The French nation desires to abort itself out of existence, so be it!

Liberty, Equality, Fraternity and Abortion. These words are going to define France as its national assembly enshrined the right to abortion in the country’s constitution on March 4, 2024. The constitutional amendment was passed by the majority of 780 votes against 72. The announcement of the amendment whipped crowds of people, mostly women, gathered among other places around the Eiffel Tower into frenzy. Protesters were few and far between. Even the so called far right with Marine Le Pen were in favour of the constitutional amendment. The media around the globe called it a historic event. It is a historic event, indeed. The French nation has been aborting itself out of existence since 1974, when abortion was made legal, and now the same nation is besides itself with joy that the right has been made even stronger, as it is anchored in the country’s basic law. With the fertility rate of 1.83 (as of 2020), which includes the millions of the “new French”, the autochthonous French nation is continuing the commission of its own suicide with joy and glee and delight.

Why did this amendment need to be anchored in the constitution in a country where (i) the overwhelming majority of people are in favour of abortion, where (ii) abortion has been legal for half a century, where (iii) contraception is commonly available, and where (iv) sexual education is part and parcel of the school curriculum? Proponents of the amendment say they needed to anchor the right to abortion in the constitution to make it harder for any future government to repeal it. Here they point to the 2022 US Supreme Court ruling against Roe vs. Wade. Well, ok, but that’s what democracy is all about: if it happens so in the future that the majority decides to ban abortion, then why not?

Why do women across France are overjoyed, elated and euphoric because of a legal act like this one? Why do they claim to be oppressed by pregnancy? Why can’t they resort to contraception if they want to avoid pregnancy? Why do they believe that this right grants them control over their bodies when they ought to know that the baby has a separate DNA, which means that the pregnant woman carries someone else’s body and by terminating pregnancy kills a human being? Why can’t these women – who are surely all in favour of nature and anything natural – see that terminating pregnancies is unnatural? Why can’t they see – quite apart from moral or religious questions – that what they celebrate so very much is simply distasteful? Why of all the French women even Marine Le Pen, who opposes mass immigration of Third World people into France, can’t see that voting for the right to abort future Frenchmen and Frenchwomen she automatically makes immigration economically and socially necessary???

Abortion frenzy

Ukraine is an inalienable part of Russia’s strategic zone, said Dimitry Medvedev

On March 5, Dimitry Medvedev, Deputy Chairman of the Security Council of the Russian Federation and former President of Russia, gave a speech at the World Youth Festival held in Sochi. In a leisurely manner Dimitry Medvedev laid out the outline of Russia’s policy and Moscow’s stance on the current political events. He said among others:

We do not need foreign territory, but we will never cede what is ours. It was 210 years ago that Russian troops captured Paris. On doing so Russia established a government in France that was Russia-friendly and friendly towards Russia’s allies. We have never, either before or afterwards, sent our armies so far westwards. Why did we need to do it at that time? We needed to do it because we needed to remove the prime threat to our existence.

Geopolitics assume the following thesis: each sovereign state has two kinds of borders and these are geographic borders and strategic borders. The former overlap with the territory actually occupied by a state, the latter correspond to the international political clout of the state: the more powerful a state is, the larger the territory enclosed within its strategic borders. The strategic borders overlap with the zone of political, cultural and economic leverage of the state. Though the strategic interests are not tantamount to national interest, they are closely related. That’s a historical fact, commencing from the Roman Empire. The empire’s strategic borders covered a territory larger than the empire’s geographic borders. Weak states were included in the empire’s zone of influence; weak states oftentimes willingly assumed the role of vassals in return for the political protection granted to them by the suzerain, by the empire. In our times vassal states are politely referred to as friendly states. The moment an empire begins to lose its international political clout, its strategic borders shrink. That is what happened to the Portugal, Spanish and French global empires. Surely, in the case of Russia its strategic borders extend far beyond its geographical borders.

As for the so-called Ukraine or to be precise Little Russia, our antagonists ought to remember once and for all: the territory on either bank of the Dnieper are an inalienable part of Russia’s historical strategic zone, which is why any and all attempts to snatch those territories from us are doomed to failure. Russia’s strategic geopolitical zone stems from the times of medieval Rus’. This zone is characterized by the common language, religion and culture. These territories are Russia’s holy space. Our enemies keep repeating that Russia’s goal is allegedly to conquer Ukraine, but nazi-Ukraine has nothing to offer to Russia: we have all the resources and in much larger quantities. The only wealth that Ukraine has and that we will never share with anybody is Ukraine’s people, who are in point of fact our relatives. Our enemies have managed to brainwash Ukrainians into zombies. We need to return Ukrainians to our common fold. The greatest enemy of Ukrainians is their current destructive state. Under the current Kiev regime, the best Ukrainians can hope for is to become a footstool of the West, a dispensable material. Once Ukraine’s leader coined a phrase: Ukraine is not Russia [The title of President Leonid Kuchma’s book.]. Now this phrase ought to be obliterated once and for all: Ukraine IS with no doubt Russia!

