The committee granting the 2021 Nobel Peace Prize had obviously a difficult choice to make. Its sights may have been set on climate activist Greta Thunberg for berating heads of states in a bid to avert the ecological Armageddon, political (Russian or Belorussian) dissidents Svetlana Tikhanovskaya and Alexei Navalny (Julian Assange need not apply), The World Health Organization for courageously combating the WORLD WIDE MENACE, the Black Lives Matter movement for opposing ubiquitous racism, President Joe Biden for putting an end to the nightmarish Trump era and many others in the similar vein. I believe you get the picture of possible contenders. The choice was made and the prize was awarded to a Filipino and a Russian journalist: Dmitry Muratov, editor-in-chief of many years’ standing of “Novaya Gazeta.”

Why Dmitry Muratov of all the people? “Novaya Gazeta” since its inception in 1993 has been engaged in issues that the post-West absolutely adores: keeping watch over human rights and the abuse of power in – yes, yes, you guessed it right! – Russia. The paper developed as an offshoot from “Komsomolskaya Pravda” with some fifty journalists as its founders. Mikhail Gorbachev contributed with some of the money from his 1990 Nobel Peace Prize to help it get started and with a 10% share he remains its co-owner to this day. A number of “Novaya Gazeta” reporters or commentators are said to have been murdered or assaulted because of their investigative journalism. Isn’t it one more argument to draw the world’s attention to the paper by decorating its founding father?

Julian Assange has been tossed from prison to prison and is currently awaiting another court ruling that will decide whether he will be delivered to the United States, where a long term prison if not death are in store for him. His journalism has not found recognition, his suffering has not been appreciated, his courage to unmask the inhuman machinations of the United States has not been praised. Why?

Continue reading →

The notorious World Economic Forum headed by Klaus Schwab has spawned two worldwide youth organisations, i.e. the Forum of Young Global Leaders (2004) and the Global Shapers Community (2011). Their websites fraught with snapshots or short films featuring hackneyed images of smiling faces of men and women cooperating in a peaceful manner and necessarily shaking hands and drawing graphs – the usual propaganda stuff we are familiar with – assault the reader with catchy slogans of providing solutions to global issues, improving the state of the world, building a better future, fighting climate change, building inclusive communities, having impact on a global scale, raising awareness of gender equality and the like. None of the items comes as a surprise or does it?

The blueprint is as follows. Young impressionable people are used to bring about change. Young people make up a quarter of the global population. Change is touted as something desirable and ranges from climate to society, from education to governance. It is a creeping revolution, the march through institutions par excellence targeting the world as it is: a repeat of what the Jacobins in France, Bolsheviks in Russia and the Red Guards in China already attempted to achieve. They, too, appealed to young people with images of a bright future and fraternity spanning the globe, with promises of universal happiness and joy, with visions of unstoppable progress and unbridled liberty.

Youth guide

The alumni of the Global Leaders and the Global Shapers – carefully selected, guided and groomed by their patrons – are then helped to find their way to important organisations, institutions, corporations, where their influence is multiplied or – to be precise – where they relay the ideas that they imbibed while being members of the Forum and the Community. Have you ever wondered about how it happens that so many actions are coordinated across state borders at the drop of a hat? Now you know. The Global Leaders and the Global Shapers inform us via their websites that they have members in almost all countries in the world and that they foster lifelong connections. Lifelong, you see. Continue reading →

Gefira 57 familiarizes us with the Ebb and Flow of World Politics. We set our sights on the man-made energy crisis that is in the making in the European Union, which – out of hubris – has decided to ban anything having to do with coal and now is heading for a disaster. The alleged man-made climate change has resulted in a genuine man-made energy crisis… Did not Aesop describe something similar in one of his fables? But then, who learns from Aesop those days?

The energy crisis is coupled with the political and economic tension. We are seeing the emergence of three formidable alliances – three empires – the Anglo-Saxon transatlantic union (NATO, AUKUS, Five Eyes) in which the United States and the United Kingdom reign supreme; the European Union, governed jointly by France and Germany; and the Eurasian bloc of states (SCO), where Russia and China rule the roost. Are those alliances and pacts not reminiscent of the Entante Cordiale and the alliance of the Central Powers of the First World War, or the Axis and Allied States of the Second World War? We may be in for big events.

