Hmmm, there are so many things I profoundly disagree with in this piece, though I’ve found myself often more in sync with the commentariat of some of these pieces. The idea of cavalierly saying that now we must have regime change in Russia? What sort of titanic arrogance does it take to walk around imagining that we can and should be just knocking off leaders here and there as we see fit? Or the fact that Russia as a nuclear power shouldn’t enter the calculation of creating an expectation amongst Americans that nothing short of killing Putin is a satisfactory solution to this crisis? It’s like people are being encouraged to believe that international relations are as complex as checkers. And with nuclear annihilation hanging in the balance. It’s all chilling. Maybe we should get rid of Xi also. He kind of makes me uneasy too.
“Since Nato is a defensive rather than an aggressive pact, why should Ukraine or any country joining NATO be a problem for Russia, unless it harbors hopes of invading their territory at some future point?” Yow, one almost doesn’t know how to respond to the shallowness of a statement like that. First of all, a ‘defensive pact’ is no different than ‘defensive weapons’, which is to say that they can, and are, used aggressively. But let’s be even simpler. Let’s just transport the whole set piece to the United States and say that China decides that it wants to invite Chile, Argentina and Bolivia into a so-called ‘defensive pact’, the China Pacific Treaty Organization (CPTO) and then gradually creeps up the continent until it invites Mexico into the ‘defensive pact’, to which the US hits the brakes. A Chinese Daniel Pinchbeck would be writing literally the exact same sentence, saying, Since CPTO is a defensive rather that an aggressive pact, why should the United States or any country joining CPTO be a problem for America, unless it harbors hopes of invading their territory at some future point? Of course, we know that the United State wouldn’t tolerate the prospect of such a threat in their hemisphere—even if 5000 miles away in Chile—for a millisecond, that such an incursion would be regarded as a unconscionable threat to our sovereignty and territorial influence, and needn’t require explanation. At the same time, the very same Chinese version of Daniel P. would then write (using your exact words): I do not find it credible to believe that any CPTO countries had the slightest interest in launching an unprovoked invasion or attack on a nuclear-missle-armed-to-the-teeth United States. The goal of CPTO is to establish stable security and peace so that countries within the pact can focus on their economies, social services, and so on (human progress, in other words), and according to a system of agreed-upon laws and conventions. etc, etc. Of course, the US in this case isn’t frightened of an attack by all the combined countries of South America, but they are terrified of all those countries attacking aligned with China, its sponsor, just a Russia looks at NATO and Western Europe and us. But we’re unable to hold the simplest mirror to ourselves, nor is Pinchbeck.
But y'know what--my biggest disappointment is that I sit here and wonder, where is the love, where is the kindness, where is the wisdom, where is the shamanic perspective that one might find in this moment in this newsletter? Where is a vision that seeks to step outside of everyday consciousness? I don’t see a hint of it. This all reads like the Council On Foreign Relations. It’s as though we’re to get excited by the possibilities of shamanism and psychedelics in ordinary times, but when things get heated, when things get ‘real’, we’re going to run back to these ruts of conventional thinking, these lines of masculine drive and logic that are already destroying the world as we know it. But here we have just more of it, dressed up with some nods to a new way of thinking, a new consciousness. I would have thought in this moment Daniel would counsel people to go outside, look up at the stars, and take a deep breath. Remember you’re alive. Remember that you won’t always be, no matter what happens in the Ukraine. Walk back inside and center yourself. Rather than hunch over our computers and contemplate this nonsense masquerading as deep wisdom.
Thanks for your comments. I honestly try to think and to learn and to integrate different perspectives. I will consider what you say. When I said "we need regime change in Russia," I wasn't thinking of something simplistic like bumping off Putin. I think that Russia is leading the race to the bottom, both in terms of its tactics with hacking and Bots and its impact on the world's failure to act on the ecological emergency. I agree - I need to return to the shamanic perspective and thanks for the reminder!
I feel there is a kind of civilizational end-game happening where we are seeing a march toward authoritarianism / totalitarianism... China appears to have achieved a technological totalitarianism that may be unbreakable. For me, I think of people forced into this "group think" without any possibility for dissent to be unbearable, like a living death. I sometimes feel the necessity of sorting through many competing perspectives to seek some kind of balance but I hear you! I will go out and look at the stars / smell the flowers.
Well, I think you’re more generous than I might have been. After I posted my note, I took my own counsel and went outside and looked at the night sky. When I came back in, my wife had, by chance (?), sent me some fabulous dance music which I put it on to shake the world out of me, and when it was over I was instantly sorry for the harshness of my note. Which is kind of the point, in a way. We’re all operating from a place so far from home. Be Well.
