GRANews-Episode 2 Gaddafi's end

The tragic end of Muhammar Gaddafi

(special issue of GRAnews channel)

Global Revolutionary Alliance News with Natella Speranskaya (Russia) as a host "Global revolutionary approach to the Lybia occupation"  

Dissonance with Alexandre Latsa (France) "Sarkozy and his atlanticism" 

Arise! with Antonio Grego (Italy) "Berlusconi's  betrayal"

Stratagems with Leo Savin (Russia) "Arab spring as the result of the network centric war"

Dissent with Mark Sleboda (USA) "Right To Protect doctrine is criminal one"

 

Topics: 

GRANews-Episode 3. Syria - Armageddon

Episode 3. Syria - Armageddon

The Problem of Dajjal.

Natella Speranskaya: Syria - the last call and final mobilization.

Leo Savin (Stratagems): the oil factor in geopolitics of Syrian conflict.

Bernard-Henri Levy - not dead (yet).

The geopolitics and the eschatology. The symbolism of Damascus.

Tim Kirby (Offensive): the double standards of USA.

Putin's Russia stands firmly

Mark Sleboda (Dissent): the Syria in new IR world structure.

Topics: 

Tim Kirby. A multipolar world

Russian’s don’t understand the absolute certainty that Anglo-Americans feel about their system. From the moment of their birth Americans are told that their system is clearly and demonstrably the best and most natural for all. It is the apex of the evolution of ideas. “Bringing democracy to nation X” is seen as the best thing that could possibly happen. It is always in the “best interests” of the people of said nation, even if that nation needs to be bombed and thrown into years of upheaval in order for democracy to be brought.

The Theory of Multipolar World

The introductiory lecture of Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin in front of the LSE students (Grimshaw Club) in Moscow State Univeristy on the Theory of Multipolar World. 

With the participation of Mark Sleboda and Tim Kirby. 

Excerpts: "A multipolar world is not bipolar world (such as we knew it in the second half of the twentieth century), because in today's world there is no power that can single-handedly resist the strategic power of the United States and countries of NATO, and moreover, there is no generalizing and coherent ideology capable of uniting a large part of humanity in a hard ideological opposition to the ideology of liberal democracy, capitalism, and "human rights", on which bases the new, this time sole hegemony of the United States. Nor modern Russia, nor China, nor India, nor some other state, can not pretend under these conditions alone for the status of the second pole. Recovery of bipolarity is impossible for ideological reasons (the end of the general appeal of Marxism), nor for the strategic potential and accumulated military-technical resources (U.S. and NATO countries over the past 30 years took the lead insomuch, that the symmetric competition with them in the military-strategic, economic and technical spheres is not possible for any single country)."

"Multipolar world is a radical alternative to the unipolar world (that in fact exists in the present situation) due to the fact that it insists on the presence of a few independent and sovereign centers of global strategic decision-making on the global level."

MANIFESTO of the French New Right

The French New Right was born in 1968. It is not a political movement, but a think-tank and school of thought. For more than thirty years—in books and journals, colloquia and conferences, seminars and summer schools, etc.—it has attempted to formulate a metapolitical perspective.
Metapolitics is not politics by other means. It is neither a "strategy" to impose intellectual hegemony, nor an attempt to discredit other possible attitudes or agendas. It rests solely on the premise that ideas play a fundamental role in collective consciousness and, more generally, in human history. Through their works, Heraclitus, Aristotle, St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, René Descartes, Immanuel Kant, Adam Smith, and Karl Marx all triggered decisive revolutions, whose impact is still being felt today. History is a result of human will and action, but always within the framework of convictions, beliefs and representations which provide meaning and direction. The goal of the French New Right is to contribute to the renewal of these sociohistorical representations.

Claudio Mutti Globalization as the Antichrist's project

Claudio  Mutti (director of Italian EURASIA magazine)

Globalization as the Antichrist's project

Interview for GRA-news by N. Speranskaya

Q. - What is your view of the modern world order/international system? Do you consider the current world order to be ‘just’? If yes, then why? If no, how do you think it might be changed? Is it already changing?

A. - If, as heirs of the Greek culture, we accept the Aristotelic point of view and think that the order is a harmonic disposition (táxis) whose cause is the universal Intellect (noûs), then we are obliged to say that the actual international system not only is not a just one, but neither can be called an order. It is not an order, because it is not founded on noûs, but on epithymía, i. e. on that immoderate appetite which historically has manifested itself as usurocratic imperialism and is represented at the highest degree by the United States of America.

Fabio Falchi Globality and thallasocracy

Fabio Falchi (Italian geopolitist)

Globality and thallasocracy

(inteview for GRA-news by N.Speranskaya)

What is your view of the modern world order/international system? Do you consider the current world order to be ‘just’? If yes, then why? If no, how do you think it might be changed? Is it already changing?

First of all, it’s necessary to consider that in Carl Schmitt’s opinion the empty, neutral and unidentified space which initiated the British thalassocracy, was replaced by new “global” space, designed by modern mass and transport media during the 20th century. So, British thalassocratic hybris flows into the conquering of infinite air aequor. A logic connection link these different moments. The world power which has comprehended these moments, making them on its own, is the hegemonic world power of our times: United States.

