The Only Path to Peace in Ukraine: Neutrality, Not Militarization!

Already three years ago, in my blog essay of February 23, 2022, entitled “The Responsibility for this War in Ukraine is on the West's Side” (https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2022/02/russian-statesmanship-against-ukraine.html), I argued that President Volodymyr Zelensky should have taken a lesson from Austria in 1955. When Austria regained full sovereignty after ten years of Allied occupation, it did so not by aligning with one bloc against another, but by promising to declare itself—once national sovereignty has been established—permanently neutral under International Law. That singular act—born of prudence rather than pride—enabled Austria to secure peace, prosperity, and exert an honored role as mediator between East and West throughout the Cold War.

Ukraine could have chosen a similar path. By declaring itself neutral—not necessarily according to International Law, just as a political declaration for future national strategic orientation—Kiev could have preserved peace, avoided devastation, and positioned itself as a bridge for cooperation and commerce rather than a battleground for weakening Russia. Instead, under pressure from the Biden White House, the neoconservative establishment, and Russophobic warmongers eager for contracts and profits, the dilettantish Zelensky chose confrontation. The result has been catastrophic: hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers dead, millions displaced, a ruined economy, shattered infrastructure, political opposition crushed, the Orthodox Church persecuted, and Europe dragged into the bloodiest war a generation after the Cold War’s end.

Now, after three and a half years of war, Ukraine stands on the brink of defeat. Its population is war-weary, its resources are exhausted, and its masters in Washington, Brussels, Berlin, Paris, and London scramble to save face. They continue to feed their public the myth of a coming Ukrainian victory, painting Russia as bled dry and overextended, while behind closed doors they know that they are lying and desperately search for a way out.

But what solutions do they now offer? Fantasies of a massive buffer zone in eastern Ukraine and a peacekeeping force manned by tens or hundreds of thousands of foreign troops to “protect” Ukraine from further Russian encroachments. This is sheer insanity. The same elites who failed Europe and betrayed Ukraine before the war are repeating their errors now in fantasies for peace arrangements. They pretend that stability lies in endless militarization—when in fact the very opposite is true.

My recommendation has not changed since February 2022 and it would now be even more important to implement: the Austrian archetype would still be the best model. If Ukraine declares itself neutral—outside of NATO, committed to peaceful coexistence—no foreign “peacekeepers” would be required. No Article 5-type guarantees, no restoration of a bloated NATO-style army rebuilt in a hollowed-out society, no endless arms shipments to an exhausted nation. Neutrality would suffice for credible assurance of peace.

To suggest otherwise and regurgitate the untrue assumptions of late—to insinuate that Russia is bent on occupying Kiev, subjugating all of Ukraine, and marching across Europe in some neoimperialist campaign—is as false now as it was in 2022. Russia’s “Special Military Operation” was not an imperialist war of aggression. It was, as I argued then and repeat now, a strategic necessity forced upon Moscow after every diplomatic overture was rejected and every legitimate Russian security concern mocked. Without the West’s refusal to engage in serious and meaningful dialogue, there would have been no war.

A just postwar settlement must therefore rest on simple realities. First, the territories now under Russian control in the east and south will remain under Russian control, unless and until a neutral government in Kiev emerges that can be trusted to deal in good faith with both West and East. Second, no foreign troops—NATO or otherwise—should be stationed in Ukraine. Third, Ukraine’s sovereignty must be preserved not by militarization but by renunciation of bloc politics. All of this, if need be, replenished by a non-attack treaty signed between NATO and Russia.

This also would require political renewal inside Ukraine. A government of neutrality and reconciliation could not be led by men such as Zelensky or Poroshenko, whose politics have been defined by hatred for Russia and subservience to Western dictates. Nor can it be founded on the suppression of religion and opposition parties or eradicating Russian language and culture in the oblasts in the east and south of Ukraine. Ukraine’s rebirth requires leadership capable of elevating itself beyond the animosities that poisoned the post-Maidan years. In this sense, even the restoration of President Yanukovych as an interim caretaker could be envisaged, until genuine elections are possible under conditions of stability and inclusion.

This will be controversial to Western ears, which have been deaf to factual reasoning for much too long. But one must remember: Ukraine is not an enemy of Russia. It is the cradle of Russian identity, a Slavic sister nation. Putin has never sought its eradication, only its refusal to be weaponized against Moscow by foreign powers. Once Washington and Brussels acknowledge this, peace becomes possible.

The larger question is whether Western leaders are capable of recovering their senses—intellectually, morally, and strategically. Can the neocons beleaguering  the White House and its chorus in European capitals, abandon their delusions of military triumph and accept neutrality as the only workable foundation of peace? Can they finally give peace, rather than perpetual mobilization and war faring, a chance?

This is not just about Ukraine. It is about Europe’s survival. The post–Cold War opportunities for peace were squandered by arrogance and blindness. But history may yet offer a second chance—if Europe has the courage to seize it.

If only this essay could reach Donald Trump himself—or at least one of his close advisors, like Secretary of State Marco Rubio! The time has come for a statesman to break with the disastrous course charted by neoconservatives and their European imitators. Neutrality, not militarization, is the only path forward—for Ukraine, for Europe, and for the West.

Alaska Summit: President Trump Is Setting Himself Up for Failure! No Peace Without Ending Zelensky’s Destructive Role and Changing the EU’s Flawed Stance

For years, I have argued in multiple blog entries—against the prevailing orthodoxy—that the true culprits behind the armed conflict in Ukraine were not to be found in Moscow, but in Washington, Brussels, and Kyiv. Western policy in Ukraine was a reckless, immoral gamble—driven not by the defense of democracy, but by a blind Russophobia and geopolitical vanity of Washington, Brussels, and their willing proxy in Kyiv. In those same essays, I also explained why the Russian Special Military Operation—routinely dismissed by the uninformed and ideologically blinded as a “war of aggression” (confusing militarily offensive with politically defensive)—was justifiable on moral grounds.

This point matters, because in our legal-positivist era, morality is often forgotten. Yet moral law—the ethical righteousness of human acts—precedes legal provisions. In the end and ultimately: Morality beats legality. Specifically in international relations! But for those unwilling to accept anything beyond legal norms, Russia’s campaign could also be justified under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which allows for collective self-defense—a principle applicable in light of the injustices committed by Kyiv against the eastern oblasts and their Russian populations since the Western-backed color revolution of 2014.

