This is from a report put out by the Transitional Integrity Project, a "bipartisan group of over 100 current and former senior government and campaign leaders, academics, journalists, polling experts and former federal and state government."
In actuality, the project is all Democrats or "Never Trump" Republicans, including:
- John Podesta, former White House Chief of Staff
- Donna Brazile, former Democratic National Committee Acting Chair
- Michael Steele, former chair of the Republican National Committee
- Max Boot, journalist
- David Frum, journalist
This is not a joke. Liberal media has been covering this story and linking to this article [1] [2] [3] But they only mention the parts about Trump refusing to concede.
Right-wing media is talking about this angle, where Biden refuses to concede. Workers must have a full understanding of what is going on, so we can prepare & respond to the coming months.
I know some people here will be like, "oh that can't be right, aren't Democratic and Republicans on the same team." No, they are not. They both want to crush any working class power, but there are serious contradictions within the bourgeois class.
One faction of the bourgeoisie wanted to slowly contain China & Russia through building exclusionary trade agreements (TPP) and maintaining relationships with Europe. This would build towards world war at a slower pace. They see war with China & Russia right now as suicide for their class.
Another faction want to crush China & Russia immediately because they recognize the rate at which these two nations are building their productive base. They see a war later down the line as harder to win.
As the contradiction of capitalism heightens, and the American Empire fumbles under Trump, the former faction is under more and more pressure to act. Their "Russian collusion" plan and impeachment failed tremendously.
Now we are in a position where neither faction will recognize the election results, which will likely be the end of "liberal democracy" in the US.
How is Russia building its productive base instead of still cannibalizing the remnants of Soviet infrastructure and scientific research though?
"Building productive base" isn't as accurate here as "building geopolitical alliances that are anit-American" which Russia definitely is doing. That serves the same function as what OP is talking about, threatening American hegemony.
Which alliances? In every conflict with the West up till now Russia has always meekly given in, and any struggle it showed was either purely for show or completely marginal in geopolitical terms. How can a country that almost exclusively relies on the export of raw materials to the West, that re-invests its surplus into Western assets and has the families of all the members of the ruling class (as well the members themselves, many of whom only venture into Russia to quickly inspect their fiefdoms) living in the West be possibly a foil to Western interests? In an armed conflict with China Russia will not have their back, the most likely scenario is it will sit on the sidelines waiting to see who wins, periodically muttering something under its breath when its physical assets suffer collateral damage now and then.
Ukraine? Syria? Armenia? What lol
Russian exports to China has increased 600% in the past decade. China is their largest export market.
Russian exports to the Netherlands (their second largest export market) have dropped by 50% in the meantime. Russian exports to Germany have dropped 60%.
Stop lying, and actually pay attention to what is happening in the world.
I'll reply by reposting my comment from a different discussion:
Look up the almost total dismantling of any advanced science, r&d and manufacturing base in Russia under Putin’s authoritarian turbo capitalism. His regime basically turned a highly industrialised country with a robust scientific culture and research infrastructure into an almost mono-economy based on the export of raw materials. Even in the defence sector: the Mayak nuclear processing plant for making warhead material (among other radioactive isotope enrichment) stopped processing weapons grade plutonium several years back, most fearsome nuclear armaments decommissioned and not replaced (Russia has only maybe 250 total functional (?) ICBM-SLBM) and almost everything is foreign made, the makers being NATO and US allied countries. In the case of a major conflict how much of that will be reliable?