The United States operates in the remotest corners of the globe, but is oh so sensitive when it comes to its sphere of influence. Washington regards Mexico and Canada as its backyard. Recall: a 1917 proposal from Berlin to turn Mexico into Germany’s ally immediately compelled Washington to enter the First World War against Germany. What would the United States do now if there was a world power aiming at encircling the United States with military bases, trying to incite and exploit American internal conflicts and demanding decolonization along with the independence for California and Texas? What would happen then? We know what would happen: the Caribbean Crisis 2.0. The current circumstances are far worse. In 1962, the Soviet Union and the United States were psyching other up. Now the United States is for all practical purposes at war with the Russian Federation. The current neo-nazi Ukraine is the West’s battering ram against Russia. The collective West by means of Ukraine seeks to materialize the West’s centuries-old dream of reducing Russia to the size of the medieval Principality of Moscow.

We will without a doubt complete the special military operation and crown it with its logical success: we will clinch a victory, and we will compel the Nazis to surrender (the audience rose, applauding and chanting “Russia! Russia!”).

After the speech Dimitry Medvedev took a number of questions from the audience. Answering them, he said among others:

– There is no return to the Soviet Union: you cannot enter twice the same river. Still, both the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union were made up of Great Russia, Little Russia (Northern Ukraine) and New Russia (Southern Ukraine), and these three ought to be reunited, ought to return home, making up one, indivisible territory.

– Russia is indifferent to who is going to be the next American president: US policy vis-a-vis Russia is not going to change.

– Negotiations with Ukraine are possible on condition that Ukraine has new leaders replacing the current comedian actor and his company, and on condition that Ukrainian authorities recognize the current political and military reality.

– War in Ukraine has forged the inhabitants of the Russian Federation into one nation.

Ukrainians, please continue dying so that Americans can have good paying jobs

If you wanted to have an audio and visual illustration of the idiom a pack of lies, watch and listen to Undersecretary of state for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland that took place on February 22, 2024 at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Taking her words for truth, you get the idea that Ukraine is winning the war, harming Russia enormously while improving its economy. You get the impression that the whole world supports Ukraine and very few irrelevant states are on Russia’s side. You also get the impression that (crushing, as she put it) sanctions imposed on Russia are bringing Moscow to its knees and Russia’s failure is a matter of time. You also learn that the many Ukrainian refugees are impatient to return the their country, which with the aid of the West will soon reform and rebuild. My goodness!

Do you still remember Madeleine Albright? Victoria Nuland resembles her physically and mentally. The same ugly face, the same stout body and the same thirst for blood.

Listening to Nuland’s speech and the following interview with Victoria Nuland, you could also notice her visceral hated of Vladimir Putin. She mentioned his surname almost every other sentence. The more she mentioned the president of Russia’s surname, the more you could see how helpless she felt in her anger. Putin, Putin, Putin, all the time Putin! Victoria Nuland is possessed – obsessed – fixated on Vladimir Putin. Putin has invaded her mind and is there to stay. She will spew out Putin, Putin, Putin even on her death bed. And no wonder. You see, Victoria Nuland thought Ukraine was hers for grabs and now she has found out that all her efforts has come to naught. Poor Victoria… Putin, Putin, Putin – all the time through the speech and the following interview. Putin, Putin, Putin! Victoria Nuland most likely has a doll representing Putin and she regularly pricks it with pins. I just dread to think what vocabulary she uses thinking about her nemesis – Putin – when not standing on ceremony.

Just as a broken clock is right twice a day, so was Victoria Nuland. She said, Most of the aid for Ukraine ended up in the United States, creating good paying jobs. Ukrainians, did you hear? Shed your blood, lose your hands and legs, die in the battlefield so that the Americans can have good paying jobs (and the American oligarchs can enrich themselves)!