Ukraine leadership, backed by signatory states like Germany and France, failed to implement the Minsk I and II agreements. As a result, Russia acted to end the intolerable conditions suffered by large portions of the population and to rectify the wrongs inflicted since post-Maidan Ukraine first came under an American proxy president, Petro Poroshenko. This policy of repression was then intensified under Zelensky, whose bid to join NATO—and thereby place the alliance’s military reach directly on Russia’s border—combined with a massive rearmament program, left no doubt that Ukraine was ready to serve as a U.S. proxy for weakening Russia, even to the point of seeking regime change in Moscow.

As I wrote in my blog essay of December 18, 2022 (to be found in totality here):

“Preemptive war can be justified when all peaceful means and all alternatives to using force have been exhausted and only immediate military action can prevent higher threats from materializing.”

I do not repeat my arguments—very much in contrast to American and European warmongers—out of pride, pigheadedness, or the inability to revise my views when confronted with historical reality. The latter has meanwhile corroborated the appropriateness of my arguments. Unfortunately, intellectual flexibility is entirely absent among the decision-makers in the European Commission, NATO, and the Ukrainian government. They stubbornly cling to the very policies and flawed judgments that ignited the war in the first place.

Now, as President Trump prepares to meet President Putin in Alaska this Friday for historic peace talks—talks already boycotted by both Zelensky and the EU—another of my earlier warnings stands vindicated. In my March 5, 2024, post, I wrote (find the whole essay here):

“To end the war, the Zelensky regime—described by some as fascist—must be ousted. Ukraine should be divided, with the conquered territories temporarily under Russian control, and a new government should be established in Kyiv. This government must be able to cooperate with both East and West and should commit to refraining from joining NATO or engaging in any form of military cooperation with the U.S. and its allies.”

If peace is to be achieved, Zelensky must go. His continued presence in power guarantees only the prolongation of conflict, needless bloodshed, and further devastation for Ukraine. U.S. and EU support should have ended long ago; instead, the relentless flow of arms and funds has merely deepened the tragedy.

It is incomprehensible that President Trump failed to act decisively when Zelensky stirred discord in the Oval Office on February 28, 2025. He was allowed to leave Washington unscathed, returning to Kyiv to continue his ruinous course. The US is not a member to the International Criminal Court, but I am sure the legal experts in the US State Department could have found a paragraph justifying detaining the usurper and war criminal Zelensky. That was a missed opportunity to remove a central obstacle to peace.

With the Alaska talks imminent, the question now is how Trump and Putin can overcome the obstructionism of Zelensky and his European backers and achieve a settlement that is both just and durable. Such an agreement must, as I have long maintained, include territorial recognition for Russia in the east and south—regions subjected to repression, discrimination, political marginalization, and military assault since 2014. Any peace plan that ignores this reality—as European leaders seem to be committed to do—is doomed to fail.

Let us once again state the obvious: First Obama and then Biden and the American national security elites—not Putin—bear primary responsibility for this confrontation between Russia and the West. Unless the U.S. neoconservatives, the European Commission, and NATO’s senior leadership awaken from their Russophobe slumber and abandon their imperial dreams of global dominance, any armistice will be temporary, and future conflict inevitable.

The decisive challenge is to reintroduce philosophical depth into the thinking of those advising both President Trump and Europe’s leaders. Trump’s instincts are, as so often, correct—anchored in conservative-Christian principles and oriented toward fair, mutually beneficial outcomes. Yet his inner circle remains mired in Cold War thinking, granting humanity and legitimate interests to allies while denying them to perceived adversaries.

Here, Mr. Putin could serve as an example: a statesman of intellect and moral clarity whose consistent positions—from his February 10, 2007, Munich Security Conference speech to countless press conferences with world journalists since—have been deliberately distorted by Western politicians and media, who project onto him the cynicism that truly resides in their own policies.

The hope now is that Presidents Trump and Putin can reach an agreement that serves Ukraine, Europe, and the wider world. The support of Zelensky and his morally bankrupt backers in Brussels will not be needed—and indeed, would only imperil any chance of lasting peace. How these forces can be neutralized so they do not sabotage a potential settlement may require nothing less than a statesmanlike miracle at the Alaska Summit.

Trump's First 100 Days: A Presidency the Media Can't Spin into Failure

After the first hundred days of Donald J. Trump's second term as the 47th President of the United States have passed, the political opposition and global interest media try to paint it as if his presidency had already failed. If you listen to The New York Times, CNN, or their European counterparts like The Guardian or Der Spiegel, you’d think the country is on the brink of collapse. But nothing could be further from the truth.

In striking contrast to the four years of drift, decline, and dysfunction under Joe Biden—about which the same dishonest legacy media outlets kept mostly silent—, Trump has already made significant headway on the key issues that propelled him back into the White House: securing the border, revitalizing the economy, restoring energy independence, and confronting the cultural rot that had taken hold in American institutions.

The united Left both in the US and Europe can’t come to terms with the most dramatic conservative counter-revolution the MAGA movement has launched under President Trump’s leadership, basically reviving a political upheaval that had started in Mr. Trump’s first term and now continuing in a more systematic and professional way.

From day one, President Trump acted decisively to restore order to the southern border, reversing Biden-era policies that had effectively opened the floodgates to millions of unvetted migrants. Biden’s border policy was a catastrophe: over six million illegal crossings that caused sanctuary cities buckling under the weight of unmanaged immigration and triggered a largely ignored humanitarian and security crisis. Today, under Trump, illegal crossings have plummeted, cartels are on the run, and for the first time in years, the rule of law is being reasserted at the border.

Ending the Reign of Woke

Perhaps one of the most underreported and deliberately misrepresented victories of Trump’s early presidency has been his decisive stand against the woke ideology that has infected corporations, schools, and government agencies. Within weeks, Trump signed executive orders barring federal funding for DEI programs that promote racial essentialism and division. He defunded radical gender ideology in education, banned it from federal training sessions and determined by executive order that “sex” is immutably defined by biological classification as either male or female and determined by reproductive anatomy.

