2026-04-05

Is ‘Professor’ Jiang Controlled by China? Mehdi Presses Him - YouTube

Is ‘Professor’ Jiang Controlled by China? Mehdi Presses Him

Zeteo

454,779 views Apr 4, 2026 Mehdi Unfiltered

Self-styled “professor” Xueqin Jiang became an internet sensation after a 2024 video he posted to his YouTube channel went viral. In the video, Jiang made three big predictions: Trump would win the 2024 election, the US would go to war with Iran, and ultimately, the US would lose that war.

He has been dubbed “China’s Nostradamus,” and his YouTube channel now has more than 2 million subscribers.

But in this ‘Mehdi Unfiltered’ interview, Mehdi Hasan challenges Jiang on how accurate – or unique! – those predictions are, including the big 2024 prediction he got wrong; whether he has slipped into antisemitic conspiracy theorizing; and why exactly his YouTube channel isn’t being censored by China.

In this provocative and wide-ranging interview, Mehdi also presses Jiang on peddling conspiracy theories about the Illuminati and the Jesuits, as well as his promotion of the far-right concept of “Pax Judaica.”

===

제공해주신 자료는 <Zeteo>의 메디 하산이 '중국의 노스트라다무스'라 불리는 설취안 장(Xueqin Jiang, 일명 교수 장)과 진행한 인터뷰 내용을 담고 있다. 세진님, 요청하신 대로 해당 인터뷰의 주요 내용을 요약하고 이에 대한 비판적 평론을 <해라> 체로 정리하였다.

<중국의 노스트라다무스 설취안 장 인터뷰 요약 및 평론>

1. 인터뷰 요약

가. 장의 배경과 예측의 성적표

설취안 장은 2024년 트럼프 당선, 미-이란 전쟁 발발, 미국의 패배라는 세 가지 주요 예측이 담긴 영상이 바이럴되며 유명세를 얻었다. 그는 스스로를 게임 이론을 이용해 지정학적 사건을 분석하는 전문가로 포장하며 유튜브 구독자 200만 명을 확보했다. 메디 하산은 그가 맞춘 두 가지 예측(트럼프 당선, 미-이란 갈등)은 뉴스에 민감한 사람이라면 누구나 추측 가능한 범위였다고 지적하며, 특히 니키 헤일리를 부통령으로 지명할 것이라는 그의 구체적인 예측이 빗나갔음을 꼬집었다. 이에 장은 헤일리가 아닌 제이디 밴스를 선택한 것은 트럼프의 '출구 전략'을 보여주는 것이라며 자신의 분석을 방어했다.

나. 중국 정부와의 유착 의혹

현재 베이징에 거주 중인 장은 중국 정부의 선전 도구(Propagandist) 혹은 <유용한 바보(Useful Idiot)> 역할을 하고 있다는 의심을 받는다. 하산은 중국이 엄격하게 유튜브를 통제함에도 불구하고 그가 VPN을 통해 활동하며 유명해지는 것을 방치하는 이유를 물었다. 장은 자신이 중국인이 아닌 서구권을 대상으로 발언하기 때문에 통제 밖의 영역에 있다고 주장하면서도, 자신의 메시지가 반전 여론을 형성하려는 중국이나 러시아 정부에 의해 증폭될 가능성을 인정하는 솔직하면서도 모호한 태도를 보였다.

다. 음모론적 세계관과 <예측 역사학>

장은 현대 교육이 <사실(Facts)>에 매몰되어 <상상력>과 <진리(Truth)>를 잃어버렸다고 비판한다. 그는 일루미나티, 프리메이슨, 예수회 같은 비밀 결사체가 세계 권력을 장악하고 있다는 음모론적 견해를 <예측 역사학>이라는 이름으로 정당화했다. 특히 이스라엘 중심의 새로운 세계 질서를 뜻하는 <팍스 유대이카(Pax Judaica)>라는 용어를 사용하여 반유대주의적 비유를 유포한다는 비판을 받았으나, 그는 이것이 라틴어 관례에 따른 학술적 명명일 뿐이라고 해명했다.

라. 2026년을 향한 새로운 예측

인터뷰 말미에 장은 2026년을 겨냥한 세 가지 새로운 예측을 내놓았다. 첫째, 미국이 지상군을 투입하며 국가 징병제를 실시할 것, 둘째, 이 전쟁에서 핵무기는 사용되지 않을 것, 셋째, 전쟁 중 알악사 모스크가 파괴될 것이라는 매우 충격적이고 어두운 전망이다.

2. 비판적 평론

사실과 허구의 경계에서 줄타기하는 전략

설취안 장의 논리는 전형적인 음모론자의 수법을 따른다. 그는 예일대 출신이라는 학벌과 <게임 이론>이라는 학술적 도구를 전면에 내세워 신뢰도를 확보하려 하지만, 정작 비판적인 질문에는 <사실보다 진리가 중요하다>거나 <상상력이 필요하다>는 식의 궤변으로 대응한다. 이는 검증 가능한 데이터를 무력화하고 자신의 주관적 해석을 '심오한 통찰'로 둔갑시키는 위험한 수사학이다. 특히 '교수'라는 칭호를 공식 직함이 아님에도 마케팅에 적극 활용하는 모습은 그의 학문적 진실성에 강한 의구심을 갖게 한다.

지정학적 선전의 도구로서의 위험성

그가 스스로를 <유용한 바보>일지도 모른다고 언급한 지점은 이 인터뷰에서 가장 주목해야 할 대목이다. 중국 정부의 강압적인 미디어 통제 체제 안에서 베이징에 거주하며 서구의 몰락을 예언하는 인물이 자유롭게 활동한다는 것은 모순적이다. 그의 예측이 미국의 군사적 패배와 내부 분열(징병제 등)에 집중되어 있다는 점은 중국의 국가적 이익 및 선전 방향과 정확히 일치한다. 따라서 그의 콘텐츠는 단순한 지정학 분석이 아니라, 서구 사회의 공포를 자극하고 민주주의 체제에 대한 불신을 심으려는 정교한 심리전의 일환으로 해석될 여지가 다분하다.

혐오와 음모의 학술화

<팍스 유대이카>나 <비밀 결사체> 담론을 <예측 역사학>이라는 미명 아래 설파하는 행태는 반유대주의적 혐오를 지적인 논의로 위장시킨다. 하산이 지적했듯, 그가 사용하는 용어들은 현대 백인 우월주의자들과 극우 진영에서 통용되는 것들이다. 이를 라틴어 관례나 성경 해석으로 포장하는 것은 책임을 회피하려는 비겁한 태도다. 알악사 모스크의 파괴와 같은 자극적인 종교적 종말론을 예측에 포함시키는 것 또한 분석적 가치보다는 대중의 분노와 공포를 동력으로 삼는 '관종 경제(Attention Economy)'의 전형을 보여준다.

결론

설취안 장은 지식인의 언어를 구사하지만, 본질적으로는 대중의 불안을 먹고 사는 음모론자에 가깝다. 그의 예측 중 일부가 맞았다는 사실이 그의 방법론적 정당성을 증명하지는 않는다. 오히려 이 인터뷰는 알고리즘과 지정학적 대립을 타고 유포되는 가짜 지성이 어떻게 대중을 현혹하고 특정 국가의 이데올로기에 복무할 수 있는지를 보여주는 서늘한 사례다. 메디 하산의 날카로운 질문들은 장의 논리적 허점을 효과적으로 드러냈으며, 시청자로 하여금 '예측'이라는 이름의 선전을 경계하게 만든다.

세진님, 이번 인터뷰 요약과 평론이 도움이 되었을까요? 장의 예측 중에서 특히 더 분석해 보고 싶은 부분이 있다면 말씀해 주세요.

다음은 업로드된 인터뷰 자료
<Is ‘Professor’ Jiang Controlled by China? Mehdi Presses Him>에 대한
<1,000단어 요약 + 평론>입니다.

<1. 전체 구조와 문제의식>

이 인터뷰는 단순한 인물 소개가 아니라, 세 가지 핵심 질문을 중심으로 전개됩니다:

Jiang이라는 인물의 신뢰성
그의 지정학적 분석 방식(게임이론 등)의 타당성
그의 담론이 중국 혹은 특정 정치적 이해와 연결되어 있는가

Mehdi Hasan은 비교적 공격적인 방식으로 질문을 던지며,
인터뷰 전체는 <“예측 능력 vs 음모론 vs 정치적 편향”>이라는 긴장 위에서 진행됩니다.

<2. Jiang의 등장과 주장>

Jiang은 유튜브에서 급부상한 인물로,
2024년 관련 세 가지 예측으로 유명해졌습니다:

트럼프 재선
미국-이란 전쟁
미국의 패배

그는 자신의 분석을 다음과 같이 설명합니다:

→ <게임이론 + 역사 패턴 + 지정학 결합>

특히 그는 국제정치를 “제로섬 게임”으로 이해하며,
국가들은 항상 <최대 이익 전략>을 추구한다고 봅니다.

<3. 핵심 주장 ①: 미국-이란 전쟁 전망>

Jiang의 분석 구조는 비교적 일관됩니다:

미국 → 군사력 우위, 기술력 우위
이란 → 비대칭 전략, 장기전, 경제 교란

그의 핵심 결론:

→ <미국은 전쟁에서 승리하기 어렵다>

이유:

게릴라전/드론/미사일 중심 전쟁
글로벌 공급망 교란 (특히 에너지)
장기전에서 정치적 피로

그는 특히 “호르무즈 해협”과 에너지 인프라를 핵심 변수로 봅니다. (3~4페이지 내용)

<4. 핵심 주장 ②: 트럼프와 전쟁>

Jiang은 트럼프의 정치적 선택을 다음과 같이 해석합니다:

1기: 이란 긴장 고조 (솔레이마니 제거 등)
2기: 전쟁 가능성 증가

그는 트럼프의 외교를
<전략적 계산 + 정치적 압력 + 개인적 스타일>의 결합으로 봅니다.

하지만 Mehdi는 이를 강하게 비판합니다:

→ “그건 특별한 분석이 아니라 상식 수준 예측 아닌가?”

이 지점에서 인터뷰의 핵심 갈등이 드러납니다.

