It is easier that way. People don't have the attention span they had before nor the will to investigate. Go along to get along.
The Russians want to restore the USSR, which is not a good thing, but the Ukrainians are fascists, which is not a good thing either, so I'm thinking that the fact that we're not simply staying out of it, given that there are no good guys to defend, suggests that something is up that's probably not in our best interests. Given their financial dealings with Ukraine, I'm sure the Bidens stand to benefit from it, however, and this probably fits into a global agenda that we're not being told about, and is probably also not in our best interests.
That global agenda you speak of may be one of delaying the rise of the multi-polar world as opposed to the one where the USA's military and dollar dominate the world, as has been the case since WW2. I think that is futile, since America's fall in rank is inevitable. That's my best guess anyway. It's hard to shift one's thinking away from geography ( the conflict between sovereign nations) and towards multi-national corporations who seem to hold the real power. The scenario playing out is complex. All the players are bad guys, with the only good guys being the common citizen of whatever nation-state.
I've heard the next 2 years are going to be the worst 2 for our nation. Hope they are wrong. But considering the influx of liberal voters here and still coming in I can believe it. I'm not sure China can supply us all with the medications and food it will take. Even the news is now telling us to stock up on medicine.
Keep in mind that we have a presidential election coming up in 2024, so the cheaters will need something to distract us from demanding a fair election. Wars have long served as adequate distractions, and they might use that instead of a pandemic in 2024. Maybe both.
leaving out the reported biolabs throughout Ukraine, the big war is over the dollar. Only the most naive believe the war is to defend Ukraine. What is at stake is the dollar's dominance on the world stage. It was already weakening with the attacks on it by China et al., but they put it all on the line when they banned Russia from the SWIFT system. That move showed that the west will severely punish any nation that defies their wishes, leading countries like India and Saudi Arabia to join the attack on the dollar. China is slowly accelerating its move away from dollar holdings.
This is to my mind a really good post. For a while now I've seen that the old "polar opposites struggle"--"them" vs "us", whether in domestic politics or strategic world power, is inaccurate. And worse, it distracts the observer--and I mean us, here--from trying to ascertain something closer to accurate reality. So what I'm saying is that seeing human socio-political interactions as a sort of organized contest between, e.g., conservatives vs liberals, or US vs Russia/China/whoever, Christianity vs Islam, etc. is misleading. What we're living in is a contest for the greatest amount of assets--an informal world plutocracy would be the best fit--by organized economic interests. We see Conglomerate XYZ trying to increase its assets, and to do this they use every tool at their disposal. Also, to ever think that we're the victim of a long-standing conspiracy is a fool's errand: no one cares about us that much--we are pissants beneath notice. What I think is happening--or rather, evolving--is that it's in the interests of these asset-gatherers (XYZ, for example) to produce trinkets at as low a cost to them, and trading them to the mass of world consumers, of which we are all a member, to one degree or another, for the greatest "price" they can obtain, for every individual transaction. Every action in life is therefore, a horse-trading session. All except family relationships. This all is to be expected...what this is, is the operation of Smith's "Invisible Hand"--the evolved mechanism for mercantilism. And since mercantilism is a natural tendency, nothing is likely to change it. It is a feature of the human environment, like the drive to procreate, to eat, etc. It does not benefit the XYZs of the world to have independent thought--they would prefer a herd-like mentality so that they can plant motivations to buy their products under conditions beneficial to them, so it doesn't trouble them to see an erosion of all education other than work training. They don't necessarily actively undermine our education system, or our cultural values, they simply do not care about them. They'd be content to let them die out if it aids their asset-gathering. So they're not out to ruin our culture, destroy our values so much as they are content to see them wither if it helps their bottom line. So what I'm saying is that we waste our time thinking that we can change this in any meaningful fashion. The best play is for you, as an individual (or family/friends group), is to avoid the easy manipulation used to convince you how to think, what to think. Because if you think and act in your own best interests, every time, it is the very best you'll ever get out of your human existence. To quote that great sage and social observer, David Byrne of the Talking Heads, "Same as it ever was..." It's not us against them, it's you against everything else.
Rage Against The War Machine https://www.rt.com/news/571706-anti-war-rally-washington/ The protest will call for peace negotiations in Ukraine and the end of military aid Lincoln Memorial at Washington DC, USA. © Getty Images/xxz114 A large rally dubbed ‘Rage Against The War Machine’ has been announced for Washington DC on Sunday, with thousands set to march to the White House to demand peace in Ukraine and an end to US military funding for Kiev. The march, organized by the Libertarian and People’s Parties, promises to be the largest US anti-war rally since the protests against the Iraq War in 2003. It is set to feature speakers from across the political spectrum, including former US Senator Ron Paul, former presidential nominee Tulsi Gabbard, and comedian and political commentator Jimmy Dore.
Americans will certainly tire of the war before the Russians do. Look what happened even in Afghanistan; we spent a trillion or more dollars, 20 years, thousands of lives, and we lost to the Taliban.
I have been bothered a lot lately about one single factor about the war, or any war for that matter. In the case of Ukraine versus Russia, who in Russia was really so concerned with the border that they wanted to go to war over it? Soldiers are mostly trained to defend their own country and not someone else’s so I do wonder how many soldiers opted to die taking over another country? For that matter, how many of American and other NATO soldiers are willing to die defending Ukraine and why? Dunno. Vietnam, Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and the list goes on. Who, in the U.S. was ready to die over what some other country does to themselves and bordering countries? Other than 9/11/01, none of those countries had even touched the U.S. border and even then, the pilots of those planes were Saudi. What I am driving at is that this government has leaders and those leaders are supposedly responsible for the safety of their own country but yet, they continually spend taxpayer dollars and send out their own countrymen to die over a cause that probably doesn’t have anything to do with the safety of this country. Maybe I’m just tired but when are the people, the real hard working backbones of this country in particular, going to start standing up and saying no more? Why are our own leaders so willing to press us into yet another war and possibly WWIII and moreover, why does one man and his cohorts have the authority to send our soldiers to their deaths? I guess the bottom line is that I would love to see the United States government take more interest in what happens here and quit spending money and sacrificing lives in initiatives that have little to do with our own welfare.
Since the USSR fell, the U.S. has been the "bully on the block" and has demanded that other nations do things our way. Russia views NATO encroaching on its borders the same way we would should Russia sign an alliance with Canada and Mexico to station troops and weapons there. We have been at war almost since the Soviet Union fell, and, except for Trump, every president since then has started a new war somewhere.
You said a lot there and I don't have any easy answers. Somewhere along the line we more and more let big money control things; political parties, candidates, office holders, even the military. There must be a way back from that but I don't see it clearly.
Further musings along these lines: In the past, in thinking about these major issues of how we might govern ourselves I always hit a point where I don't feel confident about the direction my thought takes me. If we are to make each and every person's opinions and choices as valuable as any other's, I think that such an extreme of democracy could descend into a very destructive version of communism. On the other hand, if we just allow those with the most money to make our choices we end up with some form of oligarchal dictatorship. Neither appeals to me. There should be a middle ground. Success, measured by one's net worth, is a real measure of competence and we should give the successful their due if they have a preference for how things should be. But, but, but ... this shouldn't lead to the complete disenfranchisement of the incapable, who have their special human needs that I think are as important as anyone else's. When my brain starts smoking thinking about this stuff I look for a good (or very bad) movie to distract me.