Daniele Scalea Modern World System

 

Daniele Scalea (Italian political analyst)

Modern World System

(interview with GRA-news by N.Speranskaya)

1.     What is your view of the modern world order/international system?  Do you consider the current world order to be ‘just’? If yes, then why? If no, how do you think it might be changed? Is it already changing?

The current international system is characterized by some prominent features:

-      a closed world circuit: since 15th century geographical explorations and improvement in transport and communication technologies have de facto realized a “one world”. What happens in any country of the world echoes all over the globe. Who acquires a sufficient supremacy of power could aspire to world empire;

-      a mono-polarization of power: the process of globalization begun in the 15th century was coupled, until recent times, to a progressive concentration of power towards the West and, ultimately, to a one-nation world hegemony by US;

-      a more recent and opposite tendency to multi-polarization: recently the US hegemony has begun to deteriorate and the unipolar order appears limping. After some centuries of mono-polarization towards the West, and then especially North America, new powers scattered all over the world are now emerging.

 

Jure Vujic MULTIPOLARITY AS THE IDEA

Jure Georges Vujic, french and croatian writter and geopolitolog

MULTIPOLARITY AS THE IDEA

      The premises of the modern world order and international system are already found towards the end of the 1648 Westphalian period of the right of gens and nation, based on the principle of respect for state sovereignty and territorial integrity. The entire concept of modern world order emerging in the wake of the French Revolution and materializing in Wilson’s 1919 League of Nations and the Yalta division is a negation of the principle of “jus publicam europeanum”, and just like the gradual anglosaxonisation of international law  and international relations, serves the purpose of Anglo-American global hegemony. With the fall of the Berlin Wall, the American derivation of the “new world order” is a culmination of such Anglo-American concept of international relations that is setting the stage for the internationalization of regional conflicts, introduction of permanent and emergency ad hoc international law: the right to interference, humanitarian intervention, and a wave of preventive military interventions that we witnessed in the Middle East, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, as well as in Haiti. 

Jarosław Tomasiewicz : "The world system is not just"

- What countries, groups of countries, or social and political forces might be able to challenge American Hegemony and how?

- The strength of the Core lies in its central position - there is no system without the Core and various Periphery elements are in  opposition not only towards the Core but also towards each other. I  don't know if there is any possibility for (e.g.) a Moscow-Beijing  axis  - is convergence stronger than antagonism? The only real  counterweight to the Core could be a broad coalition of all Periphery  elements but that coalition has no ideological binder. Such a  coalition needs an ideological alternative to liberal universalism - a  "pan-particularism"  that appreciates every difference. But this  ideology would be infected by relativism and therefore will become a  copy of liberal multiculturalism.

- What do you think about the ideas of Globalism (i.e., a ‘One World’ world government) and/or global governance? Is such either possible or desirable?

- I think the idea of global government is simply utopian. I don't  think global governance is possible - but in my opinion globalist  elites are interested only in control of some strategic points and  branches that make it unable to create any alternative center of power. 6a. In my opinion no single theory could explain reality. We should  use a combination of the civilizational theory of Feliks Koneczny  (modified but simplified by Samuel Huntington); the dependency theory  (developed into the "world-system" theory by Immanuel Wallerstein);  the biopolitical concept of Leszek Moczulski; and classical  geopolitical theories.

The Greater Europe Project

The only feasible alternative in present circumstances is to found in the context of a multi-polar world. Multi-polarity can grant to any country and civilisation on the planet the right and the freedom to develop its own potential, to organise its own internal reality in accordance with the specific identity of its culture and people, to propose a reliable basis of just and balanced international relations amongst the world’s nations. Multi-polarity should be based on the principle of equity among the different kinds of political, social and economic organisations of these nations and states. Technological progress and a growing openness of countries should promote dialogue amongst, and the prosperity of, all peoples and nations. But at the same time it shouldn’t endanger their respective identities. Differences between civilisations do not have to necessarily culminate in an inevitable clash between them – in contrast to the simplistic logic of some American writers. Dialogue, or rather ‘polylogue’, is a realistic and feasible possibility that we should all exploit in this regard.

Natella Speranskaya Gaddafi as tragic Third Position hero

 

The Major role in whole story was played, of course, by the United States. Today, no one in the world has any doubt that we have to deal with the Empire, with the imperialism and the colonialism in the worst sense of the words.

The Americans themselves after 2000 have began to apply the term Empire to US. They are non shy any more.

Do we have to deal with American Empire.

The neocons are particularly frank and rather cynical. They don’t hesitate to proclaim openly the Project of New American Century.

The humanitarian demagogy is over. We are living in the conditions of the new  hegemony.

They persuade us to accept it as a matter of fact. For decency's sake they prefer to  call it "benevolent  hegemony” . Yeah wow really “benevolent” ...

Every day, thousands of innocent people, mostly  civilians, children, women, old people are dying merciless killed by this benevolent hegemony. And it become every day more and more hard.

Serbia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya,  today. Propably Syria will be tomorrow, next in line is Iran, then everywhere. Benevolent hegemony...

The global oligarchy has put its masks aside.

 

Pages