https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/29/believing-impossible-things/

"The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’ whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology (and it alone) – can predominate. And, secondly to underline pointedly that the West is ‘not losing’ in this war against the other ‘reality’. This other reality is the multivalent ‘otherness’ that self-evidently is attracting more and more support around the world.

Many in the West are simply unaware of how fast the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting: The original plate bifurcation (the failed financial war declared on Russia), already has led to a building wave. Anger is growing.. People now no longer feel alone in rejecting western hegemony – they “no longer care”.

In just the week that preceded the G7 summit, the Arab League literally ‘went multi-polar’; It quit its former pro-US automaticity. The embrace of President Assad and the Syrian government was both the logical consequence to the secondary tectonic-plate shift set in motion by China with its Saudi-Iranian diplomacy — a revolution which Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) then logically extended to the entire Arab sphere.

MbS sealed this ‘break-free’ of US control through having President al-Assad invited to the Summit to symbolise the League’s act of generalised iconoclasm.

For the West, it is ontologically impossible to tolerate their reality being disassembled: to see their society and the world split in two. The narrative reality is so embedded via the well-honed effectiveness of MSM messaging however, that politicians have become lazy. They do not have to argue their case, and have no incentive to hold back on untruths either.

The dynamics are exorable: an over-hyped ‘monolithic reality’ evolves into a Manichaean fight to the death. Any backsliding by ‘principals’ could result in the collapse of the Media narrative ‘house of cards’. (This notion of a monolithic reality is not one shared by most other societies who see reality as multi-faceted).

Denial becomes endemic. So, we witness a hawkish G7, diverting from the narrative setback (of Bakhmut falling) by the casual embrace of a ploy to supply F-16s to Ukraine; chastising China for not making President Putin ‘back off’ in Ukraine; and using the meeting to set a narrative framework for the coming confrontation with China on trade issues and Taiwan..
....
The G7 salience lies not so much with the anti-China narratives launched, but, plainly said, because the entire episode expresses a western hubristic denial, which portends extreme danger in respect to Ukraine. It speaks to the reality that the West — in it’s present mental mode — will be unable to put forward any credible political initiative to end the Ukraine conflict.(Recall that Moscow was badly mauled by the earlier Minsk episode).

The G7 language abjures all serious diplomacy, and signals that the imperative remains to stick with the ‘not losing’ mantra:The fall of Bakhmut is no defeat for Kiev, but a Pyrrhic loss for Putin; Ukraine is winning, Putin is losing, was the G7 messaging.

The hubris resides in the western perennial condescension towards President Putin and Russia. Washington (and London) just cannot disabuse themselves of the conviction that Russia is fragile; its armed forces barely, if at all, competent; its economy cratering; and that therefore Putin likely would seize on just about any ‘olive branch’ America cares to offer him.

That President Xi could – or would – pressure Putin ‘to back-off’ in Ukraine, and accept a ceasefire on EU terms — which are the ‘Zelensky terms’ — is delusional.

Russia is ‘winning’ on the financial war front, and on the global diplomatic front. It has the overwhelming advantage in force numbers; it has the advantage in weaponry; it has the advantage in the skies and in the Electro-magnetic sphere. Whereas Ukraine is in disarray, its forces decimated and the Kiev entity is crumbling fast.

Don’t they ‘get it’? No. The endless bitter antagonism to Putin and to Russia has allowed a self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality; and then to transit into delusion — always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for validation and extended radicalisation.

This is a serious psychosis. "

