Dear friend,
The whole American psychodrama around Russia is frankly pathetic. And even somewhat frightening. Not only because cockfighting John McCain (John McCain) and Donald trump can get out of control and push the world to nuclear blackmail around North Korea, but because the veils torn off, and the American Republic clearly goes through a phase of agony, like the Roman Republic in the first century BC, the Money and the spirit of military hegemony increasingly undermine the Republican legacy the founding fathers.
From the military-industrial complex…
In truth, the threat was discovered half a century ago. In a famous speech at the end of his presidential term in December 1960, President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans about the dangers from the “military-industrial complex.” In addition, he could speak about how JFK stole the election from Vice-President Richard Nixon thanks to a secret deal with the mafia groups on the East coast. Three years later, Kennedy himself was murdered by the mafia, which he has not expressed special thanks: his brother Bobby, the attorney General of the country, sought to encourage godfathers to answer, forgetting who brought John to power. During his short mandate, Kennedy involved US in an increasingly dangerous arms race, pointing to not existing Soviet superiority in weapons and catastrophic war in Vietnam.
Anyway, sorry for his unlucky opponent in the election of 1960 Richard Nixon is not worth it. After his election in 1968, he, of course, put an end to the failed military campaign in South-East Asia, however, he destroyed the barriers that kept the desire for power of the Pentagon and its suppliers, eliminating 15 August 1971 the dollar peg to gold.
In the 1980’s, Ronald Reagan became the first who managed to fully benefit from the system, in which the us debt financed growth in the world economy (the dollar was the world reserve currency) and defense apparatus of the United States. His successors in turn did not take any steps for the dissolution of the system, even after the end of the cold war. Figures of the American defense budget impression: for many years the United States spend with the military operations of nearly $ 2 billion a day on military apparatus. You tell me that it is only 4% of GDP, whereas during the Korean war in the early 1950-ies (with the same Eisenhower) it was about 10%. Compared to those times there is a huge difference: today the funds come not from American wealth and international debt of the United States. Every day the us debt is growing $ 4 billion. In other words, half of the growth of us debt goes to the military budget.
…military-financial complex
The nation Eisenhower rested on supports healthy capitalism: accumulation, investment, entrepreneurship, constraints of the state budget, balanced trade with the rest of the world. USA fully deserved the status of “defender of the free world”. However, we can only reminisce about those days with nostalgia, which is akin to that experienced by a Roman citizen in a few decades after the destruction of Carthage: steeped in Mediterranean expansionism Republic, constant looting, the decline of small and medium peasantry and the urban Handicrafts, the growth conditions of the rich. I read Roman history and see Mary, Crassus, Pompey and Caesar unstoppable political rise of profited on the gains of the financiers and amassed huge fortunes commanders. And I shudder at the thought that all this is perfectly familiar to us in the West, 22 centuries later.
Since Eisenhower half a century later. The military-industrial complex became the military-financial. His money had corrupted the election campaign. When the President of the United States, such as trump, shows a little less militancy, Congress taught him in the path of the Imperial state. The Nixon American parliamentarians went Hawking in his role as a counterweight to presidential power. Today, the President suspect the lack of rigidity in relation to Russia, and Congress, like the Roman Senate in the sunset of the Republic, plays on rising rates. As in the first century BC, at the head of shlestnuvshimisya sides are the billionaires, some of whom stand on the side of the rich (under the pretext of defending liberalism), whereas others have to say about struck the heads of the people the troubles: in Rome it was the optimates and popular. Please note that during the last campaign in the US role has changed with the exact opposite. Optimates (Republicans) led a populist, whereas the popular (Democrats) was headed by candidate of which collected rooms in a… Goldman Sachs.
This change of polarities shows how much overloaded the system. The “old Romans”, which is still missing in the United States, are outraged by the rise of modern Caesarism. Seeing how Bush stole the election in 2000, with even greater complacency than in the time of Kennedy, and, consequently, an unprecedented attempt of the family of the patricians to gain a foothold in government, society decided to fight back: it not only missed another Bush (former Florida Governor Jeb Bush — that he rigged the victory of his brother 16 years earlier) in the primaries of the Republicans, but also proved his own wrong the Democrats who thought they could seek election, Hillary Clinton, 25 years after her husband. Donald trump, the magnate who made a fortune quest of the new York financiers to spending who know all the techniques of the “society of the spectacle” (the modern version of the age-old panem et circenses) presenter, took advantage of the political crisis to lead the Republican party to victory almost against her own will. Like a modern Gracchus, he became the mouthpiece of all those who were losers from American imperialism. Just look how he alienated not only the loser of the popular, but winning optimates who can’t accept the fact that someone is not playing by the rules of the most influential clans of patricians. Can trump to resist the onslaught against him the entire political system? In Washington put forward invented stratagems that Congress should proclaim the inability of the President to govern the country. It is easy to see that the spirit of the Republic is dead: no one prominent intellectual not trying to remind my colleagues that, no matter how high was not hatred Trump, the American people has the sovereign power, and that the only way to change it — the election of 2020. Once buried Nixon The Washington Post now competes with The New York Times for his status as the main minion of the military-financial complex. Stolen after the Kennedy election of 1960, voter turnout has been steadily declining, except for a small rise during the first election of Obama. The American people are turning away from their leaders and even lose hope.
