Our Blog

How the US policy elite seeks to bury the world

Western commentators, particularly critical ones, are finding explanations of US policy to be puzzling. They then drift to suggestions that the US policy elite have lost their senses. This is always a poor option.

What is the cause of this misunderstanding? It arises from thinking that these recent US policy actions are devoted to the external world. In fact, these actions are primarily designed as internal political actions.

Pelosi on Taiwan: these actions are designed to prevent subsequent administrations from having specific options. We have a policy elite seeking to prevent its successors from being able to redraw their positions i.e. they are seeking to tie the hands of their successors. This also suggests that this policy elite are foreseeing their imminent overthrow. This would imply that behind the scenes is a growing momentum of opposition. On their way out of the door, the current neo-cons seek to poison all US relations and make the ability to change course incredibly difficult. By enraging China, by making China loose all trust in US diplomacy, they hope to take away from their successors any route to rapprochement.

Ukraine: it is beyond credible to suggest that the US policy elite are unable to read military maps. Having concluded that the game is up, they also know they themselves will not be tasked to clean up this mess and to re-establish relations with Russia. What they forsee is that a new US policy regime could score a sensational success by restoring peace, restoring good relations with Russia, re-establishing food and fuel supply lines and radically returning prices to normal. In such a world, not only the reputations but the actual persons of the neo-cons would be mud or near mud, and could be subject to political or legal sanctions. By poisoning the well, they will establish that there are no quick wins for their successors.

Some may feel such a scenario is far fetched and the US policy elite would never consider such a cynical play. However, the reality is that such an attitude is exactly what the US policy elite accused the UK of adopting on its way out. As the UK left its imperial realms it fostered as much ethnic dissension and as much chaos as it could as its calling card leaving the US to pick up the tab. In their view, it was US pressure that forced them to relieve themselves of their empire and so they decided to hand over to the US a poisoned chalice. You want it – take it!

In Ukraine the US policy elite wish to foster as deep a hatred between Ukraine and Russia as possible and leave Russia to eat it. In Taiwan, they wish to provoke as great a conflict as possible and leave China to handle this with any future US policy establishment.

In Afghanistan, as in Cambodia earlier, they have done the same. A US army relieves itself on the country, and without washing its hands let alone drying them, leaves.

US neo-con policy is: follow the Brits pattern – POISON THE WELL AND RUN.

2 Aug 22

Why is Africa failing?

We are often asked how Africa, with so many bright and intelligent people, can be so badly governed. This note is a brief essay on thinking carefully about this issue.

Our first port of call is to understand that the damage done by an institution is not directly related to itself but to the context. An institution may do more harm than ever intended, particularly if by accident, the ability to reform escapes the community.

Our first post-war generation of leaders faced a brutal colonial empire. Just as in S E Asia this gave rise to comprador situations. The collapse of colonialism was so sudden and unexpected that it led to a misunderstanding. Empires are global enterprises, and the global enterprise’s failure was not fundamentally a result of local conditions. European colonialism in Africa was a very recent phenomenon, and on Independence Day in Nigeria some local rulers could recall the arrival of the British administrators.

In order to encourage future influence, British administrators cultivated those ‘natives’ who would be more pro-Britain after Independence. A whole generation of comprador middle class had arisen who told themselves, with a little encouragement from their British administrators, that the British were asked to leave and agreed. Domestically in Nigeria, there was a failure to understand the geo-political situation and its implications. The failure of French ultra-colonialism in Algeria, the dangers evidenced by the Land Freedom Army in Kenya, and the hostility of the US to European colonies, put the writing on the wall. Among the local comprador class of the 50’s and 60’s in Africa, the phrase ‘our friends, the British’ was common and popular.

In most modern countries, the formation of the intellectual and academic elite is a matter of national security. It would be unheard of to allow the next generation of academic and intellectual leaders to be fundamentally educated abroad (rather than post-grad horizon broadening etc). In Africa’s case, the cultural dominance of American and British academia led to an idea that these institutions were ‘neutral.’ This idea was utterly naive. It led to a comprador competition of young scholars to show the Oxbridge/ Ivy League elite who could be more comprador than the others and who should therefore win prizes. Nothing is done because for the political class academia has become a certificate-granting ponzi scheme not worthy of respect. Foreign academics and intellectuals say one thing to the press and then behind closed doors recommend to the politicians outrageously immoral options.

An earlier generation of fiercely nationalistic scholars was countered by a next generation posse of utterly comprador scholars. For every Cesaire, Diop , Eric Williams, there were hundreds of comprador scholars covetting academic accolades. Whereas earlier African scholars were challenging Western Academia by 1980’s they were totally captured. Their total pride was their positions at Harvard, Yale, Cornell, UCLA etc. This may not seem strange if one does not recall that an earlier generation had their pride in their work and its impact. Earlier scholars were proud to show that their latest book had changed discussion in this area of research. You could encounter a bio chemist who would explain that Aflatoxin is so named because he discovered it and so had naming rights etc . That he was working at an African university at the time meant nothing to him. He made the discovery. On a visit to MIT a Chinese researcher warned him that attempts were being made to strip him of his rights. Another generation would simply be proud to be at Yale. If you ask what they have done to change their academic field they look blank at you as if you don’t understand: ’I am a professor at Yale, what else do I need to do?’

