if it were rationally-based, it is no longer necessary to construct elaborate and complex master plans pursued over decades, in an attempt to force on events a unity that they do not possess. Nor do we need to mimic the behaviour of schizophrenics, for whom there are hidden meanings and menaces everywhere.
But it makes much more sense if we realise that this is, in fact, an existential Final Battle, against the one power in the world which could obstruct the fulfilment of the historical process and the building of the New Jerusalem. (The irony of a post-religious culture thinking in classically religious terms is almost painful.) So the correspondences are obvious: Russia is the Babylon of the Book of Revelation, Putin is the Beast, and the Mark of the Beast is the “Z” on Russian equipment. And the new Russian General commanding the troops in Ukraine, is nicknamed “General Armageddon.” No, seriously, you can’t make this stuff up. Actually, there’s a lot more correspondences you can have fun with, but that will do for now.
Victory, however, is assured, because this is not a real battle, but a symbolic one. Just as God frequently gave the Israelites victory over massively superior forces through supernatural intervention, so the war in Ukraine will assuredly be won, not by mundane things like military superiority, but by the power of ideas and norms. After all, the Deputy Defence Minister of Ukraine is a woman, and NATO has a full-time diversity officer. Thus, even if the short term involves suffering and trials, even if the Covid plague still has to be endured, even if parts of the Earth are baking, even if the weather has gone mad, even if, above all, people freeze in the winters to come, all these ordeals must be accepted, because victory and the coming of the New Jerusalem are assured thereby. Indeed, all these things are actually positive signs because they mean the End is Near.