The Mountain, or the Mont Order, is a multinational society interested in influencing politics and international relations.

Saturday, 28 August 2021

What the US withdrawal from Afghanistan means and doesn't mean

The chaotic and ineffectively executed United States military withdrawal from Afghanistan, which now includes the deaths of multiple US troops and has taken on the appearance of a disastrous military defeat, could signal the end of US military supremacy. However, it probably does not signal the end of the US's arrogant propaganda projects and contrived ideologies that seek to dominate the world. US foreign policy propaganda may be morphing from a primarily neoconservative outlook to a liberal interventionist one. The differences are very shallow, although their adherents are passionate about these differences. The extreme foreign policy of the US regime is to stay almost the same: sanctions, support of covert rebel forces, support of riots, coups, military coalitions, dubious media reports of atrocities, dubious dossiers and 'high confidence' stories about foreign adversaries' crimes authored by intelligence agencies that constantly lie, and military invasions of impoverished nations. The different rhetoric of the Democratic Party and liberal corporate media will stay dominant for some time. Whereas previously (even under Obama) the neoconservatives would set the tone and present aggressive foreign policy as defending collective "America" and appealing to the myth of the nation, instead we we will increasingly see appeals to liberty and human rights, however these are defined by the world's most prolific jailers and torturers. All kinds of contrived stories related to protecting individual freedoms and the environment will be prominent in a way they never were in the past, to support more of the same droning and bombing as before. The difference is one of the lexicon, while all policies of the US government are to be as arrogant and as violent as ever and it will not change its targets. China will still be guilty of whatever the US regime dislikes today and whatever it dislikes tomorrow, as will almost every other developing or competitive state the US might feel its power or influence is being displaced by. The list of named "adversaries" will grow as the US becomes increasingly driven by aggressive liberal internationalism and pushes conservative allied regimes (along with their vast armies) away, even in Europe, causing rifts within NATO. What we can learn from US neoconservatives changing allegiances to the Democratic Party is that they never stood for anything other than whatever narrative supports American power. Catastrophic foreign policy defeats, alienation of US allies like Turkey, incoherent strategies, and liberal obsessions with the media and even Twitter specifically also show that the US is beginning to believe its own propaganda and be driven by it. There is no longer any sign of cunning or realpolitik as there was with previous US efforts against other nations. Now, even at the cost of destroying alliance structures, US leaders can be expected to believe their own shallow propaganda about spreading liberty, and the hoax that it really is a distinct ideology or anything other than words.

Saturday, 26 June 2021

Social liberalism's triumphs in North America and our relationship to them

Not being anchored to a nation-state, Mont members possess varied views defined by geography and culture. As such, what we say can potentially represent real diversity of thought, since our aim is not one ideology but areas of compatibility between the most disparate nations and ideologies. In the US, there are real strides on behalf of institutions toward social liberalism being made a kind of state ideology represented by now diplomatically-displayed rainbow flags, black banners and other symbols, while formerly innocuous conservative sentiments and affections are treated as socially unacceptable vulgarity and worthy of punishment, with lots of talk of sacking and other sanctions applied to tether the opinions of individuals to the new norm (a backlash mainly to Donald Trump and his extreme supporters). The ideologically-charged signals of US entities may seem disturbing to someone of a conservative persuasion in any country, due to the US's lingering vast military and economic power. How long before they find cause to go on another crusade of international aggression? We may imagine them using their military or financial power to force their social liberal value system on sovereign states with deeply conservative populations, for example Turkey or Uzbekistan. This is unlikely, however. While the US "patriotic" right is in a sorry state, both self-inflicted by their own absurdities and also sustained from the US social liberals' electoral and cultural victories, the same isn't likely to happen to conservatives outside the West, or even outside North America. The key is the exact nature of social liberal "wokeness", as it is often derided and praised: it isn't false, but a real awakening among North Americans to the fact both regimes (the US and Canada) are supremely evil and were evil from the moment the first settlers set foot there. While some aspects of US-branded social liberalism might seem like long-term threats to tradition everywhere, the ideology is more likely to curtail global liberal hegemony than strengthen it. As US thought turns to reflect for the first time on their own evil and the fact they were founded on genocide, the US will fail to export its dissonant ideology abroad and will focus more on reeducating its own citizens (half the population, many illiterate and primitive amid their decaying infrastructure, might take a very long time to discipline). As such, conservatives outside North America should ignore the North American right and its reported plight. At the same time, North Americans who sincerely consider themselves "woke" should not unwittingly become a new species of imperialist or nationalist. They should be encouraged to be especially wary of rhetoric that (1) rehabilititates America on the world stage. "America is back" (AIB) is another "make America Great again" (MAGA), an expression of the same supremacist international will (2) looks back to the days of FDR and calls for the US to reindustrialise (i.e., beat China) (3) pledges that the US needs to save the world from a climate disaster and that the world cannot afford the US to die. Excuses for nationalistic salvation are only ever sanitised rightist subversion, hoping to stop the ongoing iconoclasm against the North American regime's racist and unworthy foundations. They are a desperate act to save the doctrine of US exceptionalism from the flames of the awakening - an act that would only renew the oppression of other nations (including US minorities) by the regime. In short, "wokeness" isn't for us. It isn't for humanity or for the international agenda, but it is for the North Americans and we need them to have it.

