over the british tongue, but it seems not everyone thinks that's a key event in the history books. we fought wars over english accents. i'll never forget the battle over the que versus line controversy that turned into a world war when the color versus color atrocities were exposed. so kids wouldn't learn british pronunciations. i'm pretty sure the revolutionary war was about something slightly more than that. so it was so bad as saying your please and thank you. i think it's rather lovely, but i would, i wouldn't tie, being in the homeland peppa pig international that brings you up to date for this to what? back again, but more stories and the headlines at the top of the know when i would show the wrong, why don't just don't rule out the thing

because the african and engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves, well, the parts we choose to look for common ground the who's who's only welcome to cross talk. they're all things are considered peter and bill. the binding ministration tells us the world faces the stark choice between democracy and authoritarianism. is this make any sense? the balance of power in the world system is moving to multicultural, and it's not defined by ideological preferences dangerously. washington continues

to claim it has the right to define what is the legitimate world or i can discuss these issues and more. i'm joined by my guess, george m u l e in budapest, the the podcast, or at the gaggle which can be found on youtube and locals. and here in moscow were joined by dmitri bob and she's a political analyst and editor. it's me, internet media project, gentlemen. cross off rules and effect, that means you can jump in anytime you want. appreciate it. okay, let's go to your 1st in budapest year. it's really quite interesting out the, by the ministration, endlessly talked about diversity, diversity diversity, and we see it in their politics domestically. and now we see, since they had been to the administration pushing and diversity into the international system, which actually is really quite contradictory because diversity, in least nominally,

is about having differences. but i think what we see here with the bio ministration is an extreme form of universalism, and they're covering it up under diversity because it's either or, i mean, it isn't returned to the cold board, but we are returning to a cold war paradigm. it is democracy versus authoritarianism and in that ideological minds and it kind of makes sense. but in the real world, it doesn't make any sense at all. go ahead. george. it doesn't make any sense. so there is really the difference between the sort of diversity at home and doctors official difference because when the bite administration and ologist talk about diversity, they don't actually really mean views and opinions. they mean that guy, the monolithic view of the world, they mean, you know, that was the superficial, after you know, the color of your skin, what gender you are with the sexual orientation is. but that's just the monolithic

. well, you, you want to get into the bike ministration. you have to subscribe to a certain set of doctrines, so they're not going to have a bus supposed to abuse that in the administrative. and i think that now they look on the well, that the rest of the world have to follow this monolithic, logical mindset. now, course, it's bringing them into compensation of this name with the rivalry. but it's also bringing them into conversation with countries that normally would be on their side . so when the obama administration goes back, obama, so when to kenya was the end of his administration. he started lecturing them about gay rights. so he was getting ready to welcome its favorite song, you know, the most, the most famous canyon in the well. and what is even where he goes and lecturing

them about agonized, like in your when you're seeing the right now when the, by them, it was the you just a very involved bite in this patient is getting it up in call with countries that are normally on their side is hungry and to the great, great freedom, why it was against communism. if you please be worshiped during all st trend and now demonize. why? because then subscribing to the western ideological moment. i lost count the number of times george used the word side, meaning choosing signs. again, this has nothing to do with diversity. it is actually a 0 sum game. and what's really quite remarkable is that russia and china are demonized as being authoritarian. but even if you accept that proposition, russia,

china are not proposing with the promotion and extension of authoritarian powers. there's no evidence about whatsoever. so this is an idea walkable struggle coming just from one side. they use the word side again, go ahead, dimmer, where you are quite cried. i think george was quite right in the fight in the examples of poland and hungary as country is, which just didn't fit the morally that i don't want to go monolith or the west. and it was interesting that president, do the poland rooster for because he's southern said just a few days ago that the idea would you go constraints imposed by the european union? i in fact, you know what you can constraints that were imposed by the union. and the other example is again, i mean the idea that you should educate goals before boys, you know, it just didn't go down in that case and he couldn't. but there is no so, so i mean,