Two deaths so alike and yet so different

It was a few days ago that Alexei Navalny died in a Russian prison. What a gift for the Western world, what a remarkable coincidence! With the fall of Avdiivka and the approaching presidential election in Russia, with the farmer protests that have shaken every other EU country, with the difficulties that the American president has getting yet another approval of by Congress for his financial aid for Ukraine, Alexei Navalny’s death is really a godsend. Of course all the media and commentators have shown themselves to be soothsayers: they all know for certain that Navalny was murdered. By Putin’s henchmen, no need to add. They all know it, the soothsayers that they are, no evidence is required. The consumers of the media, properly preconditioned for years, can only nod their heads in agreement.

In 2000, also in a prison, died Slobodan Milošević, Yugoslavia’s and then Serbia’s president. Nobody ever came up with the idea that he might have been murdered. God forbid! Slobodan Milošević was incarcerated in a democratic European Union, which honours human rights and is averse to deceit, violence, illegal methods of interrogation, injustice and the rest of it. Slobodan Milošević was justly brought to court because – unlike Navalny – he was the bad guy, who was responsible fully or partly as the case may be for no smaller a crime than genocide of Kosovars and Croats. Though Alexei Navalny according to his own words felt intense hatred towards non-Russians in Russia, which was familiar to anyone who only cared to listen to or read his statements, though because of that Alexei Navalny would have been termed as a white supremacist in the West, miraculously his controllers turned a blind eye to his political beliefs.

But then, do we wonder? Everything and anything is used – abused – misused – (choose the appropriate word) – to suit the managers of the world. Serbs needed to be bombed by NATO because they were reported to have murdered a number of Kosovars and Croats; Ukrainians, officially followers of the Stepan Bandera racist and chauvinist ideology need to be unconditionally supported by the collective West, which otherwise is oh so sensitive when other comes to nationalisms, racism, fascism and similar ideolo gies.

Alexei Navalny was a hugely inflated front man if ever there was one. Look up the English Wikipedia article about him and compare with that devoted to Vladimir Putin. Alexei Navalny, a man whose political popularity in Russia never exceeded 5% (five) enjoys a text of 78 PDF A4 pages, whereas Vladimir Putin, a recognized leader with huge popularity – 107. John Kennedy – one of the better known modern-age American presidents – has a mere 55 pages. Even John Paul II, the most popular and widely recognizable pope, is no match for Navalny: the Wiki article about him is 71 pages long.

Do you remember how Slobodan Milošević landed up in jail and how was Alexei Navalny imprisoned? The difference is striking and telling. Let us recall. Under the pressure from the collective West Slobodan Milošević, once he ceased performing the function of president of Serbia, was arrested by his own authorities, his own state and handed over to the Hague to stand trial there. How did Alexei Navalny end up in prison? Let us recall it. He happened to be in Russia where he was oh so unjustly prosecuted and persecuted, and one day he sank into a coma due to a poison administered to him by the notorious KGB (Russian equivalent of the American CIA), or at least that’s the official Western story. Navalny’s wife demanded that her husband be released to Germany for medical treatment and Vladimir Putin, the mad dictator that he is, let him leave Russia, knowing full well that his agents had bungled the operation of poisoning Navalny (obviously he was on the way of surviving) and knowing full well that German doctors – chemists – pharmacists – would find the traces of the substance that was to kill Navalny. Nevertheless the dissenter was released and cured of his poisoning in Germany, and of course German specialists found the traces of poison, didn’t they? Once cured, safe and sound, Alexei Navalny decided to return to Russia to be prosecuted and persecuted by the undemocratic regime. Why for heaven’s sake? To make things even more Hollywood-like, before returning to Russia, Navalny managed to produce a documentary which exposed Putin s a man who stashed away millions in order to build a palace for himself in the Crimea. Only after the film was made public and shown on YouTube did Alexei Navalny go back to Russia. What could he expect there? The really interesting question is: did Alexei Navalny really want to go back or was he made to? Did not the Russian authorities by letting him out of Russia show that they wanted to get rid of him rather than have him imprisoned? What was Navalny promised in return for agreeing to do time in prison? Who promised it?

You see, it was not so, as in Slobodan Milošević’s case, that the Russian government pressurized Germany to release Navalny. No. Navalny appears to have been a pawn in the hands of powerful players who traded his life for political benefits. He seemed to be useless in the West, but very useful inside Russia. A prisoner of conscience! Living evidence of the dictatorial and inhumane Kremlin authorities! That’s the message. That Navalny was sentenced for corruption and other acts of violating the law is not on the radar of the Western media. He was important as a card to be played and sacrificed if need be.