Whereas British public administrators were steeped in the ancient classics and the arts of power, their proteges were not so taught. It was the hope of the British administrators to teach them enough to be loyal servants of the British power elite and not be its opponents. However, their lack of political training meant they were not just open to manipulation by the British power structure but easily manipulated by bad local leaders, particularly brutal army leaders. These army officers sensed the administrators’ political naivety and, treating them with contempt, rendered the entire administrative structure their plaything. Though this was the consequence it was not the intention of the British administrators.

My father was himself a senior administrator (Permanent Secretary). By the time I arrived at Cambridge University, I had been brought up within a British elite to believe that the administrators of Britain 1900-1950 were largely incompetent as illustrated in the work of Correlli Barnett. It was therefore a piece of theatre to see my father bumping into old English colleagues during a visit to see me at Cambridge and treating them as great leaders of administration and watching the embarrassment in their eyes as they realised I looked on them as every other informed Cambridge undergraduate did.

Because the army, as created by Britain in Nigeria, was an army of occupation it lacked prestige and the children of the elite were steered away from the armed services. Whereas in Russia and China the army was the source of the nation’s survival, in most of Africa the army was viewed as askaris. Even in countries with liberation armies the West adopted a two fold attack. Firstly, the civilian kleptocracy was promoted as against the virtues of the liberation army and then ‘in extremis’, use of the external force was used to dishonour the soldiers of liberation. This happened most spectacularly in Zimbabwe but also in South Africa under the guise of ‘unifying ‘ the armed forces.

In Britain and USA, serving in the armed forces is a badge of honour for the elite. Many members of Congress are ex-Marines, many members of the Houses of Parliament in UK are ex-Sandhurst. This generates a diffusion of understanding of military matters within the civilian leadership. In Nigeria the civilian leadership are almost totally ignorant of military matters. It is not a badge of honour in the civilian sphere to have served in the Nigerian armed forces. Our Nigerian army is under trained , under resourced , under respected. Consquently, the officers of the armed services have low respect for the civilian leadership and join in the game of kleptocracy when the opportunity arises.

Lastly, we consider the business elite. After Independence, a nationalist business class arose that introduced indigenisation to nationalise the business environment which had been reserved for a foreign, mostly British, elite. A vigorous start at manufacturing began. Then arrived the IMF and Structural Adjustment, which completely destroyed the latent manufacturing class. The only business people to survive were rent seekers and comprador business people. To be a successful businessman was to be either an agent for foreign corporations or the recipient of contracts from Government due to political connections. If you tried to be independent your competitor would use political connections to deprive you of foreign exchange, government authorisations and a thousand other means in order to ruin your business through political action.

Politicians were neutered by the army during the period of structural adjustment. When they returned to office they found there was little apparent room to manoeuvre due to IMF rules and the neo-liberal consensus. In the absence of a political role to play in a neo-liberal world where the private sector is made into a ‘golden calf’, the politicians sought their own retirement plans. But their self-respect meant they were unwilling to allow their nakedness to be openly shown and so only selected members were allowed into the room. The political class have sealed the entrance in the belief that the ship is sinking without hope and that anyone entering will only seek to steal for themselves, so they might as well hold on for as long as possible. They are also deeply contemptuous of the academic class. They are astonished that they are in control, in power, despite their appalling academic records ( we have debates about whether a senior politician has in fact graduated from secondary school!) and that they can run rings around their academically smarter siblings.

Thus is created stasis: a web of self-correcting, self-serving institutions that resist change to the death.

At no point do we have a source of change: academics and intellectuals are captured by American academia and value their reputation in US more than benefiting Africa or Nigeria. Politicians are not seeking to challenge the IMF, or the neo-liberal consensus or in the least interested in any global role for Nigeria and their most urgent objective is to close the door to any new entrants that cannot be trusted to play by the rules of the kleptocracy. Business class members have siphoned funds abroad and own property in US and UK. Their only ambition is to have access to rent seeking opportunities. IPO’s are not future seeking embryonic enterprises but rent seeking shareholders secretly selling the nation’s data to Amazon or Google. Our administrators have been gutted and turned into servants of politicians, holding their political leaders in deep contempt and competing to siphon funds. Politicians cannot siphon funds without assistance from administrators, so we have a ‘pas de deux’.