Wednesday, 26 May 2021

Backlash over Israeli actions in Palestine shows weakness of establishment, media

Surprising levels of international support for Palestinians and Muslims as a whole during Israel's recent offensive in Gaza exposed the continued weakness of mainstream media in the internet age. Such weakness persists even despite online discourse being increasingly policed. Support took the form of visible protests that could not be suppressed, and appear to have gained additional energy from the (ostensibly establishment-backed) anti-racist movement taking shape in Western countries. It even included numerous celebrities unexpectedly declaring their support for Palestine, only to then be seemingly dragged away by their agents and managers who saw to it that their provocative social media posts were deleted. What all this shows is that despite the internet (social networks particularly) being increasingly policed, their anarchic nature has drastically undermined the PR of Western regimes. Despite desperately trying to restore public confidence in mainstream media in recent years, these regimes are still unable to count on a weak-minded population following their lead as happened in previous Middle East wars. The surging interest in publicly declaring sympathy for oppressed people is making it gradually impossible for the malignant foreign policy elite to get their way, especially with regard to situations like Gaza's. No matter how intolerable the online environment may superficially feel for dissident viewpoints, the situation appears to still be far worse for state elites with oppressive aims. In the long term, elites are still likely to get the information space back under control, but current trends suggest they have a long way to go.

Saturday, 27 March 2021

Selective moral, humanitarian outrage for US strategic ends continues

International media coverage is often designed to manipulate, for the strategic gain of a particular country. Whenever our focus is directed, by another party, onto a very specific country's alleged human rights abuses, our suspicion is in order. It is especially in order if that other party is part of the mainstream US-based media. Presently, we see incitement against the regime in the case of Belarus, China, and Myanmar, and we know all attention used to be on Syria (that campaign of manipulation ended in failure). While there are genuine human rights abuses and movements to counter them around the world, many such movements are in the thrall of US strategy or would accept such a pathetic role in order to be funded. If someone is criticising a regime, it is most likely to be credible criticism if it is a US-backed regime neglected by media coverage. For that reason, the least misguided assessment of international affairs demands a clear picture of the geography of pro-Western subservience and US-led liberal hegemony. If a country targeted for whatever official "humanitarian" reasons is presently escaping the coercion of the hegemonic power, that may be the only true reason it is being targeted.

Tuesday, 26 January 2021

Our voices are to be suppressed online in favor of monotonous conformity

Efforts, both known and unknown, are underway at US tech companies to suffocate all political dissent online. The goal is to re-establish the same monotonous conformity to US-led liberal hegemony seen in the 1990s that ultimately enabled the aggression on Iraq in 2003. It has started out by targeting the bombastic political right, including the then US president, but is possibly spreading beyond such a narrow scope to suppress others. Given that those doing this aren't in fact driven by justice but by cold war domination, we should suspect a broader attack on every source of information that doesn't conform to the views of the US establishment and NATO. Those of us who criticise any policy of Biden or the transatlantic policy elites should expect diminished web traffic as a result of shadow banning. Of particular interest is the possibility of Google suppressing your blog or website in search results. Stats should be monitored carefully and any suspicious decrease of traffic or engagement should be discussed with others. At the same time, some may consider putting aside ideological differences with other dissidents and attempting to share readers by being a lot more tolerant of such differences. Consider that social attitudes differ a lot across the globe, yet many people who have conservative views on domestic politics and society are anti-war and are against the far greater humanitarian ills of US imperialism, sanctions, and violence promotion. Such opposition to hegemony has long united people across borders and overridden cultural and political differences. There is no reason to give priority to feuding over minor, distracting differences in political or social views under such circumstances.

Featured News

Censorship, protests, pandemic addressed in Mont Order 2020+ conference

The positions and views of the Order in relation to the complex and challenging global dissident landscape in 2020 have been explained in an...

Get updates

Get new posts by email:

From friends of the Order