Slobodan Milošević was Serbia’s and formerly Yugoslavia’s patriot; Alexei Navalny was a traitor to Russia. Slobodan Milošević’s death was of course – how otherwise? – of natural causes; Alexei Navalny’s demise was of course – how otherwise? – murder in cold blood. End of story.

Enter Oleksandr Syrskyi or the latest stage of the Russo-Russian civil war

On February 2024, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, replaced Valerii Zaluzhnyi with Oleksandr Syrskyi as commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian army. Who is General Oleksandr Syrskyi?

He is an ethnic Russian, born in central Russia to Russian parents with Russian relatives the length and breadth of his family. He graduated from a Soviet military academy and swore allegiance as a Soviet military officer to the Soviet Union. It so happened that during the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union Oleksandr Syrskyi served in Ukraine and was faced with a choice: either to relocate to Russia and serve in the Russian army or to stay in Ukraine and serve in the Ukrainian army. As it were, during the Yeltsin era, when Russia was afflicted with all kinds of crises – economic, social, political – its army was also in deep trouble. That explains why though Oleksandr Syrskyi with the aid of his father – a retired Soviet colonel – sought employment in the Russian armed forces he could only be offered a position that was much below his military rank. That made him reconsider. Since the Ukrainian army offered him a higher rank, he made his choice. In furtherance of his career.

Still, his parents and his brother has remained and continue to live in Russia, loyal to their country and President Putin, taking part in the annual Immortal Regiment marches.

Oleksandr Syrskyi was born in the Vladimir Oblast (region, province), some 200 km east of Moscow, in 1965. His paternal grandfather fought throughout the entire Great Patriotic War of 1941-45, and was awarded the medal For Bravery and the Order of the Red Star; his maternal grandfather went to the front as a volunteer and died in an ambush. Syrskyi has a Ukrainian wife and two sons of which one has been living in Australia for years and remains highly critical of his father’s disloyalty towards Russia.

The new commander-in-chief is said not to enjoy popularity in the army. Contrarily, he is nicknamed either a “Russian officer”, or “Soviet general”, or “Bakhmut butcher”. He earned the last of the nicknames after his inefficient command during the fight for Bakhmut, where it is said he did not particularly economize on the soldiers’ blood. Needless to say, Oleksandr Syrskyi needed to learn the Ukrainian language (just as President Zelenskyy) and speaks it with a Russian accent.

No wonder that President Putin describes the ongoing hostilities as civil war. Russians kill Russians just as Spaniards killed Spaniards during the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39, or Americans killed Americans during the War of Secession of 1861-65, or the English killed the English during the times of the English Civil War of 1642-51.

Towards the end of the interview that Tucker Carlson conducted with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin told a short story related to him from the front line in Ukraine. The story was about a Ukrainian unit that was encircled by the Russian troops with no chance of either winning the skirmish or making their way through the encirclement. The Russians proposed surrender to which the encircled Ukrainians replied – in Russian: Russians! never surrender. There you have it.

The interview of the year

On February 6, 2024, Tucker Carlson, a popular television star, conducted a two-hour interview with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. Here are the main take-aways:

[1] The Russian president firmly believes that Russians and Ukrainians are one and the same nation divided by history. He proved this point by giving Tucker Carlson a brief overlook of the past, commencing with medieval Rus’ and ending at the present day. Russia’s president was well conversant with the history not only of his own country, but also with the history of this region in Europe. This lengthy narration was to set the basis for the explanation of anything that followed during the interview.

In this historical narrative President Putin appears to have tried to drive a wedge between several European countries in that he kept saying that before the Second World War Poland collaborated with Hitler (which is why it took part in dismembering Czechoslovakia), and after World War Two was given formerly German territories as compensation for the territories that it lost to the USSR in the east. It could be read by Germans as an invitation to lay a claim to Polish Western territories (formerly German eastern territories). Four times Germany (Prussia) and Russia (USSR) divided between themselves the territory of the Polish state, annihilating it from political maps. Putin’s verbal assault on Poland will most probably have been triggered by the bellicose attitude of Warsaw against Russia and the fact that – as he said – Poles make up the largest contingent of mercenaries in Ukraine, followed by Americans and Georgians.

Similar gestures were made towards Hungary and Romania: these countries, too, lost small chunks of their territories to the then USSR, to be precise to the Ukrainian Socialist Soviet Republic, and as a result they are still held by Kiev.