On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 3:59:38 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/29/believing-impossible-things/
>
> "The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’ whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology (and it alone) – can predominate. And, secondly to underline pointedly that the West is ‘not losing’ in this war against the other ‘reality’. This other reality is the multivalent ‘otherness’ that self-evidently is attracting more and more support around the world.
>
> Many in the West are simply unaware of how fast the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting: The original plate bifurcation (the failed financial war declared on Russia), already has led to a building wave. Anger is growing. People now no longer feel alone in rejecting western hegemony – they “no longer care”.
>
> In just the week that preceded the G7 summit, the Arab League literally ‘went multi-polar’; It quit its former pro-US automaticity. The embrace of President Assad and the Syrian government was both the logical consequence to the secondary tectonic-plate shift set in motion by China with its Saudi-Iranian diplomacy — a revolution which Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) then logically extended to the entire Arab sphere.
>
> MbS sealed this ‘break-free’ of US control through having President al-Assad invited to the Summit to symbolise the League’s act of generalised iconoclasm.
>
> For the West, it is ontologically impossible to tolerate their reality being disassembled: to see their society and the world split in two. The narrative reality is so embedded via the well-honed effectiveness of MSM messaging however, that politicians have become lazy. They do not have to argue their case, and have no incentive to hold back on untruths either.
>
> The dynamics are exorable: an over-hyped ‘monolithic reality’ evolves into a Manichaean fight to the death. Any backsliding by ‘principals’ could result in the collapse of the Media narrative ‘house of cards’. (This notion of a monolithic reality is not one shared by most other societies who see reality as multi-faceted).
>
> Denial becomes endemic. So, we witness a hawkish G7, diverting from the narrative setback (of Bakhmut falling) by the casual embrace of a ploy to supply F-16s to Ukraine; chastising China for not making President Putin ‘back off’ in Ukraine; and using the meeting to set a narrative framework for the coming confrontation with China on trade issues and Taiwan.
> ...
> The G7 salience lies not so much with the anti-China narratives launched, but, plainly said, because the entire episode expresses a western hubristic denial, which portends extreme danger in respect to Ukraine. It speaks to the reality that the West — in it’s present mental mode — will be unable to put forward any credible political initiative to end the Ukraine conflict.(Recall that Moscow was badly mauled by the earlier Minsk episode).
>
> The G7 language abjures all serious diplomacy, and signals that the imperative remains to stick with the ‘not losing’ mantra:The fall of Bakhmut is no defeat for Kiev, but a Pyrrhic loss for Putin; Ukraine is winning, Putin is losing, was the G7 messaging.
>
> The hubris resides in the western perennial condescension towards President Putin and Russia. Washington (and London) just cannot disabuse themselves of the conviction that Russia is fragile; its armed forces barely, if at all, competent; its economy cratering; and that therefore Putin likely would seize on just about any ‘olive branch’ America cares to offer him.
>
> That President Xi could – or would – pressure Putin ‘to back-off’ in Ukraine, and accept a ceasefire on EU terms — which are the ‘Zelensky terms’ — is delusional.
>
> Russia is ‘winning’ on the financial war front, and on the global diplomatic front. It has the overwhelming advantage in force numbers; it has the advantage in weaponry; it has the advantage in the skies and in the Electro-magnetic sphere. Whereas Ukraine is in disarray, its forces decimated and the Kiev entity is crumbling fast.
>
> Don’t they ‘get it’? No. The endless bitter antagonism to Putin and to Russia has allowed a self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality; and then to transit into delusion — always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for validation and extended radicalisation.
>
> This is a serious psychosis. "

Several descriptives stand out in the above quote from Alastair Crooke's article concerning US policy toward Russia/Ukraine . They are "believing impossible things," "self-imagined reality to detach, to drift further and further from any connection to reality," "transit into delusion," and "a serious psychosis."

A serious psychosis is probably too strong. But other writers also suggest US is believing the impossible and living in a self imaged reality.
"The Indo-Pacific Has Already Chosen Door No. 3" serves as an example. The article was written by Kelly A. Grieco, (a senior fellow in the Reimagining U.S. Grand Strategy Program at the Stimson Center), and Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow in the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/05/31/us-china-indo-pacific-asia-biden-diplomacy-competition/?

"Washington ought to heed Lee’s words, because interests, not values, guide the policy
choices of states in the Indo-Pacific.

Yet Washington seems to view the reluctance of states across Southeast Asia and the
Pacific Island region to unequivocally align with the United States as a symptom of
temporary indecisiveness while states collect more information about the strategic
worth of potential partners. In reality, these hedgers have already chosen multi-alignment
as the best way to pursue their interests.
....
Rather than trying to rewrite the rules to fit its old strategy, or overreacting to minor
diplomatic hiccups, the United States will be far more successful if it accepts that the
task is to work with, rather than against, a multi-aligned reality."

