The reason US foreign policy has been such a mess over the last two decades (Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya) is that we failed to practice restraint. Now the same people want us to shoot down Russian planes and collapse the Russian economy. Think before you act!
— David Sacks (@DavidSacks) March 5, 2022
I don’t see how I am in a tough spot.
“National populists—the same people who are dogmatic about protecting national borders—are in a tough spot right now, thanks to Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression on Ukraine.
The same ultra-nationalists passionate about building a wall on the U.S.’ southern border, or obliterating the EU and returning to hard borders among European nation states—seemed utterly unconcerned about Ukraine’s borders during the run-up to war. These folks are also known for the fetishization of masculinity and toughness, and yet they suddenly became introspective, nuanced, and dovish in their excuses for Putin’s invasion of a sovereign nation. …”
I’ve been saying the same thing about our foreign policy for over 20 years now through all the interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and now Ukraine. It is why I hated George W. Bush and voted for Ron Paul and Donald Trump. I was thrilled when Trump floated getting out of NATO.
Back in the early 2000s, I made up my mind about this issue when George W. Bush and the circle of neocons around him plunged us into the Iraq War. We were told that Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator who was part of an “Axis of Evil” that was hellbent on acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Saddam was a genocidal madman like Slobodan Milosevic. In those days, I was reading Pat Buchanan, Lew Rockwell, Sam Francis, Justin Raimondo at Antiwar.com and their views on the subject became my views.
There has always been a nationalist and populist foreign policy tradition in the United States that stretches back through Charles Lindbergh and the America First Committee through William Jennings Bryan and back to the days of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. There have always been Americans who wanted to avoid foreign entanglements and wars in Eurasia. This was the consensus in America until Teddy Roosevelt’s time. Seen in this light, the Philippines, Iraq and Ukraine are none of our business.
We have never supported NATO or its expansion to Russia’s borders or the post-World War II “rules-based international order” or staying in Afghanistan for twenty years to protect women’s rights or building a “Great Society” on the Mekong or entering World War I to “make the world safe for democracy” or trying to transform Iraq into a liberal democracy or any of these other foolish liberal crusades.
In our ideal world, we would withdraw from NATO and all entangling alliances that we have with Eurasia in Europe and the Pacific. We would withdraw from all globalist institutions. We would quit trying to rule the world and dominate and micromanage foreign countries and forcing them to be like us. We would be content to mind our own business for once in North America and the Eastern Pacific. Instead of expanding the Pentagon’s budget to over a trillion dollars and exhausting ourselves trying to fight a Second Cold War, we would radically cut the Pentagon’s budget and abolish the so-called “intelligence community.”
What we want is so simple and easy to understand that even Matt Lewis should be able to wrap his mind around it. We want peace and prosperity and economic development at home and good foreign relations with the rest of the world and a demilitarized country with strong constitutional protections of civil liberties. We don’t want to be a global empire with a totalitarian surveillance state and a bloated military. We don’t want to be anything like the old British Empire refighting the Crimean War.
If this is absolutely impossible and pie in the sky wishful thinking, then at the very least the current Empire should be content and not forever expanding into places like Ukraine where nothing but catastrophe awaits us. There is no good outcome that comes from expanding the Empire into Ukraine.
“Here are a few questions that are now hard to escape:
If one believes national borders are sacrosanct, why not respect Ukraine’s?
If the answer is that one solely cares about Making America Great Again, then why all the interest in boosting the European far right, Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, India’s Narendra Modi, and even the right-wing ultranationalists of Israel? …”
It is tragic what is happening in Ukraine, but it is not our problem. Ukraine is not a vital interest of the United States and pretending that it is imperils our own security by aggravating tensions with Russia. This also imperils Ukraine’s security. Obviously, we’re not running our foreign policy because would have preferred to dismantle NATO rather than expanding it right up to Russia’s front porch.
In terms of foreign policy, Making America Great Again has always meant to us avoiding catastrophic wars of choice based on inflated moralizing rhetoric like Iraq and focusing on long neglected domestic priorities. We can also admire how Viktor Orbán has secured his own borders and kept out George Soros without simultaneously believing that we should be in NATO or making Hungary a satellite.
“If one hates and fears foreign “dictators” (see their attacks on Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau), why all the love for Putin? …”
Russia has always been an autocratic multicultural empire throughout its entire history and we have managed to coexist with it. Canada, however, shares the longest border in the world with us and by definition what goes on there is a vital interest of the United States. Also, Canada’s shocking turn toward totalitarianism is a radical departure from its Anglo traditions whereas Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is not. Ukraine has been a part of Russia throughout all of American history until the 1990s.
“And if one exalts rugged manliness, has there ever been a better example of that than the courage being exhibited by Ukraine? …”
Is it wise for us to risk World War III with Russia to intervene in Ukraine? No, we can admire the Ukrainians who are defending their country without conflating our interests with their interests.
“In short, Putin’s invasion has exposed the fact that America’s ultra-nationalist populism isn’t just hypocritical, it’s incoherent. …”
There isn’t anything incoherent about our worldview.
Fundamentally, we don’t want to be involved in distant conflicts in Eurasia whether it is in Vietnam or Afghanistan or Iraq or Syria or now Ukraine. We have no desire to dominate Eurasia. This isn’t our ambition.
“What these natcons do seem to have in common is a hellbent determination upend the post-World War II rules-based liberal order. With all of their being, they oppose a worldview that includes an affinity for alliances with freedom-loving nations, as well as other maxims such as “appeasing a strongman is like feeding a crocodile, and hoping he will eat you last.” …”
Does expanding NATO to include Ukraine make us more or less secure? We would argue that it has made us less secure. The current situation is proof of it too. Every American is also now paying for it on a daily basis. How long can this continue before our economy plunges into recession?
National Populism isn’t mindless jingoism like Hannity bellowing about evil dictators circa 2003 or morons stuffing their faces with Freedom Fries and pouring out French wine. If anything is true, it was a reaction against that.
Who the “F” is Matt ‘Lewis’ (stein/berg/witz)????
““National populists—the same people who are dogmatic about protecting national borders—are in a tough spot right now, thanks to Vladimir Putin’s war of aggression on Ukraine.”
Actually not at all: UKRAINE IS RUSSIA.
“Orthodox nationalism, that is, ethnic and religious nationalism, is the ancient idea of community and family refusing to bow to the official ideology of individualism, globalism and Zionism.”
“Hatred for another race is justified when the leaders of that race declare war on yours with strong popular support. It’s a normal, natural and biological reaction to defend oneself. If your nation is invaded by an alien tribe and you do nothing, then your inaction is implicated in the bloodshed that follows.”- Dr. Matt Johnson, Orthodox Priest/scholar.
And then there was this brilliant connection:
Putin Signs Law To Arrest Fake News – CNN Flees Russia
https://odysee.com/@SaltyCracker:a/cnnfliees:4
Eastern Ukraine does not belong to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party.,
I fully admit to having no allegiance to Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Paty.,,
The Democratic Party is itching for a race war with The Native White Working Class….Tucker Carlson hinted at this two nights ago on his show…
Re: “There have always been Americans who wanted to avoid foreign entanglements and wars in Eurasia. This was the consensus in America until Teddy Roosevelt’s time”:
The U.S. was at war to expand its domain almost every year of its existence, but it just wasn’t strong enough to risk expanding across the oceans until about about the time of the first Rosenfeldt. Capitalism necessitates imperialist war. Imperialism is integral to capitalism. It is never isolationist. The U.S.’s hybrid war against Russia in Khazar-kraine (and elsewhere) is a reality we must face. “None of our business” and “not taking sides” on the U.S.’s hybrid war against Russia is poor sophistry, illogical and impossible.
In sparsely populated regions of North America like Alaska. This was seen as desirable while expanding to include all of Mexico was shot down and getting involved in European wars was something Americans had opposed since the beginning of the Republic.
“to include all of Mexico was shot down”:
It was shot down by politicians of the slavery states. They didn’t want to formally annex the remainder of Mexico because Mexico had abolished slavery, and because it would be impossible to move all the revolutionary, anti-slavery Mexicans to reservations. So the imperialist domination of Mexico was done a different way. The motive of imperialism was definitely there, and it was strong, in the nineteenth century. It didn’t appear suddenly at the time of the first Rosenfeldt.
Growth wasn’t seen as imperialism.
