President Putin’s “Great Society” Program Will Build The Future Russia

 

The Russian government announced that it’ll commit approximately $390 billion to implementing President Putin’s “May Decrees” that he issued following his reelection last year on a promise to revitalize the domestic economy and finally deliver tangible benefits to the majority of the population, especially those outside of the main cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg who’ve barely seen much of their livelihoods improve over the past two decades. This visionary initiative is being called the “Great Society” program and will consist of 12 National Projects that run the gamut of everything from agriculture to industry to transportation infrastructure and all that’s in between, with specific emphases also being placed on ecology, education, and the digital economy.

What if the Plan Was?

Russia’s central strategic problem is NATO. Russia must break the back of NATO. But how?

Step One, the Arab Spring: The best attack is always an indirect attack. So Russia began its attack on NATO hundreds of miles away, in the Arab world. Revolution is the perfect strategy for a country like Russia, which is rich in clandestine and criminal resources. (In Egypt’s revolution, for example, the first flags raised in protest were red. The green flags only came out afterward.) The Arab Spring revolutions were calculated to shake things up. Islamist and communist forces were initially linked, arm-in-arm. If they failed to get power, the resulting chaos would nonetheless serve other purposes. For example, the civil war in Syria presents a prime example. The Russians, who dominate the criminal underworld, created the transport net for moving millions of Muslim refugees to the heart of Europe. Russian air units carpet bombed Syrian cities and villages, driving hundreds of thousands out of their homes. Next, they salted the fleeing multitudes with military-age men trained as terrorists. Then Europe was hit by a new wave of terror.

Moscow and the Nazi International

Alexander Dugin, the Russian geopolitical theorist and advisor to President Putin, has said that the twentieth century was “the century of ideology.” It was, as Nietzsche predicted, a century in which ideas (and ideologies) warred against one another. The three warring factions were, in order of their appearance: liberalism (of the Left and Right), communism (as well as social democracy), and fascism (including Hitler’s National Socialism). These three ideologies fought each other “to the death, creating, in essence, the entire dramatic and bloody political history of the twentieth century.” According to Dugin, liberalism came out the winner by the end of the last century. Yet victories of this kind are rarely permanent. In fact, Dugin tells us that liberalism has already disintegrated into “postmodernity.” With its focus on the individual, Dugin argues that liberalism has led to globalization, and globalization means that man is “freed from his ‘membership’ in a community and from any collective identity….” This happened because a mass of human beings, “comprised entirely of individuals, is naturally drawn toward universality and seeks to become global and unified.” Even now this impetus toward globalization coincides with the glorification of total freedom “and the independence of the individual from any kind of limits, including reason, morality, identity … discipline, and so on.” The result, says Dugin, is Francis Fukuyama’s “End of History.” But let us not be fooled, Dugin explains. History doesn’t really end. What has really happened, in fact, is the realization that liberalism’s triumph has been a disaster for humanity. It is a disaster for the individual because the individual has lost his moorings. It is a disaster for freedom, because we are now under the “tyranny of the majority.” It is a disaster for our economy, because spoliation is the emerging market principle. And those who wish to preserve their racial, national, or religious identities are set down as enemies by a political correctness as deluded as it is bloodless.

Russian alignment with Asia to be fixed foreign policy: Duowei

Russia is abandoning its strategy of aligning itself with the West in favor of becoming a part of the East, according to a commentary from Duowei News, a US-based Chinese political news outlet.

….

This push towards Asia and the abandoning of the “Western path” has been spurred by Russia’s nationalist scholars such as political scientist Alexander Dugin, believed to be an important influence on President Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy. Dugin, who founded and heads Russia’s Eurasia Movement, has long envisioned a strategic bloc that would join the former Soviet Union to Middle Eastern countries, including Iran.

How Vladimir Putin is building alliances around the world

As the Russian president visits his EU ally Viktor Orban, prime minister of Hungary, we look at other leaders around the world who have embraced the divisive Vladimir Putin

…

Venezuela

Caracas is a major buyer of Russian weapons and has recognised breakaway pro-Russian territories such as Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia.

Moscow reciprocates by investing billions of dollars in Venezuelan oil projects.

Vladimir Putin once even gave Hugo Chavez a puppy.

The Balkan chessboard: Russia’s ruble diplomacy and EU interests

In 1998, Zbigniew Brzezinski argued that “a power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would entail Africa’s subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania geopolitically peripheral to the world’s central continent”. His book The Grand Chessboard was indeed a major contribution to geopolitical studies. Depicting the new challenges for US foreign policy in a multipolar world, Brzezinski identifies the geopolitical Achilles’ heel of the 21st century in the area he designated as the Global Balkans, i.e. “the swathe of Eurasia between Europe and the Far East.”