Thus the general myth that the issue for reforming Nigeria is about moral issues and honesty is complete nonsense. There are serious issues that need careful thought. The meme that the problem is about ‘corruption’ is a form of misdirection. Our problems are deep and structural, involving ALL spheres of our society, from academia to politics to business to administration.

31 July 2022

America’s ‘Loony left’ and its critics -Part 2

Cynthia Miller-Idriss has recently addressed in Foreign Affairs (8 July 2022) the issue of mass shootings. Rather than focusing on the availability of arms she has indicted extremism as an immediate influence but identified mental health as the long time underlying context:

‘The alleged Buffalo shooter was referred for a psychiatric evaluation after telling his high school classmates he wanted to carry out mass violence, but he was released. When he graduated from high school two weeks later, investigators stopped paying attention to his case. Within a year, he had targeted and murdered Black Americans.’ (note 1)

She concludes:

‘But Americans are fooling themselves if they think the country can ban or arrest its way out of violence’.

Meanwhile  Warren Farrell   has stated: “All six of those mass school shootings that have killed more than 10 people have been done by boys, and all six of them have been done by boys who have been ‘dad deprived,’ from Sandy Hook right on through to the Texas shooting,” Farrell said .

‘The boys that committed these mass shootings at schools suffered from not having a caring, strong male role model. In addition to that, boys are often told their feelings don’t matter, which leads to emotional toxicity, said Farrell (Note 2) :

At least there are some sensible people left in USA. Hope springs eternal…


  1. https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2022-07-08/americas-epidemic-hate .
  2. ‘Fatherless Homes Linked to Mental Illness, Mass Shootings’, https://www.theepochtimes.com/fatherless-homes-linked-to-mental-illness-mass-shootings-author-warren-farrell_4585225.html

America’s ‘loony’ left – the mainstream


There was a popular phrase in the UK from 1980’s – ‘the loony left’. This was directed at the far left, such as members of the Trotskyite movement. However, the strange behaviour of what passes for a left in USA can be described as fairly ‘loony’, and, ironically, these persons and views are part of the Democratic mainstream.


Somehow the American left have bought the idea that the availability of guns causes school massacres. This is so implausible and obviously wrong one wonders how such thoughtful people could be persuaded to buy this lie. Switzerland has laws requiring mass gun ownership but does not experience US levels of gun crime. There is a Taoist position: let there be weapons but let no one have any use for them. So, according to that view the issue is not the availability of guns but the fact that people have a bad use for them. This leads us to a far better understanding of the issue: mental health. 

For some young person to wish to kill their grandmother and fellow students seems prima facie evidence of serious mental health issues. While the data is unclear there seems some correlation between low per capita mental health spending per state and mass shootings.

Rather than a debate about the quality and availability of mental health services, the left debate gun laws as if healthy people go about killing their parents and fellow students. Mental health services is an area of substantial budgetary expenditure, so it suits a neo-liberal and neo-cons to divert the discussion towards something as cheap as changing gun laws…. And the American loony left bought it.


Kate Shaw, Melissa Murray, Leah Litman expressed the mainstream Democratic point of view:(NOTE 1)

They express violent vituperation against the Supreme Court overturning of Roe v Wade. BUT NOT ONE WORD about the rights of the child! All their arguments about a woman’s rights over her own body would imply that a baby was like her tonsils or a kidney, not a sacred being within them. Following their stated argument would allow abortions up till the moment of delivery.

If the Catholic Church is on one side, then some engagement will be necessary to change opinion. Repeated rantings about a woman’s body is preaching to the choir. There are quite legitimate competing claims. Failing to address the competing claims reveals a deep pattern of group thinking.


Almost to a man and a woman, the USA left supports the war in Ukraine. This is despite the fact that NATO admits preparing for this war since 2014 and Poroshenko’s admission that the Minsk accord was never entered into sincerely but just as a ruse to buy time to prepare for an intended war.

‘The former president apparently confirmed that Kiev hadn’t come to the talks in good faith, but simply wanted a reprieve after suffering a military defeat.  Note 2( 

Jens Stoltenberg added to the story:

‘The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has been preparing for a conflict with Russia since 2014, Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said on Wednesday. Addressing media reporters following the NATO summit in Madrid…. “The reality is also that we have been preparing for this since 2014,” he said. “That is the reason that we have increased our presence in the eastern part of the alliance, why NATO allies have started to invest more in defence, and why we have increased [our] readiness.” (NOTE 3)


This period after the collapse of the Soviet Union, that brought about the unipolar moment, and which many considered the end of history, was really a ‘restoration’. We have to look at the restoration that followed the English Revolution, and the restoration that followed the French Revolution. In both cases the ‘ancien regime’ returned only to remind everyone why the revolution had occured in the first place. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the restoration has been reminding people exactly why the Russian revolution took place. The ancien regimes brought impoverishment of the majority of the population, pillaging of pensions, and unnecessary wars. In the midst of all this the US left is all for the restoration. ’Loony left’ seems the most appropriate moniker.+


  1.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb_v78C1q4 
  2. https://ussanews.com/2022/06/18/poroshenko-admits-the-minsk-agreements-were-merely-a-distraction-to-buy-time-and-allow-ukraine-to-build-up-its-military/ 
  3. https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/russia-ukraine-crisis/natos-stoltenberg-admits-alliance-has-been-preparing-for-conflict-with-russia-since-2014-articleshow.html

Alicia Maravelia: Ancient Egyptians were sub-humans!

‘… it is not a matter of belittling Ancient Egyptians, it is known of course they did not have any mathematics… ‘

Alicia Maravelia 17 June 2022

Maravelia made a presentation on ‘Of Eternity, Everlastingness and Stars’1. Among her primary claims were that: 

  1. All mathematical astronomy began with the Greeks.
  2. She reads back into Ancient Egypt from the views of modern physics and views from the religion of Christianity and Judaism, seeing Ancient Egypt as a precursor;
  3. With merely simple allegories and metaphors, Ancient Egyptians could describe quite accurately many astronomical phenomena.

Before addressing her central claims, one has to reflect on the general level of scholarship displayed. She claims that Ancient Egyptians were obsessed with death and the life thereafter. We need to consider that what remains are mostly tombs and documents found in tombs. Imagine in a thousand years if all that remained of France were its cemeteries and an archaeologists were to try to convey daily life in France based on the texts available in cemeteries. More to the point if Ancient Egyptians were, in fact, as obsessed with death as Western Egyptologists often claim, they would qualify as clinically depressed and probably suicidal.

On a technical level, she throws words such as ‘philosophical’ and ’metaphysical’ around like so much confetti. Most of her uses of such terms would not be recognised in any philosophy department in Europe or Asia. In this regard, she is not so different from the average Western Egyptologist. Strangely, Egyptologists will never tread on classical Greek texts and abandon the field of study to another department as soon as Alexander The Great arrives. Yet these same scholars wax lyrical about philosophy in respect of Ancient Egypt. In reality, they would not recognise a philosophical text if it hit them on the head. They claim to be able to deduce weaknesses in Ancient Egyptian philosophy when they cannot understand it in the first place. Often they compare an Ancient Egyptian text to an unphilosophical view of the modern Western world.

Maravelia refers to a modern philosophical view of ‘time’ without any references whatsoever. Any first-year philosophy undergraduate could demolish, in double quick time, her presentation of ‘time’ in modern western philosophy.

Before attempting to address the primary claims above two matters are outstanding:

She describes the idea of ‘entropy’ as coming from the ancient Greek word, which is absurd. Rudolf Clausius who invented the term first chose an unwieldy German term and later substituted a more elegant Greek word2 . It is as realistic as saying the idea of ‘television ‘ came from the ancient world, given it is made up of ‘tele’, which is Greek and ‘visio’ for seeing from the Latin. In Germany a TV is called ’fernsehen’’ or literally ‘far-seeing’. Clearly, it is absurd to link the idea of television with the roots of the word used in English. But perhaps she means to introduce the subliminal suggestion that ‘everything came from the Greeks’.

In reading modern physics back into Ancient Egypt she seeks to represent it as an anchor to locate Ancient Egypt. In so doing, she falls directly into a trap: what happens when modern physics moves on? She talks as if modern physics were a stable place. She does not hesitate to refer to Genesis to explain ancient Egyptian texts referring to God as Adonai while discussing the Old Kingdom, or blush in seeking to reconcile the literal Biblical text of miracles by introducing string theory? 

There is a truly fundamental issue with the theories in that they are fundamentally circular. She redefined the meaning of the specific terms in the text and then refers to the text to support her argument. This is standing on sand or worse. While inconsistency may be an issue for a theory,   making a consistent argument is not an added virtue. Circularity is widespread in Egyptology.

What we have here is the view that everything came from the Greeks on steroids. Maravelia appears not to have heard of Peter Park3 . He has shown that the idea of philosophy starting with the Greeks was born with Kant in the late 18th century. Before that period no one thought philosophy started with the Greeks.

However, we must now address the key point. Mathematics like language, poetry and dance, are basic elements of being human. To have a people with no mathematics is to have a sub-human life form. When challenged about her ‘everything came from the Greeks, ’ Maravelia hedged her bets by allowing Babylonia to have astronomy but only on the condition that Ancient Egyptian continued to lack all mathematics. If their neighbours had maths at the time, then its absence in Ancient Egypt would be proof of their sub-human status. This clearly is where Maravelia is coming from: non-whites are sub-human.

As it happens, the Greeks said they learnt their mathematics from the Ancient Egyptians, from Solon to Pythagoras to Plato, they all went to Egypt to seek knowledge and wisdom. As Gregory states: the pre-Socratic Thales claimed all his wisdom came from Egypt.4 

If we look at Maravelia’s claim that the Ancient Egyptians could tell stories about the galaxy  using allegory but no maths we realise this is impossible. Visualisation is a powerful tool for communication. It was one of Minkowski’s contributions to find  a geometrical demonstration of Einstein’s special relativity, showing space-time as 4-dimensional geometry. But in order to get the visualisation exactly correct, there must be a profound and accurate understanding of the primary mathematical issues. For the Ancient Egyptians to be able to provide an accurate visualisation of the astronomical data. It should be clear that visualisation is a powerful tool for communicating what is already understood. If Ancient Egyptians could use allegory to explain astronomical data they must have come to understand that data by some other means.

Further, I have not taken time to go into the Rind and Moscow Mathematical Papyri which pre date the arrival of Alexander. This is because Maravelia’s ability to believe her statements is the issue, and the problem of the sub-human status of the Ancient Egyptians as an implication would remain. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence so one’s argument is not reliant on the existence of actual proof of the contrary. To focus on the Rind and Moscow Papyri is to suggest that if these did not as a matter of fact exist then Maravelia’s argument might have some credence, which is absurd.

This view that the Ancient Egyptians were sub-humans is, one suspects, quite deeply entrenched in the minds of many western Egyptologists.


Gregory, S. R. W. (2022). Tutankhamun Knew the Names of the Two Great Gods. Archaeopress Publishing Ltd.

Maravelia, D. A. (2022, June 17). Of Eternity, Everlastingness and Stars: A Quest for Time and Space in Ancient Egypt.

Park, P. K. J. (2013). Africa, Asia and the History of Philosophy: Racism in the formation of the philosophical canon 1780-1830. SUNY.


1.   (Maravelia, 2022)

2.  see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy

3.   (Park, 2013)

4.   (Gregory, 2022, p. 27) 

KISSINGER : letting the cat out of the bag.

In an FT  interview on 9 May 2022 with Henry Kissinger  ( Note1  )

Kissinger let the cat out of the bag. Eighty per cent of the Russian population lives in the European part and much of the Asian part of Russia was acquired recently he said. Here  Kissinger is taking 1600’s as ‘recent history’. This suggests that he is seeking to get the Russians to see themselves as ‘European’ not Asian. On the basis that Russia is mostly ‘European’, he cannot see the alliance with China being soundly based or long-lasting. In his view, Putin has a mystic faith in Russian history unlike the US view of its own unique role in history.  One commentator reported:

The problem might be that Russia and China have learned from history. I don’t think they like each other, but they know they have to have each other’s back. If they don’t, they know they’re going to be the next one on the list.” (Comments: note 1) 

Most important is: what does ‘European’ mean for Kissinger? We know that Ukraine (West Ukraine) claimed that they were European and  blue-eyed, whereas the Russians and East Ukrainians they claimed were not. What does Kissinger  mean by suggesting that Russians should see themselves as “European’ as opposed to China? This is a clearly coded reference to race. If Kissinger is confessing that identity is crucial to understanding current conflicts and future developments, one has to ask what is the basis of this identity if not race? Has he not let the cat out of the bag that this is the West versus the rest of the world, the White world against all comers?

However, we should also ask how this looks from the Russian perspective. When Germany invaded Russia it did not consider it and its people part of “Europe’. Hitler initiated a war of annihilation against Slav people. A hand of friendship and collaboration was offered to Britain by Germany and the French were treated with considerable care. Certainly, the occupation of France cannot be compared to the German occupation of Eastern Europe. Specifically during the occupation of the Channel Islands slave camps were established where Slav prisoners of war were worked to death whereas the inhabitants of the Channel Islands were largely unharmed. After the war, very little acknowledgement was made by Britain of the slave camps.

According to recent reports, 40,000 slavs and others were murdered on these islands.  In respect of a top-secret site built by prisoners, Kemp and Weigold believe it was designed to launch V1  missile attacks on the UK using Sarin nerve gas.  Once the structure was completed the prisoners were marched to a clifftop and disposed of. As the mafia would say: ‘no witnesses, please’, or as the CIA would say: ‘deniability’. Kemp and Weigold claim over 40,000 prisoners were murdered. Though these reports have been challenged by Trevor Davenport, a local historian,  James Dent, the top Alderney politician, confirmed that both Britain and Germany were withholding many records about this period. It should be borne in mind that after the end of WW2, Germany became a British ally and the release of any such stories would have inflamed British public opinion and would stand in the way of rapprochement with Germany.

