Dissent

The Tsarnaevs are a product of America

Mark Sleboda: While the guilt of the Tsarnaev brothers in being responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings may seem self-evident to most people from the narrative of events that the government and mainstream media have put forth, the US like most countries, operates on the legal principle of guilty until proven innocent. Until proven guilty of these crimes in a court of law (hopefully a civilian court of law and not a military show trial) with the presentation of sufficient evidence, they are presumed innocent. Personally, I think there are many holes and inconsistencies in the narrative of events put forth by the authorities and the mainstream media that must be addressed and answered.

As of writing, Dzhokar Tsarnaev, a naturalized American citizen, has not yet been read his Miranda rights or been charged with any crime under a legally dubious ‘public safety’ exemption that has been expanded and abused by the Obama administration under the rationale of interrogating suspects for ‘critical intelligence’. Some neoconservative politicians are calling for Dzhokar Tsarnaev to de declared an ‘enemy combatant’ so that he receives no legal due process, and others have even openly called for him to be tortured. This is all extremely disturbing for anyone concerned with the rule of law in the United States.

Syria and IR

Mark Sleboda

Mark Sleboda ‘MONSTERS TO DESTROY’

Personally, I blame Russian President Dmitri Medvedev for the fall of Libya and I believe he shares responsibility for all the deaths that have followed, as he broke with the longstanding Russian foreign policy tradition of upholding the UN Charter’s foundation of the inviolability of state sovereignty and abstained in an attempt to curry favor with Western powers for his domestic ‘modernization’ agenda, or as it should more correctly be called – neoliberalism. With this turnaround, Medvedev’s administration faced disagreement and opposition from Prime Minister Putin, from within the Foreign Ministry and even from Russia’s ambassador to Libya who reportedly wrote Medvedev a letter calling him ‘a traitor to the motherland’ for his selling out of Libya, before being recalled. At the point the resolution was passed, the insurrection had been quickly rolled back and contained by the Libyan Army to the Eastern city of Benghazi. Libya’s government needed one or two weeks at most to put down the rebellion and to restore law and order to the country.  A Russian veto would have stopped cold or at least stalled with political indecision NATO’s military plans. Given that time, all the deaths and destruction of Libya’s infrastructure and society could have been avoided and Quaddafi and his sons would still be alive with us today.

Tags: 

Mark Sleboda The Tradition and the ecology

The speech by Mark Sleboda on the Tradition and ecology in the course of the Moscow conference "Against Post-Modern World". The fisrt approach to the synthesis of the traditionalism and the Green Theory. The ecocentric approach to the World politics and the philosophy of life. The necessisty of the Deep Green Religion as the an alternative to the capitalist unhuman exploitation of the nature and the people of the planet. The union of the spiritual tradition of the past and the avanguard ecologic attitude to the living planet.

Sleboda-video-Dialogue

In a rare unanimous vote, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a proposal by the scholar and then-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mohammed Khatami, to designate 2001 as the ‘Year of the Dialogue among Civilizations’. This normative vision sought to lay out a new ethical paradigm of international relations and the formulation of a truly multicultural international society based on the simple premise of ‘unity in diversity’, a political acceptance and manifestation of the world’s inherent cultural pluralism seated in the aspiration of cross-cultural respect and understanding. The ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’ (DAC) calls for the ‘re-opening and rediscussion of the core Western-centric and liberal global order’ and in so doing, ‘represents a powerful normative challenge to the contemporary political orthodoxy implicit in all the major political discourses of the future world order’ (Petito 2009, 12). Sadly, and in hindsight, tragically, these proposals were not to be acted on or developed, either theoretically or in policy, as events outpaced the political process.
 

Dissent-1

Demystifying NWO
 
 
"In an age of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
- Attributed to George Orwell
 
 
«Во времена всеобщего обмана говорить правду - это революционный акт».
Джордж Оруэлл
Hi, my name is Mark Sleboda, and I will be your English language commentator for this section of GRANews, a segment called 'Dissent'.
In this, the time we are living in, it is often difficult, even with the seemingly unending diversity and plentitude of the internet, to find reliable sources of information amid the sea of deceit and disinformation, that the Western Mainstream Media spills into our heads. A veritable 'Tyranny of Choice' indeed. But it is difficult to find perspectives and voices that stray from the narrative of Western governments and the Western MSM. This segment is about deconstructing and dissenting from that tyrannical narrative. I hope to provide an alternative analysis and perspective of International Relations, crises and events informed from a distinctly non-Western perspective. This is our revolutionary act of 'Dissent' from the Western narrative.
Does this mean that 'Dissent' claims to be an 'objective' source of truth that you can trust implicitly? Certainly not. Such a thing does not exist. All media and theory are biased by national, ideological, religious, and economic interests and paradigms. If I may paraphrase Robert Cox, all theory (and media) 'is for someone and for some purpose'. 'Dissent' will strive to examine and deconstruct Western discourse of international relations, crises, and events, and present an alternative non-Western point of view. As with any other source of news and analysis, it is left to you to consider the arguments I raise, verify and compare them with alternate sources and perspectives, and in the end make up your own mind. I simply aim to present an oft unheard and alternative perspective from that presented by the Western government, MSM, and analyst narrative, as if from 'the Other'. Today I will be painting a broad brush stroke of the themes that the segment 'Dissent' will be exploring in the future.
By 'the West', I am referring to both a civilization and a geopolitical bloc, a hegemonic entity, centered around the United States of America, but including the United Kingdom, the European Union and Europe in general, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, as well as certain other allies and vassals, such as Japan and South Korea that have more or less and to varying degrees been subsumed into a wider 'Western' civilization.
The West is also defined by capitalism, and increasingly a virulent neoliberal strain of capitalism that drives globalization; as well as a narrow and legalistic 'liberal' interpretation of 'democracy', that denies, often aggressively, the legitimacy and right to exist of all other forms of government and political systems in a sort of modern ideological jihad or crusade.

‘Dialogue of Civilizations’ as a Theoretical Model for a Multipolar World Order

In a rare unanimous vote, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a proposal by the scholar and then-President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Mohammed Khatami, to designate 2001 as the ‘Year of the Dialogue among Civilizations’. This normative vision sought to lay out a new ethical paradigm of international relations and the formulation of a truly multicultural international society based on the simple premise of ‘unity in diversity’, a political acceptance and manifestation of the world’s inherent cultural pluralism seated in the aspiration of cross-cultural respect and understanding. The ‘Dialogue of Civilizations’ (DAC) calls for the ‘re-opening and rediscussion of the core Western-centric and liberal global order’ and in so doing, ‘represents a powerful normative challenge to the contemporary political orthodoxy implicit in all the major political discourses of the future world order’ (Petito 2009, 12). Sadly, and in hindsight, tragically, these proposals were not to be acted on or developed, either theoretically or in policy, as events outpaced the political process.

Pages