XI and Putin -- the
fly in the ointment -- the monkey wrench in the
gears of the great reset
Feb. 10/21 Tom
Luongo
Did you happen to catch the most
important political speech of the last six years?
It would have been easy to miss given
everything going on. In fact, I almost did,
and this speech sits at the intersection of nearly
all of my areas of intense study.
The annual World Economic Forum took
place last week via teleconference, what I’m
calling Virtual Davos, and at this year’s event,
of course, the signature topic was their project
called the Great Reset.
But if the WEF was so intent on
presenting the best face for the Great Reset to
the world it wouldn’t have invited either Chinese
Premier Xi Jinping or, more importantly, Russian
President Vladimir Putin.
And it was Putin’s speech that brought
down the house of cards that is the agenda of the
WEF.
The last time someone walked into a
major international forum and issued such a
scathing critique of the current geopolitical
landscape was Putin’s speech to the United Nations
on September 29th,
2015, two days before he sent a small contingency
of Russian air support to Syria.
There he excoriated not only the U.N.
by name but most importantly the U.S. and its NATO
allies by inference asking the most salient
question, “Do you understand what you have done?”
having unleashed chaos in an already chaotic part
of the world?
As important as that speech was it was
Putin’s actions after that which defined the
current era of geopolitical chess across the
Eurasian continent. Syria became the
nexus around which the resistance to the “ISIS is
invincible” narrative unraveled
And the mystery of who was behind ISIS,
namely the Obama administration, was revealed to
anyone paying attention.
President Trump may have taken credit
for beating ISIS, but it was mostly Putin and
Russia’s forces retaking the Western part of Syria
which allowed that to happen, while our globalist
generals, like James Mattis, did as much damage to
Syria itself and as little to ISIS as possible,
hoping to use them again another day.
And regardless of whether you agree or
disagree with the U.S.’s policy in Syria, which I
most definitely do not, it is hard to argue that
Russia’s intervention there fundamentally changed
the regional politics and conflicts for the
foreseeable future.
It was the beginning of the voluntary
disconnection of China, Russia and Iran from the
West.
For standing athwart U.S. and European
designs on consolidating power in the Middle East,
Russia has been vilified in the West in ways that
make the indoctrination I received as a kid
growing up in the Cold War look like vacation
advertisements for spending the summer in Crimea.
But it is that strength of purpose and
character that has defined Putin’s two decades in
power. He’s done wonders in rebuilding
Russia.
He’s made many mistakes, mostly by
first trusting American Presidents and second by
underestimating just how arrogant and rapacious
the leadership in Europe is.
That said, he’s now reached his limit,
especially with Europe, and he’s set a firmly
independent path for Russia regardless of the
short-term costs.
And that’s why his speech at the World
Economic Forum was so important.
Putin hadn’t spoken there for nearly a
decade. In a time when WEF-controlled
puppets dominate positions of power in Europe, the
U.K., Canada and now the U.S., Putin walked into
Virtual Davos and dumped his coffee on the carpet.
In terms I can only describe as
unfailingly polite, Putin told Klaus Schwab and
the WEF that their entire idea of the Great Reset
is not only doomed to failure but runs counter to
everything modern leadership should be pursuing.
Putin literally laughed at the idea of
the Fourth Industrial Revolution – Schwab’s idea
of a planned society through AI, robots and the
merging of man and machine.
He flat-out told them their policies
driving the middle class to the brink of
extinction over the COVID-19 pandemic will further
increase social and political unrest while also
ensuring wealth inequality gets worse.
Putin’s no flower-throwing libertarian
or anything, but his critique of the
hyper-financialized post-Soviet era is
accurate.
The era dominated by central banking
and the continued merging of state and corporate
powers has increased wealth inequality across the
U.S. and Europe, benefiting millions while
extracting the wealth of billions.
But the targets of those weapons, while
nominally pointed at his Russia, were really the
West’s own engines of vitality, as the middle
classes have seen their wages stagnate, and access
to education, medical care, and the courts to
redress grievances fall dramatically.
Russia is a country on the rise, so is
China. Once their ties are embedded deeply
enough to stabilize its economy, so too will Iran
rise.
Together they will lead the central
Asian landmass out of the nineteenth-century
quagmire that exists thanks to British and
American intervention in the region. Putin’s
speech made it clear that Russia is committed to
the process of finding solutions to all people
benefiting from the future, not just a few
thousand holier-than-thou oligarchs in Europe.
In a less confrontational address,
Chairman Xi said the same thing. He gave lip
service, like Putin, to climate change and carbon
neutrality, focusing instead on pollution and
sustainability.
Together they basically told the WEF to
stuff the Great Reset back into the hole in which
it was conceived.
I’ve followed Putin closely for nearly
a decade now. I got the feeling that if he
was speaking to a college-level political science
class and not a convocation of some of the most
powerful people in the world he would been laughed
in their faces.
But, unfortunately, he understands
better than any of us having been the object of
their aggression for so long, he had to treat them
seriously as their grasp of reality and
connectedness to the people they ruled was nearly
severed.
At the end of his planned remarks,
Klaus Schwab asked Putin about Russia’s troubled
relationship with Europe and could it be
fixed. Putin pulled no punches.
If
we can rise above these problems of the past and
get rid of these phobias, then we will certainly
enjoy a positive stage in our relations.
We
are ready for this, we want this, and we will
strive to make this happen. But love is
impossible if it is declared only by one side.
It must be mutual.
I don’t get the sense from anything
I’ve seen from the Biden Administration or the
European Commission in Brussels that anyone heard
a word he said.