Thank you for this interesting post. Regarding rhe framework from which to understand this current conflict i'd like to suggest two essays which i think are insightful,
and then with regard to the broader vision and the needed societal transformation, I'd like to point out what I think is the structural root cause of this (and any) war, and what can be dome about this (dealing here only with the structural root, not the psychological root, since that is much more complex and vast than what can be dealt with in one comment, i think)
Right now (and for the last 370 years, since the westphalia agreement of 1649) we have a nation-state based "world order" (or a world disorder, more accurately) which is anti-wholistic, sectarian and destructive to the extreme, and which literally guarantees that we will forever live in a state of conflict and war (for as long as this is the structural world "order" we live in). In this "world order" the entire planet is divided into nearly 200 separate atomised units (nation-states) who are each armed to the teeth and are in competition with each other to secure their own narrow sectarian "NATIONAL INTERESTS". They secure these "national interests" either through physical aggression or economic aggression (or both), each one trying to selfishly grab as much it can for itself and its "national interests" in a dog-eat-dog type of world where the smaller units get destroyed exploited raped and eaten up by the bigger bullies. It is a "world order" of bullies. A world order which creates bullies and strongly rewards bullies. A "world order" which is based on the assumption of separation, enshrines division, selfishness and competition as the "natural way of things" and guarantees that we will forever live in a state of conflict and war (until we destroy ourselves). The current war is a natural progession and expression of the nationalist sectarian "world order" we are living in. It could not happen if these weren't the basic rules the game and the basic assumptions that guide our civilization.
So what can be done? What is the solution to that?
In my view, the solution that no one seems to be talking about in these times of nationalist fervor and bloodthirst for war and collective psychosis, is to flip the rules of the game from a sectarian divisive atomised mentality into a wholistic perception and structure, a structure that will guarantee and celebrate national uniqueness and difference and at the same time will also guarantee that the national differences are NOT a source of conflict and competition but rather a source of enrichment of the human experience. In other words, a united states of the earth, a wholistic human federation of the earth. And in a minute I will give you a more practical illustration of what this means.
In my view, this will create the structural conditions that would allow for a whole new way, a mature, joyous and sane way of relating and existing.
And as you will see in a minute, even though it seems at first a non-personal political issue (and therefore perhaps uninteresting), it is actually, in my view, profoundly personal and affects every aspect of life on earth.
It shows how it is possible for nationalism and patriotism to function NOT as divisive destructive egoic unintelligent murderous force that inevitably leads humanity into a mentality of dog-eat-dog competition, sectatianism, antagonism and conflict, of one nation destroying others for its egoic "national interest" (which is the way our immature world system currently functions), but rather it shows how it is possible to create the structural conditions that will transform nationalism from a source of conflict into a source of enrichment, that will turn nationalism and patriotism from such a destructive sectarian anti-wholistic murderous unintelligent force that is dividing and separating humanity, into a force that enriches and contributes to the wellness and prosperity of humanity, NOT destroy humanity (as it does now, as we can clearly see right in front of our eyes).
In other words, it shows what are the structural conditions necessary that will turn national uniqueness from a force of antagonism, rivalry, sectarian aggression and exploitation into a force of contribution to the well being of the whole, to the richness of the human experience.
To say it differently (and please listen carefully to this part) - we can see how this outlook has already been applied on the national level and then how it can easily be applied also o the planetary level. For example, look at a wholistic framework called 'the united states of america'. This federation prevents any particular state from declaring war and attacking another state, becasue they have been bound together in the same framework, in the same federation, and are demilitarised. No state is attacking, bombing, invading, plundering and exploiting another state, because they are bound together in one framework, in one federation, a state does NOT operate as an atomised selfish unit that is completely separate from other units. No state attacks other states and tries to grab as much for itself for its "national interests" at the expense of other units (states) in the greater whole (which is called 'the united states'). It doesn't do that becasue it is an equal part of a greater whole, of one federation, and so the other states are not its enemies but are its allies inside the same whole that they are both part of. Like two cells operating inside the same body, the same whole.
In the exact same way, a wholistic framework that encompasses all the world's nation states will transform their relationship FROM being atomised egoic units who are antagonistic to each other and in competition with each other and who try to grab as much as possible for their own selfish "national interests" at the expense of others, INTO a relationship of friendly entities who are part of a greater whole, a greater federation, and who do NOT have antagonistic and conflicting interests, becasue the interests and well being of the whole is their own well being.
It completely changes the rules of the game from an immature sociopathic egoic one in which one unit feels that it must destroy others in order to secure its "national interests", into a mature sane relationship in which the uniqueness of each nation does not need to be in competition to other nations but are working together in cooperation because they are part of one whole, of one wholistic human federation of the earth.