If Kemp and Weigold’s story is true, British historian  Davenport would be found guilty of a deliberate cover-up after the war. ( Note 2) 

From the Russian point of view, this would suggest that even its allies like Britain did not consider it ‘European’. Classic Marxism has well known problems coping with race and nation.  There is no Marxist explanation or prediction of the holocaust. These recent events suggest that the history of WW2 needs to be rewritten. For Europeans Nazi’s were anti-semites. For Russia they were simply genocidal. Once we introduce ‘race’ into WW2  as an independent factor, the role of Churchill in seeking to overthrow the Soviet Union with the aid of former Nazis even while the war was ending can be seen in another light. Marxist and Western historians previously understood or presented this as anti-communism. However, I know how shocked Russians have been by the depth of the recent vilification of Russia and its people even after they had abandoned communism. Russia was excluded from recent celebrations of the ending of WW2 but Germany was included. What is behind the depth of hatred for the Russian people?

If Russia begins to see itself as a Eurasian nation this will be a bulwark for the new world order. Kissinger’s hints of Russia being part of the European family will come face to face with the West’s rejection of Russia after the collapse of communism. On what basis were Poland , Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia, Czech Republic,  Slovakia, Slovenia, North Macedonia acceptable candidates for NATO but not non-communist Russia? For Russia deNazification is getting rid of people who wish to wipe out the whole Russian people whatever flag these racist people live under. Identity is not a precise science as those Protestants who discovered they were Jewish by German law will testify. Nevertheless, hints are powerful.

As a Eurasian nation, Russia does not deny its history or its ancestry but it would on this basis walk away from the entreaties of Western nations from now on. This is a case of being bitten not twice but many times.  Its former pride in its Euro-ancestry is in tatters. The West has seen to that.


  1. ‘We are now living in a totally new era’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b89jcNqgJo&t=29s
  2.  ‘Hitler’s British Death Island’  5 May 2017  https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4478574/Nazis-killed-40-000-Alderney-chemical-weapons-island.html )

Western popular sexuality – sex in contemporary Western imagination

  1. Western views of sex

There is an important misunderstanding when there is a discussion about sexuality. Given the weight and power of western media western views of certain matters become dominant and understood as primary.  How does this affect people from other cultures? What happens is that people from other cultures try hard to make sense of western views of sexuality and re-interpret them and so begins a trail of misunderstanding.


Image from Ranker.com of Alessandra Ambrosio

It does not assist that Western societies do not see themselves in a clear mirror.

This is a matter deserving much detailed research but here we can sketch one key point. Western culture has begun to fetishise sexuality and the young almost pubescent female body but the form of expression is important. Sex in western culture has certain dynamics that maybe unfamiliar to many in other cultures. For the elite sexuality was potentially subtle with concepts such as agape /chivalric love but these were not available to ordinary persons. Women were treated as objects, under ancient Greece they could not own property or sue in their own right and were the property of the men in their household. This inevitably affected the nature of sexuality.  An objectified person barely above an honoured serf/slave cannot freely offer her spirituality as central part of her sexuality. Her sexuality becomes her body. But the body is not the heart of sexuality so the emergent sexuality is debased. The woman becomes an aide to male masturbation, a warm and soft accessory to masturbation, while sexuality becomes masturbating with a human body.

Certain forms of female liberation become opportunities for women to treat men as aides to female masturbation, mutual debasement.

Once this is understood much of the dynamics of popular Western sexuality will be understood better and non-Westerners can cease trying to find something deeper in it. 

28 April 2022

UKRAINE : Karaganov’s view – A proxy for a world race war?

Sergey Karaganov was interviewed by Bruno Macaes for The New Statesman ( 2 April 2022) see Note 1. Karaganov speaks with the fluency and calm assurance of someone closely connected to power. His tone is factual and if anything a little weary of his audience as if to say ‘I have told you this before but you won’t listen.’

He outlined Russia’s concerns and objectives in simple language with exquisite brevity. Unlike so many commentators in the West he highlights the most obvious strategic issue:  if not now when? Given US ambitions the strategic situation was not stable where a US game plan involved aggressive arming of Ukraine. It could be the West’s intention was to create a situation where Russia would have no practical options. Unspoken is the question: should Russia wait quietly until it is in a checkmate?

But the most important statements from Karaganov appear to have gone over the head of his interviewer or of the sub-editor who takes for a title a statement entirely out of context.

Karaganov’s key statements are :

  1. ’ We all feel like we are part of a huge event in history, and it’s not just about war in UKraine’.
  2. ‘Two other objectives have been added: one is the demilitarisation of Ukraine; the other is denazification because there are people in the Russian government (who) think it is beginning to resemble Germany in the 1930’s’
  3. ‘Globalisation in this (present) form is finished’
  4. ‘ during the past 500 years the foundation of Western power was the military preponderance of Europeans.’
  5. ‘I  know as a historian that Article 5 of the Nato treaty is worthless.  I also know from the history of American nuclear strategy that the US is unlikely to defend Europe with nuclear weapons.’
  6. ‘If we could have solved the crisis peacefully there’s no question that parts  of Europe would have orientated themselves not towards Russia but Greater Eurasia, of which Russia would be a key part’
  7. ‘This war is a kind of proxy war between the West and the rest – Russia being, as it has been in history, the pinnacle of ‘the rest’ – for a future world order.’
  8. ‘ the West will never recuperate but it doesn’t matter if it dies …’
  9. ‘People like myself and others are questioning the moral foundations of Western civilisation.’
  10. ‘ under circumstances of great tension, democracies always wither away or become autocratic. These changes are inevitable’.