Stephen M Walt also advise the US to take the reality as it is and not giving in to irrational
fear.
"Stop Worrying About Chinese Hegemony in Asia
U.S. fears are not only irrational—they’re a potential self-fulfilling prophecy."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/05/31/stop-worrying-about-chinese-hegemony-in-asia/

On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 3:59:38 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/29/believing-impossible-things/
>
> "The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’ whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology (and it alone) – can predominate. And, secondly to underline pointedly that the West is ‘not losing’ in this war against the other ‘reality’. This other reality is the multivalent ‘otherness’ that self-evidently is attracting more and more support around the world.
>
> Many in the West are simply unaware of how fast the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting: The original plate bifurcation (the failed financial war declared on Russia), already has led to a building wave. Anger is growing. People now no longer feel alone in rejecting western hegemony – they “no longer care”.
>
> In just the week that preceded the G7 summit, the Arab League literally ‘went multi-polar’; It quit its former pro-US automaticity. The embrace of President Assad and the Syrian government was both the logical consequence to the secondary tectonic-plate shift set in motion by China with its Saudi-Iranian diplomacy — a revolution which Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) then logically extended to the entire Arab sphere.
>
> MbS sealed this ‘break-free’ of US control through having President al-Assad invited to the Summit to symbolise the League’s act of generalised iconoclasm.
>
> For the West, it is ontologically impossible to tolerate their reality being disassembled: to see their society and the world split in two. The narrative reality is so embedded via the well-honed effectiveness of MSM messaging however, that politicians have become lazy. They do not have to argue their case, and have no incentive to hold back on untruths either.
>
> The dynamics are exorable: an over-hyped ‘monolithic reality’ evolves into a Manichaean fight to the death. Any backsliding by ‘principals’ could result in the collapse of the Media narrative ‘house of cards’. (This notion of a monolithic reality is not one shared by most other societies who see reality as multi-faceted).
>
> Denial becomes endemic. So, we witness a hawkish G7, diverting from the narrative setback (of Bakhmut falling) by the casual embrace of a ploy to supply F-16s to Ukraine; chastising China for not making President Putin ‘back off’ in Ukraine; and using the meeting to set a narrative framework for the coming confrontation with China on trade issues and Taiwan.
> ...
> The G7 salience lies not so much with the anti-China narratives launched, but, plainly said, because the entire episode expresses a western hubristic denial, which portends extreme danger in respect to Ukraine. It speaks to the reality that the West — in it’s present mental mode — will be unable to put forward any credible political initiative to end the Ukraine conflict.(Recall that Moscow was badly mauled by the earlier Minsk episode).
>
> The G7 language abjures all serious diplomacy, and signals that the imperative remains to stick with the ‘not losing’ mantra:The fall of Bakhmut is no defeat for Kiev, but a Pyrrhic loss for Putin; Ukraine is winning, Putin is losing, was the G7 messaging.
>
> The hubris resides in the western perennial condescension towards President Putin and Russia. Washington (and London) just cannot disabuse themselves of the conviction that Russia is fragile; its armed forces barely, if at all, competent; its economy cratering; and that therefore Putin likely would seize on just about any ‘olive branch’ America cares to offer him.
>
> That President Xi could – or would – pressure Putin ‘to back-off’ in Ukraine, and accept a ceasefire on EU terms — which are the ‘Zelensky terms’ — is delusional.
>
> Russia is ‘winning’ on the financial war front, and on the global diplomatic front. It has the overwhelming advantage in force numbers; it has the advantage in weaponry; it has the advantage in the skies and in the Electro-magnetic sphere. Whereas Ukraine is in disarray, its forces decimated and the Kiev entity is crumbling fast.
>
> Don’t they ‘get it’? No. The endless bitter antagonism to Putin and to Russia has allowed a self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality; and then to transit into delusion — always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for validation and extended radicalisation.
>
> This is a serious psychosis. "

Writing on the wall.
Fives trends should wake up the West, especially the US, from its la-la land reality.

"A failure to recognize, or attempting to strongly resist, these trends could pose significant risks not only to the West itself but
also to global stability. Yet future conflicts can be avoided if this period of change is viewed as an opportunity to build a more
equitable world, rather than as a crisis that threatens preferred and entrenched privileges.