Though that’s a rhetorical question because as they’ve shown in every military conflict up till now, Russian high command is scared shitless of actual confrontation with the West. In Georgia it was the general and commanders in charge of the actual troops near the border who gave the order to invade as retaliation and when the army was nearing Tbilisi the troops were promptly halted and pulled back, the commanders sacked (even as Putin and Medvedev used the quick annihilation of the Georgian forces engaged for personal patriotic clout). In Libya Russia made the no-fly zone possible in the UN security council but then later (again purely for internal consumption) bitched about it from the safety of a fair accompli. In Ukraine it murdered, pushed into senseless meat grinders and disarmed the native Eastern insurgency against the Kievan neo-nazi regime and after using federal troops to take charge of the rebels completely stopped any and all military advances even when the Ukrainian armed forces were practically non-existent (at least in any other role than harassing civilians), extended credit and low gas prices to a regime that was supposedly its enemy on the behest of western emissaries. In Syria Russia pulled out its military advisors when the conflict began, then made Assad give up his chemical weapons to please Obama and went back in only when the situation became completely hopeless in order to secure a few strips of land in a rump Syrian state. Even then they gave in in every conflict with Turkey or US forces even to the point of feigning ignorance as to the identity of their own soldiers, letting them get massacred by the US without any repercussions. The touted s-400 still standing in mighty silence, not letting itself get provoked by raids from various countries’ air forces.
In the midst of an economic crisis and the need to restart their own production in the face of sanctions the Russian regime chose to invest in US treasury bonds (assets of its supposed enemy) instead of investing in their own economy.
If Russia is trying to conspire with NATO & the US, they are doing a horrible job lol
And what about Russia's export market? It's largest trading partner is China, and their exports have increase 600% in the past decade.
The US recognizes Russian-China-Iran as an opposing bloc in the world. Military intelligence in the US identifies "Great Power Struggle", with Russian & China operating as a common enemy, as their focus now that the "War on Terror" is "over." Also, these nations have been holding joint military exercises.
This narrative seemed to have a lot more explanatory power than "Russia is a western pawn."
The Nord Stream project is struggling along only because of Germany's material interest to not be wholly subservient to the US. If Germany gets a better deal the project falls through. And even then Germany has been haggling the entire time, not willing to exchange one energy dependency on another.
And it is on you to show how any of the Russian sabre rattling and military manoeuvres have negatively impacted Western hegemony. Wherever I look I can't see America, NATO, Saudi Arabia, etc. having their power and interests curtailed by Russia in any non-negligible way. But maybe you can...
the perception matters more than the reality, no?
The biggest example is Nord Stream Two, which will make Russia the primary provider of natural gas to Western Europe.
How is that an example of "building its productive base" when all it implies is pumping of raw materials into the West. If I'm not mistaken not a single technical piece of the Nordstream system has been built or designed in Russia.
That's like asking "how is China opening up to the West 'building its productive base?'"
Nord Stream Two will place European energy in the hands of Russia's state oil company, and out of US hands. It doesn't matter who builds it, it is still means of production built in Russia, transporting natural gas owned by Russian companies.
Means of production of what? Oil itself is a resource, not a means of production.
The pipeline
The pipeline is not producing anything except for profits for the Russian bourgeoisie. The paltry part of those profits that gets earmarked for re-investment is then meticulously pocketed bit by bit by all the functionaries and bureaucrats involved in the re-investment. Forget it, Russia is not an ally whatsoever. It is a mafia state that is looking out for itself and itself only. Any opposition it shows to the hegemon is pure trolling, as criminal organisations are always known to do to periodically test the waters of what is permissible and which loot they can grab as opposed to what will earn a smack on the nose.
Yes, that is how the means of production work in a capitalist state.
I'm not saying Russia is an ally. I am saying they are an enemy of the American bourgeoisie. I do not understand why it is so difficult for people to understand that there are real divisions within the bourgeoisie. That seems to be a common trend in this thread.
This is ahistorical. They are a weak global power that wants to be a part of a counter-hegemony which opposes NATO expansion into Russia.
But it doesn't matter what they want. The space they might want is already well occupied by bigger players and the Russian state is so terminally corrupt that even any strategy for expansion they devise falls apart immediately due to personal greed and internal contradictions within the Russian bourgeoisie which are at least as large as the contradictions between the global bourgeoisie. Ironically the only source for Russia growing in power is the climate collapse, as it will free up more frozen land for resource extraction and selling off at a premium. Needless to say the Russian citizenry, unless they ever mount a new socialist revolution, will not see anything besides ever increasing austerity and neglect.
I read a lot of words here, but all I'm getting on my end is that posadas was right.