These statements apparently so clear, need decoding. The reference to Germany in 1930’s is to race war against Russia. Hitler did not consider Russians ‘white’. West Ukrainians consider themselves ‘European and blue eyed’ and not like Eastern Ukrainians and slavs. Wheares for a large part of its history Russia sought to emulate the West and to ‘join it’, it has now been shuttered out. The  so-called ‘Allies’ recently celebrated victory in WW2 by including Germany `(the opposition) and excluding Russia ( a crucial ally).  Western commentators are remarkably tone-deaf and think that references to Nazis are to Zellensky and not to themselves who for many years tolerated Nazism in the 1930’s to Russia’s cost.

He sees Russia as part of Greater Eurasia and distances Russia from the West. In two places he clearly places Europe as not morally admirable. First, he places Europe’s dominance solely on naked military power, and then he questions the moral basis of Western civilisation. Finally, he suggests that Europe is making a great strategic error in relying on the US nuclear shield (which he thinks is worthless)  and in seeking to use non-Russian gas. Germany, a major manufacturing exporter, is proposing to use much more expensive seed material (gas) than its Asian competitors. This would be a windfall for Asian manufacturers and possibly a mortal wound for Germany- the beating heart of Europe. No wonder Karaganov says Europe may wither but it does not matter (Asian countries will take up the slack). In the process of withering and the tensions that arise from that, their democratic freedoms may need to be curtailed.

Finally and most important of all, these statements all add up to his conclusion that Ukraine is a ‘proxy war’ between the West and ‘the rest’. These are shorthand for Whites versus Non-Whites.  Only race can explain the exclusion of a capitalist Russia from the European ‘family of nations’; only race can explain the exclusion of Russia from WW2 celebrations that include Germany; only ‘race’ can explain his cryptic remark about questioning the moral foundations of Western civilisation; only apparent ‘race’ can explain the split between West Ukraine and East Ukraine; and only race can distinguish Europe from Eurasia. This new world order that is being fought over is clearly not a fight between capitalism and socialism but, in Karaganov’s view, over the world’s future racial order.

Notes 1


Sovereignty vs Democracy?  Biden’s  imperial policy

27 March 2022

US foreign policy has been expressed in terms of spreading democracy around the world. There is silence around the matter of sovereignty. Is democracy compatible with sovereignty? Democratic Party in the US has acknowledged that democracy can be corrupted in such a way as to undermine sovereignty. It is not relevant what position one takes on Russiagate. The allegation is that Russia took steps as an external power to subvert the election in the US. 

This acknowledgement is not taken sufficiently seriously.  Cambridge Analytica played a well documented role in the Brexit  vote. It had already influenced elections in the Caribbean and elsewhere. If a country as powerful as US could be influenced, even as a matter of theory, by manipulation of social media what does that say for smaller less powerful countries? Prior to the world of social media, the US influenced  other countries’ elections by funding different parties and manipulating the financial markets to affect the economies. Victoria Nuland stated that the US spent $5 billion to influence the Ukraine elections. (Note 1 )

Effectively saying that support for the US preferred candidate will lead to improved economic future due solely to US discretion.

Many countries believe their sovereignty is more important than democracy. This is a position that the Democratic Party in the US has already taken.

All this leads to one conclusion: US wishes to spread democracy because it believes it can manipulate such countries better and therefore subvert their sovereignty to US interests. US invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan are clearly violations of the sovereignty of these countries under the guise of bringing democracy. No mention of sovereignty in the war propaganda.

This raises an interesting question: if US sovereignty was at stake how much curtailment of democracy would be accepted?

Biden has explicitly said that Putin ‘cannot remain in power’. Regardless of later  White House clarifications, this is regime change. US policy has revealed the iron fist within thin the velvet gloves.

iNews reported on 26 March 2022: 

‘Mr Haass, who is president of the US Council on Foreign Relations, tweeted his concerns that Mr Biden had “just expanded US war aims, calling for regime change”.

