On Writing on the Myth of the New Cold War

All these polemics are going to form part of the basis for a book I intend to write entitled The Myth of the New Cold War and The Revival of the Great Game. I reject all think tanks, "experts", those who espouse propaganda creeds instead of independent thinking.

Certainly, Lucas will loom large but his "arguments" will be judged under to rubric of those selling history as propaganda. I will also request Norman Davies whether he thinks his endorsement of the book was wise.

I want to make in clear that the advance of a homegrown Russian liberalism is a good thing as is more freedom: but it cannot be promoted given the facts we know about the NED trying to get unpopular oligarchs, Anatol Lieven's "Limousine Liberals" back into power.

Quite simply this will backfire. Dissidents are actually a protected species who fight for human rights but conflating Anna Politkovskaya's brave journalism with those like the repulsive FSB goon Litvinenko simply discredits the cause of freedom in Russia.

The Kremlin even if it really did so desire, is not going to assassinate Vladimir Bukovsky or other names going back to the Moscow Helsinki dissidents, who have spent too much time in the USA. They never mention the democidal effects of shock therapy.

There needs to be more genuine "dissident" thinking and less US funded political NGO propaganda, though human rights groups have an important role. But simply ignoring US crimes and global violations of human rights in the name of human rights ( some are less human than others) is no longer an option.

The idiocy of this amoral Market Bolshevism is shown in the fact Lucas refuses to condemn the fascistic National Bolsheviks of Eduard Limanov whose imagery is blatantly neo-Nazi and a part of the supposedly respectable coalition The Other Russia led by those like Garry Kasparov.

Moreover, the unquestioned creed of Euroatlanticism is misplaced and inexorable NATO expansion is dangerous. It will fuel nationalist irredentism in Ukraine if Western nations do not act carefully and diplomatically as Polish and Baltic diplomats have largely failed to do.

The US political system is simply not a beacon unto all humanity. It is deeply corrupt as is the way US foreign policy has continued dity tactics by the CIA, what Peter Dale Scott calls the "deep state", the support for "our terrorists" like the ethnic cleansing KLA in 1998.

Scott is correct to assert that regime change needs to begin within the USA: only then will the honourable aspects of the USA come to the fore, the charity work, humanitarian missions and philanthropy. It must embrace sensible conservatives, political liberals and social democrats.

The model of Solidarity offers a way forward here, though Scott's faith in Michnik in The Future of America is misguided: this post-Trotskyist propagandist and self promoting ideologue is unworthy of being honoured. He supported the Iraq War with craven subservience to Great Power-ant yet he once said totorure was wrong no matter which dictatorship right or left committed it.

It has never entered Michnik's mind that democracies like the US can also practice torture as well in imperial outposts. Michnik has forgotten the writings of Joseph Conrad and Heart of Darkness

Only genuine citizen power, real civil society activism, can work to reform the USA and other EU states should stop being unquestioning allies, find oil alternatives quickly through state action and support reforms of the US system of government.