We annexed sparsely populated territories, settlers moved in and the territories were admitted as new states with all the rights and powers of other states. This is a fundamentally different thing than one nation conquering and lording it over another nation. We had the chance to do that in Mexico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Hawaii. This was bitterly controversial around the turn of the 20th century. It is why it took a long for New Mexico, Oklahoma and Hawaii to be admitted as states. Cuba and Puerto Rico never became states because of this
I’d go further than that. I’d argue that the American effort to grab French speaking Quebec was the first imperialistic war of the United States, Empire building before the Illuminatist Tom Paine penned most of the Declaration. However, if the USA was so ardently imperialist and interventionist, it cannot account for George Washington and Thomas Jefferson’s policies. Certainly there was more than one “school of thought.” The United States thought about invading Cuba and had to put it off at times because they realized the Spanish Navy was more up to date than theirs. It wasn’t until the Zionists started to control the press that issues like the Tsar and Germany started to matter to “the American people.”
The only nationalism jewboy Matt Lewis supports is Zionism. And the Ukraine is not a sovereign nation it’s a region of Russia. If anyone is in a tough spot it’s the jews, because they are supporting the “neo nazj” Azov Battalion.
Notice how hardly anyone is bringing up this very strange partnership, even on the dissident right? I was brought up to think Jews and Nazis would kill one another on sight whenever in proximity. That’s just one example of the kind of subtle gaslighting which has been underway for many decades. The reality is considerably more complicated. The German Nazis had some strange partnerships going on with other races as well: Muslim units and even black units fighting alongside the Germans, etc. Granted it was nothing like the negrification of the USSA and “French” units opposing them (Emmett Till Sr. was hanged by the US army in Italy for raping and killing Italian women, to give one tiny example), but nevertheless very odd. Nazi multiculturalism wasn’t anything like that pushed by Globo-Pedo’s Barabara Specter, nor is the Russian version endorsed by Putin.
Jews are funding units who explicitly identify as Nazis and even display the dreaded swastika. The Nazis in Country 404 are not only allowed to display symbols which would get a zek in the EUSSR a very long prison term, but are even directly funded by the same folks who throw elderly German ladies in prison for questioning certain “facts” about what happened in Germany between 1933-45. The same moron-herd who approves of harsh prison sentences for old ladies is also in favor of sending weaponry (which they themselves are forbidden to own) to actual Nazis who are killing people in Country 404. This event has exposed some really odd relationships if nothing else. Of course these Nazis are chiefly devoted to killing their fellow white slavics, which does offer a logical explanation for their support from Jews and various blue-checka types in the west.
Hollywood, jew-funded “Nazis”. ZOG, the EU, Nato, and the jewish media would never take the side of actual National Socialists. More jewish machination to get more whites killed.
That’s because these jews understand how international politics and economics work, while people like “Ukraine nationalists” and the dupes joining azov battalion don’t. The Jews know that Ukraine will never be independent and that it will only fall either on the Russian side or the American side. The Jews know that, like with PIRA in Ireland, those fighting for Ukraine “independence” are ultimately fighting to have it colonized by western capital and destroyed.
The west is showing us what it truly takes to be independent with their economic actions against Russia. Being independent means being cut off from western trade and put on the receiving end of non-stop economic warfare. “Ukraine nationalists” expect that they can be independent while also being integrated into this western economic system, but it doesn’t really work out that way.
Bingo. Soros even spoke of establishing a “Soros Empire” to replace the Soviet Empire. I read today that Russia dropped the VAT on gold and is moving to the gold standard. They should expel all western banking and financial interests.
People who push us toward nuclear war are useless idiots, and lunatics as well. The Putin haters don’t give a rat’s rear about “Ukraine’s borders.” They are simply using Ukraine as means to destroy Putin’s Russia, which is a now a roadblock to their goal of a borderless global tyranny.
The more i read the more pro-Russian i become and i´m not alone FYI
Great piece, Hunter. Agree with every word.
Kneeling down the Jews like eye-patch man isn’t masculinity, it’s servility. Warmongering in matters that are not our business in order to please chickenhawk Jews. It’s pure degeneracy. Sorry, men don’t fight for the rainbow flag, they fight for our nation and our liberties. Not for degenerate Jews and their criminal gang in Ukraine.
There’s always two sides of a coin and the left, Hollywood and the media is Zelebsky’s useful idiots.