Five Trends to Consider
First is the unravelling of the hitherto telling of history. The West, across its colonial history, has practiced and perfected the
selective interpretation and telling of events, choosing to portray itself as the originator of modern civilization and a benevolent
guiding force. This is now changing; information technologies, such as the Internet and social media, have broken the monopoly
over information and history once held by Western gatekeeping institutions (media companies, universities, book publishers, and
more). As a consequence, people around the world are recognizing that history is no longer confined to Western interpretation—
including its projection of benevolence.

A significant component of this has been the West’s frequent failure to acknowledge its own imperfect past.
....
The second trend is the re-evaluation of the” rules-based” international order. Policymakers in Washington may not like hearing it,
but the concept is the subject of much derision around the world and is widely regarded as a tool used by the West to control global
affairs and maintain hegemony. There is ample resentment growing against Western nations given the repeated breaching of their
own rules, meaning that the legitimacy of this order is being questioned despite its positive aspects.
....
Third is the unmasking of Western “peacekeeping.” Despite portraying itself as the guarantor of global security, much of the world
now views the United States‚ and Europe to a lesser extent, as profiting from war rather than being interested in promoting authentic
peace. The Western military-industrial complex—particularly the United States’—is so powerful that it is now well-known to drive U.S.
foreign policy to the extent that it perpetuates conflicts to thus profit from war.
....
The fourth trend underway is the dethroning of the Western financial superstructure. That the West makes ample use of its financial
might for geopolitical advantage and purposes is no great secret—policymakers and experts openly talk about the “weaponization of
finance” and applying sanctions on countries that do not comply with Western intentions. Likewise, the ability of the United States and
its allies to freeze and even confiscate the reserves of sovereign states—Afghanistan, Venezuela, Russia—sent shock waves across the
world.
....
Fifth and finally, there is the notable collapse of the Western press’ credibility. This comes at a critical juncture, as repeated shortcomings
in the last few years have heightened global awareness of Western media’s role in perpetuating the West’s preferred aspects of the current
world order—often to the detriment of other countries.

For instance, persistent China-bashing in Western headlines has perpetuated an unproductive and fear-mongering narrative of Beijing as a
threat to its own citizens and the world at large. The geopolitical contexts of Hong Kong and Taiwan, though complicated affairs, have been
particularly and selectively drummed up to push an “us vs. them” narrative, rather than encouraging understanding between the West and
China."

