2.24 A Wake Up Call

2.24 A Wake up Call

The most westernise countries have all adopted principles of democratic control. It has been a slow hard won process and requires carful maturing and reinforcement but it is, of late under threat from casual disregard, a lack of historical perspective as to the foundations upon which the movements to it occurred. In this disregarded state, how it came about with haphazard fights (and it has been fights) to bring it into some current day maturity and the efforts attempted to limit its advance, does not generally impinge on everyday consciousness. This today is for countries populaces that have as its core principles of democratic guidance, has some that do have any understanding of its developing process and have an ignorant disrespect of its importance; some hold a simple acceptance that what they enjoy via its freedoms, is taken for granted, things are just as they are, things have ‘forever and a day’ been this way. It is a harsh generalisation but anyone under a certain age has little grasped the value of the ongoing struggle to maintain and bolster the principles upon which all the freedoms they enjoy, lie. Within this age group there are increasing too many (located in privilege) that have little consideration for the freedom of others where such does or not increase to impinges on the value of their own privilege life. In some circles they see democratic freedoms as inconvenience to their game play and prefer a wholly laissez-faire approach to enable their own freedoms to be predominant.

There is a continuing illusion that democracy is the best form of government (compared to all others?) and that it should be an aspiration to be adopted by all countries. One would suggest that this is an illusion built on the comfort of apathy to the unrepresentative nature of how the majority liaise with and influence those that it (democracy) has given administrative power to, the few that are supposed to carry out the wishes of the people and the fine sequestration of power taken by them from democratic accountability. Consider that most democracies have within their citizenship a limited voting ability in that once in every four/five years the populaces are asked to vote in favour of one party or another. This is the only time that a population has in giving their assumed favoured direction to influence government and yet having done so then has no bearing on the eventual application of any policies they assumed the government offered or the policy pathways.

There are just two powers that influence government, money that buys manipulation of political connivance and people power. Money power is in play all the time with lobbyist acting for corporate power with ready access to Politian’s. People power only matters when it is of sufficient volume and persistence of action, which is infrequent and difficult to effect without media support. This deficiency of influence (call it lack of political policies recall) is its greatest weakness; during the governments tenure the dynamics of a policy and its impact may become distorted from what was assumed to be clear of ambiguity yet becomes not as originally sold to the voting populace. Practically there is little scope to challenge the faulted mindset that takes root in the (governments) cabinet as its group think is set in corporate responsibility and provided in the weight it has to influence compliance in parliament. Then in objecting to a faulted mindset there can be as many peaceful marches as ‘you’ like which the state (governments) cabinet can convincingly ignore or denigrate to the point of not taking any notice of them, such marches have very little effect of persuading a government stance to change compared with pressure that monetary power has wielded to shape policies to their own needs. The only time demonstration have effect is when it is consistent, forceful, accepted as being morally legitimate, so justified and carries the weight (in the main) of public opinion albeit that there will always be some media and a section of society that do not wish to be discomforted in their daily activities by disruptions and will fall in line with government repression of demonstrations.

In some way this form of administrative democracy has been driven by the socially developed acknowledge need to have the power of the people invested into a state governmental administration influenced by the people for the communal construction of the use of all resources shaped for the well being of the majority of the people that it (the government) then purports to represent. To achieve such a worthy aim requires a certain unanimity of a vision that is accessible as an agreeable intent by all participants on whom power and influence is given and on whom the benefits of the communal vision is to be bestowed. One thinks humans have no natural inclination to behave in a collective mutual way. They are created in their being singular, to be acting autonomous and of a lone isolationist tendency; they do not have a communal mind. (They are intrinsically selfish) It is only the initial nurturing process and the imperative to survive that can raise the usefulness of joint action for a given end. Once that end has been satisfied the individualistic desires are subtly paramount and continue to act to pursue their own desires onto continuing future joint actions. From this position some individuals, who have exhibited (undefined) status attributes, gain directive control to amass influential power aided by others of compatible need to create a force of self serving exploitation, inimical to any vision of communal aims and excluding any that are not of this sectored persuasion. There may well be any number of such self selected groups all perhaps with ‘needful’ overlaps or dissimilar motives for power and it is only when they are all faced with a recognised common danger that could destroy what they hold as their power bases that a move to communal action is contemplated but again only for the duration of the danger.