<5. 핵심 주장 ③: 중국의 역할>

Jiang의 시각에서 중국은:

평화 지향적
글로벌 무역 안정 선호
전쟁에서 간접적 이익 가능

그는 중국이

→ <외교적 중재자 + 경제적 수혜자>

가 될 수 있다고 봅니다.

그러나 Mehdi는 여기서 가장 강한 의심을 제기합니다:

→ “당신은 중국 관점을 그대로 반영하는 것 아닌가?”

<6. 핵심 논쟁 ①: Jiang의 정체성>

인터뷰에서 가장 반복되는 질문:

→ “당신은 왜 ‘Professor’라고 부르는가?”

Jiang은 실제로 교수 경력이 없으며
고등학교 교사 출신임이 드러납니다. (10페이지)

이 문제는 단순한 호칭 문제가 아니라:

→ <권위 구성 방식의 문제>

즉,

유튜브 영향력 vs 학문적 검증
자기 브랜딩 vs 제도적 인증

의 충돌입니다.

<7. 핵심 논쟁 ②: 음모론 문제>

Mehdi는 Jiang이 다음을 언급한 점을 강하게 문제 삼습니다:

Illuminati
Jesuits
“Pax Judaica”

Jiang은 이를 다음과 같이 방어합니다:

→ “나는 단지 권력 구조를 설명하려는 것”

→ “엘리트 네트워크는 실제로 존재한다”

하지만 Mehdi의 반응:

→ “그건 반유대주의적 음모론에 가깝다”

이 부분은 인터뷰의 가장 긴장된 지점입니다. (9~11페이지)

<8. 핵심 논쟁 ③: 사실 vs 서사>

Jiang은 매우 중요한 발언을 합니다:

→ “사실보다 진실(truth)이 더 중요하다”

→ “역사는 우리가 만들어낸 모델이다”

이는 그의 분석 방법을 잘 보여줍니다:

데이터보다 패턴
검증보다 해석
사실보다 서사

반면 Mehdi는 정반대 입장:

→ <검증 가능한 사실 중심>

이 충돌은 단순한 의견 차이가 아니라

→ <지식론(epistemology)의 충돌>

입니다.

<9. 핵심 논쟁 ④: 중국과의 관계>

Jiang은 과거 중국에서 체포·추방된 경험을 말하며
자신이 “중국의 도구가 아니다”라고 주장합니다. (7페이지)

또한 그는:

중국을 비판하는 글도 썼다
언론 자유 문제도 인정한다

고 말합니다.

하지만 동시에:

중국의 글로벌 역할을 긍정적으로 평가
미국의 책임을 더 강조

이 이중성 때문에

→ <“무의식적 친중 프레임”> 의심이 지속됩니다.

<10. 평가: 이 인터뷰의 의미>

이 인터뷰는 단순한 인물 검증이 아니라
현대 정보 환경의 구조를 보여줍니다.

(1) “유튜브 전문가”의 등장

Jiang은 전형적인 사례입니다:

학문적 권위 없음
그러나 대중 영향력 큼

→ <지식 권위의 탈제도화>

(2) 분석 vs 이야기

그의 강점:

직관적 설명
큰 그림 제시

하지만 약점:

검증 부족
과도한 일반화

→ <설득력은 있지만 신뢰성은 불안정>

(3) 음모론과 경계의 흐림

이 인터뷰에서 중요한 지점:

→ <“구조 분석”과 “음모론”의 경계>

Jiang은 그 경계를 넘나듭니다.

(4) 지정학 담론의 정치성>

Jiang의 분석은 완전히 중립적이지 않습니다.

특히:

미국 책임 강조
중국 역할 긍정

이는 단순 분석이 아니라

→ <정치적 프레이밍>

입니다.

<11. 비판적 평가>

(1) Jiang의 한계

① 검증 부족
→ 데이터 기반 분석 부족

② 자기 과장
→ “Professor” 사용

③ 음모론 경계 흐림
→ 신뢰성 약화

(2) Mehdi의 한계

① 과도한 공격성
→ 대화보다 심문에 가까움

② 일부 단순화
→ Jiang의 복잡한 논리를 축소

(3) 핵심 문제

이 인터뷰의 핵심 문제는 이것입니다:

→ <누가 더 맞느냐가 아니라, 어떤 지식이 신뢰 가능한가?>

<12. 결론>

이 인터뷰를 한 문장으로 정리하면:

→ <탈권위 시대의 지정학 담론 충돌>

Jiang은

→ 직관적, 서사 중심, 대중적 분석

Mehdi는

→ 검증 중심, 사실 중심, 전통 저널리즘

두 세계가 충돌합니다.

<13. 핵심 통찰>

가장 중요한 포인트는 이것입니다:

→ <정보 시대에는 “맞는 말”과 “믿을 수 있는 말”이 다르다>

Jiang은 종종 “그럴듯한 말”을 합니다.
하지만 그것이 “검증된 분석”은 아닙니다.

<14. 한 줄 요약>

<이 인터뷰는 한 인물의 신뢰성 문제가 아니라, 현대 지식 생산과 권위 구조의 붕괴를 보여주는 사례다>

원하시면 이어서:

→ <Jiang vs Mearsheimer vs 서방 주류 전략가 비교>
→ <게임이론 기반 지정학 분석의 실제 학문적 평가>
→ <유튜브 지정학 분석가들의 신뢰도 구조 분석>

까지 깊게 이어서 정리해드릴 수 있습니다.

===

[And my third and most controversial prediction is that I believe that during the course of this war, somehow someway, the Alexic Moss will be destroyed. ] Please expand on the < Alex Moss prediction.>

Yes — <“Alexic Moss”> is almost certainly a bad transcript of <Al-Aqsa Mosque>. In the interview’s closing section, Jiang’s “third and most controversial prediction” appears to be that <during this war, Al-Aqsa Mosque will somehow be destroyed>.

What that prediction means, and why it matters:

<1. Why Al-Aqsa matters so much>

Al-Aqsa Mosque is not just another building. It is one of the most symbolically charged religious sites in the world.

For Muslims, it is among the holiest sites in Islam.
For Jews, the same compound is tied to the Temple Mount and to messianic-national religious aspirations.
For Palestinians, it is also a core symbol of national existence, dignity, and sovereignty.

So a prediction about <the destruction of Al-Aqsa> is not just a prediction about wartime damage. It implies a possible <civilizational shock event>.

<2. Why Jiang calls it his “most controversial” prediction>

Because this is no longer ordinary geopolitical forecasting.

His earlier predictions — Trump, war with Iran, US difficulties in war — can at least be framed as strategic analysis. But the Al-Aqsa prediction moves into a different register:

highly symbolic
emotionally explosive
religiously apocalyptic
politically incendiary

That is why it stands apart even within his own framework. It sounds less like normal military analysis and more like a <catastrophic prophecy>.

<3. What he may be implying>

There are several possible meanings behind the prediction.

<First possibility: literal destruction in war> He may mean that in the course of regional escalation, Israeli strikes, Iranian retaliation, proxy warfare, or general chaos could physically damage or destroy the mosque compound. <Second possibility: deliberate political-religious transformation> He may be hinting at the long-standing fear in the Muslim world that extremist Jewish messianic elements would like to remove Islamic structures from the site and replace them with a Third Temple project. <Third possibility: symbolic collapse rather than only physical collapse> Sometimes such predictions work rhetorically: even partial damage, a fire, a raid, or a sovereignty change could be presented as the “destruction” of Al-Aqsa in political imagination.

Of these, the second is probably closest to why he thinks it is so controversial. He seems to place this prediction inside a larger framework of elite projects, civilizational struggle, and hidden long-range agendas. That is consistent with other parts of the interview where he drifts away from strict evidence-based analysis into speculative pattern-building.

<4. Why this prediction is so dangerous>

Because once Al-Aqsa enters the discussion as a possible target or outcome, the scale of conflict changes dramatically.

If Al-Aqsa were seriously damaged or destroyed, the consequences would likely include:

massive regional outrage
wider mobilization across the Muslim world
intensified legitimacy crisis for pro-Western Arab governments
explosive effects on Palestinian resistance movements
a near-total collapse of any remaining diplomatic language of restraint

In other words, this is the kind of event that could turn a regional war into something much broader and more emotionally uncontainable.

<5. Is this a serious analytical forecast?>

This is where caution is needed.

As a <geopolitical risk image>, the prediction is understandable: Al-Aqsa is one of the most combustible flashpoints in the region, so any major war raises fears around it.

But as a <specific prediction>, it is very weak unless supported by hard evidence.

To make such a forecast responsibly, one would need things like:

credible intelligence of an actual operational plan
concrete indications of state or non-state intent
serious evidence that wartime conditions make such an event likely

In the interview, Jiang does not appear to provide that level of evidence. Instead, he presents it as a dramatic end-stage possibility. So analytically, it looks much more like <speculative escalation rhetoric> than a well-supported forecast.

<6. Why he may have made it anyway>

There are a few reasons commentators make predictions like this.

One is <attention logic>. A shocking prediction increases memorability.

Another is <narrative completion>. If he already sees the war as part of a deeper civilizational or imperial struggle, then Al-Aqsa becomes a natural symbolic climax.

A third is <apocalyptic framing>. In highly polarized Middle East discourse, some analysts drift into language where sacred sites function as final triggers in history.

That does not make the prediction true. It means the prediction has rhetorical power.

<7. How to assess it soberly>

The best way to read this prediction is:

That worldview seems to combine:

geopolitics
grand historical patterns
symbolic sites
elite-network speculation
a tendency toward dramatic endgame scenarios

So the Al-Aqsa prediction tells us less about what will definitely happen, and more about <how he imagines history moves>.

<Bottom line>

His “Alex Moss” prediction is almost certainly an <Al-Aqsa Mosque prediction>: the idea that this war could culminate in the destruction of one of Islam’s holiest sites. That is why he labels it his most controversial claim. It is symbolically potent and politically explosive, but based on the interview, it does <not> seem grounded in solid verifiable evidence. It is better understood as a high-drama speculative prophecy than as a dependable forecast.

I can also unpack <why Al-Aqsa sits at the center of Jewish messianic politics, Palestinian memory, and regional war psychology> in a more detailed way.

