The problem with the modern day elites
This is a quick idea that I noted down in a conversation. The elites see truth and facts coming from power, rather than from material reality. They see them as interchangeable.
The problem with the Elites
They look you in the eye and demand: "abandon reason, don't believe your lying eyes!"
Because the powerful think: A, they are the source of truth, so when they change their minds, the truth changes, B, the underlings must comply with these changes, and C, power determines who is right, not material reality. And maybe D, that a narrative is more important than finding the truth, and if facts are different the facts must be changed as opposite to the narrative. (because they invested heavily in the narrative and would look silly if they have to change the narrative)
The Establishment knows that its sons and daughters need jobs and an income, that enables them to have a good life.
But only the right people, with the right background are employed.
Plus the companies themselves are not paying much, but get their workers to pay taxes that pay for the police, schools and society that enables those companies to operate in the first place.
I never buy the "we help people but in a roundabout way, through the hoop and up the stairs! And you should be thankful for the crumbs!", this sounds to me like a convenient excuse to direct away the conversation from the truth.
Ideally, a high-tech sector would devolve into a large number if smaller, local software companies over time but the world doesn't really work like that.
Why would entities that derive their power through monopoly help to end a monopoly?
Especially that the current systems help the individual people running these entities commit a bunch of common crimes like pedofilia, (Jeffrey Epstein), and get protection, that the normies don't get, while parading that "we are a system with the rule of law!".
Or even worse, use modern academic language to take apart old laws, in order to enable their sick fantasies.
Greatest trick they play is to convince otherwise rich countries that they need them to be successful. But again, the Devil is the nice guy with the pearly smile, while Jesus is the grumpy guy who takes a bat to the money lenders in the church. The Devil might make you feel good, however the Devil has no real friends, "fire is the Devil's only friend." At the end, it will twist the knife, with a big broad smile.
The money lenders end up running the church, and Jesus gets put on the cross. While the same money lenders end up blaming the Jews, using racialism to distract from elite control. "Get the have nots, to take from the have somethings, while the have everythings are not touched and take most from the have somethings, using the brutality of the have nots. The have nots get nothing."
Ukraine
My view on Ukraine is that it is a real country with real people, with their own agency. They are not a chess piece/culture war/ideology issue/buffer zone, but real people with real lives, so I don't like when the West puppeteers them, or when Russia is trying to take them over, and the Western left applauds it like Chomsky, because "America bad". I really used to like Chomsky, but it would have been better if he would have died circa 2014, as to not ruin his own good works like Manufacturing Consent with the modern ramblings of "Ukraine should just sit down and let Russia rape them"; no.
Also it is funny that the modern Ukrainian army post 2014 was set up by a lot of ex-Soviet commanders who fought in WW2, but wanted social democracy. I read a story of a person who was Ukrainian Jewish, refused to fight in the Soviet army, evaded capture, got taken to Auschwitz, survived till the liberation, joined the Soviet army, served in it till the 1950s, became a university professor, helped to build modern Ukraine post Cold War, and used to fight in the Donbass for Ukraine until dying of old age. He regularly went to Auschwitz to teach tourists.
He had this really long interview where he warned about both Russian and Ukrainian nationalism, despite being pro-independent Ukraine, and called Putin a Fascist ready to pounce.
Flags
Flags represent the internal struggle of man being both an individual and a social being.
This is the reason why my political thesis centers around the contrasts between the 'Long 19th century' and the 'Short 20th century'.
----------
If the 19th [century] was the century of the individual (liberalism means individualism), you may consider that this is the "collective" century, and therefore the century of the state.
Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, of Liberalism, and of Democracy, it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism, Liberalism and Democracy: political doctrines pass, but humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... a century of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State.
-
Mussolini was a hateful man, but these quotes show a good glimpse into the conflict.