Population, Eugenics and more such folklore

It's probably best if I repeat something I wrote on January 21 (`More
Comments on Chase Dunn'):


A.)

>The discussion on this list, - I'm loath to say to the small incrowd
>presently only writing on this list - has been filled with utter rubbish
>postings recently, or is written in such
>torturous jargon that I have no idea what the writer is trying to express.
>
And B.)

>    By the way, speaking to the present incrowd of this list: many World
>System theorists are avowedly perhaps `progressives' but not Marxists, let
>alone Leninists, so I'm not even sure all this
>Maoist/Marxist/Leninist/Gramscian/Althusserian/Spivakian/what other
>generally `Marxisant' folklore have you belongs on this list at all.

Note that I also made a prediction in January, which was proven by Clinton's
visit to Moscow this week - for the Russian parliament was to put it mildly
hostile to Clinton and Putin was to say the very least not very cooperative:


>    So, basically, what I'm trying to say is that the Cold War has only
>ended in Europe and after Kossovo has reemerged in Europe too.  Now, the US
>may tamper with the GNP-statistics, to comfort itself, as much as it may
>like in order to prove Russia is not a great power anymore but sadly there
>are lies, there are big lies and there are statistics. Does the US really
>think Russia's massive industries, mineral resources and armed forces -
>which made the USSR into a super-power in the first place - have somehow
>suddenly miraculously disappeared off the face of the earth if they don't
>show up in statistics? Of course not - the US has made itself appear more
>powerful than it is by a statistical trick in which Russia dropped from
>second industrial power of the world to twenty-fifth but, statistics or
not,
>Russia's productive capacity, brainpower and armed forces are simply still
>there.
>
>    And, furthermore, Russia is in some ways stronger now than it was in
the
>1970's. For, first, even apart from `strong' allies like Mengishtu's
>Ethiopia even its European allies (GDR perhaps excepted) weakened rather
>than strengthened the USSR. After all in COMECON the USSR was to `exchange'
>to a favorable rate its valuable oil with shoddy products from Eastern
>Europe. The USSR netly made a loss on its satellites. The same is true for
>the republics (Ukraine, Kazakhstan and sometimes the Baltic states
excepted)
>which had to be heavily subsidized from Russia. Since most republics have
>nowhere to go but Russia in the future instead of the `losing' Union of
>Socialist Republics we will probably witness a more profitable
>`neo-colonial' arrangement in which Russia only invests in the republics if
>it's profitable and in a few republics - notably Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan
>and Uzbekistan - who really cares for Kirgizistan or Tajikistan ? As the
>Russian say: "What has Asia ever done for US ?". Second, in the 1960's the
>USSR was faced with a hostile 1 billion Chinese on its southern border -
>this situation has meanwhile changed completely. Since both Russia and
China
>(not to speak of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan) rightly fear US- and so called
>Muslim terrorist subversion (But in substance that's not really `Muslim
>fundamentalism' but armed smuggle which is why equally fundamentalist Iran
>has concentrated almost 300.000 soldiers on the Afghan border). Both
>have to collaborate if only to safeguard their southern/western border. A
>common threat has united
>them. Thus - although it was not considered `news' in the media -
>immediately after Kossovo (mind you !) Russia and China staged military
>maneuvers together for the first time.
>
>    Long term trends notwithstanding we can not predict the distant future
>for there are simply too many imponderable factors and then - as I wrote
>before - Germany may very well again emerge as a rival to the US. For the
>foreseeable future though - partly as a result of Kossovo but more because
>of
>Middle Eastern and Central Asian entanglements, which are perhaps rightly
>perceived as a threat by both Russia and China  -
>the `Cold War' between the US and Russia/China has recommenced. A Cold War
>in which the favorable factors to some extent compensate for unfavorable
>changes to Russia in the last decade. Russia is certainly much weaker but
it
>has much less to protect too. It is always possible this may lead to an
all-out war but the more likely prospect are further regional
conflagrations, which still - because of the extreme destructive power of
even a modern submachine gun - will  involve millions
>of casualties.
>
Now, THAT is the real world and that is the real world we ought to be
discussing - with all these repetitive postings on socio-biology, population
etc - and all of the calling your opponents `fascists'  `anti-human' and
more of such old communist folklore - for if this list was really a threat
to the `global elite' its normal contributors would surely long have had `an
arranged accident', and, Mine, you would have been expelled from the US as
`unwanted foreigner' -  anybody noted that Russia just put the prototype of
a new supersonic long-distance bomber - to replace its 1970's supersonic
long distance- backfire - bombers - into use?

Do n't be mistaken for a single moment any correspondent of this lists in
the US - these bombers carry nuclear warheads and they are targeted at YOU.
And the new missile defense-system the US wants to take into use is not
directed against `rogue states' but against Russia - note that this means
the USA unilaterally revokes the ABM - treaty of 1972, which was about the
only disarmament treaty which worked.

That means we're heading straight towards a new nuclear- armaments' race
which might still very well ensue in a nuclear exchange by accident - for
Russia is going to counter that system with multipile tragetting missiles
based on nuclear submarines, based a few miles from the US' coast - so that
warning times will again be down to a few minutes. - But of course the
in-crowd on this list `has more urgent things to discuss'.

R.J. Barendse

Amsterdam/Netherlands