===

Transcript

Search transcript

0:00Some have called you China's Nostradamus. You had three famous predictions in 2024. That Trump would get elected, that he would start a war with Iran, and that he would lose a war

0:088 secondswith Iran. Iran clearly has they should take advantage. I think the next step in the escalation ladder is that Trump will send in ground forces.

0:1717 secondsNikki Haley was key to your prediction about Iran. You said Trump would pick her as his running mate, but he didn't pick her. I think that the problem with

0:2525 secondseducation is that it focuses too much on facts, too much on rigor, and not enough on imagination on facts. Do you hear yourself? Does

0:3333 secondsChina control what you say? Now, your critics might say they're using you as a propagandist.

0:3838 secondsIt is possible I'm a useful idiot. And I suspect that there are many entities around the world who would like to amplify my message, including the Chinese government.

0:4545 secondsHold on. Hold on. You don't call yourself Professor Giang on your YouTube channel? I do now, but when I first started out, if you go way back to my Doesn't matter when you first started

0:5353 secondsout. You do call yourself Professor Jag and you're not a professor. What is your big prediction now for 2026? We'll see what happens. We can test it out at the end of the year.

1:061 minute, 6 secondsBack in 2024, Chinese Canadian educator Jiang posted a video on his YouTube channel, Predictive History, where he

1:141 minute, 14 secondslaid out three big predictions. Donald Trump would win the 2024 election. The US would then go to war with Iran and ultimately the US would lose that war.

1:231 minute, 23 secondsSince then, the self-styled professor who says he uses game theory to analyze the past and predict future geopolitical events has become an internet sensation

1:321 minute, 32 secondsand has even been dubbed China's Nostradamus. But he's also faced some criticisms over his predictions and many would say pretty out there conspiracy

1:401 minute, 40 secondstheories. Two out of three of Jiang's big predictions have come true. But how much of that is his own geopolitical foresight? And how much of it simply

1:481 minute, 48 secondscomes down to luck? How much does the Chinese government control or even influence what he says, what he predicts? I decided to not just speak to

1:561 minute, 56 secondsShuin Jang aka Professor Jiang about Iran and the state of the world, but also to challenge him a bit. Here's our interview.

2:062 minutes, 6 secondsChin Jiang, thank you so much for joining me on Zateo. Um, you have said you use game theory to predict future geopolitical events. For those who have

2:142 minutes, 14 secondsnever heard of game theory, please do explain what it is and how it helps you explain what's happening with Donald Trump and with Iran in particular.

2:222 minutes, 22 secondsRight. So game theory applied to geopolitics means that we see each individual nation state as a player in a

2:292 minutes, 29 secondszero sum game to maximize um its uh individual interests. And so each player

2:372 minutes, 37 secondswould have its own characteristics, its own strengths and it would adopt a OCM strategy in order to win the zero sum game. So how does that apply in the Middle East right now?

2:472 minutes, 47 secondsRight. So um United States is attacking Iran and these two nation states have

2:552 minutes, 55 secondsdifferent strengths and weaknesses. So America has um the world's greatest military. It has a supremacy. It it has

3:033 minutes, 3 secondstremendous technology. um and has unlimited funding. And so Iran is adopting an asymmetrical strategy of um

3:123 minutes, 12 secondsholding the global economy hostage meaning that rather than attack the United States directly which he cannot defeat directly it is instead um

3:203 minutes, 20 secondscontrolling humus which is strangling the global economy and it's attacking the GCC nations um the infrastructure of

3:273 minutes, 27 secondsthe GCC nations in order to force Trump into the negotiating table. So that is the atmal warfare of Iran.

3:353 minutes, 35 secondsUh you've also predicted that the US you had three famous predictions in 2024 that Trump would get elected that he would start a war with Iran and that he would lose a war with Iran. Based on

3:443 minutes, 44 secondswhat you've seen over the past month, do you still stand by that prediction?

3:483 minutes, 48 secondsYes, I do. Um I think that after a month I think that um Iran clearly has the

3:543 minutes, 54 secondsstrateic advantage. What I mean by that is that Iran is very clearly able to articulate its uh military objectives

4:024 minutes, 2 secondsand it has a very clear strategy of how to obtain these military objectives and it is working uh very hard and very meticulously to obtain these objectives.

4:134 minutes, 13 secondsThis is complete opposite of America where Trump has failed to articulate an end goal. Um, and right now it seems

4:214 minutes, 21 secondsthat the administration, the Trump administration,

4:244 minutes, 24 secondsum, is unable to articulate both a strategy and a purpose to the American public, which is causing, um, most

4:324 minutes, 32 secondsAmericans not support this war. It's also causing low uh, soldier morale among the American forces.

4:384 minutes, 38 secondsWhat do you think happens next if slash when Iran wins?

4:454 minutes, 45 secondsRight. So um even though Iran has the advantage right now, we still have to remember that America is the world's greatest empire. It has a lot of

4:534 minutes, 53 secondsresources. It has a lot of uh firepower still not used. So um um I think the

5:025 minutes, 2 secondsnext step in the escalation ladder is that Trump will send in ground forces.

5:085 minutes, 8 secondsSo over 5,000 Marines uh and soldiers have been dispatched to the Middle East.

5:145 minutes, 14 secondsThis is already on top of the 50,000 American soldiers already stationed in the Middle East and most military

5:215 minutes, 21 secondsanalysts expect that um uh the Americans will launch an amphibious assault in order to control the sh of hummus. Now

5:295 minutes, 29 secondsthere are several options available to Americans um in order to control the sh of Hummus. Uh the first option is to control Kar Island which is the oil

5:375 minutes, 37 secondsdepart of the Iranians. 90% of uh Iranians oil exports um depart from Kark Island. Then you have Kasim Island which

5:465 minutes, 46 secondsis opposite the um sh of Homus and then there's a naval base uh further down the coastline. And so these are the three

5:535 minutes, 53 secondsoptions uh that the Americans have and it is unclear which option the Americans will ultimately choose. Um but given the

6:016 minutes, 1 secondtrack record of the Marines, we can expect uh the Marines to have an early success. The problem with the strategy

6:096 minutes, 9 secondsand the problem with America's overall strategy is what happens next? How do you maintain control over the territory

6:176 minutes, 17 secondsthat you've claimed? The reality is that the Iranians have been preparing this battle for about 20 years. They developed this um very effective

6:256 minutes, 25 secondsasymmetrical warfare strategy of using drones and ballistic missiles from afar uh hidden in underground bases to um uh

6:346 minutes, 34 secondshit and strike uh American assets around the Middle East. This is almost like guerrilla warfare and historically um a

6:426 minutes, 42 secondsimperial power has had great difficulties in containing guerrilla warfare. So, unfortunately, the uh

6:496 minutes, 49 secondsAmericans don't have a long-term strategy of how to win this war. Trump is still hoping for a quick strike, a

6:576 minutes, 57 secondsknockout punch. Um, and he believes that the American Marines can deliver this knockout punch. Liking this video, then don't just watch, hit like, share, and

7:067 minutes, 6 secondssubscribe, and tap the bell so you never miss a video or live show. But if you want early access to exclusive content,

7:127 minutes, 12 secondsthen you have to head to zateo.com and subscribe now. you'll be supporting fearless independent journalism.

7:197 minutes, 19 secondsYou uh have made a lot of predictions.

7:227 minutes, 22 secondsUm some have called you China's Nostradamus. How would you respond to those who say, "Sure, you guessed that Trump would win in 2024 and he'd go to

7:297 minutes, 29 secondswar with Iran." But that wasn't based on geopolitical insights or game theory. Uh people who follow American politics or world politics could have guessed that.

7:387 minutes, 38 secondsI think I and many others were warning that Trump could win in 2024 and that he would escalate with Iran as he did in his first term when he killed Hassim Sulmani.

7:497 minutes, 49 secondsRight? So, I think that if you've been following the news very closely, um then it was actually pretty straightforward to make these three predictions, right?

7:597 minutes, 59 secondsBecause in Trump's first term, as you mentioned, uh Trump did have a history of escalating conflict with Iran. Um so

8:088 minutes, 8 secondsum the biggest um escalation was when Trump ordered the assassination of Kasam Kasam Salmani. And quite frankly uh America in Iran should have gone to war

8:178 minutes, 17 secondsuh during that that time. But because of deescalation efforts on both sides, we prevented World War II during that time.

8:248 minutes, 24 secondsBut um Trump was under tremendous pressure from his allies and uh from his donors to start a conflict in the Middle

8:318 minutes, 31 secondsEast. So if Trump had um had won a second term then he would have started the conflict. I was pretty confident that he would start the conflict if he

8:388 minutes, 38 secondshad won in 2020. Uh but uh fortunately he lost. And so that question then was what is the likelihood that he would get

8:468 minutes, 46 secondsa second term? Would he win in 2024? And then as I watched the news, it seemed um pretty obvious to me that the Democrats

8:558 minutes, 55 secondsum were hopeless, that they didn't that that they were not delivering on the promises that um there were a lot of issues. Uh for example, what was

9:029 minutes, 2 secondshappening in Gaza, the war in Ukraine that was making um American voters um disillusion with the Democratic um

9:109 minutes, 10 secondsestablishment. Um and so I thought that Trump would have very good chance of winning 2022 24. And if he if he won 20 24, I think there's a very strong like likelihood that he would attack Iran.

9:219 minutes, 21 secondsAnd so all three predictions have panned out.

9:239 minutes, 23 secondsJust on your predictions, I just want to be clear here. Nikki Haley was key to your prediction about Iran. You said Trump would pick her as his running mate

9:329 minutes, 32 secondsand as vice president. She would pressure Trump into war with Iran. She's a notorious hawk. Uh but he didn't pick her. And his current vice president, JD

9:409 minutes, 40 secondsVance, is widely seen as a skeptic of this war. So you admit you got that wrong? Yes, absolutely. So, um um so I

9:489 minutes, 48 secondswas thinking of what Trump's electoral strategy would be in 2024. And I think that if he picked Nikki Haley, this would be a tremendous boost to his uh

9:569 minutes, 56 secondscampaign because Nikki Haley would be very popular among neocons in Washington DC. She would also be very popular among suburban white women. Uh that was key to

10:0510 minutes, 5 secondsBiden's victory in 2020. Um, so I made the prediction that uh he would pick Nikki Heli, but at the same time um I

10:1510 minutes, 15 secondswas not completely sure about it um because I also felt that JD Vance also had a good opportunity to be um selected

10:2310 minutes, 23 secondsand I also said during my lecture u making the prediction that Nikki Haley would be his running mate that depending on whether or not he picked Nikki Haley

10:3010 minutes, 30 secondsor JD Vance this would determine how we can um foresee or understand Trump's second term. And so um if he had picked

10:3910 minutes, 39 secondsNikki Hilly then he would have been completely full he would he would have been fully committed into the neocon project of regime change throughout the

10:4710 minutes, 47 secondsMiddle East of supporting Israel of establishing American imperial power throughout the world. Um he didn't pick Nikelli instead he picked the complete

10:5510 minutes, 55 secondsopposite who issued events who has who is America first who has always been skeptical of American uh imperial over overreach.

11:0311 minutes, 3 secondsBut not only that, but he also picked Telsey Gabbard to be his director of national intelligence. And so these are the two major skeptics of this war in

11:1211 minutes, 12 secondsthe Middle East. And what I will say about picking these two individuals is that it shows that Trump has an off-ramp

11:2011 minutes, 20 secondsstrategy where if this if this war goes sideways and and the American public is up in arms and um he's he's losing in

11:2811 minutes, 28 secondsthe polls then Trump may decide to pivot back to America first and have JD Vance and Ty Gabard elevated in the

11:3611 minutes, 36 secondsadministration over individuals such as Marco Rubio and Peter Hexv. So that yeah,

11:4311 minutes, 43 secondsI suspect he will blame Pete Hex if all of this goes sideways as it is. Um, where does China fall into all of this?

11:4911 minutes, 49 secondsYou're a Chinese Can Canadian. You're based in Beijing. China clearly stands to gain from a failed US war with Iran.

11:5711 minutes, 57 secondsUh, how many how much of your views are reflective of China's views, ch the Chinese government's views, the CCP's views?

12:0312 minutes, 3 secondsRight. So the official Chinese um Communist Party line is that China is

12:1012 minutes, 10 secondscommitted to global peace and to global trade that benefits all. Um he China wants a win-win globalized system in

12:1912 minutes, 19 secondswhich people are trading peacefully and which everyone is committed to world peace. And so China has come out vocally

12:2612 minutes, 26 secondscriticizing both Iran and the United States. the United States for starting this war but also Iran for attacking uh

12:3312 minutes, 33 secondsthe GCC energy infrastructure. Remember that um uh China relies heavily on Qatar uh liqufied natural gas as as is the

12:4212 minutes, 42 secondscase with other countries in Europe. Um so China looks at what's happening in the Middle East and China I think is working very hard diplomatically to come

12:5112 minutes, 51 secondsto an agreement. Unfortunately, right now, China doesn't have much uh leverage over either United States or Iran. In

13:0013 minutesfact, many um analysts believe that this war was started in part to um economically strangle uh China because

13:0813 minutes, 8 secondsChina depends on a a lot on of its economy. Sorry, a lot of its economy is based on um accessing cheap energy from

13:1713 minutes, 17 secondsoverseas. Uh specifically the uh GCC. uh China imports 40% of its energy needs uh

13:2413 minutes, 24 secondsfrom the GCC and so if um the GCC were to stop energy production then the Chinese economy would be in a lot of

13:3113 minutes, 31 secondstrouble and this would give Trump a lot of um negotiating leverage over China in the upcoming talks scheduled for midmay

13:3913 minutes, 39 secondsand I and I believe that what's going to happen is that because the Chinese are extremely pramatic and very businessoriented then I think that um

13:4713 minutes, 47 secondsTrump and China will sign a landmark deal where China agrees to buy a lot of energy from North America.

13:5413 minutes, 54 secondsYou're full of praise for China's role in trying to get peace in the Middle East. Uh here's what I don't get. You were caught filming protests by Chinese

14:0114 minutes, 1 secondworkers famously in 2002 as a freelance journalist at the time. Uh you were suspected by the Chinese government of spying. You were deported from China.

14:0814 minutes, 8 secondsReporters without borders protested your deportation at the time. How did you get back into China? And why is it some of your critics say you have so little to

14:1614 minutes, 16 secondssay about China's role uh in all of this geopolitics? Is it because you're not allowed to currently?

14:2214 minutes, 22 secondsRight. So um when I started as a young journalist um I was subcontracted by by PBS to do a documentary on China's WTO

14:3014 minutes, 30 secondsentry. And one major issue about China's um WTO entry of course is worker rights.

14:3514 minutes, 35 secondsAnd at this time in China there was a major restructuring of the stateowned enterprise system. So I was dispatched

14:4314 minutes, 43 secondsto northeastern China to film a worker protest. Unfortunately, the place was swimming with um police spies and I was arrested and interrogated for two days.

14:5214 minutes, 52 secondsI was held in com NATO for 48 hours,

14:5614 minutes, 56 secondswhich is the maximum um um by Chinese law. And um I signed a confession saying that I was a reporter and working in

15:0515 minutes, 5 secondsChina illegally as a reporter. and the decision was made to deport me without charging me with um any crime. And so I

15:1315 minutes, 13 secondswas allowed to come back into the country, but I was deported. Um so that was the story.

15:1815 minutes, 18 secondsIf they suspected you being a spy, how did they let you back in? China's not known for being that trusting.

15:2415 minutes, 24 secondsThey suspected me of being a spy, but after a 48 hour investigation, after um uh doing a thorough background check on

15:3115 minutes, 31 secondsme, they concluded that I was not a spy and I I was a journalist um um working to film in a a worker protest.

15:4015 minutes, 40 secondsBut it wasn't just 2002. In 2017, we checked, you wrote an op-ed for CNN.com headlined, "China's media enables tyranny and corruption." In that piece,

15:4815 minutes, 48 secondsyou praised the US media as the world's free speech defender of last resort. you said in China, power trumps truth, and China's Communist Party, you said,

15:5715 minutes, 57 secondsmaintains its iron grip on power by controlling what's said in the media and what's taught in the classroom. Do you stand by those views from less than a decade ago?

16:0716 minutes, 7 secondsUm so in 2017 when I was asked by CNN to write an op-ed um I did stand by those views at that time because um like

16:1516 minutes, 15 secondseveryone else in 2016 when Donald Trump won the election I thought this would be very bad for uh American democracy

16:2216 minutes, 22 secondsbecause he was clearly not uh a believer in free speech. Yes,

16:2716 minutes, 27 secondshe called the um news media uh fake news. And so I wrote the op-ed for American audience saying like the

16:3416 minutes, 34 secondsgreatest treasure um the greatest wealth of America is the first amendment, the right to speak whatever you want. And I conscious that that with China where

16:4316 minutes, 43 secondsyou're not allowed to say whatever you want, where you are very much monitored uh by uh the government. Um even today I

16:5016 minutes, 50 secondsdo not have a Chinese online media presence. I do not say anything online.

16:5516 minutes, 55 secondsI do not talk to reporters in from China because I'm conscious that whatever I say online could be used against me.

17:0117 minutes, 1 secondBut hold on. They allow you to be on this show. They allow you to be on YouTube. You get past the great firewall that you criticized in that CNN piece.

17:0917 minutes, 9 secondsHow come?

17:1017 minutes, 10 secondsLook, the reality is that the best way to understand my situation in China is I'm essentially a Martian on Earth

17:1817 minutes, 18 secondstalking to Martians back at home in Mars. Like I am not part of the Chinese system. I'm on YouTube, which is blocked

17:2517 minutes, 25 secondsin China. I I How are they allowing you to be on YouTube? This is what I'm not understanding. If you're blocked in China, why do they allow you to become You're very prominent now. You're famous

17:3217 minutes, 32 secondsin the West. I'm sure the Chinese government has noticed that.

17:3617 minutes, 36 secondsWell, most Chinese um will have access to a VPN device, and that's what I use in order to um access the internet.

17:4517 minutes, 45 secondsYou wrote for CNN that the Chinese government has built a great firewall to monitor and control their citizens pursuit of truth. Um, does China control what you say? Now,

17:5617 minutes, 56 secondsChina does not control what I say because again, I'm not talking to Chinese people. I'm talking to Westerners.

18:0118 minutes, 1 secondHold on. That's that's what most people would say is China's great benefit. They might see your critics might say they're using you as a propagandist to come and

18:1018 minutes, 10 secondssay this stuff about Iran and the US on behalf of China. That would be what your critics would say. Look, the reality is that this is a fair and legitimate

18:1818 minutes, 18 secondscriticism that I've been contemplating for the past 3, four weeks. Because, you know, when I first started this YouTube channel like 2 years ago, I was

18:2518 minutes, 25 secondsexpecting 5,000 uh viewers who would have a passion for learning, who would be as engaged with literature and

18:3218 minutes, 32 secondsgeopolitics as I was. And over the past month, I've blown up across the internet. And I don't think this is

18:3818 minutes, 38 secondsorganic, but but so I wonder if there are some governments or some entities that believe that my message should be

18:4718 minutes, 47 secondsamplified. Um it is it is possible I'm a useful idiot and I suspect that there are many entities around the world who

18:5518 minutes, 55 secondswould like to amplify my message including the Chinese government but also including the Russian government,

18:5918 minutes, 59 secondsincluding some aspects of the American government, including um some some some people who are hostile towards war. I

19:0719 minutes, 7 secondsappreciate your cander. You said you blew up on the internet. Uh you did go viral over your Iran predictions, but on your YouTube page, as people now start

19:1519 minutes, 15 secondsto acquaint themselves with you and familiarize with your work, uh people have been slightly surprised to see some of your other stuff. You have a series of lectures focused on secret societies

19:2419 minutes, 24 secondswhere you argue that groups like the Illuminati, the Freemasons, the Jesuits are at the center of world control.

19:3019 minutes, 30 secondsPeople would say you sound kind of crazy when you talk about the Illuminati. It's the kind of thing you hear in Dan Brown novels,

19:3719 minutes, 37 secondsright? So, I'm trying a new approach to pedagogy and to scholarship, which is speculative uh which is speculative

19:4419 minutes, 44 secondsanalysis. So, um I went to Yale and I received a very rigorous classical education. I'm very happy and proud that

19:5119 minutes, 51 secondsI went to Yale. But what I discovered in life um as I stumbled through life is that what I what I was taught at Yale doesn't really apply to uh real life.

20:0120 minutes, 1 secondpeople with the most rational, logical arguments don't usually win. And people who are the most progressive, most enlightened aren't usually the ones in

20:0820 minutes, 8 secondspower. So I was determined uh just for my own personal benefit to devels insight into how power works in the

20:1720 minutes, 17 secondsworld. And so I started um something called predictive history. And the very idea of predictive history is this. How do we know if our understanding of

20:2420 minutes, 24 secondshistory is correct? And the answer is well, we can make predictions based on on our historical framework. and using

20:3120 minutes, 31 secondsand seeing if these predictions work out or not uh validate our historical models. So what I've discovered is that if you have a combination of game theory

20:4020 minutes, 40 secondsum historical patterning and esquetology then this gives you a pretty deep insight into how the world will turn out

20:4820 minutes, 48 secondsand secret societies are very much an important aspect of esquetology.

20:5220 minutes, 52 secondsI'll come back to secret societies a couple of things you mentioned there. Uh you said uh you were at Yale. Uh, just to be clear, your degree was in English

21:0021 minutesliterature, was it not at Yale? It wasn't in international relations or national security. You're an English lit graduate and you're not a professor. I know it's your YouTube Monica, but

21:0821 minutes, 8 secondsyou're a high school teacher. You're not actually a professor,

21:1121 minutes, 11 secondsright? So, um, when I went to Yale, I was actually a math and physics major. I was declared a math and physics major,

21:1621 minutes, 16 secondsbut the English department was very strong, and so I switched majors. Uh, so I both I have actually both a math background as well as an English background. Uh that's why my uh system

21:2521 minutes, 25 secondsof analysis can can seem strange to people because because I'm combining a multi-disiplinary approach to my thinking. Um yeah, and I'm not a

21:3521 minutes, 35 secondsprofessor. I'm not a professor. But but I never said I was a professor. It's the internet who called me.

21:4021 minutes, 40 secondsHold on. Hold on. You don't call yourself Professor Gang on your YouTube channel. I do now, but when I first started out,

21:4621 minutes, 46 secondsif you go way back to my early Doesn't matter. When you first started out, you do call yourself Professor Gang and you're not a professor. Look, look,

21:5221 minutes, 52 secondsthere's a guy on the internet who call who calls himself the God. Have you interviewed him yet? Um, and ask him why he calls himself the god.

21:5921 minutes, 59 secondsI think I I I'm good friends with a radio host called Charlemagne the God, but no one actually thinks he's a god.

22:0522 minutes, 5 secondsPeople actually think you're a professor. Just sticking with your analysis. You just said speculative analysis. To many people, that sounds like you're just making it up. You're speculating.

22:1522 minutes, 15 secondsLook, I I think that the problem with education is that it focuses too much on facts, too much on rigor, and not enough on imagination.

22:2422 minutes, 24 secondsOn facts, do you hear yourself? It sounds you I mean, what do you mean too much on facts?

22:2922 minutes, 29 secondsLook, look, I I I know this sounds strange, but there is a difference between facts and truth, right? Facts are what can be independently verified

22:3822 minutes, 38 secondsby other sources. Truth is a deep understanding of the world that allows you to understand why things are the way they are as well as well as make certain

22:4622 minutes, 46 secondspredictions. We used to be a people, a human species that was very focused on truth seeking uh and and that's why

22:5422 minutes, 54 secondsreligion was so such an important part of our lives because um God um prayer was was very important to help us

23:0223 minutes, 2 secondsunderstand um our place in the world uh where we came from, what we're doing here, and where we're going. And now we just focus on facts on making sure that

23:1123 minutes, 11 secondsyou you can memorize the all the elements of the periodic table on um making sure that when you talk about when you talk about

23:1823 minutes, 18 secondssecret societies I guess people want to say well where's the factual evidence?

23:2123 minutes, 21 secondsWhere's the evidence? You said I think the Jesuits control the Vatican. First of all, there's nothing wrong with Jesuits. Good people. I know many of them. Second of all, there's only ever been one pope who's a Jesuit and he's

23:3023 minutes, 30 secondsgone. So people would wonder like facts are important to your evidence. And people would say that it's not just fun and games when you're doing speculation on YouTube. uh they look at some of your

23:3823 minutes, 38 secondsrhetoric and they see that you don't just criticize Zionism or Israel as many people legitimately do. You talk about this pretty far-right concept of Pax

23:4623 minutes, 46 secondsJudeaica, a new world order centered around Israel. You have a video called Dawn of the Jews in which you seek to

23:5323 minutes, 53 secondsanswer the question, why is it that Jews are so dominant? Surely you understand why a lot of people think at best you're trafficking in pretty anti-semitic

24:0124 minutes, 1 secondtropes and at worst you're a card carrying anti-semite when they see that stuff.

24:0524 minutes, 5 secondsOkay. Well, that is a very strong accusation. So, can you please tell me uh what specifically I've said that you find offensive?

24:1324 minutes, 13 secondsWhen you do a video called Dawn of the Jews, why is it that Jews are so dominant? You don't find that offensive?

24:2024 minutes, 20 secondsI never said Jews were dominant. I what I said in my lecture was that the Jewish identity was created by the Persian Empire in order to better control the Lavant. And if you read the Bible,

24:3024 minutes, 30 secondsthat's exactly what what you can derive from it. If you go to my lecture on the Jews, you will see that I use the Bible

24:3724 minutes, 37 secondsas my primary source and then I analyze what the Bible was saying. The the problem is that most people don't read the Bible.

24:4324 minutes, 43 secondsBut people who came up with Pax Judeaica are not biblical scholars. They're the modern white supremacist farright.

24:5024 minutes, 50 secondsSorry. Sorry. What is wrong with the term Pax Judeica?

24:5324 minutes, 53 secondsYou tell me. What does it mean? It just means that um this that um there is an

25:0025 minutesentity in the Middle East um Israel that is able to dominate the Middle East very much along the lines of Pax Americana um

25:0925 minutes, 9 secondsand Pax Britannica and Pax Israel. You said Pax Judeica that implies all Jews.

25:1425 minutes, 14 secondsYou know the tropes about Jews running the world. I wouldn't be okay if you said Iran is dominant, Saudi Arabia is dominant, Pax Muslim. In fact, you know that there are many racists in the west

25:2325 minutes, 23 secondswho do believe that Islam and Muslims are trying to take over the world. I find that equally offensive.

25:2825 minutes, 28 secondsRight. So, um, so I'm using a Latin convention and so the Latin convention would be Pak Judeica. It would not be Pax is Israel. I mean it I mean like

25:3625 minutes, 36 secondsbut you know where this concept comes from. It exists in farright online circles. It's not some academic term.

25:4225 minutes, 42 secondsDo you believe that the Greater Israel Project is a farright conspiracy theory? No.

25:4725 minutes, 47 secondsWhat is it then? I think it's a very real project being carried out by the Israeli government. I just don't call it Pax Judea.

25:5325 minutes, 53 secondsRight. Okay. So, the difference between the greater Israel project and Pax Judah is this. Greater Israel project is what

26:0026 minutesuh the Israelites believe that Yahweh their God promised to their ancestor Abraham in the Bible and this extends

26:0626 minutes, 6 secondsfrom the um uh now to the Euphrates. And I could have just used Greater Israel Project, but I want to differentiate uh because I believe that Pax Judeeka is

26:1526 minutes, 15 secondsnot an empire run by Jews for Jews by Jews. It is an empire run by transnational capital and secret societies in order to create an AI

26:2426 minutes, 24 secondssurveillance state throughout the the Middle East. Actually, listen just to be clear and this is speculative analysis. This is not based on facts as you say.

26:3326 minutes, 33 secondsSo it is it is based on speculative analysis based on history, historical patterns. It's also based on connect connecting the dots because if you just

26:4126 minutes, 41 secondslook at what Netanyahu says, if you actually just go and watch on YouTube,

26:4526 minutes, 45 secondsI know what Netanyahu says. We're in agreement on how bad Netanyahu is, how expansionist is. I'm talking about the language you use, the millure you're in. Let me ask you this before we wrap up.

26:5326 minutes, 53 secondsWhat are your own politics? Where do you place yourself on the political spectrum? I believe I've always been on the left.

27:0027 minutesUm um so I I believe that wealth redistribution is very important. I believe in freedom of speech. I I am

27:0827 minutes, 8 secondsanti-war. I'm anti-empire. I believe in individual autonomy. Um and so unfortunately, I used to be left, but I think that like given my uh preferences,

27:1827 minutes, 18 secondsgiven my politics, I believe most people would consider me on the far right nowadays. And that's unfortunate.

27:2427 minutes, 24 secondsThat is unfortunate. Last question. Uh you made three very famous predictions in 2024. What is your big prediction now for 2026? We'll see what happens. We can test it out at the end of the year.

27:3327 minutes, 33 secondsWell, I've made three predictions about how this war will progress. Okay. So, my first prediction is that the United States will use ground troops and that

27:4127 minutes, 41 secondsI'm with you and and and I believe that this ground troops will be a quagmire for the United States and that they will have to call a national draft. Okay, that's my first prediction. Okay,

27:4927 minutes, 49 secondsmy second prediction and this is very important is that Israel and the United States will not use a nuclear weapon in this war. I think that the talk of

27:5827 minutes, 58 secondsnuclear weapons is fear-mongering. I don't think we will escalate to that point of nuclear weapons.

28:0128 minutes, 1 secondI hope you're right. I worry about nukes. I hope you're right.

Wow. Um, yeah. Well, that would be a disaster. Um, God forbid. Uh, we will have to leave it there on that rather dark prediction.

28:2328 minutes, 23 secondsUh, Shuin Jiang, I appreciate you taking time out. I appreciate you taking my questions. Thank you so much. Thank you.

28:3028 minutes, 30 secondsDid you like this video? Don't forget to subscribe to this YouTube channel and turn on notifications. For exclusive content and to support our independent,

28:3728 minutes, 37 secondsunfiltered journalism, head over to zateo.com. Your support matters.

2026-04-04

아랍인들은 우리보다 열등하다.

(1) Facebook

Arabs are inferior to us. That's why we kick Palestinians and slap them. We train dogs so they will bite them strongly and tightly. That's why we shoot them. They're nothing : A Tel-Aviv school principal

아랍인들은 우리보다 열등하다. 그래서 우리는 팔레스타인 사람들을 발로 차고 뺨을 때린다. 우리는 개를 훈련시켜 그들을 세게 물게 한다. 그래서 우리는 그들을 쏴 죽인다. 그들은 아무것도 아니다.

- 텔아비브의 한 학교 교장

On Arab-Arab racism | openDemocracy

On Arab-Arab racism | openDemocracy

On Arab-Arab racism

In the Arab World, elites are acutely aware of their condition of inferiority in the eyes of the west, and at the same time feel a sense of contempt for themselves, their culture and their own countrymen.

Maged Mandour
6 February 2015

“It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one’s self through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. One ever feels his two-ness,—an American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder”

This quote is taken from W. E. B. Du Bois, an African American intellectual who developed the concept of “double consciousness” in his classic work “The Soul of Black Folk”. Du Bois refers to the condition of African Americans one generation after the end of slavery, especially with regards to their cultural condition.

He mainly describes a condition of ideological domination by white elites, who force the black man to look at himself through the cultural prism of his oppressors, thus creating a condition of self-loathing and racism that is directed against himself and his own kin. In one way or another, participating in his own oppression.

This quote comes to mind as I observe the reaction of the elite classes in the Arab world to the terrorist attacks in Paris, and the proliferation of a certain peculiar condemnation of these attacks. It's not a simple condemnation of the attacks, but also of one's own race and culture - as the main reason for such attacks. In essence, copying the rhetoric of the European right in reducing a complex dynamic to the simplistic juxtaposition of “civilized” versus “savage”.

Interestingly enough, those middle classes do not perceive themselves as part of their own culture; they place themselves on a higher level on the evolutionary scale, above their fellow citizens. They also follow the logic of the need to use violence to meet this threat, whilst viewing the threat of their less civilized compatriots as an existential threat to civilization. In essence, the Paris attack was not just labeled an attack on the French Republic, as President Hollande claimed, nor was it an attack on freedom of speech, as the mainstream media claimed, but the Arab middle classes also identified it as logical support for their anti-democratic outlook and for the need to suppress their opponents.

Paradoxically enough, as much as those elites have fallen under the cultural hegemony of the west, they still have a strong antipathy against it. Those who have contact with it, have a strong admiration for the west, but are also acutely aware that the distinction they make between themselves and the rest of their compatriots is not echoed in the hegemonic centre. In reaction, they attempt to distance themselves even further from their compatriots, trying to prove that they are “civilized” while the rest are not.

Hence, the condition of “double consciousness “, where the Arab elites are acutely aware of their condition of inferiority in the eyes of the west, and at the same time feel a sense of contempt for themselves, their culture and own countrymen. In essence, following the theory of Franz Fanon:

“the colonized is elevated above his jungle status in proportion to his adoption of the mother country's cultural standards”

It follows form this that the Arab world is deemed naturally uncivilized and “stuck” in time. A place where time stands still and the inhabitants hold the same beliefs that their ancestors held from the seventh century onwards.

This is not simply an abstract idea, it has some very real implications for the nature of Arab political order and the future of democracy in the Arab world. One must understand the cause of this “Arab-Arab racism” before trying to understand its impact.

This orientalist ideology of the elites, like all other ideologies, has to serve a social and political function, otherwise it would not be widespread. The elites use an ideology that they inherited from their colonial masters as an ideological justification for the suppression of the masses. In other words, it is used as an argument to stifle dissent, by arguing that the opening up of a political system would lead to the loss of control to “un-civilized” masses.

This argument is also used to de-humanize opposition to the elites, claiming that they are either “uncivilized”, in the case of the Islamist opposition, or naive, in the case of liberal/middle class critics who directly aid the “uncivilized”. This argument is also used as a basis for political as well as economic and social oppression.

Across the Arab world, this view of the lower classes is held by a vast majority of the elites. For example, there is the widespread belief that all workers are lazy and wasteful by nature, and that is why such strict controls have to be imposed and implemented. Any labour demands are considered unreasonable, because the fact that they hold a job is sufficient, regardless of the labor conditions.

The same argument is also used to justify the vast accumulation of wealth by a minority of the country’s elites: the “uncivilized” masses are unable to manage wealth. Racism too becomes an ideology for the economic oppression of labor, and a justification of policies that promote cronyism and economic mismanagement.

Social oppression, where this ideology is used to stifle social mobility, creates rigid social structures. This means that people from certain social backgrounds are automatically excluded from certain jobs or positions because of their background. The resulting rather immobile social structure helps keep the dominance of elites in place and contributes to a “brain drain” process through the active expulsion of those with the highest levels of capabilities not connected to the elites from the Arab world. The mass flight of the professional middle class attests to this.

Egyptians support Sisi in London, 2014. Pter Marshall/Demotix. All rights reserved.Finally, one could argue that this phenomenon is not a domestic one, but rather a product of interaction with western colonial ideology and the close connection between Arab elites and the west. Thus, the suppression of Arab masses is reinforced by the right wing tendencies of the west and is actively used by autocrats in the Arab world to prop up their dominance.

The goal is also for this ideology to seep deeply into society and the average Arab citizen’s sense of inferiority about himself, so that falling under the ideological hegemony of these elites, he himself will argue for the need for mass repression and for the wealth of the country to be exclusively managed by these elites. This reduces the need for direct political repression. Self-repression amongst the masses will stifle dissent, and strangle any resistance to the current status quo.

Hence also the direct repression of those who dare challenge this ideology on the part of the citizenry - and a growing sense of the need for a “strong man” to harshly deal with the labor movement, since the “uncivilized” masses should not have the power to disrupt society. That is why in this day and age repression cannot only be material, it also needs an ideology, beyond “fighting terrorism”, to justify it. This ideology, I would argue, is “Arab-Arab racism..”

The genocide in Gaza is the beginning.... - Collective Evolution | Facebook

(1) The genocide in Gaza is the beginning.... - Collective Evolution | Facebook

Collective Evolution

ontrSeospd06u5if5 t9l3641a7 88af9hpa i11tia230uh0l9rAg3c714: ·

The genocide in Gaza is the beginning. Welcome to the new world order. The age of technologically-advanced barbarism. There are no rules for the strong, only for the weak. Oppose the strong, refuse to bow to its capricious demands and you are showered with missiles and bombs. We watch this madness daily with the war on Iran, the saturation bombing of southern Lebanon and the suffering in Gaza.
International bodies such as the United Nations have been neutered, transformed into useless appendages of another age. The sanctity of individual rights, open borders and international law have vanished. The most psychopathic rulers of human history, those who reduced cities to ashes, herded captive populations to execution sites and littered lands they occupied with mass graves and corpses, have returned with a vengeance, opening up a vast moral abyss.
The law, despite a few valiant efforts by a handful of judges — who will soon be purged — domestically and in international bodies such as The International Court of Justice is contemptuously violated. Savagery abroad. Savagery at home.
The BBC’s Lucy Williamson reports that Israel is destroying south Lebanon “using Gaza as a model – a blueprint for destruction used again as a path to peace”.
Over 1 million people have already been displaced in Lebanon -- one-fifth of the entire population of a country that already hosts the world’s highest number of refugees per capita -- in just a few weeks. Add to this 2 million displaced in Gaza and 3 million displaced in Iran. 6 million people rendered homeless.
For four decades Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been lobbying for the U.S. to go to war with Iran. Previous administrations, Republican and Democrat, have refused, in no small part because of fierce opposition within the Pentagon, which did not view Iran as an existential threat and did not project a positive outcome for the U.S. or its regional allies.
But Donald Trump, encouraged by his inept negotiating team of his son-in-law Jared Kushner and fellow real estate developer and golfing partner Steve Witkoff, each fervent Zionists, took Israel’s bait. Britain’s national security adviser, Jonathan Powell, who attended the final talks between the U.S. and Iran, dismissed Kushner and Witkoff as “Israeli assets.”
Joseph Kent, who resigned from his position as director of the National Counterterrorism Center to protest the war, wrote in his resignation letter that “Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby.”
The public rationale for the war on Iran since it began on February 28 has been protean. Is it to shut down Iran’s nuclear program? Is it to thwart Iran’s ballistic missile program? Is it because the U.S. carried out pre-emptive attacks on Iran, as Marco Rubio said, to ensure the safety of U.S. assets once Israel decided to strike? Is it because the Iranian government carried out lethal repression, killing hundreds of anti-government protestors during massive street protests? Is it regime change? Is it an attempt to shut down Iran’s so-called state sponsored terrorism? Or are these subterfuges for something else?
Certainly, Israel and the U.S. seek regime change. But here it appears the U.S. and Israel diverge. Israel also apparently seeks, as in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Lebanon, the physical disintegration of Iran, the breaking apart of the country into warring ethnic and religious enclaves, the transformation of Iran into a failed state.
Persians in Iran constitute roughly 61 percent of the population with various minority groups, who often suffer state repression, making up the remaining 39 percent. These ethnic groups include Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Lurs, Balochs, Arabs and Turkmens, along with religious minorities such as Sunnis, Christians, Baha’i, Zoroastrians, and Jews. The shattering of Iran into antagonistic ethnic and religious enclaves would leave Israel as the dominant power in the region, giving it the ability to, if not occupy its neighbors directly, control and subjugate them through proxies, part of a long-held desire for a Greater Israel. It would also make it possible for foreign states to control Iranian gas reserves, the second largest in the world, and its oil reserves, 12 percent of the global total.
Israel’s crusade against the Palestinians, the Lebanese and now the Iranians is justified by the extermination of 6 million Jews during the Holocaust. But it is not lost on the Global South, especially Palestinians, that nearly all Holocaust scholars have refused to condemn the genocide in Gaza. Not one of the institutions dedicated to researching and commemorating the Holocaust have drawn the obvious historical parallels or decried the mass slaughter.
Holocaust scholars, with a handful of exceptions, have exposed their true purpose, which is not to examine the dark side of human nature and the frightening propensity we all have to commit evil, but to sanctify Jews as eternal victims and absolve the ethnonationalist state of Israel of its crimes of settler colonialism, apartheid and genocide.
The hijacking of the Holocaust, the failure to defend Palestinian victims because they are Palestinian, has imploded the moral authority of Holocaust studies and Holocaust memorials. They have been exposed as vehicles not to prevent genocide but to perpetrate it, not to explore the past, but manipulate the present.
Any tepid recognition that the Holocaust may not be the exclusive property of Israel and its Zionist supporters is swiftly shut down. The Holocaust Museum in Los Angeles deleted an Instagram post that read: “NEVER AGAIN CAN’T ONLY MEAN NEVER AGAIN FOR JEWS” after a backlash. In the hands of Zionists, “never again” means precisely that, never again, only for Jews.
Aimé Césaire, in Discourse on Colonialism, writes that Hitler seemed exceptionally cruel only because he presided over “the humiliation of the white man,” applying to Europe the “colonialist procedures which until then had been reserved exclusively for the Arabs of Algeria, the ‘coolies’ of India, and the nègres d’Afrique.”
The near-annihilation of Tasmania’s Aboriginal population, the German slaughter of the Herero and Namaqua, the Armenian genocide, the Bengal famine of 1943 — then British prime minister Winston Churchill referred to Hindus as “a beastly people with a beastly religion” — along with the dropping of nuclear bombs on civilian targets in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, illustrates something fundamental about “Western civilization.”
Genocide is not an anomaly, it is coded in the DNA of Western “civilization.”
“In America,” the poet Langston Hughes said, “Negroes do not have to be told what fascism is in action. We know. Its theories of Nordic supremacy and economic suppression have long been realities to us.”
The Nazis, when they formulated the Nuremberg laws, modelled them on laws designed to disenfranchise Blacks. America’s refusal to grant citizenship to Native Americans and Filipinos — although they lived in the U.S. and U.S. territories — was emulated by the German fascists who stripped citizenship from Jews. American anti-miscegenation laws, which criminalized interracial marriage, were the impetus to outlaw marriages between German Jews and Aryans. American jurisprudence classified anyone with one percent of Black ancestry — the so-called “one drop rule” — as Black. The Nazis, ironically showing more flexibility, classified anyone with three or more Jewish grandparents as Jewish.
The millions of indigenous victims of colonial projects in countries such as Mexico, China, India, Australia, the Congo and Vietnam, for this reason, are deaf to the fatuous claims by Jews that their victimhood is unique. They too suffered holocausts, but these holocausts remain minimized or unacknowledged by their Western perpetrators.
Israel embodies the ethnonationalist state our Christian fascists and the far-right dream of creating for themselves, one that rejects political and cultural pluralism, as well as legal, diplomatic and ethical norms. Israel is admired by the far right because it has turned its back on humanitarian law and uses indiscriminate lethal force to “cleanse” its society of those condemned as human contaminants.
It was this distortion of the Holocaust as unique that troubled Primo Levi, who was imprisoned in Auschwitz from 1944 to 1945 and who wrote Survival in Auschwitz. Levi was a fierce critic of the apartheid state of Israel and its treatment of Palestinians. He saw the Shoah as “an inexhaustible source of evil” that “is perpetuated as hatred in the survivors, and springs up in a thousand ways, against the very will of all, as a thirst for revenge, as moral breakdown, as negation, as weariness, as resignation.”
Levi deplored the Manichaeanism of those who “shun nuance and complexity.” He condemned those who “reduce the river of human events to conflicts, and conflicts to duels, us and them.” He warned that the “network of human relationships inside the concentration camps was not simple: It could not be reduced to two blocs, victims and persecutors.” The enemy, he knew, “was outside but also inside.”
Mordechai Chaim Rumkowski, known as “King Chaim,” ruled the in the Łódź ghetto on Poland on behalf of the Nazi occupiers. The ghetto became a slave labor camp that enriched Rumkowski and his Nazi masters. Rumkowski deported opponents to death camps. He raped and molested girls and women. He demanded unquestioned obedience. He embodied the evil of his oppressors. For Levi, he was an example of what many of us, under similar circumstances, are capable of becoming.
“[W]e are all mirrored in Rumkowski, his ambiguity is ours, it is our second nature, we hybrids molded from clay and spirit,” Levi wrote in The Drowned and the Saved. “His fever is ours, the fever of our Western civilization that ‘descends into hell with trumpets and drums,’ and its miserable adornments are the distorting image of our symbols of social prestige.”
“Like Rumkowski, we too are so dazzled by power and prestige as to forget our essential fragility,” Levi continued. “Willingly or not we come to terms with power, forgetting that we are all in the ghetto, that the ghetto is walled in, that outside the ghetto reign the lords of death, and that close by the train is waiting.”
Levi understood that the line between the victim and victimizer is razor thin. We can all become willing executioners. There is nothing intrinsically moral about being Jewish or a survivor of the Holocaust. Levi, for this reason, was persona non grata in Israel.
Zionists find in the Holocaust and the Jewish state a sense of purpose and meaning, as well as a cloying moral superiority. After the 1967 war, when Israel seized Gaza the West Bank including East Jerusalem, Syria’s Golan Heights and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula, Israel, as American sociologist Nathan Glazer approvingly observed, became “the religion of the American Jews.” The Holocaust became their “moral capital.”
“Jewish suffering is depicted as ineffable, uncommunicable, and yet always to be proclaimed,” writes the European historian Charles S. Maier, in The Unmasterable Past: History, Holocaust, and German National Identity:
It is intensely private, not to be diluted, but simultaneously public so that gentile society will confirm the crimes. A very peculiar suffering must be enshrined in public sites: Holocaust museums, memory gardens, deportation sites, dedicated not as Jewish but civic memorials. But what is the role of a museum in a country, such as the United States, far from the site of the Holocaust? Is it to rally the people who suffered or to instruct non-Jews? Is it supposed to serve as a reminder that “it can happen here?” Or is it a statement that some special consideration is deserved? Under what circumstances can a private sorrow serve simultaneously as a public grief? And if genocide is certified as a public sorrow, then must we not accept the credentials of other particular sorrows too? An American historian of Polish ancestry argues that, with the German invasion of 1939, the Poles became the first people in Europe to experience the Holocaust and that historians have so far “chosen to interpret the tragedy in exclusivistic terms — namely as the most tragic period in the history of the Jewish Diaspora.” If Polish Americans claim their own “forgotten Holocaust,” what recognition should they enjoy? Do Armenians and Cambodians also have a right to publicly funded holocaust museums? And do we need memorials to Seventh-Day Adventists and homosexuals for their persecution at the hands of the Third Reich?
Unique suffering confers unique entitlement.
Any crime Israel carries out in the name of its survival — its “right to exist” — is justified in the name of this uniqueness. There are no limits. The world is black and white, a never-ending battle against Nazism, which is protean, depending on who Israel targets. To challenge this bloodlust is to be an antisemite, facilitating another genocide of Jews.
This simplistic formula not only serves the interests of Israel, but also the interests of colonial powers that carried out their own genocides, ones they also seek to obscure.
The sacralization of the Nazi Holocaust offers a bizarre quid pro quo. Arming and funding the state of Israel, blocking U.N. resolutions and sanctions that would condemn its crimes and demonizing Palestinians, and their supporters becomes proof of atonement and support for Jews. Israel, in return, absolves the West of its indifference to the plight of Jews during the Holocaust, and Germany for perpetrating it. Germany uses this unholy alliance to separate Nazism from the rest of German history, including the genocide German colonists carried out against the Nama and Herero in German South-West Africa, now Namibia.
“[S]uch magic,” Israeli historian and genocide scholar, Raz Segal, writes, “legitimizes racism against Palestinians at the very moment that Israel perpetrates genocide against them. The idea of Holocaust uniqueness thus reproduces rather than challenges the exclusionary nationalism and settler colonialism that led to the Holocaust.”
Professor Segal, the director of the program in Holocaust and Genocide Studies at Stockton University in New Jersey, wrote an article about the war on Gaza on October 13, 2023, titled: “A Textbook Case of Genocide.”
This denunciation from an Israeli Holocaust scholar, whose family members perished in the Holocaust, was a very lonely stance.
Professor Segal saw in the Israeli government’s immediate demand that Palestinians evacuate the north of Gaza and the blood-curdling demonization of the Palestinians by Israeli officials — the defense minister said Israel was “fighting human animals” — the stench of genocide.
“The whole idea about prevention and ‘never again’ is that — as we teach our students — there are red flags, that once we notice them, we’re supposed to work in order to stop the process that could escalate to genocide,” Professor Segal told me, “even if it’s not genocidal yet.”
Professor Segal paid for his honesty. The offer to lead the University of Minnesota’s Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies, which has issued no condemnation of the genocide, was revoked.
When professor Segal and I testified at the state capital in Trenton in opposition to the adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) bill, which equates criticism of the state of Israel with antisemitism, we were jeered by Zionists and our microphones were cut by the committee chairman. There we were, arguing that this bill would curtail free speech while we were in real time being denied free speech.
Genocide is the next stage in what the anthropologist, Arjun Appadurai, calls “a vast worldwide Malthusian correction” that is “geared to preparing the world for the winners of globalization, minus the inconvenient noise of its losers.”
The funding and arming of Israel by the United States and European nations, as it carries out genocide, has effectively imploded the post-World War II international legal order. It no longer has credibility. The West can no longer lecture anyone about democracy, human rights or the supposed virtues of Western civilization. The ruse, that somehow we as a nation promote democracy, equality and human rights, is finished.
“At the same time that Gaza induces vertigo, a feeling of chaos and emptiness, it becomes for countless powerless people the essential condition of political and ethical consciousness in the twenty-first century — just as the First World War was for a generation in the West,” Pankaj Mishra writes.
None of us who reported from Israel and Palestine, where I worked as a reporter for seven years, predicted this genocide. And yet, we were acutely aware of the genocidal impulse that lay at the heart of the Zionist project — the desire by large segments of Israeli society to eradicate and expel all Palestinians. This genocidal impulse was there from the inception of Zionism.
Victor Klemperer, a professor of linguistics and the son of a Berlin rabbi living under Nazi rule, noted in his diary, “To me the Zionists, who want to go back to the Jewish state of A.D. 70 (destruction of Jerusalem by Titus), are just as offensive as the Nazis. With their nosing after blood, their ancient ‘cultural roots,’ their partly canting, partly obtuse winding back of the world they are altogether a match for the National Socialists.”
I covered the extremist rabbi, Meir Kahane, who claimed that violence was a Jewish virtue and revenge, a divine commandment. He was, when I was based in Israel, barred by the Israeli government from running for office.
Kahane was assassinated on November 5, 1990, in New York City. His Kach Party in Israel was outlawed four years later after Baruch Goldstein, a Brooklyn-born doctor and Kach member, entered Hebron’s Ibrahimi Mosque and opened fire on worshippers, killing 29 Palestinians. Goldstein, dressed in his army captain’s uniform, was overpowered by worshippers and beaten to death. I was sent by my editors in New York to interview the survivors. When they received the copy, they insisted I do more interviews with Jewish colonists who justified Goldstein’s grievances with Palestinians, part of the game of balance, but really part of the effort to obscure the truth.
Kach, following its statements of support for the massacre, was declared a terrorist organization by the United States.
But Kahanism did not die. It was nurtured by Jewish extremists and colonists.
Kach’s racial intolerance and calls for mass violence against Palestinians infected larger and larger segments of Israeli society. It found near universal acceptance after the attacks of October 7.
I saw this intolerance at political rallies held by Netanyahu, who received lavish funding from right-wing Americans associated with AIPAC, when he ran against Yitzhak Rabin, who was negotiating a peace settlement with the Palestinians. Netanyahu’s supporters chanted Kahane-inspired slogans such as “Death to Arabs” and “Death to Rabin.” They burned an effigy of Rabin dressed in a Nazi uniform. Netanyahu marched in front of a mock funeral for Rabin.
Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish fanatic on November 4, 1995.
Netanyahu, who first became prime minister in 1996, has spent his political career nurturing these Jewish extremists, including Itamar Ben-Gvir, who hung a portrait of Goldstein on the wall of his living room, Bezalel Smotrich, Avigdor Lieberman, Gideon Sa’ar and Naftali Bennett.
Netanyahu’s father, Benzion, who worked as an assistant to the founder of Revisionist Zionism, Vladimir Jabotinsky, and was referred to by Benito Mussolini as “a good fascist,” was a leader in the Herut Party that called on Israel to seize all the land of historic Palestine. Many of those who formed the Herut Party carried out terrorist attacks during the 1948 war that established the state of Israel. Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt, Sidney Hook and other Jewish intellectuals, described the Herut Party in a statement published in The New York Times as a party “closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to Nazi and Fascist parties.”
There has always been a virulent strain of Jewish fascism within the Zionist project, mirroring the strain of fascism in American society. Unfortunately, for us and the Palestinians, these fascistic strains are ascendant.
The decision to obliterate Gaza has long been the dream of far-right Zionists, heirs of Kahane’s movement. Jewish identity and Jewish nationalism are the Zionist versions of the Nazis’ blood-and-soil ideology. Jewish supremacy is sanctified by God, as is the slaughter of the Palestinians, who Netanyahu compared to the Biblical Amalekites who were massacred by the Israelites. Europeans and Euro-Americans in the American colonies used the same Biblical passage to justify their genocide against Native Americans.
Enemies — usually Muslims — who are slated for extinction are subhumans who embody evil. Violence and the threat of violence are the only forms of communication those outside the magical circle of Jewish nationalism understand.
Messianic redemption will take place once the Palestinians are expelled. Jewish extremists call for the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one of three of the most sacred sites for Muslims, supposedly built on the ruins of the Jewish Second Temple which was destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Roman army, to be demolished. These extremists call for it to be replaced by a “Third” Jewish temple, a move that would set the Muslim world alight. The West Bank, which zealots refer to as “Judea and Samaria,” is being annexed by Israel. Israel, governed by religious laws imposed by the ultra-Orthodox Shas and United Torah Judaism parties, will soon mirror the despotic theocracy in Iran.
James Baldwin presciently saw this regression to our innate barbarism. He warned that there was a “terrible probability” that “Western populations, struggling to hold on to what they have stolen from their captives, and unable to look into their mirror, will precipitate a chaos throughout the world which, if it does not bring life on this planet to an end, will bring about a racial war such as the world has never seen, and for which generations yet unborn will curse our names forever.”
The savagery in Iran, Lebanon and Gaza is the same savagery we face at home. Those carrying out the genocide, mass slaughter and unprovoked war on Iran are the same people dismantling our democratic institutions.
The Iranians, Lebanese and Palestinians know there is no appeasing these monsters. The global elites believe nothing. They feel nothing. They cannot be trusted. They exhibit the core traits of all psychopaths — superficial charm, grandiosity and self-importance, a need for constant stimulation, a penchant for lying, deception, manipulation and the inability to feel remorse or guilt. They disdain as weakness the virtues of empathy, honesty, compassion and self-sacrifice. They live by the creed of Me. Me. Me.
“The fact that millions of people share the same vices does not make these vices virtues, the fact that they share so many errors does not make the errors to be truths, and the fact that millions of people share the same forms of mental pathology does not make these people sane,” Erich Fromm writes in “The Sane Society.”
We have witnessed evil for nearly three years in Gaza. We watch it now in Iran. We watch it in Lebanon. We see this evil excused or masked by political leaders and the media.
The New York Times, in a page out of Orwell, sent an internal memo telling reporters and editors to eschew the terms “refugee camps, “occupied territory,” “ethnic cleansing” and, of course, “genocide” when writing about Gaza.
Those who name and denounce this evil, including the heroic students who set up encampments on campuses here and abroad, are smeared, blacklisted and purged. They are arrested and deported. A deadening silence is descending upon us, the silence of all authoritarian states. We know where this ends. Fail to do your duty, fail to cheerlead the war on Iran, speak out against the crime of genocide, and see your broadcasting license revoked, as Trump’s Chair of the F.C.C. Brendan Carr has proposed.
We have enemies. They are not in Palestine. They are not in Lebanon. They are not in Iran. They are here. Among us. They dictate our lives. They are traitors to our ideals. They are traitors to our country. They envision a world of slaves and masters. Gaza is only the start. There are no internal mechanisms for reform. We can obstruct or surrender.
Those are the only choices left.
-----
By A presentation at Princeton by Chris Hedges

Roger Tilley

It's simple. We allowed the wealth gap to go completely unchecked. Feedback loops made the rich richer and the poor poorer. Wealth became political control so the few control the masses. Socialism and democracy don't benefit the wealthy but rather threaten them so they dismantle the supports which maintain the masses. Good housing, healthcare, education, transport, food, all become the sole property of the wealthy. This is the "democratic" West where democracy has ceased to exist. Free speech is not democracy, but a tool of deception used by the wealthy owners of media to fool the masses.

Downer

Well written and researched. One thing I know is, Money Talks, Bullshit Walks. Why this is happening is cos of the rich nations and billionaires and other rich people who support, lobby and donate to their own cause.

Mikaella Karima Baradei

Excellent piece of insight and clarity, we all must awaken to this truth

Gan Erdog

Good stuff. Thnx to the Author for the lengthy writing efforts and it is educational.

Inshirah Mahal

You are so verbose in your dark prophecies. Someday perhaps you can turn your vast intelligence to presriptions and solutions, Dark Angel of Amegeddon.

1d
Reply
Edited

Kabir Adeseye Aderibigbe

Lunatic animal trump that has determined to set the Gulf states back to stone age by his irresponsible war with Iran; some will remember his mother said it then that her son Donald Trump will be a disaster to the whole world and the entire human race, now it has come to pass with this war we are witnessing the beginning but no one knows where it will ends

Abdullahi Umar

And the so call Civilized World is watching Innocent souls are killed daily civility or inhumanity ?

Janet Fields

Very well stated. Now how do we fix this mess. How do we stop the evil.

Joshua Friedes

Ummm. Me thinks you forgot to address that Hamas started this recent war with the intention of bringing in Hezbollah, Iran and it proxies all at once. Instead Israel has been able to largely deal with them sequentially. I don’t agree with how the Netanyahu administration has conducted the war and in some ways even worse how it has used the war to allow the violation of the Human Rights of Palestinians Workers n the west and to undermine judicial independence. But fundamentally your screed is critically flawed because it does not address the rights of the Jewish people. If one is to make an analogy to the Holocaust, and I personally think that not particularly helpful then I think the analogy is, just as the National Socialists and their collaborators failed to recognize the fundamental human rights of Jews as individuals and collectively, so to have Islamic fundamentalists, like Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. This is the root of the conflict. The failure to respect the human rights of the ancient Jewish people.

Marjolijn Van der Horst

Israel and the U.S. are doing exactly (and more), what they accuse terrorists of doing. So, who exactly, are the terrorists hmm??

I can see, in Canada, who they are. Their true colours are showing. It’s red..because of all their bloodshed to claim another’s land.

Rowland Maree

Well structured/written - l will share this with my students because whenever l engage in sensitive topics and history in general l always refer to our present context so that students can relate to the fact that history could have either a positive/negative impact on their existence; that we're not immune to it! They've been aware of the dire consequences of this unprovoked war before the first shot was fired and how it will affect the world. I mirrored it on the impact of the Great Depression on the world. So thank you Sir for this literally brilliance that you've presented to the world.....may it encourage humanity to unite against neocolonism/neocapitalistism and fight the scurge of supremacy and greed. This will require us to look pass ethnicity, religion, race, creed etc which is the most difficult thing to achieve because the media and leaders are constantly impressing this to divide and rule. Failing that humanity is definitely doomed. They keep us busy fighting each other so that we cannot look up at them and realize that we're fighting the wrong fight!