With Angela Merkel eventually leaving the post of the German chancellor, we are also summing up the 16 years of the denationalization of Germany (as a part of the denationalization of France, England, Scotland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Italy), sixteen years of the violation of fundamental rights and the lying press, sixteen years of the exploitation of the German taxpayer and the favouritism shown towards Third World immigrants, sixteen years of energy transition and green lies, sixteen years of the collapse of German security, police and justice.

 
 

 

As the globe is splitting into two rivalling camps with the the English speaking world plus Europe and Israel on the one side and Eurasia (countries gathered within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization that encompasses not only Russia and China but also India, Pakistan, the former Soviet Asian republics, and recently Iran) on the other, as the storm clouds are gathering and the invasion of Europe by the Third World has found a new channel via Belarus and Poland, amid the energy crisis over the supply of Russian gas and the decarbonization of the white man’s countries, amid the ethnic replacement and the alleged threat from the Kremlin, the European Union has launched an ideological attack against its colonial coolies – Poland, Hungary, Romania and Latvia – for not living up to the values that the Union is founded on. The said member states refuse to accept the LGTB ideology that is being foisted on them by their more enlightened brothers. The European Union expresses its deep concern over “a serious breach of the rule of law, the stigmatization, intimidation and increased discrimination against LGTB people, bans on pride marches and awareness-raising programmes in schools.” The Union’s leaders are annoyed by the numerous initiatives of Polish regional authorities which (i) declared the areas under their control free from LGTB ideology, and (ii) adopted regional charters of family rights which – what an abomination! – provide a “too narrow definition of the family.” The European leaders are also angered over “conversion therapy” offered in these countries and the way in which the central and eastern European governments deal with pro-LGTB activists, punishing them for resorting to “creative advocacy tools”(??).

In response to all this outrage – like not recognizing two mothers of a child – and “having regard to” the statement made by Ursula von der Leyen, the lady who was humiliated by Turkey’s leader in that he offered her no chair or – more formally – the lady who is the current President of the European Commission (read: government) – that “LGTBQI-free zones are humanity free zones”, the European Union declared its territory – which automatically means the territory of Poland, Hungary, Romania and Latvia – an “LGTBQI Freedom Zone”. So much for the political, rational and moral condition of the alliance of some of the most developed countries in the world. Continue reading →

France is in the midst of a serious political crisis. It will come to a head – at the latest – before the presidential elections in April 2022.

Macron’s governments showed how alienated the French elites are from their people. The largest street protests in the country’s history (since the 18th century French Revolution) of the Yellow Vests, mass strikes against the planned pension reform and the extremely strong – compared to other, for example Eastern European countries – anti-lockdown movement showed that Macron’s legitimacy comes from the Rothschild bank, where he started his brilliant career, rather than from the people. The guillotine of the people, however, can decapitate, excuse me, sweep away from the political scene all three main candidates for the office in the Élysée Palace next spring. After all, with the coming wave of autumn viruses and rising prices at the farmers’ market, who will believe in Macron’s promise of revival through development of the more carbon-neutral economy? Who will believe in his “republican patriotism” in the country where Muslim associations, tightly intertwined with Arab clans, rule the streets of the big cities? Where retired generals openly call for a coup d’état “in a perilous mission to protect their civilisational values and their fellow citizens on the national territory”? Who will believe Le Pen, who is distancing herself more and more from the conservative ideas well thought out by her father by, for example, completely discarding the idea of withdrawing from the Schengen Agreement? Who will believe that her demand to lower the retirement age from 62 (the lowest in OECD countries) to 60 is sensible and feasible in the face of the coming inflation and the Paris debt mountain? Uneducated migrants, the shrinking middle class or well-educated elites? Le Pen and Macron are getting closer and closer, like enemies who have been shooting at each other in their trenches for too long. Le Pen renounces “radical” ideas and Macron proposed his security law to reassure civil servants. With her proposals for pension reform, isn’t Le Pen serving the bankers who own France’s debt and warmly welcome the bankruptcy of any state? Implementing her idea of earlier retirement would double the deficit of the pension system (by about 37 billion euros). As for spending: when Macron, the super-specialist in finance, took office in 2017, French ministries spent €3 billion. With his magic wand, he will make it to 11 billion of the common currency annually next year. Continue reading →