[2] Then the Russian president retold the events running up to the current hostilities. These included:

[a] the five waves of NATO expansion;

[b] the support given by the United States to separatist forces in Russia;

[c] the deployment of missiles in eastern Europe allegedly to defend it against Iranian missiles;

[d] the invitation of Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO (Bucharest NATO conference);

[e] the support of the Nazi elements in Ukraine by the Western powers; and

[f] the coup d’état carried out in Kiev in 2014 against President Yanukovych.

[3] Being asked by Carlson whether the conflict could be resolved by way of negotiations, President Putin said that:

[a] Russia has been ready to negotiate since day one; as proof he mentioned the Istanbul talks of March 2022, which were prevented from finalization by Boris Johnson;

[b] President Zelensky issued a ban on negotiations;

[c] it was now the West’s turn to come to resume talks as it was the West thwarted the negotiations.

[4] To the question whether Russia was not about to attack Lithuania or especially Poland, the president answered that such an attack was only possible if Poland launched an attack against Russia.

[5] Being asked whether Russia did not fear China more than the United States, Vladimir Putin said that China and Russia had always known how to cooperate and that China had always been presented by the West as a boogeyman, which, however, did not correspond to reality.

Generally, Russia’s president believes that the West overplayed its hand out of conceit and at present does not really know how to solve the problem. The many sanctions did not have the expected effect: worse, Russia is developing while the dollar’s role as a means of international business is diminishing because of the same sanctions. Vladimir Putin quoted from memory that if a few years earlier 50% of Russia’s transactions were conducted in dollars, it is down to 13% nowadays.

The whole talk ended on a somewhat optimistic note: Russia is ready to talk over Ukraine, but the initiative rests with the West. The West has committed the mistake of drawing Ukraine into the war, the West ought to rectify it. There should be found ways, said the Russian president, how to do it with dignity, meaning: how to save the West’s face.

The United States in death throes

The United States – once such a great country, a great nation – is plummeting with an ever increasing speed to the disbelief, amazement, wonder, surprise of the whole world. What is happening?

The United States is suffering from ailments compounded by other ailments and the nation seems to be on a suicidal path. It involves itself in conflicts around the globe, policing (a polite word) or bullying (the right term for the phenomenon) smaller nations, which is a huge drain on its financial resources and which turns more and more countries into sworn enemies of the United States. The proxy war against Russia in Ukraine is about to be lost, which is a huge loss of prestige and the money invested in it! China is constantly framed by American government propaganda as America’s most formidable rival while Israel, the tail that wags the American dog, demands that Washington commits itself more and more in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. To make things even worse, hawks in Washington are vociferous about launching a punitive attack against Iran. Let us sum it up: the United States is taking on – simultaneously – Russia, China, Palestinians and Iran not to mention the Houthies in Yemen.

The United States is governed – at the face of it at least – by a senior citizen who has become the international butt of unkind jokes. This senior citizen either does not know how to run the country or quite purposefully is hellbent on having it nosedive into a bottomless pit. The country’s southern border has been opened wide for the whole period of Joe Biden’s administration, letting in hundreds of thousands of aliens. It is said they are from Mexico: properly speaking, they cross the border where Mexico neighbours the United States, but they are from all over the Third World: from the whole of Central and South America, from Africa and Asia. What policy is the Hill pursuing? Is Joe Biden following in the footsteps of German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who in 2015 let in roughly a million of Third World aliens? Joe Biden has let in THREE MILLION so far. What purpose can this huge influx of foreigners serve? A possible explanation says the democrats want to enlarge their voting base: grateful immigrants once they are granted US citizenship will always vote for the democrats. If that is true, then the extent of high treason to the nation committed by the American democrats just blows everybody’s mind.

Texas, one of the most prosperous states, has begun to rebel against this policy. Its governor decided to put up razor wire along the border to prevent aliens from entering. This met with the resistance on the part of Washington. Texas is supported in this respect by more than twenty republican states. A run-up to a civil war? We have witnessed the dissolution of the Soviet Union, we may become witnesses to the dissolution of the United States of America.