In my view, this is the application on the macro level of the same wisdom and maturity that many of us have already realized on the micro level of personal relationships (that an immature sociopathic ego who acts to benefit only his/her "personal interests" with complete disregard of the damage and suffering he/she is causing others, will clearly create nothing but havoc, destruction, trauma and suffering all around him/her self) . Isn't it time that we applied what is obvious in personal relationship also to the macro level of the national ego, and stop acting like murderous sociopathic narcissists also on the national level?
In my view, what is suggested here will create the structural conditions that will allow for such maturing of the dysfunctional sociopathic nationalist ego and will create a PROFOUND DIFFERENCE in today's fragmented warring anti-wholistic sectarian dog-eat-dog divided world.
Please do read this essay and give this careful consideration. In my view, this is profoundly important for life on earth
That essay above was quite short and didn't dive deeply into the actual roots of where this nationalistic separative anti-wholistic atomised mentality came from (the mentality that led to the divisions into nationalities in the first place, as well as to the separate egoic mentality on the personal level). This truly profound and wise essay below does exactly that. Very very highly recommend
Thanks for your comments. I think reality is somewhat multi-dimensional and Caitlin Johnstone is a bit one-dimensional in her analysis. Yes, Ukraine is a geopolitical pawn, but also, it is a country of 44 million people who choose self-determination and are willing to fight and die for it. I don't think any amount of US or European propaganda or support is causing them to think like this. People simply for the most part do not want to live under kleptocratic dictatorships for all of the good reasons.
Yes I agree that something like a Earth Federation would be great... I discussed similar ideas in my book How Soon Is Now... the problem is that technocratic totalitarian control seems to winning right now, as we see in China. We don't seem to have the time to master the powers unleashed via accelerated technological development without a shared ethical and even metaphysical framework. But let's hope for the best and do what we can to work toward the better outcome.
Thanks for this piece, Daniel. I agree with another commenter that ultimately the effort to determine exactly where and how much blame should fall on which state actors can get swamped in details. The larger point that gets missed is that, in many ways, not much has really changed. Rather than departing from the great power clashes of WW2 and prior, the US-led liberal world order merely found a savvy new way to play the same imperial game using more surreptitious means: covert operations (e.g., CIA-backed coups), social engineering via duplicitous civil society orgs (e.g., USAID and National Endowment for Democracy), Shock Doctrine-style economic terrorism (e.g., IMF/World Bank), and proxy wars (e.g., Libya, Syria). In the end, it's just an updated version of imperialism and Game of Thrones style geopolitics — a transnational corporatist empire cunningly cloaked in the language of liberalism and democracy. Sure, democracy for all sounds like a noble advancement from despotism, but as Chileans, Guatemalans, Salvadoreans, Brazilians, and many others will tell you, the West prefers murderous despots to democracies when it serves their economic power interests.
As you point out, the US flagrantly reneged on their pinky-swears to keep NATO far from Russia's borders -- "not one inch eastward" from Berlin, went the promise to Gorbachev in '90. This oft-repeated promise was never intended to be kept and was instead repeatedly broken, against warnings from key US-Soviet relations experts (George Kennan) and even CIA director Robert Gates that NATO expansion would dangerously exacerbate tensions with Russia and one day lead to a momentous conflict. (https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early). Kennan called this “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” So, rather than viewing Russia's invasion of Ukraine as an indicator of prescience in NATO's utility, it seems much more appropriate to acknowledge the prescience of those who warned that lining NATO's "defensive" weapons along Russia's doorstep would inflame Western-Russian tensions and eventually lead to a nuclear standoff.
I'm far from an expert in NATO, but it seems naive to me to imagine that its supposed "peacekeeping" role is the full truth of its agenda. It seems more like a tool of Western hegemony and geopolitical dominance than a purely "defensive" alliance of would-be pacifist, humanitarian nations. NATO's involvement in regime change and nation-building operations in Afghanistan and Libya speaks to this incongruity.
I also question the narrative that Ukraine democratically chose to align with NATO and the West. Resisting Putin's horrific invasion is one thing, but a deeper dig into the Maidan Revolution and coup of 2014 reveals some standard-fare US machinations and social engineering to tilt Ukrainian politics toward the West (and potential NATO inclusion). Certainly this doesn't excuse or warrant a bloody war of choice from Putin, but we sure do love to poke the bear, don't we?? https://jacobinmag.com/2022/02/maidan-protests-neo-nazis-russia-nato-crimea
Finally, I have to give props to Ezra Klein for thinking critically outside the echo chamber he's surely surrounded by. His guest, Fiona Hill, seems to elide the complex history of Western interventionism, coups, overthrows, and anti-democratic meddling, etc., to paint a Pollyanna-ish picture of global politics evolving neatly from colonial empires to autonomous, free republics. I'll take Hedges' dour but historically dense analysis over the whitewashed liberal propaganda any day...
