As mentioned before, the human species has different races or ethnicities, with different spiritual and physical characteristics, different history, different culture, different religion, different art, different aesthetics, different gastronomy, different customs and traditions, etc.
One of the most important values of humanity is precisely its variety and diversity. Deglobalization is the only way to preserve and promote those values. Globalization is anti-Nature, a source of evil, and a violent crime against humanity.
Throughout history, all empires aspired and attempted to globalize. They all failed, no exceptions.
Globalization is the most effective way of allowing the strong countries to violate and rape other countries, to enslave the weak, to steal their natural resources, and to take advantage of their misery and cheap labour.
Globalization makes all nations depend on other nations. Invariably, the result is permanent insecurity, which usually leads to economic recessions, depressions and collapses.
It is possible and easy to control a national economy with great precision, for each nation has a pretty good idea and can know in detail, what will be its short-term, medium-term and long-term needs. On the other hand, to control a global economy is literally impossible. Surpluses and shortages are inevitable.
Nations must be 100% sovereign, auto-sufficient and sustainable, in order to assure, by themselves, the supply of all the required essential goods & services.
The simple fact of nations being forced to fulfill their own needs, generates a tremendous boost in the creativeness and inventiveness of each nation, and of humanity as a whole.
Mass tourism is a superfluous and volatile industry, which entails many unnecessary ills: extra pollution and energy consumption, risks of leaving home alone, risks of international transports, risks of lost luggage, risks of theft, risks of rape, risks of new pathogens and of food poisoning, and all the inherent risks of being in an unfamiliar environment. Throughout history, humans have travelled for commercial, military, religious, cultural or vital purposes. Never for leisure. Tourism is a “last minute” artificial commercial scheme.
Through internet, anyone can have a much more complete, profound knowledge of any country and its history, without ever leaving home. If you like, you can even engage in cyber audiovisual chats with the natives.
Social propaganda compels people to visit the all world, instead of knowing their own countries, because tourism has somber occult political goals: to accustom citizens to mingle with other races, to promote cross breeding, to make them lose their national identities, and to foment big immigration. These strategies coincide with the globalist agenda of eliminating all national borders and sovereignties.
Positive patriotism, nationalism and protectionism are the essential ingredients for safe, healthy, wealthy nations, and world.
United States, United Kingdom, ex-Soviet Union, European Union, African Union, EAEU - Eurasian Economic Union, United Nations, Unesco, etc. The “U” word indicates globalist manure.
No wonder, the new digital global currency has been named Unicoin by both institutions, the BIS - Bank of International Settlements, and the IMF - International Monetary Fund. Henry Kissinger rightly said — Who controls the money, controls the world.
AFW is the only political system that allows nations to prosper by themselves, on their own terms, independently of all other nations. In simple terms, globalization means the rich nations get richer, and the poor nations get poorer. In a AFW, all nations get richer, thanks to nationalism and no foreign interference.
Human happiness depends on being able to plant the flowers you like best in your own garden, without the interference and intervention of other people, or of other nations, or of extraterrestrials…
Theory and practical politics are very different. On the practical level, reification of the church is almost a disaster without much intermediary. Its a very corrupt church. You can spot radicals who are very ugly. it is very easy to be divisive with the entire modern character owed to the Soviet Union's legacy, a great legacy of imperfect revolution, enlightenment, and emancipation.
This macro-state might happen, but then it might not. If the United States manages to starve Russia and Russia makes the wrong moves like the Soviet Union did, then internal fragmentation will happen again.
### Critique of the Text Using Multiple Methodologies
#### **Philosophical Critique**
The text employs a **teleological worldview**, positing the "inevitability" of a Eurasian macro-state as the culmination of historical destiny. This deterministic perspective neglects the role of human agency and contingency in history. Philosophically, it echoes Hegelian or Marxist dialectics, where history progresses toward a predetermined end. However, this view is contested by existentialist and postmodern philosophies that emphasize fragmented narratives and the absence of inherent historical purpose. The assertion that sovereignty is strengthened through integration into a macro-state also contradicts classical theories of sovereignty (e.g., Hobbes, Rousseau), which prioritize self-determination and territorial autonomy.
#### **Logical Critique**
The argument suffers from **logical fallacies**:
- **False Dilemma**: Claims small states must align with a great power or face destruction, ignoring alternatives like neutrality (e.g., Switzerland) or multilateral alliances (e.g., ASEAN).
- **Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc**: Attributes the Eurasian Union’s stagnation solely to its economic focus, without disproving other factors (e.g., political distrust, cultural differences).
- **Appeal to Inevitability**: Asserts the macro-state’s creation as historically unavoidable, a circular argument lacking empirical validation.
#### **Historical Critique**
- **CIS and EAEU**: While the CIS (1991) and EAEU (2015) have underperformed relative to initial ambitions, their challenges stem from political divergences among member states (e.g., Ukraine’s pro-Western shift, Central Asian hedging), not merely a lack of "civilizational mission."
- **Russia-Belarus Union State**: Since 1999, integration has been limited; Belarus retains significant autonomy, contradicting claims of "success."
- **Imperial Nostalgia**: The text romanticizes the Russian Empire/USSR as a model, ignoring their collapse due to internal fractures (nationalist movements, economic inefficiencies) and external pressures.
#### **Sociological Critique**
The text assumes homogeneity among post-Soviet societies, disregarding **divergent identities**:
- **Ukraine**: Pro-Western sentiment and anti-Russian resistance since 2014.
- **Baltic States**: Firmly integrated into NATO/EU.
- **Georgia and Moldova**: Aspirations for EU membership, despite recent geopolitical shifts.
- **Central Asia**: Multi-vector foreign policies balancing Russia, China, and the West.
The claim that these nations would willingly join a Russian-led macro-state ignores sociological realities of nationalism and anti-colonial memory.
#### **Geopolitical Critique**
- **Multipolarity**: While a trend, the text overstates the decline of smaller states. Examples like Qatar (leveraging gas wealth) or Singapore (economic diplomacy) show how small states retain agency.
- **Russia’s Role**: The assertion of "steady progress toward final victory in Ukraine" is speculative; the conflict remains unresolved, with significant Western support for Ukraine.
- **Trump’s Impact**: The claim that Trump cemented irreversible multipolarity is reductionist; U.S. foreign policy oscillates between administrations, and EU/Chinese roles remain pivotal.
#### **Fact-Checking**
- **CIS**: Formed in 1991; functional in technical cooperation (e.g., anti-terrorism), but not a deep integrator. Translator’s "spectral shell" is subjective.
- **EAEU**: Founded in 2015 with Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan. Economic integration is real but shallow (e.g., no common currency).
- **Russia-Belarus Union State**: No supranational governance exists; Belarus resists deeper integration (e.g., rejecting the Russian ruble).
- **Georgia’s "Independence"**: While critical of Western pressure, Georgia retains EU aspirations (applied for membership in 2022).
- **South Ossetia/Abkhazia**: Recognized only by Russia and a few allies; internationally considered Georgian territories under occupation.
#### **Conclusion**
The text advances a **Kremlin-aligned narrative** that frames Russian hegemony as historically and morally inevitable. While factually accurate on organizational timelines, its analysis is steeped in geopolitical determinism and dismissive of post-Soviet states’ sovereignty. The translator’s notes amplify this bias through mystical language ("sacred-geopolitical entity"), further divorcing the argument from empirical rigor. Ultimately, the text reflects a **neo-imperial ideology** rather than a neutral assessment of Eurasian dynamics.
Humanity does not need macro empires, we need:
DEGLOBALIZATION
As mentioned before, the human species has different races or ethnicities, with different spiritual and physical characteristics, different history, different culture, different religion, different art, different aesthetics, different gastronomy, different customs and traditions, etc.
One of the most important values of humanity is precisely its variety and diversity. Deglobalization is the only way to preserve and promote those values. Globalization is anti-Nature, a source of evil, and a violent crime against humanity.
Throughout history, all empires aspired and attempted to globalize. They all failed, no exceptions.
Globalization is the most effective way of allowing the strong countries to violate and rape other countries, to enslave the weak, to steal their natural resources, and to take advantage of their misery and cheap labour.
Globalization makes all nations depend on other nations. Invariably, the result is permanent insecurity, which usually leads to economic recessions, depressions and collapses.
It is possible and easy to control a national economy with great precision, for each nation has a pretty good idea and can know in detail, what will be its short-term, medium-term and long-term needs. On the other hand, to control a global economy is literally impossible. Surpluses and shortages are inevitable.
Nations must be 100% sovereign, auto-sufficient and sustainable, in order to assure, by themselves, the supply of all the required essential goods & services.
The simple fact of nations being forced to fulfill their own needs, generates a tremendous boost in the creativeness and inventiveness of each nation, and of humanity as a whole.
Mass tourism is a superfluous and volatile industry, which entails many unnecessary ills: extra pollution and energy consumption, risks of leaving home alone, risks of international transports, risks of lost luggage, risks of theft, risks of rape, risks of new pathogens and of food poisoning, and all the inherent risks of being in an unfamiliar environment. Throughout history, humans have travelled for commercial, military, religious, cultural or vital purposes. Never for leisure. Tourism is a “last minute” artificial commercial scheme.
Through internet, anyone can have a much more complete, profound knowledge of any country and its history, without ever leaving home. If you like, you can even engage in cyber audiovisual chats with the natives.
Social propaganda compels people to visit the all world, instead of knowing their own countries, because tourism has somber occult political goals: to accustom citizens to mingle with other races, to promote cross breeding, to make them lose their national identities, and to foment big immigration. These strategies coincide with the globalist agenda of eliminating all national borders and sovereignties.
Positive patriotism, nationalism and protectionism are the essential ingredients for safe, healthy, wealthy nations, and world.
United States, United Kingdom, ex-Soviet Union, European Union, African Union, EAEU - Eurasian Economic Union, United Nations, Unesco, etc. The “U” word indicates globalist manure.
No wonder, the new digital global currency has been named Unicoin by both institutions, the BIS - Bank of International Settlements, and the IMF - International Monetary Fund. Henry Kissinger rightly said — Who controls the money, controls the world.
AFW is the only political system that allows nations to prosper by themselves, on their own terms, independently of all other nations. In simple terms, globalization means the rich nations get richer, and the poor nations get poorer. In a AFW, all nations get richer, thanks to nationalism and no foreign interference.
Human happiness depends on being able to plant the flowers you like best in your own garden, without the interference and intervention of other people, or of other nations, or of extraterrestrials…
Theory and practical politics are very different. On the practical level, reification of the church is almost a disaster without much intermediary. Its a very corrupt church. You can spot radicals who are very ugly. it is very easy to be divisive with the entire modern character owed to the Soviet Union's legacy, a great legacy of imperfect revolution, enlightenment, and emancipation.
This macro-state might happen, but then it might not. If the United States manages to starve Russia and Russia makes the wrong moves like the Soviet Union did, then internal fragmentation will happen again.
### Critique of the Text Using Multiple Methodologies
#### **Philosophical Critique**
The text employs a **teleological worldview**, positing the "inevitability" of a Eurasian macro-state as the culmination of historical destiny. This deterministic perspective neglects the role of human agency and contingency in history. Philosophically, it echoes Hegelian or Marxist dialectics, where history progresses toward a predetermined end. However, this view is contested by existentialist and postmodern philosophies that emphasize fragmented narratives and the absence of inherent historical purpose. The assertion that sovereignty is strengthened through integration into a macro-state also contradicts classical theories of sovereignty (e.g., Hobbes, Rousseau), which prioritize self-determination and territorial autonomy.
#### **Logical Critique**
The argument suffers from **logical fallacies**:
- **False Dilemma**: Claims small states must align with a great power or face destruction, ignoring alternatives like neutrality (e.g., Switzerland) or multilateral alliances (e.g., ASEAN).
- **Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc**: Attributes the Eurasian Union’s stagnation solely to its economic focus, without disproving other factors (e.g., political distrust, cultural differences).
- **Appeal to Inevitability**: Asserts the macro-state’s creation as historically unavoidable, a circular argument lacking empirical validation.
#### **Historical Critique**
- **CIS and EAEU**: While the CIS (1991) and EAEU (2015) have underperformed relative to initial ambitions, their challenges stem from political divergences among member states (e.g., Ukraine’s pro-Western shift, Central Asian hedging), not merely a lack of "civilizational mission."
- **Russia-Belarus Union State**: Since 1999, integration has been limited; Belarus retains significant autonomy, contradicting claims of "success."
- **Imperial Nostalgia**: The text romanticizes the Russian Empire/USSR as a model, ignoring their collapse due to internal fractures (nationalist movements, economic inefficiencies) and external pressures.
#### **Sociological Critique**
The text assumes homogeneity among post-Soviet societies, disregarding **divergent identities**:
- **Ukraine**: Pro-Western sentiment and anti-Russian resistance since 2014.
- **Baltic States**: Firmly integrated into NATO/EU.
- **Georgia and Moldova**: Aspirations for EU membership, despite recent geopolitical shifts.
- **Central Asia**: Multi-vector foreign policies balancing Russia, China, and the West.
The claim that these nations would willingly join a Russian-led macro-state ignores sociological realities of nationalism and anti-colonial memory.
#### **Geopolitical Critique**
- **Multipolarity**: While a trend, the text overstates the decline of smaller states. Examples like Qatar (leveraging gas wealth) or Singapore (economic diplomacy) show how small states retain agency.
- **Russia’s Role**: The assertion of "steady progress toward final victory in Ukraine" is speculative; the conflict remains unresolved, with significant Western support for Ukraine.
- **Trump’s Impact**: The claim that Trump cemented irreversible multipolarity is reductionist; U.S. foreign policy oscillates between administrations, and EU/Chinese roles remain pivotal.
#### **Fact-Checking**
- **CIS**: Formed in 1991; functional in technical cooperation (e.g., anti-terrorism), but not a deep integrator. Translator’s "spectral shell" is subjective.
- **EAEU**: Founded in 2015 with Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan. Economic integration is real but shallow (e.g., no common currency).
- **Russia-Belarus Union State**: No supranational governance exists; Belarus resists deeper integration (e.g., rejecting the Russian ruble).
- **Georgia’s "Independence"**: While critical of Western pressure, Georgia retains EU aspirations (applied for membership in 2022).
- **South Ossetia/Abkhazia**: Recognized only by Russia and a few allies; internationally considered Georgian territories under occupation.
#### **Conclusion**
The text advances a **Kremlin-aligned narrative** that frames Russian hegemony as historically and morally inevitable. While factually accurate on organizational timelines, its analysis is steeped in geopolitical determinism and dismissive of post-Soviet states’ sovereignty. The translator’s notes amplify this bias through mystical language ("sacred-geopolitical entity"), further divorcing the argument from empirical rigor. Ultimately, the text reflects a **neo-imperial ideology** rather than a neutral assessment of Eurasian dynamics.
Why using an AI generated evaluation of an article that you haven't even read yourself???