20 years, the longest warning american history americans are leaving, they're going to stop. and i don't hear a war of self criticism. what did we do wrong? it's all about the table, our guns, the other you came to, you know, they are unable to. so it's, it's the same story. again, i told you said the 0 sum game and all the sites is very important because, you know, we are trying to find out why is the situation so bad in europe? i mean, it's no worse than a 1989 or even in 1987. why did it happen? well, because of george be right. you're right in his article. it's a big wall, the importer, somebody most american foreign policy article published in the national interest. in fact, clinton even clinton and george bush with more so supported university of

diversity. that was there. i mean, i remember how clinton many times came to moscow with his wife lecturing rations on the, on the benefits of american life. the problem was that he projected the immature great sympathy to rush. so, i mean, it's just a noxious, you know, when he'll respond that a chance in russia before the election in 2016 and when she was there, sexual state, bill clinton never object of even though that was basically undue. and you know. busy what he said for many years when he was the president. so they basically impose this idea off against them. you know, instead of talking about compromise, talking about cooperation in europe. it was about democratic west save in the former soviet republics from the authoritarian clark. just over russia,

i think that was the image or whatever that was very well presented by glen, be some our friend and the participant in the, in the cross talk in his reach and logical on our team website. you can also test driven in bill russian culture. that's the headline on the you for look at how the situation develop. basically, why did we have wars in the formless, you know, the form or something to get. the main reason why people have what is the situation presents an opportunity for national. so the 1st time they actually saw opportunity was in the end of the soviet union when loan to for moving, you know, in the, in soviet politics. so people are nationalists, nationalists in europe, and john nationalists in georgia just had to the moment you know, the moment when we can redraw board us or preserve, or the says they are, they started the worse. if i could just jump in here, give me you're absolutely historically empirically, correct. let me move over to george here. but this all was counted as being pro

democracy in the west jokes dba got a spot on you have these rabbit nationalists looking for an opportunity and then they, they in the west in their and their underlings and the media. and they wrap it up into some kind of, you know, fluffy, democratic thing. i mean, it wasn't had nothing to do with that whatsoever. go ahead. george. no, nothing is all. of course, the paradigm of the law was it was you the law in which the west deliberately deliberately misled the public about what was really going on in the slot. so you have in croatia, princeton openly fashioned open apologise while the fashioned regime in world war 2, coming to power and espousing the patriot. the raven hatred, which was reminiscent of what they were doing in the western media. western

politician policy makers presented some of these are real democrats, you know, they, they, they're, there is a democracy, as opposed to the terrible people in belgrade pro russian ro come in. but the start of this, the game, you know, the model to be used elsewhere, like so as somebody who demands bigger like real estate present game as a democrat. and then of course the gaining ukraine will be for nationally, crashes. the knowledge is a present that as democrats, you know, less than later. so if you tell them, well, this guy, you know, this is yara sh, you know, he's a sort of us of like, bigger. right. and that's, that's the west places. so, you know, they saw these nationalist classes, islamic in a number of days as useful goals for destroying yugoslavia

and weakening, basically weakening russia and presented to them as liberals and democrats. it's really interesting to me and said, you know, again, we have this kind of false choice or false binary. is it? if you want more reform and democracy must be pro western an anti russian? i mean, why can't you be pro, reform and pro number be and still be pro russia? of course i'm talking about beer roost. ok. they're creating these artificial divisions that are, are completely unnecessary and do not exist in real life. go ahead. well i think glen d some presented where you wow. in his article that i mentioned, you can also test driven in circles. he writes that basically the russians have to make this choice between europe and russia and in the same way ukrainians, catered to make the choice. i remember how the control c o association agreement

with the start that it started in 2003. when president coach mark joined the joint economic space with russia and immediately mano, the europe in commissioners. when he came to, you know, prince, you said you have a choice, you know, if you stay in the jointly going to make space, say good bye to that. your membership it will never be offered to you. so the ukrainians were before the same choice, the, the west is now forcing the bell russians to make and blend decent is very right that this was the reason for the conflict on the was in the former soviet union, democracy de mer. yeah, i mean it's, it's amazing. the west might forcefully severing countries performance. so you probably have common language, coleman history, common religion, with russian by several of them from russia, the west repairs the truth for c,

one was like in your grain of conflict and coming back to what they just said. you know, the 1st way will was, so it was, it was in the late ages early 91 moment and we're moving in the soviet union and all this could be redrawn. you know, let me give you the example of georgia nationalists. they decided that this is the moment to take the land from the minority, from their projects, from their agents, their terrible 1st president. gums have tried to do it and she failed. and i must, it was that the west change because the west had the gods to condemn gums or they didn't make you one when they found mr. so actually the better we go to a short break break, we'll continue our discussion and some real new stay with our ah ah, join me every thursday on the alex simon show. when i was speaking to guess in the

world, the politic sport business. i'm show business, i'll see you then me. i haven't been in my phone since i don't i just saw up the format isis fighters and now voting a philippine naval ship with 900 dollars. just aren't abdulla still don't know, watch waiting for them. can i

get a hold of me . ready ready i welcome back. across all things considered. peter, this is the home edition and to remind you, we are discussing some real news. ah, ah okay, let's go back to jim in moscow here. when we went to a quick break here, you want to finish up your point. go ahead. so some of the 1st wave off or so it was, was in the early ninety's, the by the 1994. the situation stabilized, you know, the tools was find in the car box, georgia for some time, stop their attacks against pardons and seconds. and then we started in 2008 when

saga really tried to retake south a think it. why did you know that? why did the 2nd, we'll see more more stuff in the pharmacy region because georgia and ukraine were promised to membership in bucharest. so the nationalists decide up here goes there . but unity again, you know, we had the opportunity in the early 90 s late eighty's when the 17 wasn't doing integrating. we just did, but most of the food stamps now come to the 2nd. and we've had the conflicts in car, a bar. and we had the civil war in ukraine, basically in the, you know, the reason was need to expand and you know, because need to, expression gave an impression of great and you job political reality. and given you up and you need to enter this in the form. so again, it's create a,

creating a choice of either or and when you have a good part of ukraine, historically traditionally called free look towards russian air was the same. but they have to make this pact with the devil, george. ok. and it is the, you know, what did the title of this program? it's ideological stability because it's ideology. oh it does. it's great stability . yes, yes, that's it. and of course it was always the goal to scoop up. all of these are all of the countries that had been aligned with the soviet union. the was back and those who weren't align such as you saw, scoop them all up with a native and coop up all of the republics of the former soviet union. also within native that was always adult. and so, but they use this ology of freedom and democracy to present it as if somehow these

countries, you know, they want to be free. russian influence, you know, there are, you know, they're, they're fighting for their freedom. and here we are, you know, the west coming to their assistance, but in re, as the point. so, you know, these are countries who have distinct histories, distinct national interests, distinct cultural relationships with russia. they don't have an interest in being scooped up within which a problem. anything else is leading them into perilous conflict in georgia and the same. what does it prove to be in ukraine? i mean, it's never been thoughtfully explained. has been you can want to have more transparency in your government. you want to have a government that respects rights, basic rights that are expected around the world. but you have the but to have that you have to be anti russian. that never made any sense to me whatsoever. want to change gears a little bit. you know, you said you focused on europe,

but i think you're absolutely right. but not mistaken. fema russia has good relations with japan, south korea, philippines, all through. i mean they, there are no issues there, it's only in europe. ok. but then again, when you shifted to the east, there's a top prosy versus democracy argument called class. i think that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. it's only focused on europe at this point in time. go ahead here . well, tonight the states use the same argument against china. i mean it's, it's terrible. in the last few decades, china has been mandy and ties with japan. you know, there was a trilateral comment meeting on the president. so in japan, south korea and china just recently, things seem to be moving up, you know, looking up and now they're like, stay, success or chinese. so gracious in south china, sea or chinese. so aggressive is trying to see and they even don't look at the job

if it names that are actually supposed to china. but you're right. you know, i think that the program is much deeper than just foreign policy. it all depends there in systems use certain frame, just southern weaknesses or the nation that they control the not to use germans pension for collectivism and for collective sacrifice, sometimes in the same way. now, the american authorities just using these st demand in america, america is a nation of immigrants. and people in america, melville describe the play well in moby dick, come and liberate the wolves, destroyed the tyrants, you know, destroy this table way, which is a symbol of evil. right, so the authority gets in the united states are using it very clearly, and it's very interesting. get into your article, george, be gold, jeff k,

you know, kennedy, i'm like, go wilson, who's called on making that won't say for you more christian. can you just said make the world say for diversity? that's very, that's a very important distinction. you know? and i think that the moment in the early seat just, we were very close to a new agreement between the soviet union and the united states. that would save a lot of lives and a lot of effort. georgia cannon wrote about it by the field because kennedy was killed and you know, the people came to power, but in general, i think it should be the flow. when do they want to avoid another world war? we need to make the world safe for them and diversity, georgia. and then the important thing is, is that for a stable international order, all of the major stakeholders have to see the international order. it is being legitimate, but the ideology coming out of on steroids now from the,

by the ministration, is that, you know, if you do not participate in act in the international system as we deem then you weren't illegitimate after. and if you deem a major power like russia and china is not being legitimate, then the order itself cannot be legitimate because you're denying them being stakeholders. yes, and that's why the russians repeatedly emphasize the united nations charter and the united nations as a whole, as the very basis of the international system. and the reason they do is that we created this some of the security council in which the great powers are given a veto. in other words, we have a mechanism in place in which way where we get into issues in which great power interests are on the line, the great right to veto. and that created these, the stability that was absent in the league of nations because it was, you know,

you could say ok, you know, no one can do anything that will threaten the interests of soviet union. russia don't have anything that will threaten the interest of china and so on. so that was the, that was why the united nations has worked, where the league of nations failed because the great power, there's nothing in it for me. i mean, i don't, i don't know and that's why what the west is talking about the rules based all the is simply on the, you know, arbitrary rules that the nato power just cobbled together at any particular moment to justify what they do and to demonize the di legitimize what great power like china and russia, we don't get signing on the list. we use that the rules. ready and we are held to be a violation of the interesting georgia is that, remember samantha power,

she lamented russia's use of the veto. and it's really quite incredible i would say to samantha power, it shows the system works because that's how it was supposed to work. that was, that was the whole point. that's why they put that in the veto. they don't want to do what they, why, and the league of nations that failed. so we can't do this again. you know, if you know this, this, this is hiding behind the close of democracy. but well, let's look at the record yugoslavia. let's look at iraq. let's look at syria afghan, and then we go on and on. i mean, it's really quite incredible this, this idea logical offensive has garnered very little again. ok, and ends in failure every single time. and we have, we have the bio ministration, actually doubling down on it and, and as you just pointed out in the 1st part of the program, no interest section whatsoever. why it didn't work. go ahead. well,

you're right them though locally did fail spectacularly in the, in libya or in a game where it's obvious. but it also failed the former soviet union. i mean, the idea that america, george a demon, it's all right. the idea that western interference can help you more chrissy is absolutely counterproductive. glenn decent shows it very well in his article at the opinion website. basically, the majority of the russians on law for her last or even phone, or, you know, most kids, the least for your person. there are looking for someone who could replace shackle and preserve with russia. someone like barber eco, but the west, the narrative is out in only 200 k, you know, the, that's the problem with, with the area and i would just, they have only one candidate. they have only bonds,

wary. and you know, so that out in d colonels, that's very productive when dance economy was working badly when you have a role in the money and outside interference is in lockets relations. and that's exactly what happened in bell or was in your grain because western influences, that's what happened in russia regarding what have step down from the political scene back in the early 9. just if there was real competition, you know, not impeded by western financial injections. and because the west has been helping lindsay and there he stays there because he is the controls from all the money flow . right. so, and talking about relations between conscious you said europe and asia, well basically, processes in the europe. you know, there were 2 attitudes, one, you know, be strong against russia. the other one, represented by the brand and the others negotiate with russia and the brands.

strategy worked in a game. there were 2 approaches. mon, the japanese one is like stand for, you know, until you see the islands, no peace treaty. and then there was the chinese or did you negotiate? be cramped, you know, cooperate, and the chinese ovarian worked. while the japanese, you know, they just, they want, they are 60 years or 7080 years later, they just stay wherever they are. so these edge, it also doesn't work with russian. this can last word here. i mean, as far as the west fixation on. because once they pick their candidate, that's what they call diversity. ok, i'm going to have to, in my, i want to think, my guess in budapest and here in moscow and i think be worth watching as he entered on the scene exam. remember ah ah

when i would show the wrong. why don't oh, just don't hold the new world. yes to shape out the thing because the after an engagement equals the trail. when so many find themselves world the parts we choose to look for common ground. oh wait, now there are 2000000000 people who are overweight or obese is profitable to sell food that is fatty and sugary and faulty and addicted. not at the individual level, it's not individual willpower. and if we go on believing that will never change as obesity epidemic, that industry has been influencing very deeply. the medical and scientific

establishment, ah, what's driving the corporate? me ah, the code restrictions amanda 3 passes furious rally of freedom around the world. hold on, medics to argue that the risks of cove it still need to be assessed. you have to balance personal choice with what's good for the most people at the end of the day. like it's a balance of risk. you can't wrap people up in costing well for the u. s. wasn't investigate new york state's handling of co bidding care homes despite accusations of deliberately under counting death. we have.