That’s not all. America is riddled with crime and drug addiction. Crime has been condoned for years by strange forces behind the scenes, forces that incapacitate the police and pass laws that depenalize petty crime: California is a notorious example. Here, one can shoplift up to a certain amount of money and must not be bothered about it by either shop-owners or the police. Fentanyl – a strong drug – is being traded in American cities and towns on a large scale causing ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DEATHS annually. Due to the open border, the cartels that deal in drugs have easy access to the whole of the United States. This is Mexican organized crime in action. Rumour has it that China has its hand in it as well: an act of revenge for the nineteenth century procedure imposed on the Middle Kingdom by the Western powers (including the United States) of selling drugs to the Chinese population. Two prolonged wars were fought against China (Opium Wars: 1839-1842 and 1856-1860) to force the Chinese authorities to agree to having its own people be put on the dope. So, who knows? Fentanyl is produced in China.

Does all this close the list of ailments that the United States is suffering from? Hell, no! The woke ideology is finishing the job off. God, the morals, tradition, values such as the family or marriage have been for the most part done away with; instead, wokeism is gaining ground. Everything traditional is scorned, derided, frowned upon or destroyed; conversely, everything hitherto abnormal is given a status of something grand, progressive, humane, wonderful.

We have had such societal and moral revolutions in history: the French and the Bolshevik revolutions are the first that come to mind. During those times of upheaval, the then do-gooders or progressivists were also hellbent on destroying everything that they could lay their hands on: the faith, the family, the calendar, even the names of months. Christ was replaced with the cult of wisdom or the adoration of Marx while all the traces of the past had to be demolished, crushed, erased, turned inside out or put upside down. Precisely as it is in today’s Western world in general, and in the United States of America in particular.

Do they who run the United States know what policies they are pursuing? They haven’t finished the war against Russia, and yet they want to bomb Iran; they have the Gaza conflict on their hands, and yet they want to challenge China over Taiwan; they have difficulties drafting sufficient numbers of troops, and yet by putting the US Army on the Woke platform they do everything to discourage patriotic, healthy and mentally sound men from joining the troops; they say they need to fight Russia in Ukraine or else Russia will invade the whole of Europe, and yet they are complicit in the invasion of their own country; for years they have been outsourcing the American industry to China and India, and now they have found out that they have become dependent on the outside world and that people who are flocking inside the United States will find no employment; they have tried to stage colour revolutions here and there around the globe, and now they are about to have a national split on their own turf due to their weird policies; they imposed the dollar as the currency of international business, and now they are facing the budding process of de-dollarization. Are these America’s death throes?

What else can we expect? The enmity between the democrats and the republicans is such that one cannot exclude that one of these days Donald Trump will be eliminated from the presidential campaign before he gets elected. America knows how to remove individuals who dare to challenge the powers that be: two Kennedies were murdered, while recently Jeffrey Epstein – the guy who procured teenagers to slake the sexual appetite of the powerful of this world – has been made to kill himself.

I am not original in drawing the comparison between the United States and ancient Rome, but it imposes itself: rising inflation, influx of foreigners, childless families, corrupt morals, reliance on aliens, a deep split within the country (eventually the eastern – Byzantium – and the Western parts of the Roman Empire went their separate ways), the impotence to control borders, the teeming wretches in the big cities with their ever increasing entitlements, the babel of nations and races that was so characteristic of the twilight of the Roman Empire, and, and, and. Are these death throes?

Sure, ancient Rome did not die overnight. It took some time. Yet, once Romans began their suicidal journey, there was no stopping it. Sure, this or that emperor was successful in reversing the downward trend, but only for a while. The general process could not be undone. Remember: it was the foreigners who eventually devastated the cradle of the Roman Empire, the foreigners that the emperors let in.

Psychologists have worked out the concept of five mental stages that precede the death of an individual. These are: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance. What stage is the United States in? It is certainly denial: few Americans would agree that their Empire is about to die. It is certainly anger: Washington is throwing its weight about around the globe as if there was no tomorrow. It is bargaining: the Empire is trying to buy time by enlarging its military alliances, by waging proxy wars, by sabre-rattling, by trying to invigorate its decadent population with the influx of foreigners. It is depression: you can see it in terms of decaying morals, low self-esteem, the finances and economy of the Empire. What remains? The very last stage. Once Americans have been convinced that their ancestors were evil people (slave owners, racists, oppressors of women), once Americans have been made to believe that women are better than men (and so should oust men from all their positions, also in the military), once Americans have been induced to dabble in and argue over “gender-reassignment” (boys becoming girls and girls becoming boys, boys and gilrs identifying as a third sex/gender), once Americans have SLAUGHTERED SIXTY MILLION PEOPLE in the wombs of their women since Roe vs Wade (1973), there is no one to fight, there is nothing to fight for, there is nothing to fall back on. The last phase – acceptance – will follow any time soon.