ST - I hear all of this... yet it still seems to me that the Ukrainians have chosen the relative freedom of Western European-style Liberal Democracy over Putinism and that is real. It is the bottom line.
You bring up a good point about Russia's geography weathering climate change well. Similar to the U.S., Russia has a very low population density. Russia and the U.S. will be critical in establishing new forms of living to accept the billions of likely climate refugees. But rather than have people re-settle in cities, thus creating mega-cities that we will be unsustainable, we need a new settlement program that creates many small resilient and sustainable towns and small cities linked together in regions. Rather than huge nuclear reactors providing power to millions of people, we need energy solutions that can power 5-8k person towns. Rather than export food around the world, we need to find ways to produce a good majority of our food needs locally. We'll be less inclined to destroy ecosystems when everyone's food is grown in their direct sphere of influence We could likely house a good majority of the world's most vulnerable populations in Canada, the U.S. and Russia. We need a blank slate way of looking at the future.
I spent the past week digging into critical leftist content on the history of NATO. What I'm finding is darkly fascinating. The extent of Western criminal interventionism (via NATO and the CIA, primarily) in European democracy is pretty staggering and atrocious. There's not enough time or space here to detail it all. I would point people to the Oliver Stone produced 2016 documentary "Ukraine on Fire" and the 1992 BBC documentary "Operation Gladio" for some dense explorations of some of the more shocking and relevant examples. Both are available on YouTube.
Daniel, thank you for your words. You are putting into words an entirely new way of perceiving reality in this present world. I sense a deep connection to the deeper realms of connection that have no doubt been influenced by your reverent work with various sacred plant medicines. The ethos that is the essence of your writing comes through loud and clear and it speaks for an entire group of humans who have shared in your work with plant medicine. You are a true guide and mentor in these wild times. And for this, myself and many others are extremely grateful!
Well, for starters, a few of my friends are hard at work in this arena of thought. Lindy Newlove-Ericksson in Stockholm has just finished her Ph.D on the future tech of private-public economic governance. I am very proud of her. And my friend Wolf Tivy in Sanfrancisco/Vancouver has assembled a cadre of thoughful writers for this magazine that I would very much like to see you contribute something to: https://palladiummag.com/
I have to ask if we really need to undertake this level of deep investigations into the cause, and who's right or wrong, depending on your moral perspective.
I think wars like this one happen at the time when they become geopolitically viable.
I think Putin weighed up the strategic pros and cons, had some long chats with his buddy, Premier Xi (Western sanctions on Russia, weaken the eurodollar and strengthen the yuan) and then just pushed the button. His gamble was that the West was now sufficiently weakened and yet still in that bullish energy that he could walk back into Ukraine.
Hi Devaraj, I think it is a multi-dimensional situation and it is not reducible to any one factor. Clearly Putin was not motivated by purely rational calculations as he has professed a kind of religious drive toward re-incorporating Ukraine and other Eastern states back into Russia. He seems to think this is his destiny - read Snyder's The Road to Unfreedom for instance. What seems to have happened is that he is suffering a major military defeat / clusterfuck, which is great for the world if Ukraine holds on, or even defeats Russia, which is not impossible.
I agree that there are many levels on which we can view the situation. As to "who's winning" I find this not easy to determine, certainly not from within the ever-strengthening Western Propaganda Silo! I follow a few US military analysts on Twitter, who look at satellite images etc, and they seem less bullish than you. But who knows?
But it seems clear to me that the real war going on here is actually the Chinese and Russians against the march of western Neoliberalism. The Chinese see neoliberalism as merely a vessel for US hegemony. The Russians see it as a threat to traditionalism. But both clearly see it as a major threat to their sovereignty and this, despite what you hear in the silo, is what this is really about.
I hear your Snyder but I also listen to Dugin. I'm about to start on The Great Awakening vs The Great Reset.
Hmmm, there are so many things I profoundly disagree with in this piece, though I’ve found myself often more in sync with the commentariat of some of these pieces. The idea of cavalierly saying that now we must have regime change in Russia? What sort of titanic arrogance does it take to walk around imagining that we can and should be just knocking off leaders here and there as we see fit? Or the fact that Russia as a nuclear power shouldn’t enter the calculation of creating an expectation amongst Americans that nothing short of killing Putin is a satisfactory solution to this crisis? It’s like people are being encouraged to believe that international relations are as complex as checkers. And with nuclear annihilation hanging in the balance. It’s all chilling. Maybe we should get rid of Xi also. He kind of makes me uneasy too.
