There's A Rational (Evil) REASON Why United States Rulers Are Doing Exactly What It Takes To Make Russia and China Ally With Each Other Against the U.S.
Pundits who don't understand the 'why' of U.S. foreign policy call U.S. rulers crazy.
In this June 3, 2024 video right at the very beginning of it, Alexander Mercouris—a person who is extremely knowledgable about the ‘what' of world affairs even if not, in my opinion, the ‘why’—expresses total inability to understand why the United States is doing everything possible to force Russia and China to join together in a virtual alliance against the United States, a very strong alliance that, as Mercouris explains, absent U.S. actions, would not exist. Please listen to as much of this video as you wish; the more you hear Mercouris describe the ‘what’ of what is happening, the more I believe you will agree with the ‘why’ I explain below.
The reason Mercouris is unable to understand U.S. actions, why he finds them absolutely perplexing and bizarre, is this. Mercouris operates on the premise that U.S. rulers engage in conflicts (sometimes military wars) with other nations for the purpose of WINNING the conflict or war. Yes, based on this premise, the actions of the United States are indeed perplexing and bizarre. If the U.S. wanted to win the (proxy) war in Ukraine against Russia, then it would certainly be stupid to do things that made China become a tight ally of Russia. Likewise, if the U.S. wanted to win a war against China it would be crazy to do things that made Russia a tight ally of China.
So why does the United States do such crazy stupid things?
Here’s why
The United States wants to re-create the Cold War with a New Cold War. U.S. rulers LOVED the old Cold War. They loved it because it meant that there was a perfect bogeyman enemy—World Communism—for U.S. rulers to use to justify in the eyes of the American have-nots, whom they oppressed, doing all the things that the have-nots would otherwise have revolted against. U.S. rulers claimed that everything they did was for the purpose of protecting Americans (and sometimes foreign people) from the Uber-Evil, the Communist demon that aimed to enslave everybody in a totalitarian nightmare of suffering.
This gave U.S. rulers the perfect excuse for enriching the few—such as the military-industrial complex industry owners—at the expense of the many have-nots who had to forego what we later referred to as a “peace dividend” (that never arrived when the Cold War ended.)
This gave U.S. rulers the perfect excuse for using the CIA to topple government they didn’t like around the world.
Having the Communist bogeyman enemy was so important and wonderful that, in order to make sure that it was sufficiently frightening, the U.S. armed the Soviet Union all during the Cold War, as Antony Sutton proved and as I recount here.
As I write in “Oppressors Need Bogeyman Enemies and Invent them When Necessary”:
When Mikhail Gorbachev ended the Soviet Union he told American diplomats, "I will do something very terrible to you America--I am going to take away your enemy" [source: here and an equivalent one here]. Unless you understand the need that bad guys have for a bogeyman enemy you wouldn't understand Gorbachev's remark. But if you do understand it then you will understand why the U.S. armed the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
The U.S. ruling class, after losing its Communist bogeyman enemy in 1991 wasted no time creating a new Fundamentalist Islam bogeyman enemy (Read the details in Dave Stratman's "Inventing the Enemy" and in my "Drones Create Hatred of the U.S. Which Is Their Real Purpose."). It is no secret that there is growing anger in the United States at the obscene economic inequality and consequent suffering of the have-nots. The U.S. ruling class dares not allow peace to break out due to the absence of a frightening bogeyman enemy!
It’s not just the United States; it’s virtually all oppressor classes. For example, before Japan attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor in World War II, there was very great and increasingly revolutionary working class opposition to the Japanese ruling class (as I discuss in some detail in my book on WWII also free to read as a PDF file online here). Andrew Gordon, a professor of History at Harvard University, in is book, Labor and Imperial Democracy in Prewar Japan, writes about the 'big story' of the 'ascendance of the military and fascism in the 1930s [in Japan]':
"We shall see, first, that the newly ascendant military men and bureaucrats, among many others, truly feared that domestic social order might collapse during and after the depression, and second, that this fear informed, and at times propelled, a wide range of new domestic and foreign policies.
"[Key Japanese army leader, Lieutenant General Suzuki Teiichi's] diary from 1933 to 1934 notes numerous lengthy discussions on the subject with Army Minister Araki, as well as with the ministers of finance, foreign affairs, and agriculture, and also reports on the deliberations at several cabinet meetings, echoed by reform-oriented bureaucrats in the Home Ministry such as Goto Fumio: 'domestic unrest' was a great problem, impeding traditional defense...Suzuki repeatedly told his associates that 'a great war fundamentally strengthens the people and their nationalism.' " [pg. 279]
Sometimes the bogeyman enemy is another nation or another ethnic group. If there is no currently existing such enemy that is sufficiently frightening, then the ruling class must invent one: it does whatever it takes to make a would-be bogeyman enemy sufficiently frightening. Lurid propaganda is part of this, but often, in order to make such propaganda credible, the ruling class attacks the would-be bogeyman enemy (claiming, of course, that it is in self-defense to protect its have-nots) for the purpose of making the would-be bogeyman enemy fight back so that the propaganda can then portray its fighting back as unprovoked evil aggression against the have-nots and their ruling class that defends them.
Think about it. Which makes a more effective, a more frightening, bogeyman enemy: Russia and China not allied together against the United States, or Russia and China strongly allied together against the United States in a new “totalitarian axis”?
If Alexander Mercouris in the above video understood the “WHY” of U.S. foreign policy he would not be so perplexed.