Germany slams NATO 'warmongering' on Russia

9 posts

Thomas777
Its difficult for people to grasp the intended point of WWII and the New Deal project in the 21st century because the assumptions that gave rise to the effort and the institutions that characterized government in the USA and in Europe and the attendant conceptual horizon(s) intrinsic to both are now very remote and the tangible instantiations of these things no longer exist.

It can't really be overemphasized that in America in the 1930s and 1940s, there was simply an assumption that Capitalism had failed with the 1929 Crash, the in essence subsequent extinction of conventional, genuinely free-market banking, and the implementation of actual state socialism. One way we know that Americans are totally senile and conceptually illiterate at present is because they talk about ''socialism'' like its this remote and frightening thing that may arrive at some point in the future - despite the fact that the history of 20th century American politics is basically the implementation of Socialism and its subsequent dismantling on grounds of enduring failure in favor of a kind of hybrid, 'mixed system' managerialism.

This is one reason why the narrative surrounding World War II in the 21st century both makes no sense and is sort of constantly changing - with the one constant being a macabre and ethnosupremicist Jewish theological story...this of course being the only dominant conceptual strain in the narrative because America and all the important NGOs and IGOs are dominated by a Jewish ruling caste.

The reason why World War II was waged was to erect and implement and subsequently administer a global Socialist regime that would replace the Westphalian system and which would relegate Europe and the few non-European ascendant powers (Japan) to irrelevancy and political serfdom. The United States and the Soviet Union were supposed to cooperatively integrate their core institutions of State and industry to accomplish this - while retaining a sort of general police power (in Constitutional-political terms I mean) in their respective spheres of influence. This isn't a conspiracy theory - it was all conducted very much above-board. That was Senator McCarthy's point - no less than 200 actual registered Soviet agents (many of them NKVD men) became ensconed in the Roosevelt administration, for example. This was not some sort of horrible accident or comically large scale security breach - it was simply part and parcel of an effort to fully incorporate political power between the two allied Socialist superstates.

This project was derailed for various reasons that conspired to end its implementation and ultimately to cause a catastrophic rift. Part of this owed to basic features of Stalin's personality and his unwillingness to compromise on principle even when it was foolish to pursue such a course. Part of this had to do with America's rapid development and subsequently alarmingly eager (and frankly strange in strategic and political terms) use of atomic weapons. Some of it involved the fact that the State Department and what remained of the pre-CIA intelligence apparatus retained basically patriotic sensibilities and set about to sabotage the New Deal project in various capacities. Some of it is simply attributable to the fact that no 'world government' ambition is feasible simply because man is a Political animal and will subconsciously deign to annihilate such projects even if he sincerely has tried to convince himself that he is engaged in a grand moral ambition in working towards building a monstrous Tower of Babel utopia that will facilitate the End of History and perpetual peace.

One reason why the Right gained so much ground in the 1950s was because these things became strikingly obvious - which is the subtext to the chapters of Danny Parker's book that deal with the period and the calculated commutation of the sentences of Third Reich military officers. America had waged total war on Germany as Germany was leading a pan-European Army against the Communist leviathan. Half a decade later, the Soviet Empire was occupying the territory that once housed the Reich General Government and America was setting about to lead a pan-European Army against the (now exponentially more powerful in geostrategic terms, thanks to the USA) Soviet Union. It was an absurd and comically horrifying state of affairs for the men who bore witness to it and found themselves caught in its historical currents.

Is this clear or do I need to explicate further? I'm not being obtuse or a wise-ass.
Local Daimyo
Yes, the center and left of American and British politics in the 1940s wholeheartedly believed this, membership in organizations like the "World Federalism League" was not uncommon among the elite of that time. These people earnestly believed in a future comprised of state-built Le Courbusier-designed planned communities of the sort displayed at the World's Fairs of the 1930s, and they felt that this sort of technocratic socialist utopia had to go hand in hand with a rationalization of international politics through world government (an understandable belief to a generation that had witnessed the world wars).

The original charter of the United Nations is the key document to understanding this; it was intended to be a constitution for world government. It had within itself bureaucratic bodies that were supposed to administer the global economy in a state-socialist fashion, alongside the UN's sister institutions, the World Bank and the IMF. The somewhat confusing descriptions of the creation and purpose of the World Bank and IMF that you'll encounter in American high school textbooks are confusing because they don't want to say it plainly: these institutions were not actually intended to serve any market purpose, but were supposed to be a global"Gosbank" to direct American capital into New Deal-style development projects worldwide. When the Rockefeller family donated the land for the UN headquarters in Manhattan, this was the vision they were hoping to implement. It was honestly believed that the Soviets would cooperate. Understanding this type of belief among postwar Atlanticist elites helped me understand why the supported the Communists in China, and decolonization globally. But in the end, it didn't quite work out. The full world government system was rendered unworkable by the Cold War and in its stead a sort of covert world government-lite was implemented through the American security state and multinational corporations, which is what we live under now.

PS: this is why I can't handle Boomer-con adulation of the "Greatest Generation patriots" that "beat Nazism" for "freedom". The smartest among the Greatest Generation were basically mad scientists hell bent on implementing a grandiose scheme for utopian-socialist world government.
RedHand
No that was a clear explanation, much thanks.

PS: Agreed, boomer WW2 triumphalism and exultation of 'humanitarian warfare' is historically illiterate and disturbing.
auteur_theory
A friend of mine and I have begun using the term "Boomer History" (like Whig History) to describe this belief system and all its attendant representations in media, particularly film.
Laocoon
I've blamed a lot of modern society's ills on the Boomers, and rightly so. But when the Hart-Cellar Act passed in '65, the oldest Boomers were only 20. It was the "Greatest" generation that comprised the politicians and majority of voters who supported it.
Jude
Any lit that expands on this, LD?
Local Daimyo
Carroll Quigley's CFR-backed tome "Tragedy and Hope" is a key text for all this. I haven't read most of it because it's very long, boring and hard to find but I have read enough excerpts to get the idea of what I need to know.
RedHand
Jude
Thanks for this. Very fascinating and not surprising. It will be interesting to see how this project progresses as we get further into the 21st century.

Somewhat related; I wonder how Thomas equates the New Deal with state socialism.