“Since Nato is a defensive rather than an aggressive pact, why should Ukraine or any country joining NATO be a problem for Russia, unless it harbors hopes of invading their territory at some future point?” Yow, one almost doesn’t know how to respond to the shallowness of a statement like that. First of all, a ‘defensive pact’ is no different than ‘defensive weapons’, which is to say that they can, and are, used aggressively. But let’s be even simpler. Let’s just transport the whole set piece to the United States and say that China decides that it wants to invite Chile, Argentina and Bolivia into a so-called ‘defensive pact’, the China Pacific Treaty Organization (CPTO) and then gradually creeps up the continent until it invites Mexico into the ‘defensive pact’, to which the US hits the brakes. A Chinese Daniel Pinchbeck would be writing literally the exact same sentence, saying, Since CPTO is a defensive rather that an aggressive pact, why should the United States or any country joining CPTO be a problem for America, unless it harbors hopes of invading their territory at some future point? Of course, we know that the United State wouldn’t tolerate the prospect of such a threat in their hemisphere—even if 5000 miles away in Chile—for a millisecond, that such an incursion would be regarded as a unconscionable threat to our sovereignty and territorial influence, and needn’t require explanation. At the same time, the very same Chinese version of Daniel P. would then write (using your exact words): I do not find it credible to believe that any CPTO countries had the slightest interest in launching an unprovoked invasion or attack on a nuclear-missle-armed-to-the-teeth United States. The goal of CPTO is to establish stable security and peace so that countries within the pact can focus on their economies, social services, and so on (human progress, in other words), and according to a system of agreed-upon laws and conventions. etc, etc. Of course, the US in this case isn’t frightened of an attack by all the combined countries of South America, but they are terrified of all those countries attacking aligned with China, its sponsor, just a Russia looks at NATO and Western Europe and us. But we’re unable to hold the simplest mirror to ourselves, nor is Pinchbeck.
But y'know what--my biggest disappointment is that I sit here and wonder, where is the love, where is the kindness, where is the wisdom, where is the shamanic perspective that one might find in this moment in this newsletter? Where is a vision that seeks to step outside of everyday consciousness? I don’t see a hint of it. This all reads like the Council On Foreign Relations. It’s as though we’re to get excited by the possibilities of shamanism and psychedelics in ordinary times, but when things get heated, when things get ‘real’, we’re going to run back to these ruts of conventional thinking, these lines of masculine drive and logic that are already destroying the world as we know it. But here we have just more of it, dressed up with some nods to a new way of thinking, a new consciousness. I would have thought in this moment Daniel would counsel people to go outside, look up at the stars, and take a deep breath. Remember you’re alive. Remember that you won’t always be, no matter what happens in the Ukraine. Walk back inside and center yourself. Rather than hunch over our computers and contemplate this nonsense masquerading as deep wisdom.
Thanks for your comments. I honestly try to think and to learn and to integrate different perspectives. I will consider what you say. When I said "we need regime change in Russia," I wasn't thinking of something simplistic like bumping off Putin. I think that Russia is leading the race to the bottom, both in terms of its tactics with hacking and Bots and its impact on the world's failure to act on the ecological emergency. I agree - I need to return to the shamanic perspective and thanks for the reminder!
I feel there is a kind of civilizational end-game happening where we are seeing a march toward authoritarianism / totalitarianism... China appears to have achieved a technological totalitarianism that may be unbreakable. For me, I think of people forced into this "group think" without any possibility for dissent to be unbearable, like a living death. I sometimes feel the necessity of sorting through many competing perspectives to seek some kind of balance but I hear you! I will go out and look at the stars / smell the flowers.
Well, I think you’re more generous than I might have been. After I posted my note, I took my own counsel and went outside and looked at the night sky. When I came back in, my wife had, by chance (?), sent me some fabulous dance music which I put it on to shake the world out of me, and when it was over I was instantly sorry for the harshness of my note. Which is kind of the point, in a way. We’re all operating from a place so far from home. Be Well.
