Skip to content

Robert Kagan admits main purpose of endless foreign wars is to keep Americans in line. Without global hegemony, US would lack ability to enforce its version of liberal democracy at home-Alastair Crooke, 3/15/2021

August 24, 2022

Continued ‘westification’ of the globe-the principal component to ‘old’ liberal globalism- though tarnished and largely discredited, remains mandatory, as made clear in the cogent reasoning recently advanced by Robert Kagan: Absent the justifying myth of ‘seeding democracy across the world’ around which to organise the empire, the moral logic of the entire enterprise begins to fall apart,

[Image, Robert Kagan, 3/25/2019, You Tube]

Kagan argued (with surprising frankness). He thus asserts

that the U.S. empire abroad is required –

precisely in order

to preserve the myth of ‘democracy’

at home.

An America that retreats from global hegemony, he argues,

would no longer possess the cohesive binding

to preserve America as liberal democracy, at home either.“...[March/April 2021, “A Superpower, Like It or Not. Why Americans Must Accept Their Global Role,” Foreign Affairs, by Robert Kagan]

……………………….

March 15, 2021, Leviathan Mobilises for Decisive Battle,” Alastair Crooke, Strategic Culture

“Globalist forces are being mobilised to win a last battle in the ‘long-war’ looking to break-through everywhere.

In The Revolt of the Public, Martin Gurri, a former CIA analyst, contends that western élites are experiencing

a collapse of authority deriving from

a failure to distinguish between legitimate criticism and –

what he terms – illegitimate rebellion.

Once control over the justifying myth of America was lost,

the mask was off.

And the disparity between the myth and public experience of it became only too evident.

Writing in 2014, Gurri foresaw that

the Establishment would respond by

denouncing all evidence of public discontent,

as lies and disinformation.

The Establishment would, in Gurri’s telling, be so constrained within their ‘bubble’ that they would be

unable to assimilate their loss of monopoly

over their own confected ‘reality’. This Establishment denial would be made manifest, he argued, in a delusional,

ham-fisted authoritarian manner.

His predictions have been vindicated with Trumpist dissidence denounced as

a threat to ‘our democracy’ –

amidst a media and social platform crackdown.

Such a response would only confirm the suspicions of the public,

thus setting off a vicious circle

of yet more “distrust and loss of legitimacy”, Gurri concluded.

This was Gurri’s main thrust. The book’s striking feature however, was how it seemed so completely to nail the coming Trump and Brexit era – and

the ‘anti-system’ impulse behind them.

In America, this impulse found Trump – not the other way around.

The point here essentially being that America no longer saw Red and Blue as the two extended wings belonging to the bird of liberal democracy. For something around half of America, the ‘system’ was rigged towards a profiteering 0.1%, and against them.

The key point here surely is whether the élites’ Great Re-set –

to reinvent themselves

as leaders of the ‘re-vamped’ values of liberalism,

overlayered by a newly up-dated, AI and robot-led, post-modernity –

is destined to succeed, or not.

Continued ‘westification’ of the globe – the principal component to ‘old’ liberal globalism – though tarnished and largely discredited,

remains mandatory, as made clear in the cogent reasoning

recently advanced by Robert Kagan:

Absent the justifying myth of

‘seeding democracy across the world’

around which to organise the empire,

the moral logic of the entire enterprise begins to fall apart,

Kagan argued (with surprising frankness).

He thus asserts that the

U.S. empire abroad is required –

precisely in order to preserve the myth of ‘democracy’ at home.

An America that retreats from global hegemony, he argues,

would no longer possess the cohesive binding

to preserve America as liberal democracy,

at home either….

What is happening today in the U.S. is but one ‘battle’ (albeit a key one)

in a longer strategic war, reaching far back….

What sets the current Great Re-set apart however, is that it is a later,

more updated, version of Western values —

not the same Western values as they were yesterday.

The reek of colonialism has been exorcised from the imperial project

through the launch of

war on ‘white supremacy’ and on racial and social injustice.

Global leadership has been recast as

‘saving the planet’ from climate change;

saving all humanity from the pandemic;

and safeguarding us all from a coming global financial crisis.

Mothers’ milk. Who would resist such a well-intentioned agenda?

The current Great Re-set is a process of metamorphosisa change in Western values, and paradigm. As Professor Dugin writes: “And this is important —

it is a double-process to update the West itself – and [at the same time],

to project an updated version to the world beyond.

This is a kind of postmodern combination of the Western and the Modern”.

But its essence…always has been the world order, [so-called] open society

focus on dis-embedding humans

from all forms of collective identity.

Firstly, to dis-embed Renaissance Man from his notion of being a microcosm interpenetrating within a vast surrounding, living macrocosm (this aim being largely achieved via the advent of empirical Scientism); then the de-coupling from Latin Catholicism (via Protestant individualism);

and lately,

liberation from the secular nation-state (through globalism).