These moves were predictably labeled “fascist” or “anti-democratic” by the legacy press. But for millions of Americans—and indeed, for many Europeans cheering from across the Atlantic—they marked a long-overdue reassertion of reason over ideological madness.

From merit, occupational proficiency and character replacing affirmative action and gender identities in government hiring to protecting children from irreversible medical procedures pushed under the banner of “gender affirmation,” Trump is waging a cultural battle that forces of sanity are hoping he will win as DEI and radical gender politics have done little to create a more just society, but undertook much to divide, confuse, and demoralize one.

Economic Stability

Trump’s first 100 days have already begun to stabilize an economy ravaged by inflation, high interest rates, and bureaucratic overreach. By establishing DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency) under the leadership of Elon Musk, the administration focused on eliminating “Waste, Fraud, and Abuse” within the federal government. As of early May 2025, DOGE claims to have achieved savings for taxpayers of around $165 billion by terminating wasteful contracts and improper payments, workforce reductions and regulatory savings. The Left’s hollow criticism is directed mostly toward the fact that DOGE has focused on terminating worldwide contracts for “energy and climate advisory services” and gender-focused curricula and projects  

President Trump’s rollback of Biden’s anti-growth regulations and tax policies has boosted business confidence, and early signs indicate a recovery in manufacturing and energy employment. The administration’s rapid response—cutting red tape, unleashing domestic energy, and restoring fiscal discipline—has signaled a return to common sense in economy as well.

A cornerstone of President Trump’s “America First” economic agenda has been his much-discussed tariff policy as a strategic tool to protect American industries from unfair foreign competition and to revitalize domestic manufacturing. The US’s trade deficit amounts to more than one trillion dollars annually and needs revision. While critics argue that tariffs are raising prices and function like a hidden tax on consumers, also inviting retaliatory tariffs that hurt U.S. exporters and could distort global supply chains, Trump’s tariff strategy reflects a shift from blind and—in many cases—one-sided trade arrangements toward more balanced and just economic realism. While this strategy must be managed with careful precision and its results remain to be seen, the hasty condemnation by most media owes more to ideological ill-will rather than factual critique.

The Unreasonableness of European Political Elites Prevents Peace in the Ukraine-Russia War

The war in Ukraine, now entering its fourth year, has left the European Union and much of the West on the wrong side of history. This conflict, deeply rooted in the complex geopolitics of Russia, Ukraine, and the broader Western alliance, was—at least from Russia’s vantage point—never merely about territorial disputes or nationalistic ambition. It was instead about NATO expansion and the ongoing subjugation of Russian populations in the Donbas by Kiev in the wake of the Maidan Revolution in 2014. The response to these legitimate Russian concerns by the US and Europe has been short-sighted and historically misguided, and owed to a substantial failure in the West’s security policy design and diplomatic foresight. 

Ukraine’s potential accession to NATO would have represented a significant shift in the balance of power on Russia’s doorstep. Rather than an imperial ambition, as often portrayed by the West, this was a matter of national survival for Russia.  Despite Russia's repeated warnings, Western policymakers, particularly in the US and the EU, dismissed these concerns, choosing to expand NATO right up to Russia’s borders.

 Maidan and the Neglect of Russia’s National Security Interests 

The situation took a decisive turn after the 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine, which was largely instigated by the United States. The revolution overthrew then-President Viktor Yanukovych, who had been seen as pro-Russian, and installed the anti-Russian Petro Poroshenko as the new president. This shift, backed by Washington and much of the EU, sowed deeper divisions within Ukraine, particularly in the Russian-speaking eastern and southern regions.

Instead of seeking peace and reconciliation and preparing Ukraine as a neutral bridge for political exchange between Russia and Europe, the West pushed Ukraine into an arms race that ultimately escalated the conflict. [for the rise in Ukraine's defense budget from 2013 until before the outbreak of the war see https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2022/02/russian-statesmanship-against-ukraine.html]. Feeling its hand forced, Russia moved toward the annexation of Crimea in 2014. From Russia’s perspective, this move was a necessary and strategic response to the destabilization of Ukraine and the growing military presence of NATO forces near its borders. Crimea, home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, held immense strategic significance. The possibility of Ukraine joining NATO posed a direct threat to Russia’s access to the Black Sea, making the annexation of Crimea an inevitable step in Russia’s security strategy.

As the Maidan Revolution unfolded, Russian-speaking minorities in these regions felt increasingly marginalized by the new Kiev government. Poroshenko’s policies, including restrictive language laws and the suppression of Russian cultural identity, led to a violent backlash that escalated into a full-blown civil conflict, with Russia stepping in to protect its ethnic kin and safeguard its strategic interests.

Politics of Hatred Brings Success for Democrats and Biden – The Swamp Prevails

With yesterday's inauguration of the Biden/Harris administration, a significant moment in American history unfolded—its true impact on world history remains to be fully understood. However, one thing is certain: dark times have begun for the Christian-conservative camp in the U.S. and the defenders of Western civilization. Tyranny is now upon us.

After four years of fierce propagandist vilification of the 45th President, the "storming" of the Capitol on January 6 provided a fresh opportunity for journalists and commentators to engage in their ongoing Trump denunciations and judgmental excesses.

What began as unrest caused by fringe elements within a peaceful demonstration of tens of thousands of Trump supporters has been elevated to a democratic catastrophe. Donald Trump has been blamed as the sole instigator, despite the fact that he never called for violence, instead encouraging his followers to demonstrate "peacefully and patriotically." The fact that Capitol security forces opened the gates at the precise moment Republican members of Congress and senators were preparing to present evidence of election irregularities and blatant voter fraud is conveniently omitted.

The united left accuses Mr. Trump of inciting a violent coup and claims that the Capitol's occupiers desecrated a landmark of American democracy. What is conveniently overlooked is the fact that many politicians, with strong backing from the power centers of the Deep State, have long turned the Capitol into a den of corruption and moral decay.

Since Trump’s 2016 election victory, a campaign of hatred—wholly incompatible with any legitimate opposition in a fledgling republic—has been waged to oust him from the White House. After Hillary Clinton's defeat, Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, and Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader (until yesterday), as leading figures of the nation's progressive left, spearheaded an almost irrational campaign to destroy Trump. They were supported by the bulk of the corporate media in an unprecedentedly vicious, partisan effort.