There is an imperious inclination for humans to gather to themselves power and influence by affiliation or force to suit their own ends. A demonstration of such could be exercised in a benevolent fashion, loose consensual directives or dictatorial mandate all located in a person, executive structure, residence, sect, party etc providing that control is recognised to remain within the ‘rulers’ hands. This form of control does not lend itself to a communal vision for there will be alterative forces abutting up against a dominant power that relies on the forces it controls for its position; other forces it cannot influence eventually have bring about change or the pillars of its power are eradicated, it is inevitable. So good or bad there is for now a fashioned way of containing the fractious nature of humans and it is in the form of a process that offers a choice in the direction of a complex system that forms the social structures of a number of ‘developed’ countries. Such control (democracy) has an established hierarchy of involvement that has moved away from the dictatorial control resident in an individual or house and does no longer place great presence on organisations or the influence of obvious class tribe structure. But class/affluence is still influential though it may not be obvious in seeking to maintain a beneficial status for itself, reliant on an unchallenged populace being comfortable in their un-taxing democratic existence.

But there are some clear indications that the unthinking casual nature that seem to pervade those in democracies, taking for granted their ‘freedoms’, is only put into context when it is exceptional threatened. For a long time the democratic countries have enjoyed comparative peace with indifferent prosperity. In this a very relaxed approach can and is taken to the exercising of their voting rights, that taking part is a casual choice or unimportant. There is never a hundred percent turnout to vote in any democratic country and the assumption that might be held may be things (freedoms) in democracy are as they are and always will be.

There has been no comparison thus far as to the strength in the belief of democracy compared to any other system from the point of view is it worth fighting for? Of course there has been recent past fights, as in wars but these were more to do with territorial and political ideology control, not primarily for the saving of democratic accountability within and for long standing democratic countries. The most recent and probably closest comparison for an effort to hold onto some elements of democracy may be placed in the takeover of Hong-Kong by the Chinese capitalist communist system which met resistance from Hong-Kong occupants and perhaps the disgrace of the attempted Trumpian insurrection in the USA on Capitol Hill on 6.1.21. There have been many conflicts in other non western countries attempting to wrest controlling influence from malevolent hands that can be taken as fights for freedoms but not necessarily showing a potential shift to fight for elective democratic accountability.

In most westernised countries there is the other constant fight, not really identified as a tensional fighting difference, it is one of democracy vs. manipulted dictatorial style control but it is still a potential threat to the enjoyment of ‘accepted’ freedoms. It is between ‘laissez-faire’ marketeers seeking wealth appropriation of and for the few and impeding efforts against the installation of improvements to collectively fairness with equality for a “good society” and the strengthening of democratic accountability. In the main one would suggest that the western countries that have an established base of democracy is something that is still, relatively, ten decades new, yet in that time it has shown a slow degrading of effective participation by the populace and an increase in a political ‘affluent class created aristocracy’. There are extensive reasons for this segregation of influential power and accountability laxity, one reason might be behind this carelessness is the faith that may be in that their Freedoms remain secure; and “not much can change”. There is also a happy apathetic existence in the comfort of the security built on these ten decades which to some extent is and has been taken for granted, being unknown of the processes made to bring such about; trust in administrative democracy and unchallenged peace is comfortable. But the fact that elective participation is falling and political party offerings are becoming more fragmented into a narrower range of appellant selectivity to gain popularised support, may show that faith in freedoms, security and stability should not be taken as a definitive states now shown in the diverse range of political offering and subsequent actions. There is evidence, (in some western countries) that democracy that should uphold high fundamental ideals, is being nibbled away by affluent opportunist influencers or an extremist cadres, who want things their way and people will blindly relinquish control without a serious fight. Up to now!

Ukraine is the 2nd largest country in Europe with a population of 43.6m. It is an ex soviet USSR (CCCP) nation state with a long historical link with Russia yet gained an agreed recognised independence in 1991 from USSR / Russia. It is poor, has elements of corruption, has large grain output, an elected administration and was moving to link with the EU in some form. It sought to establish a Ukraine-European Union Association agreement for closer working relationship which the general population was in favour of. The past president Viktor Yanukovych cancel it without permission as he wanted to return to Russian influence and this resulted in popular demonstration against this step. He was democratically (forcible) replaced in 2013 which irritated Russia. From then on with a population of 80% Ukrainian and 20% Russian, Russia engaged in festering dissent in small part of “separatist” regions of the country leading to conflict on 24th, Feb, 2022.Ukraine posed no military, economic, religious or political harmful influence on Russia and does not have nor used munitions directly against Russia other than the resisting the annexation by discontent Russian speaking separatist and with Russian infiltration assisting the disputing region: Read all about it:

So today there is a war being projected onto the Ukrainian cities and country by Russia which is manically with artillery and rockets blasting cities and air bombing its way to the main cities like Kiev to take it over and ‘free’ the people of the Ukraine; those who are not killed by the asset clearance or collateral actions are being forced to evacuate to neighbouring countries for their own safety as their homes and utilities are destroyed, for their own good. The Ukrainians are fiercely resisting being liberated into Russian domination with (so far) thousands (?) of Ukrainian civilians/soldiers being liberated to heaven. Russia’s intent is to affirm Ukraine is not to be in the EU, it is not to be in NATO, it is understood to be in Russia’s sphere of influence and it, Ukraine, had allowed destabilising ‘unlawful’ factors to take root and cause trouble to Russia’s ‘interest’ which might also cause trouble to Russian GAS line exportations to the west (Nord stream 2). The unhelpful direction of aspirational development that the country seemed to want to gain, holding to the idea of becoming a European style country, was a threat, it sparked the concentration of the Russian mafia – Bratva – Organised Criminal Group, otherwise known as the Kremlin Oligarchy, to play a long game of conquest for the furtherance of consolidating Russia’s unifying plan and to insure that there are no disturbing liberating influence effecting their income tributaries. Such destabilising ideas, that may feed back into the Russian populace awareness and threaten to upset their Kremlin Oligarchy business fiefdom; Read all about it.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine, was, so far as the west is concerned, a deliberate murderous intent, breaking all international agreements and now killing uncounted innocent people – men, women, children, and destroying their means of survival; to eradicate Ukraine. So far as Russia is concerned there are no innocent people, they are guilty of wanting their own county, guilty of wanting to be free to choose their own direction, guilty of wanting to be free for the development of their own legal democratic system, guilty of wanting to be free to be associated with civilised countries as in the European Union, guilty of wanting to be free to think themselves Ukrainian and to prove this they are guilty of wanting to fight for all the budding difficulties of democracy (all things the Bratva Kremlin Oligarchy do not allow nor want for their own populace). It is horribly magnificent to see the Ukrainians fight for what malleable Europeans now take lethargic interest in, democracy, freedoms; and the west can only strand on the side lines and ship weapons to them to use in the fight and impose on Russia and its Oligarchy the most far reaching trade and financial restriction ever enacted. It will hurt Russia (+ the west), and the Russian people and it will give the Kremlin Oligarchy palpitations fearing change. All possible restrictive steps are being taken by the opposing nations, to isolate and eviscerate Russia’s ability to pursue this aggression, yet to avoid a direct third European war: Read all about it.

There is no public media in Russia showing the scope of aggression and destruction its war is causing. Independent sources of information has been closed down and imposed a media blackout, any public dissent to the war is viciously squashed. Russian state control radio and TV is the mind bending fabricating source of ‘news’, just as it has been for decades. To the extent that most people (of an age band) believe all the propagandas of ‘justification’ spun out from the Putin Kremlin Oligarchy. It is important for the west to understand this public altered state of reality. The truth of what is taking place, is for Russians, that external news has becomes a total fabrication of forged news created by western conspirators. From this imbedded position there is little chance of achieving a national gestalt of peaceful equanimity compatible with free liberal values or democracy; at least not before Putin and the Bratva are put down. As Putin has effectively been in power for 22 years he has built on the preponderances of Russian inclination for promoting a strong controlled Dumas and political direction. With control of information output during this time, it has inculcated a majority of the aged population to take as fact all that is expressed by the dictatorship of Putin and the Dumas; it is a near collective ingrained problem within the populace. Getting rid of one man will not aid Russia; it has to have a systematic alteration to the Dumas, administrative functions and Oligarchy and enact greater openness of free information. It will take, one thinks at least 2 decades to help Russia become a reliable country otherwise it is heading to a resentful failing state, squandering its wealth and pursue conflicts.