Thank you for this interesting post. Regarding rhe framework from which to understand this current conflict i'd like to suggest two essays which i think are insightful,
This https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/ukraine-is-a-sacrificial-pawn-on?s=r
And this https://caitlinjohnstone.substack.com/p/big-brave-keyboard-warriors-notes?s=r
and then with regard to the broader vision and the needed societal transformation, I'd like to point out what I think is the structural root cause of this (and any) war, and what can be dome about this (dealing here only with the structural root, not the psychological root, since that is much more complex and vast than what can be dealt with in one comment, i think)
Right now (and for the last 370 years, since the westphalia agreement of 1649) we have a nation-state based "world order" (or a world disorder, more accurately) which is anti-wholistic, sectarian and destructive to the extreme, and which literally guarantees that we will forever live in a state of conflict and war (for as long as this is the structural world "order" we live in). In this "world order" the entire planet is divided into nearly 200 separate atomised units (nation-states) who are each armed to the teeth and are in competition with each other to secure their own narrow sectarian "NATIONAL INTERESTS". They secure these "national interests" either through physical aggression or economic aggression (or both), each one trying to selfishly grab as much it can for itself and its "national interests" in a dog-eat-dog type of world where the smaller units get destroyed exploited raped and eaten up by the bigger bullies. It is a "world order" of bullies. A world order which creates bullies and strongly rewards bullies. A "world order" which is based on the assumption of separation, enshrines division, selfishness and competition as the "natural way of things" and guarantees that we will forever live in a state of conflict and war (until we destroy ourselves). The current war is a natural progession and expression of the nationalist sectarian "world order" we are living in. It could not happen if these weren't the basic rules the game and the basic assumptions that guide our civilization.
So what can be done? What is the solution to that?
In my view, the solution that no one seems to be talking about in these times of nationalist fervor and bloodthirst for war and collective psychosis, is to flip the rules of the game from a sectarian divisive atomised mentality into a wholistic perception and structure, a structure that will guarantee and celebrate national uniqueness and difference and at the same time will also guarantee that the national differences are NOT a source of conflict and competition but rather a source of enrichment of the human experience. In other words, a united states of the earth, a wholistic human federation of the earth. And in a minute I will give you a more practical illustration of what this means.
In my view, this will create the structural conditions that would allow for a whole new way, a mature, joyous and sane way of relating and existing.
And as you will see in a minute, even though it seems at first a non-personal political issue (and therefore perhaps uninteresting), it is actually, in my view, profoundly personal and affects every aspect of life on earth.
It shows how it is possible for nationalism and patriotism to function NOT as divisive destructive egoic unintelligent murderous force that inevitably leads humanity into a mentality of dog-eat-dog competition, sectatianism, antagonism and conflict, of one nation destroying others for its egoic "national interest" (which is the way our immature world system currently functions), but rather it shows how it is possible to create the structural conditions that will transform nationalism from a source of conflict into a source of enrichment, that will turn nationalism and patriotism from such a destructive sectarian anti-wholistic murderous unintelligent force that is dividing and separating humanity, into a force that enriches and contributes to the wellness and prosperity of humanity, NOT destroy humanity (as it does now, as we can clearly see right in front of our eyes).
In other words, it shows what are the structural conditions necessary that will turn national uniqueness from a force of antagonism, rivalry, sectarian aggression and exploitation into a force of contribution to the well being of the whole, to the richness of the human experience.
To say it differently (and please listen carefully to this part) - we can see how this outlook has already been applied on the national level and then how it can easily be applied also o the planetary level. For example, look at a wholistic framework called 'the united states of america'. This federation prevents any particular state from declaring war and attacking another state, becasue they have been bound together in the same framework, in the same federation, and are demilitarised. No state is attacking, bombing, invading, plundering and exploiting another state, because they are bound together in one framework, in one federation, a state does NOT operate as an atomised selfish unit that is completely separate from other units. No state attacks other states and tries to grab as much for itself for its "national interests" at the expense of other units (states) in the greater whole (which is called 'the united states'). It doesn't do that becasue it is an equal part of a greater whole, of one federation, and so the other states are not its enemies but are its allies inside the same whole that they are both part of. Like two cells operating inside the same body, the same whole.
In the exact same way, a wholistic framework that encompasses all the world's nation states will transform their relationship FROM being atomised egoic units who are antagonistic to each other and in competition with each other and who try to grab as much as possible for their own selfish "national interests" at the expense of others, INTO a relationship of friendly entities who are part of a greater whole, a greater federation, and who do NOT have antagonistic and conflicting interests, becasue the interests and well being of the whole is their own well being.
It completely changes the rules of the game from an immature sociopathic egoic one in which one unit feels that it must destroy others in order to secure its "national interests", into a mature sane relationship in which the uniqueness of each nation does not need to be in competition to other nations but are working together in cooperation because they are part of one whole, of one wholistic human federation of the earth.
In my view, this is the application on the macro level of the same wisdom and maturity that many of us have already realized on the micro level of personal relationships (that an immature sociopathic ego who acts to benefit only his/her "personal interests" with complete disregard of the damage and suffering he/she is causing others, will clearly create nothing but havoc, destruction, trauma and suffering all around him/her self) . Isn't it time that we applied what is obvious in personal relationship also to the macro level of the national ego, and stop acting like murderous sociopathic narcissists also on the national level?