“However desirable it may be, it is not within our power to accomplish – plus runs risk it will increase Putin’s inclination to see this as a fight to the finish, raising odds he will reject compromise, escalate, or both,” he added.’ (Note 2)

We have previously pointed out the connection to China. It remains astonishing that the US, currently sanctioning China quite severely, expects China to support US sanctions on Russia. To threaten China with sanctions if it does not support US sanctions on Russia is breathtaking. As if China does not see itself as next on the list. Ukraine is a situation where China can help create an environment to withstand US sanctions which it might have to use itself in the near future.  At the moment they can watch what the US might do and make appropriate preparations. As Jack Rasmus has clearly indicated on 26 March 22:

‘This proxy war in Ukraine is not at all about freedom or democracy. That’s just bullshit propaganda. It’s about money and power. It’s about restoring US imperial hegemony over Europe, breaking Russia as a global challenger to the US, and a dress rehearsal for then going after China.’ ( Note 3)


  1. https://worldfinancialreview.com/10-reasons-why-us-may-want-russia-to-invade-ukraine/
  2. https://inews.co.uk/news/world/white-house-us-president-biden-unscripted-speech-not-calling-for-russian-regime-change-1541866
  3. On US Imperialism’s Proxy War with Russia in Ukraine –   https://jackrasmus.com/?blogsub=confirming

Anson Thom & Daily Mavericks (South Africa)  – disgraceful misuse of statistics..

On 8 Feb 2022 they published an article entitled:

What the hard data reveals about the true state of the nation (spoiler alert: not good at all)

This article goes over many features and data sets in the apparent attempt to appear detailed and objective. However, it assumes that most Africans are data ignorant and statistically uninformed. It exhibits a deliberate misuse of data. When painting a data picture of a country, the selective omission is a form of outrageous omission, particularly when the data set shows an aspect of the country where it leads the world.

We are talking about the GINI Index.


What is the GINI Index?

‘The Gini coefficient, also called the Gini index or Gini ratio, is the most commonly used measure of income distribution—simply put, the higher the Gini coefficient, the greater the gap between the incomes of a country’s richest and poorest people. A country’s Gini coefficient is important because it helps identify high levels of income inequality, which can have several undesirable political and economic impacts. These include slower GDP growth, reduced income mobility, greater household debt, political polarization, and higher poverty rates.’


South Africa has the worst ranking in income inequality in the world at 62.7 No one else comes close.



This is one data set that is missing. The gap between the rich and the poor is greater than anywhere else in the world. In South Africa, the top percentiles are mostly white. I wrote to the Editors earlier this year (be aware of time zone differences!) and  they responded:

Anso Thom <anso@dailymaverick.co.za>
Sun, 16 Jan, 13:56

to me, Letters

Dear Dapo

Thank you for taking the time to write to us. Our website is busy and I can understand if you miss some stories. I invite you to read Maverick Citizen one of our sections and specifically some of Mark Heywood’s editorials, which addresses these exact issues on a regular basis.

Take care, Anso

Anso Thom, Managing Editor

Maverick Citizen (Daily Maverick)



On Sun, Jan 16, 2022 at 2:48 PM Dapo Ladimeji

Dear Editor

I have read your news with interest over the years. I also note the high moral tone you adopt. Your columns are full of concern for the corrupt politicians. However one topic I never hear about (forgive me if I missed it) is that South Africa has the worst inequality in the world according to the Gini index. 

( https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gini-coefficient-by-country

Nowhere do I see you holding the government to account for not taking firm action to reduce this. Nowhere do I see any expression of outrage that South Africa is leading the world in this area. Is this just a blindspot or proof of grand hypocrisy?


Dapo Ladimeji’

Undaunted I followed this up:

 Dapo Ladimeji  Sun, 16 Jan, 14:25 
 to Anso, Letters 


I have Daily Maverick and did not notice Maverick Citizen. I have now looked for Heywood and found some articles  (which was not so easy). This is an important issue for me so I seek your assistance. I have only found (most likely due to my own inadequate search) articles by Heywood on poverty and the plight of the poor. That is a different issue than income inequality. It is possible to have a poor population with low-income inequality…two different issues. No doubt you can point me to some of his articles dealing with income inequality. We know that in US to top 1% have incomes 40x greater than 90% of the rest of the US population. SA is meant to be worse than this according to GINI.  Of course, I wanted to know if the income inequality is getting worse or better over the past decades. Perhaps Heywood has covered this. I am keen to be informed.

best wishes


Disappointingly, I have to date received no response.

While it is true that Maverick Citizen somewhere sports a link to the University of Wits Southern Centre for Inequality Studies, Daily Maverick’s report generally does not refer to this available data at all. This data shows that wealth inequality has not changed since the end of apartheid, that 0.1% own 25% of all wealth, that the top 10% own 85% of all wealth and more astonishing is that the bottom 50% (mostly Black) are net debtors (liabilities exceed their assets). This is after so many years from the end of apartheid. However, Daily Maverick does not think this tells us anything fundamental about South Africa.

However, it tells us a lot about South African journalism and its faux liberal protest about the economic conditions of the poor while keeping quiet about the primarily white rich. What sort of harmonious society can this give rise to?

Perhaps someone should tell the editor, Anso Thom, that contrary to her expectations Africans can read and follow statistical legerdemain.