And finally, we reach the shedding ‘late-stage’ – the severance from all collective identities and histories,

including ethnicity and gender (both now to be self-defined).

It is the passage to a new kind of liberalism, one that

sweeps gender and identity into full, liquid fluidity.

This latter aspect is not some secondary ‘accessory’ or add on – it is ‘something’ essentially

embedded within in the logic of liberalism. The logic is inescapable.

And the ultimate logical end to which it leads? Well,

to the dis-embedding of the subjective self into trans-humanism. (But let’s not go there; it is dark –

i.e. being human is to impose the subjective on the objective – “We need

to liberate the objects from the subjects, from humanity,

and explore the things as they are –

without man,

without being a tool

of man”).

And here, Gurri’s insight is salient:

The plan is out of control, and becoming progressively more bizarre.

The American unipolar moment is ‘done’. It has created oppositions of various kinds, both abroad and at home. Conservative and traditional impulses have reacted against the

radical ideological agenda, and

crucially, the 2008 Financial Crisis and near collapse of the system foretold to the élites of the

ultimate coming end to the U.S.’ financial hegemony,

and concomitantly to America’s primacy.

It forced a critical juncture.

Now they are at a crucial impasse. When they speak about Re-set,

this means a forced return to the continuation of the agenda.

But it is not as straight-forward as it seems. Everything seemed almost primed to fall into place twenty years ago;

yet now, the Establishment is having to fight for every element of this strategy because

everywhere they encounter a growing resistance.

And it is no insignificant resistance. In America alone, some 74 million Americans reject the cultural war being waged on them….

If asked why Western culture has been trapped in an oscillating dynamic between liberalism and nihilistic radicalism for roughly two centuries

with no end in sight,

Dostoevsky would probably answer that it is

because of our dis-embedding from the deeper levels

of what it means to be human.

This loss inevitably creates pathologies. (Carl Jung came to the same view).

So will the Re-set be realised?

The élites still cling to westernisation (‘America is back’ although no-one is greatly enthused). The obstacles are many and growing….Who is in charge of foreign policy? It is opaque….also, for the first time, the U.S. and EU are increasingly seen abroad to be inept at managing the most simple of affairs.

Nonetheless, the globalist call to arms is evident. The world clearly has changed during the last four years.

Globalist forces, therefore, are being mobilised to win

a last battle in the ‘long-war’ – looking to break-through everywhere.

Defeating Trump is the first goal. Discrediting all varieties of European populism is another. The U.S. [seeks] to lead the maritime and rim-land powers in

imposing a searing psychological, technological and economic defeat

on the Russia-China-Iran alliance. In the past, the outcome might have been predictable.

This time Eurasia may very well stand solid against a weakened Oceana (and a faint-hearted Europe). [“Oceania has traditionally been divided into four parts: Australasia (Australia and New Zealand), Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia.”]

It would shake Leviathan [US Empire] to its foundations. Who knows

what might then emerge from

the ruins of post-modernity.”

………………………………………………

Added: Definition of “post-modernity:”

“Postmodernism, also spelled post-modernism, in Western philosophy, a late 20th-century movement characterized by broad skepticism, subjectivism, or relativism; a general suspicion of reason; and an acute sensitivity to the role of ideology in asserting and maintaining political and economic power….

Postmodernism is largely a reaction against the intellectual assumptions and values of the modern period in the history of Western philosophy (roughly, the 17th through the 19th century). Indeed, many of the doctrines characteristically associated with postmodernism can fairly be described as the straightforward denial of general philosophical viewpoints that were taken for granted during the 18th-century Enlightenment, though they were not unique to that period.

The most important of these viewpoints are the following.

1. There is an objective natural reality, a reality whose existence and properties are logically independent of human beings—of their minds, their societies, their social practices, or their investigative techniques. Postmodernists dismiss this idea as a kind of naive realism. Such reality as there is, according to postmodernists, is a conceptual construct, an artifact of scientific practice and language. This point also applies to the investigation of past events by historians and to the description of social institutions, structures, or practices by social scientists.

2. The descriptive and explanatory statements of scientists and historians can, in principle, be objectively true or false. The postmodern denial of this viewpoint—which follows from the rejection of an objective natural reality—is sometimes expressed by saying that there is no such thing as Truth.

3. Through the use of reason and logic, and with the more specialized tools provided by science and technology, human beings are likely to change themselves and their societies for the better. It is reasonable to expect that future societies will be more humane, more just, more enlightened, and more prosperous than they are now. Postmodernists deny this Enlightenment faith in science and technology as instruments of human progress.”…

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: