Ridiculous statement in The Economist: 

poligamy is a cause of civil wars and conflict!

According to The Economist, polygamy is a key factor in civil wars and conflict. How convenient to blame it all on ‘the natives’ and their ‘backward’ customs, obscuring the role of the US and its allies in destabilizing regions.

In the 1930 Marx Brothers comedy ‘Animal Crackers’ Groucho Marx proposes to two women at the same time. One protests: “But that's bigamy!” Groucho replies: “Yes and that's big-a-me, too. It's big of all of us. Let's be big for a change. I'm sick of these conventional marriages!”

We know the Economist isn’t a great fan of Karl Marx, and it’s doubtful it would approve of Groucho much either – or at least the idea of him taking two wives. You see, it would probably lead to armed conflict.  

Forget the illegal invasion of Iraq, which led to 1 million deaths and turned the Middle East into a cauldron. Forget too the mass casualties of two World Wars. It’s polygamy that we should be focusing on to explain violence in the world. Run for your wives? More like run for your lives.

It’s fair to say that The Economist, the weekly Bible of Western neoliberal capitalism, is very keen that we get the Polygamy = Wars thesis.

“Polygamy is still common in Africa, the Islamic world and parts of Asia. It makes civil war more likely,” we were told on Twitter.

This follows an article entitled ‘Why Polygamy breeds civil war,’ published on March 19, 2018, a piece by The Economist’s Foreign Editor Robert Guest entitled ‘Big Love and Big War,’ on January 12, 2018, which cited a 2009 study by Satoshi Kanazawa of the LSE, and another piece entitled ‘The link between polygamy and war,’ published in the 2017 Christmas edition.

“Wherever it is widely practised, polygamy (specifically polygyny, the taking of multiple wives) destabilizes society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts, and loins, of young men,” the last piece states.

The neo-liberal Economist, which has championed all the Thatcherite reforms of the past 40 years, concerned with inequality? Why, you could have knocked me down with a feather!

The article also says polygamy “is one of the reasons why the Arab Spring erupted, why the jihadists of Boko Haram and Islamic State were able to conquer swathes of Nigeria, Iraq and Syria, and why the polygamous parts of Indonesia and Haiti are so turbulent.” It adds: “Polygamous societies are bloodier, more likely to invade their neighbours and more prone to collapse than others.”

The Economist doesn’t blame polygamy for the recent heat-wave, but that’s probably coming up in next week’s edition.  

By way of evidence the magazine states that: “The taking of multiple wives is a feature of life in all of the 20 most unstable countries on the Fragile States Index compiled by the Fund for Peace, an NGO.”

But if we look at said Index we see that a large number of the ‘top 20’ have been affected directly or indirectly by Western de-stabilization campaigns, or even –  in case of Yemen (4), Iraq (10), Syria (6), Afghanistan (9) – by Western alliance invasion/bombing. 

This is the ‘link’ that The Economist won’t mention because it has largely been in favor of these ‘interventions.’ Who can ever forget the way the magazine whitewashed the Iraq invasion with its ‘Sincere Deceivers’ cover featuring the warmongers Bush and Blair?

South Sudan and Sudan feature heavily in The Economist’s arguments – but again, the US role in sponsoring oil-rich South Sudan’s secession and creating instability in the region is not mentioned.

As for the ‘conquering’ by Boko Haram and Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) of ‘vast swathes’ of Nigeria, Iraq and Syria, who do we blame for that?

Here’s my fellow OpEd contributor Dan Glazebrook, writing about global famines: “The situation in Nigeria is also a result of war, in this case the Boko Haram insurgency – an insurgency which owes its massive spread in recent years directly to the NATO destruction of Libya, which opened up the country’s weapons dumps to Boko Haram and its partners.”

A destruction of Libya which The Economist described as “a modest win for liberal internationalism.” The Iraq War – also backed by The Economist, led directly to the rise of IS, while Syria whose polygamy rates are ‘N/A’ in the index, became a ’fragile state’ only because of the regime change operations of the West and its regional allies.  The more we analyse the global situation a very clear pattern emerges. The US and its allies have targeted a succession of independently-minded resource-rich countries in strategically important parts of the world and, where they haven’t been able to directly invade, they’ve fomented civil wars to further their own economic and geopolitical interests. A classic example was the break-up of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Unilateral secessions were encouraged from the republic, in contravention of Article 5 of the Yugoslav constitution.

By Neil Clark

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/434639-polygamy-war-economist-west/

Feeding the industrial-military monster of the USA.

The attacks and bombings continue. Everything is justified in ordere to feed the industrial-military machine of the USA.

A few months ago, with the complicity of the United Kingdom, France, and of course Israel (which has not ceased its attacks) the US launched more than a hundred Tomahawks missiles against Syria.

Of course, from afar, on the Red Sea or the Persian Gulf.

The success of these attacks has been doubtful, some goals achieved, a few fatalities.

However, the bombing continues in Afghanistan, Iraq, eastern Syria and other areas of the world (always far from US territory).

It is a practice that lasts several decades.

The United States believes to solve the (their) problems by bombing populations more or less indiscriminately.

In reality, these military actions continue to fuel the armament production complex in which their economy and politics are being supported.

To this is added the insistent request of Israel to carry out an attack on Iran. Maybe it will happen although is not sure.

A widespread bombing of Iran would cause tens of thousands of deaths, and unpredictable geopolitical consequences.

These consequences are already being felt.

For starters, an unexpected alliance is brewing.

The three empires, historical enemies, the Persian Empire, the Ottoman Empire and the Tsarist-Russian Empire, now transformed into the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Republic of Turkey and the Russian Federation, are beginning to coordinate actions.

An unforeseen Turkey-Iran alliance (Sunni, Shiite) is brewing. And of course, with the support of Russia.

Things are not going to be that easy.

Donald Trump is encountering powerful enemies.

Not only Iran, Russia, and perhaps Turkey, but also China in East Asia. They begin to realize that today their enemy (and the enemy of all mankind) are the USA, and of course Israel, which is their advanced foothold in the Middle East.

We will see how it continues, but difficult times can be predicted for the peoples of that region of the world.

An unwinnable war

It is the 21 of August of the 2017,
The speech of Donald Trump where he was presenting the new strategy in the war - invasion - occupation of Afghanistan is over.
It turns out that the new strategy is the old strategy.
- Increasing the number of troops without saying how many and when (4,000?).

- Continuing the war without first announcing the actions. 
- Fighting the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Isis. 
- Forcing Pakistan not to give shelter to jihadists. 
- Involving India in Afghanistan, especially economically. 
No big changes. Only verbal changes.
The war will continue for a few more years.
Death and destruction will continue.
The 800 billion dollars spent so far (!!!) will rise to 1 trillion dollars (1 million million).
The industrial-military complex and the US financial oligarchy of congratulations!

Current situation
After almost 17 years of war in Afghanistan (the longest war ever waged by the US), several hundred thousand dead, millions displaced, spending $ 800 billion, and using the most powerful weapons, the United States (as it could not be otherwise) are losing the war.
After being displaced during the US invasion in 2001, the Taliban are reorganizing and gaining control of the territory. Added to this is the emergence of al Qaeda and ISIS groups and heroin marketers.
The war is lost. Donald Trump will manage to extend it a few more years. But defeat is inevitable.
However, for the US military-industrial complex, defeat or victory is relatively secondary, because what really matters is to be able to perpetuate wars to continue accumulating trillion-dollar profits and succulent dividends.

How to totally destroy a country

D.Anton

Syria's population was 21 million before the war in an area of 185,000 km2 of which less than half are arable. Because of the war the population declined to 17 million. As a result of the war, economic losses are greater than 200,000 billion since the beginning of the conflict. Unemployment rose from 14.9 to 57.7%. 12 million people lost their main source of income, 80% of the inhabitants live in poverty.

There are almost 7,000,000 refugees in Syrian territory and 3,300,000 in neighboring countries plus 1,550,000 emigrants. 

A total of almost 12,000,000 people have lost or are out of their homes.

To that it should be added that 200,000 people were killed and nearly 1 million wounded.

And the war continues ...

Judaism, Christianity and Islam

Monotheistic religions of the Middle East and the pursuit of power by any means
Danilo Anton

These thoughts only seek to show some aspects of organized monotheistic religions that virtually  since their inception were used as tools to obtain and retain power and to gain control of territories, resources, societies and minds.
From the point of view of the number of believers and their influence on the political and social geography of these nations the three main religions, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the most important in the world history. All three of them originated in the Middle East.

Judaism emerged as a set of traditions, originally transmitted orally, that narrate the legendary history of a people influenced by the intervention of one God, Jehovah (in Hebrew יהוה transliterated YHWH). This story is contained in the Torah, a sacred book that contains the foundational narrative of the Jewish people: their trials and tribulations, and its covenant with God. It describes a way of life to follow embodied in a set of moral and religious obligations and civil laws. While the first prophet (Abraham) has lived in the twentieth century BCE and the second prophet, Moses, who received the divine commandments in the twelfth century BC, Most biblical scholars believe that the Torah was actually written between the sixth and fourth centuries BCE, although some components may have been recorded in earlier times.
The second monotheistic religion that acquired historic importance was Christianity, which was derived from Judaism. It is based on the teachings of a prophet, Jesus, whose life is chronicled in a holy book usually called New Testament, which consists of four officially approved (or canonical) Gospels (Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John). Christianity also includes the ancient sacred books of Judaism, generically called Old Testament. The actual existence of Jesus was only confirmed by the gospels, not only official ones, but also several others that have been preserved or its fragments are known, but were not recognized by the ecclesiastical authorities. According to the biblic historians, at the beginning, the gospels were transmitted orally and only were written between 65 and 100 DEC or more than 30 years after the date on which Jesus was (probably) crucified.
Like Judaism, Christianity bases its religious system in the existence of one God and on the confirmation of the arrival of the Messiah announced by the prophets of the Old Testament, and whose death would redeem mankind from their sins. The books include also the  moral teachings transmitted by Jesus during his life.

Islam, who is also a monotheistic religion, developed in Arabia where a prophet (Muhammad), considered by his followers as sent by God (Allah), preached a faith based on the ancient jewish and christian sacred books. Muhammad added a new final divine message, the Koran, which contains the fundamental premises of the new religion.

A basic belief of the religion was that "There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his prophet". The Quran also defines the obligations of Muslims (followers of Islam) including Islam five pillars, profession of faith, daily prayers, zakat (alms), fasting in the month of Ramadan and pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in life, and various moral teachings, many of which were included in the other holy books (Old and New Testament). They included also the life stories of the previous prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Like the Torah and the Christian Bible, the Quran was memorized by Muhammad's followers and was only written or compiled several years later. Ultimately the three monotheistic religions began as oral traditions and only some years, decades or centuries later were recorded in writing.

The faithful of these three religions are numerous. There are about 2,000 million christians, 1,500 million muslims and 15 million jews. For that reason, largely, thoughts and actions of many societies that embrace these faiths are directly or indirectly influenced by the moral, social or political mandates (fulfilled or not) of these religions.

We must consider that ALL these religions originated in the Middle East (Palestine, Israel, Arabia) and since its inception the have disputed for the control of the territories and peoples of that region. The history of the Middle East is largely the confrontation of organized groups on behalf of these religions who fought successive wars for the control of lands, resources and societies.

These religions were the reason or the excuse for wars, bloody clashes, killings, rapes, looting, torture, racial or religious intolerance, enslavement or ethnic cleansing that began more than twenty centuries ago and still continue today. Not only they have these religions have violently confronted among them but their different organized divisions or sets also have bloodily fought to obtain or preserve power. These concepts apply to these organized religions, their churches, and mainly to those leaders who base their power in religion.
In that sense we can consider that monotheistic organized religions organized, almost from the beginning were used as unscrupulous tools to obtain and retain power, and to better manage resources, territories, societies and minds.
And still they are.