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:13:52 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 3:59:38 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> > https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/29/believing-impossible-things/
> >
> > "The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’ whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology (and it alone) – can predominate. And, secondly to underline pointedly that the West is ‘not losing’ in this war against the other ‘reality’. This other reality is the multivalent ‘otherness’ that self-evidently is attracting more and more support around the world.
> >
> > Many in the West are simply unaware of how fast the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting: The original plate bifurcation (the failed financial war declared on Russia), already has led to a building wave. Anger is growing. People now no longer feel alone in rejecting western hegemony – they “no longer care”.
> >
> > In just the week that preceded the G7 summit, the Arab League literally ‘went multi-polar’; It quit its former pro-US automaticity.. The embrace of President Assad and the Syrian government was both the logical consequence to the secondary tectonic-plate shift set in motion by China with its Saudi-Iranian diplomacy — a revolution which Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) then logically extended to the entire Arab sphere.
> >
> > MbS sealed this ‘break-free’ of US control through having President al-Assad invited to the Summit to symbolise the League’s act of generalised iconoclasm.
> >
> > For the West, it is ontologically impossible to tolerate their reality being disassembled: to see their society and the world split in two. The narrative reality is so embedded via the well-honed effectiveness of MSM messaging however, that politicians have become lazy. They do not have to argue their case, and have no incentive to hold back on untruths either.
> >
> > The dynamics are exorable: an over-hyped ‘monolithic reality’ evolves into a Manichaean fight to the death. Any backsliding by ‘principals’ could result in the collapse of the Media narrative ‘house of cards’. (This notion of a monolithic reality is not one shared by most other societies who see reality as multi-faceted).
> >
> > Denial becomes endemic. So, we witness a hawkish G7, diverting from the narrative setback (of Bakhmut falling) by the casual embrace of a ploy to supply F-16s to Ukraine; chastising China for not making President Putin ‘back off’ in Ukraine; and using the meeting to set a narrative framework for the coming confrontation with China on trade issues and Taiwan.
> > ...
> > The G7 salience lies not so much with the anti-China narratives launched, but, plainly said, because the entire episode expresses a western hubristic denial, which portends extreme danger in respect to Ukraine. It speaks to the reality that the West — in it’s present mental mode — will be unable to put forward any credible political initiative to end the Ukraine conflict.(Recall that Moscow was badly mauled by the earlier Minsk episode).
> >
> > The G7 language abjures all serious diplomacy, and signals that the imperative remains to stick with the ‘not losing’ mantra:The fall of Bakhmut is no defeat for Kiev, but a Pyrrhic loss for Putin; Ukraine is winning, Putin is losing, was the G7 messaging.
> >
> > The hubris resides in the western perennial condescension towards President Putin and Russia. Washington (and London) just cannot disabuse themselves of the conviction that Russia is fragile; its armed forces barely, if at all, competent; its economy cratering; and that therefore Putin likely would seize on just about any ‘olive branch’ America cares to offer him.
> >
> > That President Xi could – or would – pressure Putin ‘to back-off’ in Ukraine, and accept a ceasefire on EU terms — which are the ‘Zelensky terms’ — is delusional.
> >
> > Russia is ‘winning’ on the financial war front, and on the global diplomatic front. It has the overwhelming advantage in force numbers; it has the advantage in weaponry; it has the advantage in the skies and in the Electro-magnetic sphere. Whereas Ukraine is in disarray, its forces decimated and the Kiev entity is crumbling fast.
> >
> > Don’t they ‘get it’? No. The endless bitter antagonism to Putin and to Russia has allowed a self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality; and then to transit into delusion — always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for validation and extended radicalisation.
> >
> > This is a serious psychosis. "
> Writing on the wall.
> Fives trends should wake up the West, especially the US, from its la-la land reality.
>
> "A failure to recognize, or attempting to strongly resist, these trends could pose significant risks not only to the West itself but
> also to global stability. Yet future conflicts can be avoided if this period of change is viewed as an opportunity to build a more
> equitable world, rather than as a crisis that threatens preferred and entrenched privileges.
>
> Five Trends to Consider
> First is the unravelling of the hitherto telling of history. The West, across its colonial history, has practiced and perfected the
> selective interpretation and telling of events, choosing to portray itself as the originator of modern civilization and a benevolent
> guiding force. This is now changing; information technologies, such as the Internet and social media, have broken the monopoly
> over information and history once held by Western gatekeeping institutions (media companies, universities, book publishers, and
> more). As a consequence, people around the world are recognizing that history is no longer confined to Western interpretation—
> including its projection of benevolence.
>
> A significant component of this has been the West’s frequent failure to acknowledge its own imperfect past.
> ...
> The second trend is the re-evaluation of the” rules-based” international order. Policymakers in Washington may not like hearing it,
> but the concept is the subject of much derision around the world and is widely regarded as a tool used by the West to control global
> affairs and maintain hegemony. There is ample resentment growing against Western nations given the repeated breaching of their
> own rules, meaning that the legitimacy of this order is being questioned despite its positive aspects.
> ...
> Third is the unmasking of Western “peacekeeping.” Despite portraying itself as the guarantor of global security, much of the world
> now views the United States‚ and Europe to a lesser extent, as profiting from war rather than being interested in promoting authentic
> peace. The Western military-industrial complex—particularly the United States’—is so powerful that it is now well-known to drive U.S.
> foreign policy to the extent that it perpetuates conflicts to thus profit from war.
> ...
> The fourth trend underway is the dethroning of the Western financial superstructure. That the West makes ample use of its financial
> might for geopolitical advantage and purposes is no great secret—policymakers and experts openly talk about the “weaponization of
> finance” and applying sanctions on countries that do not comply with Western intentions. Likewise, the ability of the United States and
> its allies to freeze and even confiscate the reserves of sovereign states—Afghanistan, Venezuela, Russia—sent shock waves across the
> world.
> ...
> Fifth and finally, there is the notable collapse of the Western press’ credibility. This comes at a critical juncture, as repeated shortcomings
> in the last few years have heightened global awareness of Western media’s role in perpetuating the West’s preferred aspects of the current
> world order—often to the detriment of other countries.
>
> For instance, persistent China-bashing in Western headlines has perpetuated an unproductive and fear-mongering narrative of Beijing as a
> threat to its own citizens and the world at large. The geopolitical contexts of Hong Kong and Taiwan, though complicated affairs, have been
> particularly and selectively drummed up to push an “us vs. them” narrative, rather than encouraging understanding between the West and
> China."

Mr. Lee, I could say many things to bash your Xi and the CCP's governance of the PRC, and they would all be accurate.

But the real problem with the US narrative comes from Donald Trump. He is, without a doubt, the real problem.

On Saturday, June 10, 2023 at 1:45:05 AM UTC-4, bmoore wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:13:52 AM UTC-7, ltlee1 wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 30, 2023 at 3:59:38 PM UTC-4, ltlee1 wrote:
> > > https://strategic-culture.org/news/2023/05/29/believing-impossible-things/
> > >
> > > "The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’ whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology (and it alone) – can predominate. And, secondly to underline pointedly that the West is ‘not losing’ in this war against the other ‘reality’. This other reality is the multivalent ‘otherness’ that self-evidently is attracting more and more support around the world.
> > >
> > > Many in the West are simply unaware of how fast the geopolitical tectonic plates are shifting: The original plate bifurcation (the failed financial war declared on Russia), already has led to a building wave. Anger is growing. People now no longer feel alone in rejecting western hegemony – they “no longer care”.
> > >
> > > In just the week that preceded the G7 summit, the Arab League literally ‘went multi-polar’; It quit its former pro-US automaticity. The embrace of President Assad and the Syrian government was both the logical consequence to the secondary tectonic-plate shift set in motion by China with its Saudi-Iranian diplomacy — a revolution which Mohammad bin Salman (MbS) then logically extended to the entire Arab sphere.
> > >
> > > MbS sealed this ‘break-free’ of US control through having President al-Assad invited to the Summit to symbolise the League’s act of generalised iconoclasm.
> > >
> > > For the West, it is ontologically impossible to tolerate their reality being disassembled: to see their society and the world split in two. The narrative reality is so embedded via the well-honed effectiveness of MSM messaging however, that politicians have become lazy. They do not have to argue their case, and have no incentive to hold back on untruths either.
> > >
> > > The dynamics are exorable: an over-hyped ‘monolithic reality’ evolves into a Manichaean fight to the death. Any backsliding by ‘principals’ could result in the collapse of the Media narrative ‘house of cards’. (This notion of a monolithic reality is not one shared by most other societies who see reality as multi-faceted).
> > >
> > > Denial becomes endemic. So, we witness a hawkish G7, diverting from the narrative setback (of Bakhmut falling) by the casual embrace of a ploy to supply F-16s to Ukraine; chastising China for not making President Putin ‘back off’ in Ukraine; and using the meeting to set a narrative framework for the coming confrontation with China on trade issues and Taiwan.
> > > ...
> > > The G7 salience lies not so much with the anti-China narratives launched, but, plainly said, because the entire episode expresses a western hubristic denial, which portends extreme danger in respect to Ukraine. It speaks to the reality that the West — in it’s present mental mode — will be unable to put forward any credible political initiative to end the Ukraine conflict.(Recall that Moscow was badly mauled by the earlier Minsk episode).
> > >
> > > The G7 language abjures all serious diplomacy, and signals that the imperative remains to stick with the ‘not losing’ mantra:The fall of Bakhmut is no defeat for Kiev, but a Pyrrhic loss for Putin; Ukraine is winning, Putin is losing, was the G7 messaging.
> > >
> > > The hubris resides in the western perennial condescension towards President Putin and Russia. Washington (and London) just cannot disabuse themselves of the conviction that Russia is fragile; its armed forces barely, if at all, competent; its economy cratering; and that therefore Putin likely would seize on just about any ‘olive branch’ America cares to offer him.
> > >
> > > That President Xi could – or would – pressure Putin ‘to back-off’ in Ukraine, and accept a ceasefire on EU terms — which are the ‘Zelensky terms’ — is delusional.
> > >
> > > Russia is ‘winning’ on the financial war front, and on the global diplomatic front. It has the overwhelming advantage in force numbers; it has the advantage in weaponry; it has the advantage in the skies and in the Electro-magnetic sphere. Whereas Ukraine is in disarray, its forces decimated and the Kiev entity is crumbling fast.
> > >
> > > Don’t they ‘get it’? No. The endless bitter antagonism to Putin and to Russia has allowed a self-imagined reality to detach; to drift further and further from any connection to reality; and then to transit into delusion — always drawing on like-minded peer cheerleaders for validation and extended radicalisation.
> > >
> > > This is a serious psychosis. "
> > Writing on the wall.
> > Fives trends should wake up the West, especially the US, from its la-la land reality.
> >
> > "A failure to recognize, or attempting to strongly resist, these trends could pose significant risks not only to the West itself but
> > also to global stability. Yet future conflicts can be avoided if this period of change is viewed as an opportunity to build a more
> > equitable world, rather than as a crisis that threatens preferred and entrenched privileges.
> >
> > Five Trends to Consider
> > First is the unravelling of the hitherto telling of history. The West, across its colonial history, has practiced and perfected the
> > selective interpretation and telling of events, choosing to portray itself as the originator of modern civilization and a benevolent
> > guiding force. This is now changing; information technologies, such as the Internet and social media, have broken the monopoly
> > over information and history once held by Western gatekeeping institutions (media companies, universities, book publishers, and
> > more). As a consequence, people around the world are recognizing that history is no longer confined to Western interpretation—
> > including its projection of benevolence.
> >
> > A significant component of this has been the West’s frequent failure to acknowledge its own imperfect past.
> > ...
> > The second trend is the re-evaluation of the” rules-based” international order. Policymakers in Washington may not like hearing it,
> > but the concept is the subject of much derision around the world and is widely regarded as a tool used by the West to control global
> > affairs and maintain hegemony. There is ample resentment growing against Western nations given the repeated breaching of their
> > own rules, meaning that the legitimacy of this order is being questioned despite its positive aspects.
> > ...
> > Third is the unmasking of Western “peacekeeping.” Despite portraying itself as the guarantor of global security, much of the world
> > now views the United States‚ and Europe to a lesser extent, as profiting from war rather than being interested in promoting authentic
> > peace. The Western military-industrial complex—particularly the United States’—is so powerful that it is now well-known to drive U.S.
> > foreign policy to the extent that it perpetuates conflicts to thus profit from war.
> > ...
> > The fourth trend underway is the dethroning of the Western financial superstructure. That the West makes ample use of its financial
> > might for geopolitical advantage and purposes is no great secret—policymakers and experts openly talk about the “weaponization of
> > finance” and applying sanctions on countries that do not comply with Western intentions. Likewise, the ability of the United States and
> > its allies to freeze and even confiscate the reserves of sovereign states—Afghanistan, Venezuela, Russia—sent shock waves across the
> > world.
> > ...
> > Fifth and finally, there is the notable collapse of the Western press’ credibility. This comes at a critical juncture, as repeated shortcomings
> > in the last few years have heightened global awareness of Western media’s role in perpetuating the West’s preferred aspects of the current
> > world order—often to the detriment of other countries.
> >
> > For instance, persistent China-bashing in Western headlines has perpetuated an unproductive and fear-mongering narrative of Beijing as a
> > threat to its own citizens and the world at large. The geopolitical contexts of Hong Kong and Taiwan, though complicated affairs, have been
> > particularly and selectively drummed up to push an “us vs. them” narrative, rather than encouraging understanding between the West and
> > China."
> Mr. Lee, I could say many things to bash your Xi and the CCP's governance of the PRC, and they would all be accurate.
>
> But the real problem with the US narrative comes from Donald Trump. He is, without a doubt, the real problem.

The opening statement from Believing Impossible Things:
"The recent G7 summit should be understood as firstly, the shaping of a battlespace in the ‘War of Narratives’
whose principal ‘front’ today is the Team Biden insistence that only one ‘reality’ — the US-led ‘Rules’ ideology
(and it alone) – can predominate"