Since day one of his presidency, Trump has faced what amounts to an ongoing coup—a "color revolution," a coup d’état carried out without military force.

Representatives and senators from both parties, beholden to oligarchic donors from globalist, revolutionary elites like George Soros, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg, collaborated to further the globalist agenda against this political outsider. Trump, by strengthening the United States as a nation-state and adopting his "America First" principle, stood in the way of their plans.

Every means possible was—and is—considered legitimate to remove this "troublemaker." Despite his flaws and constant attacks, President Trump proved to be an excellent and influential leader. His accomplishments for the American people were numerous, including:

• Tax reform benefiting corporations and individuals

• Dismantling anti-industrial regulations

• An unprecedented economic recovery with record employment rates for Black Americans, Hispanics, and women (a recovery that was only slowed by the pandemic)

• Improved trade agreements with Canada, Mexico (USMCA), and China

• Initiatives toward restructuring and pacifying the Middle East

• The beginning of ending endless wars and bringing troops home from overseas territories

• Promoting energy independence, achieving the United States' first true energy self-sufficiency

• Reviving Christian values and social ethics

Even before he took office, rumors of a supposed collaboration between the Trump campaign and Russia (the RussiaGate scandal) were spread, only to later be proven entirely baseless. Then came the ill-fated impeachment trial over a phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky, while evidence of former Vice President Biden's abuse of office in Ukraine went unaddressed. Nothing was done when Biden forced the resignation of a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating alleged bribes to him and his son, Hunter, from the energy company Burisma, despite Biden bragging about withholding support payments until the prosecutor was fired.

When impeachment failed and Nancy Pelosi's dramatic tearing of Trump’s State of the Union speech before a global audience didn’t achieve its goal, the Democrats found a new weapon in early 2020: the pandemic.

Though the pandemic certainly slowed economic recovery, governors are primarily responsible for managing pandemic response. Yet, Trump was blamed for every COVID-19 death. Democratic state leaders who sent infected patients into nursing homes, leading to tens of thousands of deaths, were hailed as heroes. Once the public saw through the myth, the final card was played: the manipulation of the 2020 presidential election. Despite clear evidence of irregularities and voter fraud—such as Judicial Watch’s finding of 1.8 million more voters than actual voters in 27 states—politicians and courts sided against Trump. Over 74 million of his supporters, who viewed him as an exceptional president due to his success in economic, energy, immigration, and foreign policy, saw him as robbed of re-election and do not recognize Joe Biden as a legitimate president.

For many, the betrayal of Trump and the shameful corruption of politics have reached unbearable levels. The Capitol incident and the absurd accusation that Trump incited an insurrection represent the tragic climax of this betrayal.

Violence only seems to be acceptable when it comes from the right, often tolerated or even applauded by the left. The arson and looting carried out by violent left-wing groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter since the summer of 2020 has cost lives and caused billions in property damage. Left-wing mobs have stormed and occupied state capitols in Wisconsin and Minnesota, yet because these actions do not fit the narrative of cultural Marxists, they are either ignored or downplayed.

But fraudulently voting Trump out of office is not enough for the political left. They are determined to ruin Donald Trump personally and prevent him from ever holding political office again. As the final step in their strategy of total discrediting, they have shamelessly used the Capitol occupation to push through a second impeachment, charging Trump with inciting violent insurrection. This attempt at impeachment—far more absurd than the first—now moves to the Senate, with an uncertain outcome. What is clear, however, is that some Republicans have already stabbed Trump in the back, and a repeat performance cannot be ruled out.

The erasure of Trump’s political legacy coincides with a growing mental dictatorship reminiscent of the totalitarian regimes of both communist and fascist origins. Trump has been denied access to social media and the ability to communicate directly with the public. His supporters have been socially ostracized, and some have faced threats and persecution.

For now, the political left has triumphed at nearly every level. What is most devastating is that their politics of destruction and hatred have been rewarded, while the inertia and spinelessness of the Republican Party, along with most of their representatives, have allowed the left to gain even more ground. The arrogance of these forces will only grow.

The Marxist left's totalitarian machinery, which has been steadily intensifying, is now fully operational. With the Democratic Party controlling the Presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives, Marxist-driven policies are all but assured. I fear that what we are witnessing may soon be compared to the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 or the rise of the Khomeini theocracy in Iran in 1979.

American society is deeply divided, and frustration is widespread. The cultural struggle is likely to intensify. The Biden/Harris agenda is poised to bring disaster to the United States, leading to widespread damage across all political fronts—economy, defense, cultural values, immigration, education, and free speech. There is no immediate solution in sight. Before the conservative camp can once again engage in the culture war, it must first overcome the emotions of resignation stemming from defeat and betrayal.

A Nation Threatened by Ignorance

---

The Ancient Adage of Democracy’s Fragility

The ancient adage that democracy can easily degenerate into its evil opposite, an ochlocracy—a reign of the mob—materializes in the reality of our everyday lives.

What is unfolding before our eyes is something I once thought possible only as speculation, something that could exist merely as an ideal representation in political philosophy. Yet here it is. We are witnessing in real time what happens when a society loses touch with the essential social ingredients of democracy—human freedom and its complement, individual responsibility—and succumbs to a chaotic wave of lawlessness and disorder.

---

Mob Rule and the Plebeians of Our Time

The rise of mob rule has not occurred overnight, and if it ever ends, it will not vanish quickly. I first warned of the looming "mental dictatorship" and the ideological despotism of the leftist mob in my January 31, 2017 post, "The Tyranny of the Mob." Link

In that post, I addressed a phenomenon that has gained prominence today. The mob—the plebeians of our time—is no longer made up of illiterate citizens as in ancient times. Today, the unruly crowd consists of the poorly educated and morally confused individuals from all walks of life: workers, teachers, journalists, academics, scientists, and politicians. Among this group, I count many, if not most, Democrats in both the Senate and Congress, as well as neoconservatives among Republicans and the neoliberal elite in the State Department and other governmental bodies. This includes the vast majority of faculty in higher education.