How this apprehensive period will reach a conclusion is fractious, though it is not as yet, as some say, being on par with the Cuban Crises. It is still testing time and potentially precipitous; only GodAllahTetragrammaton knows the outcome? Hopefully ‘negotiation’ will arrive at some rational extraction but without doubt the ramification of such unjustifiable aggression perpetrated by a superior power onto a non-intimidating country will take decades to stabilise. It is all very well being sage after the event however the red warning signs have been long flashing in the eyes of the west but obviously no one was paying attention, well perhaps one and some others of irrelevance pointed a way, summed up in a quote “stop underwriting our own demise”, this from HR McMasters a USA national security advisor of 2017/18 who wrote a book “Battleground”-‘fight to defend the free world’.

One would hope the ‘call’ has not come too late even though it has taken a long time to be heard and the invasion of Russia into Ukraine on February 24th 2022 helps resets the apathetic indolence of economic democracy and the need to defend it and bolster it with greater self sufficiency. One might concede that European countries have effectively been sucker punched, one that came out from the past, building up its power from 1970s but had a gestation form in the era of Mao Zedong, who ruled as the chairman of the Peoples Republic of China from 1949 until 1976 when he died. During this timeframe human and economic disaster was created by him for China that led to the reforms of Deng Xiaoping to map out an economic strategy built on cheap labour, low capital cost succour for enticement and thus becoming the productive work house of the west. This was funded by massive opportunistic inflows of western finance from 1979, from this time on there was a tremendous growth in global multinationals, consumption - demand and energy need requirements for the west to turn to “any suitable provider” (CDUP saying) to power its affluence. These elements, productive capacity and energy meshed neatly with the strategy outlook for Russia and China. Russia gained energy economic power inserted into Europe and China gained a useful diversionary accomplice (having the west fret over Russia’s communism influence etc) while it subtlety built up its own economic productive command and of course both strutting up their military presence with western finance!

This was only possible because of the west’s political naivety and the nature of its sort term political policy directions. Russia and China have no time limitations on any politic direction but whereas Russia has accumulated massive wealth into the corrupted hands of Kremlin Oligarchy and not done much to lift the majority of its populace aspirations for a better life style, or mirroring western ‘openness’ it has no inclination to do so. Productively and economically it has very little presence on a global scale and it is in all administration fields, business, law, health etc are endemically corrupt standing at 136th out of an international 180 scale. Apart from oil/gas and a big stick, it is an irrelevance. China though has maintained directive wealth control that has transformed the prospects of millions of its people and taken a niche as a global power house. It is a global productive and economic presence using its directive wealth to be an investment influential player. It does have an ingrained “cadre” level of corruption (affluent class and administrative power) yet stands at the 80th position out of the 180 global corruption scale; and it has a big stick, all built on long term carefully laid strategy planning and gullibility. Again, up to now.

From 1970s Europe has had no real long term strategic energy source policy or productive planning that secures its foundation into self sufficiency. It has become much too dependent on external suppliers, resources and political connivance disconnect from the need to have managed economic resources and allowing “the markets” to behave unfettered. Much of this problem is from the nature of the political ideology, which does not allow the development of ideologically compatibility for long term policies direction and results in just responding to event as they unfold; like this “wake-up call” and then wonder how it can happen! In one small way the warning was made loud in 2014 with the forced illegal takeover of Crimea by Russia. This step was decried by the west for which no sanctions were applied. Although not directly related, also referenced to the problem was a speech given by Mark Carney Governor of the Bank of England in 2016 when taking about the UK deficit that Britain (by extension the west) was “dependent on the kindness of strangers to fund its appetites” this quoted from Tennessee William’s A Streetcar Named Desire. This may have been a coded warning which perhaps should have been interrogated as the need for greater self sufficiency and the control of transferable investment including those of strategically importance. Of course it was ignored.

Well the irritating “wake-up call” has not finished. Yet its resonance has been buzzing for 25 days so far (at 21.3.22) and injecting a shock to rouse complacent politics, civil populations in Europe and nations of NATO to act. NATO has offensive capacity to help bring cessation or shorten the Kremlins killing rampage onto Ukraine But NATO as it is constituted it is not able to instigate a militarily offense. Each nation has the power to act individually to conflicts it falls into but if it did, NATO is not authorised to be called into joint action. NATO can only be called into action if a member nation is unwarrantedly attacked. As Ukraine is not a member it fights alone however limited manual munitions are being supplied by countries to Ukraine and humanitarian refuge aid is provided, again individually supplied and not under any NATO guidance.

Countries of Europe and NATO have been shocked by the flagrant discarding of international conventions and to have exposed their own wilful ignorance to now have a new war created on the continent. As much as the EU and member countries of NATO do not want to engage in a war with the rogue Kremlin state of Russia, it is in fear of a military action response under NATO that might lead to a ‘world war’. It is an unwillingness of applying counter measures, to be robust against invasion, as in 2014; that Putin has countered on. However Putin has forced long term tactic actions onto members of the EU that he did not want, so is does seem that for the member of NATO, with its constituted limitation for action, that this will have to change and substantial reinforcement in NATO’s ability will take place. In this there seems little choice until Putin and the Bratva Kremlin Oligarchy Dumas is superseded.

For now it suits the Kremlin to have millions of war refugees from Ukraine flee into neighbouring countries, they are now used as stressing collateral weapon to aid media distraction and cloud the ability to verify the overall destruction taking place in the annihilation of a country it does not want to exist. The Kremlins actions have opened a new understanding for Europe of the need to be wary of psychotic dictators bearing gifts and not succumb to dependency on them. With this war, even if Russia is managed to be stabilised, a process that may take decades; its actions will have also exposed Chinas actions and its use of sovereign fund for external investments to greater scrutiny. Something it would prefer not to have scrutinised or restricted, nor does western trading interest.

Now, it has not been said yet, but it will; “Lessons will be learnt” well let one offer the following:-

Any administration without some form of open oversight and guidance will be dictatorship, if not initially in name it becomes so in practice by acts of dismembering public legitimacy and objection. This risks conflicts. Inconsistent and erratic instances of administration use are alert signals to others; ignoring this poses risk and dangers to stability. Movement of forces without clear unambiguous intention should be suspect and counter measures are required immediately. Conflicts resolution with or without reasonable mediation, with an irrational party is generally futile. One prefers peace the other prefers to win. 1st strike hypothesis is unreliable and MAD. Previous assumption that methods used in a last war are out of date, are wrong. Mechanised conflict is a slow grind, only matched by similar response. Air superiority is essential, air to air, and surface to air. Constant location coverage of any ground action is required. Block Chain Communication development is essential in conflict. Massed well trained and equipped conflict resistance (soldier s) are still indispensable. Constituted Free and Truthful Media is the foundation of democracy/liberty, able to record everything, make it known and give historical legitimacy. Counterfeit media output must be vigorously opposed. Human reasonableness is not a reliable stable condition in conflicts. The Environment tranquil time is running out which will restrict conflict recovery ability. Any elements of external dependency are fundamental weaknesses to self-sufficiency. And finally: if something is to be done do it fast and hard!

It does seem likely, like it or not, that the terrorist act by Putin is the political paradigm shift of the 21st century. One which is unlikely to begin to be resolved until He and the noxious administrative cultures he built are gone, perhaps over 3(?) decades from now on. For Europe and sovereign little england as much as they do not want to face the idea of a “special operation”, the destruction of cities in Ukraine by Him, is a unifying act which is a ‘heads up’ eyes-wide recalibration to the potential scope of thing to come and little england, just as within the EU, are unable to avoid the economic implications of bad political policy judgments of decades, from which such global ramification are now exposed. They cannot ignore the eventuality of action – if not now, when? With a bit of luck, eurosaps with Chinese scheming may setback a ww3 if an issue of ELE doesn’t start it first. But how and whose ‘door’ is to be knocked on for restitution after this one ‘local’ conflict.

One is not being glib or frivolous with the following but where are the political wo/men of stature who have or can display consistent, truthfulness, honour, integrity and seen defending high ideals; in this period of enmeshed distress. One knows of none, thereby is the problem and it takes time for economical rousing words to mean anything. Anyway what does one know about any of this!

Declaration of Independence. Extract:- "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-"

The US President Biden said, in a live streamed speech to G7/Munich Security Council on 19.2.21 Neither he nor Europe’s leaders could take democracy for granted. “In so many places, including Europe and the United States, democratic progress is under assault,” Biden said. “Historians are going to examine and write about this moment as an inflection point and I believe with every ounce of my being that democracy will and must prevail”. “That, in my view, is our galvanizing mission.” “Democracy doesn’t happen by accident. We have to defend it, fight for it, strengthen it, renew it.” “We have to prove that our model isn’t a relic of history”.

© Renot 213221633