Veni. Vidi. Vici is the first tweet in history?
You tell me that historical comparisons have limits. Despite all the similarities, indeed the world 2000 years ago can be compared with the modern West, which is experiencing the third industrial revolution? I must say that one of the foundations of my political views is to trace the constants of human nature, regardless of the change of scenery and a huge progress in technical terms. Once you make a reference to the digital revolution, will tell you that Veni. Vidi. Vici Julius Caesar is in some way not just the first “tweet”: Donald Trump is very far from such words. Anyway, you touch on the crux of the problem: the digital revolution will be a salvation, if we put it at the service of our ancient institutions and democracy, and a curse, if we meekly follow the metamorphosis of the military-financial complex, headed by Goldman Sachs and the military-digital complex under the control of Google. Imagine what you would be able Nero, if he had the NSA?
No, the differences from the Roman era, I think, lie elsewhere. The Roman Empire was built without much interaction with the outside world. Traditional China was experiencing the same phenomena the decline of the classical civilization and sliding into imperialism, and Greco-Roman world, albeit a little ahead: the first Chinese Emperor Qin Shi Huang approved its power for two centuries until Aug. With all this, the two empires, in spite of considerable similarity, there was virtually no relationship beyond trade on the “silk road”. Today, when a distant successor of the emperors of China, XI Jinping is trying to revive and even enhance these routes with the project “One belt and one road”, everything happens in a setting of everyday interaction of the great powers, and not brittle when practically strangers to one another, of empires. That is globalization. Internal conflicts among American leadership not only on public display, but can result in severe consequences for the equilibrium in the world. This is the influence of modernity: the world interacts on a regular basis, and the American Republic (whatever it was) will have to adapt to changes in the rest of the world or to take the risk of another world war.
Will the balance of power to reason with the American Empire?
Recently deceased Zbigniew Brzezinski (Zbigniew Brzezinski) – wrote in 1997 “the Grand chessboard” about the stages of American dominance in Eurasia. However, this great Imperial plan goes to pieces. Let old Europe showed Washington the same weakness as Greece with the Roman conquerors, the rest of Eurasia reacted quite differently: Turkey breaks NATO, Russia stopped the us strategy of domination in the continental “heartland” (a concept introduced by geopolityka Mackinder in 1904), Iran patiently plays the card of the decline of us influence, and China has the funds for the peace organizations of Eurasia. The US do not get to indulge in Indian map, since it would be harder. In the end, the two leading protivoborstvuyuschih in Washington groups have their own foreign policy. The us Senate would like to destroy Russia, while trump believes the key to preserving the power of the U.S. Alliance with Moscow, which would take China in a vise. When the American leader committed to reconciliation with Putin, threatens Iran and North Korea, and supports India, he refuses to neo-isolationism of the days of his campaign, but at the same time offers an alternative to the lines of the McCain-Clinton and in his own way justifies the extension of the defense budget.
If we in the old Europe, which is characterized by a balance of forces and harmony of Nations, to realize what we need to do together with supporting balance in Eurasia powers? Do we have the courage to reject the dangerous rapture of the deep crisis of the American Republic? After all, the best service we can provide all true to the spirit of the American Republic, citizens, is to distance themselves from NATO.
Tell Mr. Macron that “house of cards” — not just a game power, which can inspire official photos, but the Symphony is the deepest moral crisis of American democracy. Whether it be Paris, London, Berlin or Rome, all of us now should look to other political models. Next week I will share with you news about British politics.
Sincerely yours,
Benjamin Disraeli
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881) was the founder of the British Conservative party and Prime Minister of Her Majesty in 1868 and then from 1874 to 1880. Some time ago we started to receive “letters from London” from the namesake of the great statesman. Presented interesting thoughts convinced historian Edouard Usson publish them to the background of how the world is re-emerging split between “conservatives” and “liberals”.