However, never before has the harm caused by political illiteracy and moral confusion been so profound, pushing the country to the brink of destruction. Misconceptions about political and social coexistence have reached dangerous levels. In my November 2015 blog post, I explored the fallacies and educational delusions that have brought the U.S. and, to a lesser degree, Europe to this point of societal disintegration. Link

---

The Mob’s True Aim

I doubt I would find a single person among the recent protesters—whether peacefully demonstrating or participating in the looting and violence—whose awareness would include a sound political philosophy for human and social existence. It wouldn’t matter whether the individual came from a highly educated background (college graduates, mayors, senators, media figures) or from less educated participants.

They have all fallen victim to the imposition of a “Culture of Insanity,” which has suffocated the basic reason necessary for stable social coexistence. By pretending to protest against alleged systemic anti-Black racism in the police force following the tragic killing of a Black man by a white officer, protests and riots broke out across the country. In many cases, law enforcement, ordered to stand down by Democrat governors and mayors, could only watch as looting and violence unfolded.

It soon became clear that the mob, acting under the guise of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, was pursuing a different agenda. Their indifference toward Black-on-Black violence and the struggles of disadvantaged Blacks in society reveals that they are using the issue of systemic anti-Black racism as a smokescreen for their true objective.

---

The Radical Left’s True Purpose

Once calls to defund the police became widespread within leftist circles and the mob began establishing anarchistic “autonomous zones” and purging the nation’s history by destroying monuments, their true aim became clear: to disrupt national cohesion, overthrow the government, remove President Trump, transform the U.S. into a secularist Marxist-Socialist collective, devoid of its Christian social ethics, and ensure permanent Democrat control of the nation’s political institutions.

We are witnessing the collapse of a mighty nation, on the brink of civil war or disintegration—a fate that awaits any country that renounces law and order and surrenders its monopoly on power. Can this destruction be the goal of the broader leftist and progressive movements in the U.S.?

No longer can there be any doubt. The proponents of mob rule seem to believe that abolishing law enforcement and experimenting with new approaches to crime and disorder will lead to better, more humane governance. They believe that peaceful social coexistence and the political structures it requires can be subject to trial and error. They argue for “Reimagining Public Safety” as though eradicating law and order could lead to a more just society. But history has shown that dismantling the State’s monopoly on force inevitably leads to chaos, as evidenced by the failure of the CHAZ experiment in Seattle.

---

The Crisis of Moral and Political Understanding

A dreadful blend of ignorance and moral deficiency has taken hold of this country, the result of decades of indoctrination and an education system devoid of classical erudition. The disregard for the wisdom of the great traditions of classical liberal arts and the unbending desire to destroy monuments—attempting to erase history deemed objectionable from an ideological perspective—can only be explained by this education crisis.

What we are witnessing is the consequence of the collapse of foundational moral and civic values. The common denominator for what is right and wrong, lawful and unlawful, good and bad—the minimal agreement required for stable social coexistence—has been dismantled by this culture of ill-education and indoctrination. I addressed this phenomenon in my March 2015 post, "The Crisis of Morality," where I explained what happens when a society faces such a profound moral crisis. Link

---

The State of National Emergency and Constitutional Weakness

The mayhem of recent months has exposed a severe weakness in the U.S. Constitution that has yet to be publicly acknowledged. This weakness relates to the question of national leadership during times of distress. The rift between federal authorities (the President) and local and state authorities (governors and mayors) has demonstrated the lack of clear constitutional provisions for leadership in times of national crisis.

The chaos of the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent unrest following George Floyd’s death revealed the inefficiencies of the current leadership structure. Several left-wing governors and mayors acted against federal policy, turning their cities into war zones for political reasons. The President’s occasional mobilization of National Guard troops and the passing of executive orders to protect monuments may have prevented the worst, but the overall situation—where lawlessness dominates many cities—is unacceptable.

---

The Need for a Strong Executive in Times of Crisis

What we see unfolding in the U.S. makes clear the need to strengthen the President's executive powers in times of national crisis. While the Constitution grants the President special powers during emergencies, there is no clear preponderance for the Executive to act unilaterally, without legislative constraint. The President’s ability to protect the nation during crises must be paramount, and this requires revisiting the constitutional framework to allow for decisive action without undue interference from local and regional authorities.

This issue may be too important to ignore any longer. The survival of the nation depends on it.

---

A Path to National Salvation?

With the presidential election just months away, the nation finds itself at a crossroads. The chaos and unrest continue unabated. Radical leftists, and even some Republicans and Never-Trumpers, seem willing to support the rioters and lawbreakers, as they push to remove President Trump from office at all costs, even if it destroys the nation.

Restoring order may require extensive use of force—both law enforcement and military. In some areas, martial law or military rule may be necessary. Yet, ironically, it is often the media outlets that support the mob, such as CNN, who have called for martial law—projecting their own culpability onto the opposition.

The radical left and its enablers know the gravity of the situation. They will not relent unless the mob’s lawlessness ceases, either through exhaustion or by the force of an iron fist. The nation’s survival depends on decisive action, and it may fall to President Trump to lead the way.

---

Conclusion

The path ahead is grueling and costly. To restore order, we may have to return to a more traditional political order, rooted in our Christian heritage. Time will tell if it is too late to reverse course

When the Breakdown of Rationality becomes a Habit

I have been commenting on the political spectacle unfolding in U.S. domestic politics ever since Donald Trump first ran for office. From the beginning, I argued that the undignified scale of it was truly mortifying.

Over the years, my analysis of this mortifying spectacle has proven accurate. However, I was wrong about one prediction: I expected that the irrational Trump-hatred would subside within a reasonable time frame, and that fairness would return to the mainstream media.

That prediction has certainly not come to pass. On the contrary, the madness has continued and even intensified. While sane minds might assume it couldn't get worse, it somehow does. For now, it has culminated in the utterly unreasonable impeachment spectacle in the House of Representatives. This farce represents the shameful continuation of the tragicomedy of U.S. domestic politics that I first outlined in my post on October 12, 2019 (link).

The impeachment investigation in the House committees was a futile waste of time. For the most part, partisan, one-sided witnesses and so-called constitutional experts simply parroted their preconceived ideas. As the process dragged on, it became clear that the Democrats' conduct was fueled by an intent to destroy rather than to seek common ground. It was clear they had no interest in ending this political charade.

Even more astonishing, the forces opposing impeachment—including the majority of Republicans and President Trump himself—allowed themselves to be tricked into debating a phony cause. They fell for a scam, a scheme devoid of substance and reality. It is inconceivable that those who opposed the impeachment would participate in the charade with such willing participation.

Instead of refusing to dignify the unreasonable show trial orchestrated by the Democrats in the House, Republicans and others played along as though there were any real substance to the impeachment claims. This only fueled the out-of-control Trump-haters, who, completely neglecting the basic principles of governance, continued and even exacerbated the already appalling situation.

It was absolute nonsense when Democrat Representative Adam Schiff—a cold-blooded ideologue, liar, and Trump-hater—initiated the impeachment proceedings by claiming to have found “incontrovertible evidence” that President Trump abused his power.

The truth, however, is quite different. Mr. Trump’s request for Ukraine to investigate was legitimate and in the interest of the United States. When Joe Biden was vice president, the Biden family's actions already appeared corrupt on the surface. Who would want a politician to rise to the highest office in the land when he had previously abused his power in the second-highest office? Why should a presidential candidate’s bid for nomination shield them from criminal investigation? Moreover, why would President Trump even consider Mr. Biden a serious rival more than a year before the next presidential election, especially when it was still highly uncertain whether “Sleepy Joe” would even be the Democratic nominee? Schiff’s claim that Trump sought to “defeat Mr. Biden in the 2020 presidential election and enhance his prospects for reelection” is utterly foolish and beside the point.

The mental disorder of the Democrats became even more evident when they argued, through their henchman Adam Schiff, that Trump was undermining “a nation at war with our adversary, Vladimir Putin’s Russia” by withholding $391 million in military aid.

As far as I know, neither Ukraine nor the U.S. is at war with Russia. Neither the Democrats' Russia-hatred nor the lies of Schiff can make it so. In fact, as I pointed out in my blog entries in 2015 (link) and 2014 (link), the U.S. and the EU instigated a coup in Ukraine, installing a Washington-friendly figure, Poroshenko. Then, under the pretense of Russian aggression, the U.S. deployed armored troops and anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and the Baltics. There has never been a legitimate security reason for the U.S. to station troops in Ukraine or provide massive military aid at the expense of American taxpayers.

The Cold War-minded, Russophobic factions in the U.S. State Department and the Deep State national security complex fabricated the idea of Russian aggression and war. They continued to deceive the American public, including during the impeachment trials.

As the primary actor in foreign affairs and national security, President Trump was fully entitled to withhold military aid to Ukraine while assessing corruption. He also had the authority to alter the failed foreign policy toward Ukraine, though that didn't happen. Nonetheless, the proceedings revealed how the left distorts facts, obstructs presidential power, and undermines constitutional principles.

The Democrats also disregarded the conclusions of special prosecutor Robert Mueller, who confirmed after two years of investigation that there was no collusion between Russia and Trump's 2016 campaign. Yet Schiff tried to link Trump’s alleged abuse of power regarding Ukraine to the disproven allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 election.

No matter the facts, the Democrats have remained steadfast in their false beliefs. Trump Derangement Syndrome at its peak.

Now, the impeachment trial has moved to the Senate, where the Republican majority could easily dismiss this sham process. But instead, the Republican Party is allowing the ludicrous articles of impeachment concocted by the Democrats to go forward with a trial. This shows that ill-will and anti-Trumpism are not confined to the Democrats and the radical left; they have spread through the Republican Party as well.

Someone once said the U.S. has two political parties: one, the Democrats, is evil; the other, the Republicans, is foolish. I would add that the Republican Party is also utterly cowardly.

Syria - President Trump One-Ups Security Experts Again

To further elaborate on the previous post, I’d like to first present a truth before discussing Syria’s conflict. It seems that almost everything the Democrats, Never-Trumpers, Neoliberals, and Neocons claim is a reliable indicator of falsehood and nonsense. Thus, judging the situation has become relatively simple: One can often get closer to the truth by simply opposing what figures like Pelosi, Schiff, Sanders, Graham, Romney, Bolton, and the majority of mainstream pundits claim. The legitimacy of opposing viewpoints then becomes a matter of personal perspective and emphasis.

This logic is useful when analyzing the US withdrawal from northeastern Syria and the alleged abandonment of the Kurds. By considering the opposite of the artificial outrage from the political swamp inside and outside the Beltway, the reality becomes clearer.

The argument that the US has betrayed the Kurds, who fought alongside us to defeat ISIS, is absurd. With the ISIS caliphate eliminated, Turkey sought to establish a safe zone to counter Kurdish forces in Syria, which it views as an anti-Turkish terror group. US intelligence observed preparations for a Turkish operation over several weeks and concluded that Turkey had serious intentions, which even last-minute calls between Presidents Trump and Erdogan couldn’t prevent. Clearly, the US administration neither approved nor could deter Turkey’s actions. Even if US forces had been reinforced, the few dozen special forces in northeastern Syria could not have stopped or repelled a Turkish incursion.

Therefore, the decision to withdraw US troops was the right one. It avoided conflict between NATO allies and allowed the Kurds to turn to the Syrian Army for protection. The Syrian Army is now moving to the border, assuming control of the region and safeguarding the Kurdish population.

The military leadership and the armchair generals in Congress (led by warmonger Senator Lindsey Graham) who accuse the US of abandoning its Kurdish allies fail to recognize (and likely never will) that the Syrian crisis began with the misguided US regime-change operation against Assad nearly seven years ago.

In my May 10, 2013 blog post (https://www.edwinseditorial.blogspot.com.edwinseditorial.com/2013/05/disastrous-foreign-policy-failures.html), I criticized the disastrous decision to politically and militarily support radical insurgents in Syria. This followed similar mistakes in Egypt and Libya, which already yielded terrible outcomes.

Since then, the chaos caused by the US’s failed regime-change effort has become evident. The US worked alongside the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a group composed of Kurds and Sunni Arabs, and the Kurdish PYD, which is aligned with the PKK, a group Turkey considers a terrorist organization.

When Russia intervened in 2015 to prop up Assad and restore Syrian territorial integrity, it was clear that the US intervention – illegal under international law and ethically questionable – was doomed to fail. In its Russophobic, regime-change mindset, Washington rejected Russia’s offer to fight ISIS together and instead continued supporting Kurdish-dominated forces with money, weapons, air support, and special forces.