In my view, what is suggested here will create the structural conditions that will allow for such maturing of the dysfunctional sociopathic nationalist ego and will create a PROFOUND DIFFERENCE in today's fragmented warring anti-wholistic sectarian dog-eat-dog divided world.
Please do read this essay and give this careful consideration. In my view, this is profoundly important for life on earth
https://oneworldrenaissance.com/2022/02/12/nation-states-nationalism-and-the-common-good/
That essay above was quite short and didn't dive deeply into the actual roots of where this nationalistic separative anti-wholistic atomised mentality came from (the mentality that led to the divisions into nationalities in the first place, as well as to the separate egoic mentality on the personal level). This truly profound and wise essay below does exactly that. Very very highly recommend
https://oneworldrenaissance.com/2021/01/23/holism-fragmentation-and-our-endangered-future-a-new-vision-and-a-new-hope/
Thanks for your comments. I think reality is somewhat multi-dimensional and Caitlin Johnstone is a bit one-dimensional in her analysis. Yes, Ukraine is a geopolitical pawn, but also, it is a country of 44 million people who choose self-determination and are willing to fight and die for it. I don't think any amount of US or European propaganda or support is causing them to think like this. People simply for the most part do not want to live under kleptocratic dictatorships for all of the good reasons.
Yes I agree that something like a Earth Federation would be great... I discussed similar ideas in my book How Soon Is Now... the problem is that technocratic totalitarian control seems to winning right now, as we see in China. We don't seem to have the time to master the powers unleashed via accelerated technological development without a shared ethical and even metaphysical framework. But let's hope for the best and do what we can to work toward the better outcome.
Thanks for this piece, Daniel. I agree with another commenter that ultimately the effort to determine exactly where and how much blame should fall on which state actors can get swamped in details. The larger point that gets missed is that, in many ways, not much has really changed. Rather than departing from the great power clashes of WW2 and prior, the US-led liberal world order merely found a savvy new way to play the same imperial game using more surreptitious means: covert operations (e.g., CIA-backed coups), social engineering via duplicitous civil society orgs (e.g., USAID and National Endowment for Democracy), Shock Doctrine-style economic terrorism (e.g., IMF/World Bank), and proxy wars (e.g., Libya, Syria). In the end, it's just an updated version of imperialism and Game of Thrones style geopolitics — a transnational corporatist empire cunningly cloaked in the language of liberalism and democracy. Sure, democracy for all sounds like a noble advancement from despotism, but as Chileans, Guatemalans, Salvadoreans, Brazilians, and many others will tell you, the West prefers murderous despots to democracies when it serves their economic power interests.
As you point out, the US flagrantly reneged on their pinky-swears to keep NATO far from Russia's borders -- "not one inch eastward" from Berlin, went the promise to Gorbachev in '90. This oft-repeated promise was never intended to be kept and was instead repeatedly broken, against warnings from key US-Soviet relations experts (George Kennan) and even CIA director Robert Gates that NATO expansion would dangerously exacerbate tensions with Russia and one day lead to a momentous conflict. (https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early). Kennan called this “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era.” So, rather than viewing Russia's invasion of Ukraine as an indicator of prescience in NATO's utility, it seems much more appropriate to acknowledge the prescience of those who warned that lining NATO's "defensive" weapons along Russia's doorstep would inflame Western-Russian tensions and eventually lead to a nuclear standoff.
I'm far from an expert in NATO, but it seems naive to me to imagine that its supposed "peacekeeping" role is the full truth of its agenda. It seems more like a tool of Western hegemony and geopolitical dominance than a purely "defensive" alliance of would-be pacifist, humanitarian nations. NATO's involvement in regime change and nation-building operations in Afghanistan and Libya speaks to this incongruity.
I also question the narrative that Ukraine democratically chose to align with NATO and the West. Resisting Putin's horrific invasion is one thing, but a deeper dig into the Maidan Revolution and coup of 2014 reveals some standard-fare US machinations and social engineering to tilt Ukrainian politics toward the West (and potential NATO inclusion). Certainly this doesn't excuse or warrant a bloody war of choice from Putin, but we sure do love to poke the bear, don't we?? https://jacobinmag.com/2022/02/maidan-protests-neo-nazis-russia-nato-crimea
https://soundcloud.com/trueanonpod/ukraine-with-ames-part-1
Finally, I have to give props to Ezra Klein for thinking critically outside the echo chamber he's surely surrounded by. His guest, Fiona Hill, seems to elide the complex history of Western interventionism, coups, overthrows, and anti-democratic meddling, etc., to paint a Pollyanna-ish picture of global politics evolving neatly from colonial empires to autonomous, free republics. I'll take Hedges' dour but historically dense analysis over the whitewashed liberal propaganda any day...
