https://t.co/g55Omi9s4nhttps://t.co/g55Omi9s4nA SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF TRUMP’S GRAND STRATEGY FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE
https://t.co/g55Omi9s4n TO: #Trump @realDonaldTrump @POTUS
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 11:22:00 UTC
https://t.co/g55Omi9s4nhttps://t.co/g55Omi9s4nA SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF TRUMP’S GRAND STRATEGY FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE
https://t.co/g55Omi9s4n TO: #Trump @realDonaldTrump @POTUS
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 11:22:00 UTC
https://t.co/g55Omi9s4nA SIMPLE EXPLANATION OF TRUMP’S GRAND STRATEGY FOR ORDINARY PEOPLE
https://t.co/g55Omi9s4n TO: #Trump @realDonaldTrump @POTUS
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 11:22:00 UTC
https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatter/news/cdc-buried-study-showing-guns-are-used-more-often-for-protection-than-crime-x970gOZQOk2kB7knmCgdIQ/https://www.themaven.net/bluelivesmatter/news/cdc-buried-study-showing-guns-are-used-more-often-for-protection-than-crime-x970gOZQOk2kB7knmCgdIQ/
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 10:26:00 UTC
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 10:26:00 UTC
TRUMP LOOKS FOR AND USES POSTURING TO DRIVE OPPONENTS INTO “FAIR DEALS”.
If you posture or virtue signal, Trump will humiliate you for it. Trump takes posturing off the table. He is a master of it. And his response is always the same: “lets just do a fair deal”. This is a variation on “The Last Moral Man” negotiating tactic. This strategy is almost impossible to defeat. Which is one of the reasons it’s helpful to have a larger number of people involved in any negotiation – so that people posture themselves into traps, which you can then use against them.
(I know because I do the same damned thing)
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 09:23:00 UTC
GOD EMPEROR TRUMP COMMENT OF THE DAY
“……and then he was late for Trudeau’s feminist breakfast, and missed their climate change meeting to denuclearize NK, and punked them on Twitter while he was on the plane. He’s got them by nuts.”—- Jim Leis
If Posturing and signaling is part of your game, Trump will own you. He does it all the time…. Why? “Make a fair deal.”
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 08:45:00 UTC
Um. That’s hard to answer in a tweet other than (a) yes I agree with the moscow-berlin axis as necessary / w-europe is corrupt, (b) Yes I agree with removing anglo (atlantic) civilization from europe, (c) as for the rest of it, Duggin like Evola is a space cadet. And childish.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-09 21:29:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1005562599889653760
Reply addressees: @absolutelysubv
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1005551836236079104
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1005551836236079104
DUGIN’S BOOK SAYS:
The book declares that “the battle for the world rule of [ethnic] Russians” has not ended and Russia remains “the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution”. The Eurasian Empire will be constructed “on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us.”[9]
Military operations play relatively little role. The textbook believes in a sophisticated program of subversion, destabilization, and disinformation spearheaded by the Russian special services. The operations should be assisted by a tough, hard-headed utilization of Russia’s gas, oil, and natural resources to bully and pressure other countries.[9]
The book states that “the maximum task [of the future] is the ‘Finlandization’ of all of Europe”.[9]
In Europe:
Germany should be offered the de facto political dominance over most Protestant and Catholic states located within Central and Eastern Europe. Kaliningrad oblast could be given back to Germany. The book uses the term “Moscow–Berlin axis”.[9]
France should be encouraged to form a “Franco–German bloc” with Germany. Both countries have a “firm anti-Atlanticist tradition”.[9]
The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.[9]
Finland should be absorbed into Russia. Southern Finland will be combined with the Republic of Karelia and northern Finland will be “donated to Murmansk Oblast”.[9]
Estonia should be given to Germany’s sphere of influence.[9]
Latvia and Lithuania should be given a “special status” in the Eurasian-Russian sphere.[9]
Poland should be granted a “special status” in the Eurasian sphere.[9]
Romania, Macedonia, “Serbian Bosnia” and Greece – “Orthodox collectivist East” – will unite with “Moscow the Third Rome” and reject the “rational-individualistic West”.[9]
Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics”. Ukraine should not be allowed to remain independent, unless it is cordon sanitaire, which would be inadmissible.[9]
In the Middle East and Central Asia:
The book stresses the “continental Russian–Islamic alliance” which lies “at the foundation of anti-Atlanticist strategy”. The alliance is based on the “traditional character of Russian and Islamic civilization”.
Iran is a key ally. The book uses the term “Moscow–Tehran axis”.[9]
Armenia has a special role: It will serve as a “strategic base,” and it is necessary to create “the [subsidiary] axis Moscow-Erevan-Teheran”. Armenians “are an Aryan people … [like] the Iranians and the Kurds”.[9]
Azerbaijan could be “split up” or given to Iran.[9]
Georgia should be dismembered. Abkhazia and “United Ossetia” (which includes Georgia’s South Ossetia) will be incorporated into Russia. Georgia’s independent policies are unacceptable.[9]
Russia needs to create “geopolitical shocks” within Turkey. These can be achieved by employing Kurds, Armenians and other minorities.[9]
The book regards the Caucasus as a Russian territory, including “the eastern and northern shores of the Caspian (the territories of Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan)” and Central Asia (mentioning Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan).[9]
In Asia:
China, which represents a danger to Russia, “must, to the maximum degree possible, be dismantled”. Dugin suggests that Russia start by taking Tibet–Xinjiang–Mongolia–Manchuria as a security belt.[1] Russia should offer China help “in a southern direction – Indochina (except Vietnam), the Philippines, Indonesia, Australia” as geopolitical compensation.[9]
Russia should manipulate Japanese politics by offering the Kuril Islands to Japan and provoking anti-Americanism.[9]
Mongolia should be absorbed into Eurasia-Russia.[9]
The book emphasizes that Russia must spread Anti-Americanism everywhere: “the main ‘scapegoat’ will be precisely the U.S.”
In the United States:
Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke “Afro-American racists”. Russia should “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements – extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics”.[9]
The Eurasian Project could be expanded to South and Central America.[9]
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-09 20:02:00 UTC
National socialism for example, is actually and “Authoritarian, Nationalist, Autarkic, Commons-biased, Mixed economy” Classical liberalism for example is actually a “Rule of Law, Nationalist, Private Property-biased, Free Trade, Mixed Economy, with houses for the classes to negotiate commons.” (repost)
National socialism for example, is actually and “Authoritarian, Nationalist, Autarkic, Commons-biased, Mixed economy” Classical liberalism for example is actually a “Rule of Law, Nationalist, Private Property-biased, Free Trade, Mixed Economy, with houses for the classes to negotiate commons.” (repost)