In my September 27, 2017 post (https://www.edwinseditorial.blogspot.com.edwinseditorial.com/2017/09/why-my-north-korea-resolve-could-have.html), I predicted the inevitable failure of US foreign policy in Syria and its resulting embarrassment.

President Trump's decision to avoid engaging in a war with Turkey prevented yet another costly intervention. This decision, heavily mediated by Russia, allowed the Kurds to finally turn to Damascus for protection. It seems that Syria is now taking advantage of the ceasefire negotiated by US envoys Pence and Pompeo to regain control of its territory. Once sovereignty is restored and national security is assured by Syria’s armed forces, there will be no justification for further Turkish incursions.

Let’s be clear: The US’s former “Kurdish allies” were essentially mercenaries, bought with vast amounts of money and weapons, carrying out the US’s bidding. Their commitment to fighting ISIS was likely more about carving out territory for themselves, potentially creating an autonomous region in Syria or even parts of Turkey.

The outcry from the left and neoconservatives in the US is not only unwarranted, but downright foolish. Notable exceptions, such as GOP Senator Rand Paul and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard, criticized the interventionist policies and supported President Trump’s shift in foreign policy. Meanwhile, the discredited Hillary Clinton, who pushed disastrous policies under President Obama, derides Gabbard as a Russian agent for her stance.

What’s also disturbing is the lack of loyalty within the Republican Party, as 129 of its members signed on to a House vote condemning the President’s troop withdrawal. The military-industrial complex's hold on Washington, combined with the Trump Derangement Syndrome, seems to stifle any reasonable debate on war, even among conservatives.

The disregard for the President’s prerogative to set foreign policy and the viciousness with which the Washington establishment opposes any correction to failed policies over the last two decades is alarming. It reflects a deep corruption of minds and morals in the capital, along with a concerning lack of professionalism and understanding of civic and human affairs.

It’s clear: as far as its political culture is concerned, the Republic is in serious trouble.

---

 

The United States of America – A Doomed Republic?

The last two and a half years of politics in the United States presented us with the turmoil of hitherto unknown and unprecedented variety in Western democratic republics. The situation has reached a point where the question raised in this essay's title no longer appears far-fetched or inappropriate, as indeed it looks as if the doom of this Republic might be imminent unless something decisive happens reasonably soon.
 
When has anybody seen the political opposition, in utter disbelief over losing a presidential election, engrossed in a policy of destruction against the winner? When has anybody seen the radical political opponent so vehemently and lopsidedly supported by nearly all societal interaction pillars, including print and electronic media outlets, commentators and pundits, academia and education, political representatives at all government levels? When has anybody ever seen such destructiveness and devastation in the wake of democratic elections in an established Republic?

Here is why: A total corruption of the minds and hearts – in other words, want for proper erudition in civic affairs and moral decency – across vast parts of society. The subtle and yet – in its psychological impact – radical cultural-Marxist subversion of society that has been going on for decades claims stunning success.

In the wake of Donald Trump's victory, whoever expected the usual political business continuation must be disappointed. The regular competition between Democrats and Republicans, the typical antagonism between the political left and right as they operate within the conventional boundaries of mutually shared constitutional and civilizational principles, turned out to be much more. It has turned out to be an existential struggle over our entire Western civilization's future, a battle over essential values and principles for Western societies, quite naturally spearheaded by the West's most potent and influential lead-nation, the United States of America. 

This circumstance alone can explain the sheer incomprehensible hatred President Donald Trump faces from significant media outlets and the bulk of the political establishment in Washington D.C. Make no mistake. There is a relentless war going on, not yet waged primarily with lethal weapons, but one in which the Democrat Party and the vast majority of its sympathizers want to bring down this President. 

A significant number of so-called never-Trumpers and RINOs in Mr. Trump's party, assisted by a broad spectrum of globalists and economic and military-industrial profiteers, reject this President and his Christian-conservative policies. They are not only bent on beating him politically; they intend to get him out of the office and utterly destroy him and his family personally. 

It sure appears to be quite an asymmetric kind of warfare. Trump and a relatively small nucleus of government supporters around the White House are waging this cultural war. A few hardcore conservative fortresses in society (such as Ben Shapiro and his Daily Wire) fight against a colossal overload in ill-will and malevolence that reaches far beyond the usual clientele of the Democrat Party and the political Left. 

The gloves began to come off in this 'ad hominem' campaign of destruction about two and a half years ago when Mr. Trump was elected candidate for the presidential race. Since elected and in office, the offensive against him has increased continuously in intensity and wickedness. It has now, at the time of a government shutdown where Democrat leaders apodictically refused to move even one inch toward the fulfillment of Mr. Trump's election promises, reached a new peak. 

How could anybody who has a grain of moral decency left who watched the Senate Minority Whip Chuck Schumer making his hateful statements against the incumbent President still support this Democrat Party? How could anybody bolster a political force led by such a disingenuous and utterly loathsome human being!

But the old ploy of reversing cause-effect relations and blaming the political opponent for one's wrongdoing and devilishness is being pulled off quite successfully by the left. They project their disgraceful personality traits and behavior onto President Trump. When he is rightfully fighting back and setting things straight, they accuse him of being the initial aggressor, evildoer, and disparager of the Presidential office.

It is mind-boggling to imagine what some measure of critical, yet 'constructive' and decent cooperation with the President from the part of Trump-opposing forces could have accomplished for the benefit of this nation and the entire world. Alas, instead, the hatred of Mr. Trump appears to trump all considerations for successful governance and the common good of this nation. If only they can bring down Trump, the left, and their henchmen (and –women) in all kinds of societal strata appear willing even to destroy this country. 

Is there an immediate solution to the ruinous state of political affairs in this country? The same will of the people who elected Mr. Trump and his policies into office must be the will that now ensures that he can implement them. It is on 'We The People' to become proactive, break up the deadlock in Washington D.C. and lead the country back into a productive and constructive social and political discourse.

The Destructiveness of Unfettered Progress - How the Moral and Intellectual Bankrupcy of the Left Destroys this Nation

The idea that change and progress can be potentially destructive and represent decline and decadence goes back to Plato. In essence and applied to our time, outlined mostly in his dialogue 'Timaios,' the underpinning thought is that social and political evolution must always be tempered and corrected by the ideal ontological concepts of man and the various manifestations of his coexistence.