ST - I hear all of this... yet it still seems to me that the Ukrainians have chosen the relative freedom of Western European-style Liberal Democracy over Putinism and that is real. It is the bottom line.
You bring up a good point about Russia's geography weathering climate change well. Similar to the U.S., Russia has a very low population density. Russia and the U.S. will be critical in establishing new forms of living to accept the billions of likely climate refugees. But rather than have people re-settle in cities, thus creating mega-cities that we will be unsustainable, we need a new settlement program that creates many small resilient and sustainable towns and small cities linked together in regions. Rather than huge nuclear reactors providing power to millions of people, we need energy solutions that can power 5-8k person towns. Rather than export food around the world, we need to find ways to produce a good majority of our food needs locally. We'll be less inclined to destroy ecosystems when everyone's food is grown in their direct sphere of influence We could likely house a good majority of the world's most vulnerable populations in Canada, the U.S. and Russia. We need a blank slate way of looking at the future.
Yes well-said... what do you think of this as a possible approach? https://rethinkdisruption.com/next-economy-growth-degrowth/
Bravo!
I spent the past week digging into critical leftist content on the history of NATO. What I'm finding is darkly fascinating. The extent of Western criminal interventionism (via NATO and the CIA, primarily) in European democracy is pretty staggering and atrocious. There's not enough time or space here to detail it all. I would point people to the Oliver Stone produced 2016 documentary "Ukraine on Fire" and the 1992 BBC documentary "Operation Gladio" for some dense explorations of some of the more shocking and relevant examples. Both are available on YouTube.
Also very useful info: https://youtu.be/ytwffRO7Lnk (Parts 2 and 3 are for paid subscribers, and they are well worth it.) The history on Operation Gladio -- clandestine NATO/CIA-backed right-wing terror campaigns across Europe to suppress Communism/neutralism, from the 1950s on -- is one of the most insane and sinister episodes in deep politics I've ever heard of. Washington Post wrote a brief piece on Operation Gladio after its existence was revealed to the public by Italian PM Andreotti in 1990: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/11/14/cia-organized-secret-army-in-western-europe/e0305101-97b9-4494-bc18-d89f42497d85/
Daniel, thank you for your words. You are putting into words an entirely new way of perceiving reality in this present world. I sense a deep connection to the deeper realms of connection that have no doubt been influenced by your reverent work with various sacred plant medicines. The ethos that is the essence of your writing comes through loud and clear and it speaks for an entire group of humans who have shared in your work with plant medicine. You are a true guide and mentor in these wild times. And for this, myself and many others are extremely grateful!
Daniel I invite you to continue your writing with a sharpened focus on the possibilities for governance by the arising elites of the future.
tell me more.
Well, for starters, a few of my friends are hard at work in this arena of thought. Lindy Newlove-Ericksson in Stockholm has just finished her Ph.D on the future tech of private-public economic governance. I am very proud of her. And my friend Wolf Tivy in Sanfrancisco/Vancouver has assembled a cadre of thoughful writers for this magazine that I would very much like to see you contribute something to: https://palladiummag.com/
I have to ask if we really need to undertake this level of deep investigations into the cause, and who's right or wrong, depending on your moral perspective.
I think wars like this one happen at the time when they become geopolitically viable.
I think Putin weighed up the strategic pros and cons, had some long chats with his buddy, Premier Xi (Western sanctions on Russia, weaken the eurodollar and strengthen the yuan) and then just pushed the button. His gamble was that the West was now sufficiently weakened and yet still in that bullish energy that he could walk back into Ukraine.
I don't know that it's more complex than this.
Hi Devaraj, I think it is a multi-dimensional situation and it is not reducible to any one factor. Clearly Putin was not motivated by purely rational calculations as he has professed a kind of religious drive toward re-incorporating Ukraine and other Eastern states back into Russia. He seems to think this is his destiny - read Snyder's The Road to Unfreedom for instance. What seems to have happened is that he is suffering a major military defeat / clusterfuck, which is great for the world if Ukraine holds on, or even defeats Russia, which is not impossible.
I agree that there are many levels on which we can view the situation. As to "who's winning" I find this not easy to determine, certainly not from within the ever-strengthening Western Propaganda Silo! I follow a few US military analysts on Twitter, who look at satellite images etc, and they seem less bullish than you. But who knows?
But it seems clear to me that the real war going on here is actually the Chinese and Russians against the march of western Neoliberalism. The Chinese see neoliberalism as merely a vessel for US hegemony. The Russians see it as a threat to traditionalism. But both clearly see it as a major threat to their sovereignty and this, despite what you hear in the silo, is what this is really about.
I hear your Snyder but I also listen to Dugin. I'm about to start on The Great Awakening vs The Great Reset.
https://g.co/kgs/wa5zck