 

 The ancients also made us aware that a democratic republic is in constant danger of perishing due to the inability to deal responsibly with the core element of its political system - liberty. They showed us clearly that once a democracy transforms itself into an OCHLOCRACY, the reign of the mob, it is on its best way to coming apart.

 

When the mob of a society floods the streets, negates the laws and the order their elected representatives have stipulated for that very society, the state of political affairs has reached the eleventh hour. When the proletariat attempts to intimidate the government and openly threatens to overthrow it, the social community is about to descend into chaos and ungovernability. What awaits is tyranny!

 

This development is precisely the reason why so many commentators speak of an imminent civil war in the U.S. I felt compelled to point out that more than a year ago when the country faced the hatred and nasty obstructionism of the left in the wake of their loss in the presidential elections (https://www.edwinseditorial.com/2017/07/a-sick-republic-yeah-dude-im-talking.html).

 

 As I pointed out, the stunning fact in the U.S.' case is that the societal mob does not only consist of disgruntled blue-collar workers or angry hordes of jobless people but rather recruits from all strata of society. It is made up and even led and represented by elected officials of the Democratic Party, supported by many neoconservatives and so-called Never-Trumpers and a considerable portion of the mainstream media and exponents of academia the world of arts and culture.

 

Examples of the rants of renowned people who have apparently lost their minds and probably never had morals are aplenty. They prove how unhinged and utterly unacceptable the discourse on the political left has become:

• Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Waters, who encouraged violent harassment of Trump supporters and White House Staff.
• Republican Senator Jeff Flake, Trump back-stabber and open-border advocate.
• HBO show host Bill Maher wished the economy to crash and the country to fail to get rid of Trump.
• Hollywood actor Robert de Niro, talking in front of high school kids of the elected president as a 'soulless, amoral, abusive, con-artist SOB.'

 

A significant part of the electorate shows disrespect for political institutions, offices, and regulations. Even worse, many elected representatives of both parties in executive and legislature at federal and regional levels do the same. They negate one of the prime features of democratic republics: that governing regimes alternate due to periodic electoral decisions. Without a doubt, ill-education and wrong morality have penetrated all strata of society.

 

 I gave an account of how immoral the political dialogue has become shortly after President Trump took office. Once the desperation of the far-Left had shown its real fascist face (https://edwinseditorial.blogspot.com/2017/01/the-tyranny-of-left.html), I made clear what brought about this sheer ubiquitous political illiteracy. I blamed the lack of classical art instruction as the primary cause for the utter lack of philosophical depth and wisdom in many areas of US-American politics.

 

 Let's make no mistake. Despite rapid technological advancements and the globalized connectedness of nations and peoples, only against the backdrop of a century-old and even millennia-old can the core elements of our civilizational social and political arrangements be understood appropriately. The condition of the human being per se – aside from driving cars, using smartphones, and moving in airplanes from continent to continent – has not changed.

 

We avail over the same faculties. We face identical physical and emotional needs. Besides a more substantial oeuvre of historical experience and scientific knowledge, human reasoning and the capacity for moral judgment have not improved. The hubris of progressivism is not only unwarranted but dangerous if developing unfettered and immune to the eternal wisdom of human efforts generated in philosophy, religion, and the fine arts.

 

 The most recent and still ongoing proof to that effect is the widespread ignorance regarding open borders and the bias in extending constitutional citizen rights onto not only foreigners who come to visit or temporarily work here but even onto individuals who entered and remain in the country illegally. It culminates in calls for abolishing ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency, as the new battle-cry of the radical left.

 

 In their desperation over Trump being president and, in several policy areas relevant to people, quite successful at it, the progressives move ever further to the left. But as we know, in these times of deranged minds and hearts, hateful obstructionism, and fabricated false news and accusation, there is no limit as to how far the left can go. And the further the left moves leftwards, the more space is being built for blaming even the most reasonable political stances as far-right.

 

While the lunacy of the radical left seems to know no bounds, quite a few people recovered their senses and fled the Democratic Party. New York Assemblyman Dov Hikind of Brooklyn went public and told Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in an open letter that he will support President Trump and Republicans until "sanity and honesty to the Democratic Party" have been restored. Hikind accuses Schumer of launching "hard-right attacks" in a recent mailer while ignoring President Trump's "multiple policy victories." Hikind particularly mentions the unemployment at its lowest in decades and economic confidence at a 17-year high, including a record low for minorities.

 

 But these encouraging signs cannot deceive over the fact that for the left – including the neo-liberals and large cohorts of the neo-conservatives – the political struggle has become genuinely existential. As they are looking at the wreckage of their failed policies - pernicious globalist imperialism of interventions and regime-change operations in international relations; deconstruction of Christian values and weakening of the Westphalia Nation-State System domestically - they become ever more desperate. By the way, their policies' apparent failure was the actual reason why Donald Trump and conservative political administrations in Europe got elected.

 

The left claims that they occupy the moral and intellectual high ground in politics. In reality, they are only moralizing without having morals. Life's reality denies their social and political theories the only real proof for any intellectual concept's correctness – validation by success and improvement of human living conditions continuously at any level of coexistence.

 

 But the left's minds and hearts are neither troubled by the constant falsification of their theories by the chaos they create in real life, nor are they disturbed by the moral depravity of their positions. If it suits their goals, they disparage the sensible as reprehensible, the good as bad, and the American (or civilized) as un-American (or uncivilized). Their existential instinct to survive at all costs makes them relentless in their pursuit to bring down political opponents and whoever and whatever else might stand in their way. It also hinders them from acknowledging the deprivation their progressive policies have brought over the U.S. and the entire Western civilization.

 

Indeed, Plato was right when he envisioned that progress must not be confused with improvement and betterment. If progress is pushed at all cost and develops unrestrained, without constructive criticism, and without being gauged against the backdrop of the timeless notions of justice and morality, it becomes a destructive and evil force. We have witnessed this development in recent years, if not decades, but it has accelerated to unsavory dimensions ever since Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential elections.

 At least intuitively, the silent majority of Americans and people who live in western countries seem to be mindful of the wicked ways of the left and the damage caused to our societies' fabric. They voted accordingly and will continue to do so. But the struggle reached existential significance as to the future of our civilizational development – in this country and beyond.