๐Ÿ‡ฐโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ทโ€Š๐Ÿ‡พโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ตโ€Š๐Ÿ‡นโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ฎโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ฝ's avatar
๐Ÿ‡ฐโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ทโ€Š๐Ÿ‡พโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ตโ€Š๐Ÿ‡นโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ฎโ€Š๐Ÿ‡ฝ
kriptix2@iris.to
npub1f2gk...jky4
Cogito ergo... Running BIP110
image No media is perfect. RT has bias, just like CNN or BBC. But one asks questions. The other reads scripts. Thatโ€™s the difference. And anyone paying attention already knows it. If journalism is dead in the West, itโ€™s because itโ€™s been reading the same script for decades. RT? Itโ€™s still writing its own. #rt #journalism #nostr #bitcoin #freepalestine ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ
**The Cloud Crashed. Nostr Didnโ€™t. Thatโ€™s the Whole Story.** 1๏ธโƒฃ AWS went down. The world froze. Starbucks orders failed. Banks glitched. โ€œSmartโ€ homes turned stupid. One region in Virginia sneezed โ€” and the internet caught pneumonia. 2๏ธโƒฃ Meanwhile, Nostr didnโ€™t blink. No downtime. No apologies. No โ€œengineers investigating the issue.โ€ Because Nostr *canโ€™t* go down. Thereโ€™s no down to go to. 3๏ธโƒฃ The cloud was never a cloud. Itโ€™s just a few corporate data centers pretending to be infinity. A trillion-dollar single point of failure โ€” sold as โ€œresilience.โ€ 4๏ธโƒฃ Centralisation isnโ€™t innovation. Itโ€™s dependency. We built a permissionless economy on permissioned infrastructure. And now we act surprised when the permission-givers trip. 5๏ธโƒฃ AWS is fragility wrapped in branding. Convenience that costs sovereignty. We outsourced uptime to the same people who sell our downtime as a feature. 6๏ธโƒฃ Nostr is the opposite. Pure protocol. No platform. No region. No CEO. One relay dies, ten others hum louder. Thatโ€™s what *resilience* looks like: indifference to catastrophe. 7๏ธโƒฃ Decentralisation isnโ€™t a buzzword anymore. Itโ€™s survival engineering. Bitcoin keeps time without clocks. Nostr keeps speech without servers. 8๏ธโƒฃ We donโ€™t need better uptime from Amazon. We need an internet that *canโ€™t* crash โ€” because itโ€™s everywhere, and owned by no one. 9๏ธโƒฃ Every outage is a reminder: When infrastructure centralises, failure globalises. When it decentralises, freedom scales. 10๏ธโƒฃ Let the clouds collapse. Weโ€™ll build the mesh. Run your relay. Host your node. Seed your data. Grow the forest. Because when their skyscraper burns, our network breathes. --- ๐Ÿ”ฅ **Final note:** The future isnโ€™t hosted in Virginia. Itโ€™s *relayed everywhere*. #nostr #bitcoin #decentralisation #sovereignty
image ## The Rogue Empire: Americaโ€™s Unipolar Decline and Reflexive Global Disorder ### The Unipolar Moment and Its Discontents In the immediate aftermath of the Cold War, the United States appeared to have achieved a historic and unprecedented global ascendancy. With the Soviet Unionโ€™s collapse in 1991, Washington emerged as the unrivaled superpower, capable of projecting military, economic, and cultural influence across the globe. This era, famously described by Charles Krauthammer as the โ€œunipolar moment,โ€ seemed to validate liberal democracy as the natural organizing principle of international affairs (Krauthammer, 1990). U.S. global leadership was framed as both inevitable and morally justified, a benevolent hegemon safeguarding international norms. Yet, thirty years on, this narrative has been increasingly contested. The United States now exhibits behaviors characteristic of a rogue state โ€” acting unilaterally, disregarding international law, and destabilizing regions in pursuit of strategic and economic goals. What was once a projection of confidence has become a reflexive outburst of global disorder. This essay argues that U.S. foreign policy in the twenty-first century reflects the death throes of unipolarity: a combination of defensive aggression, economic coercion, and moral exceptionalism indicative of an empire in decline. --- ### Democracy as Alibi The ideological veneer of โ€œdemocracy promotionโ€ has been central to U.S. foreign interventions. From Iraq and Afghanistan to Libya and Syria, Washington has justified military action under the rhetoric of liberation and human rights. Yet the outcomes often contradict the proclaimed moral aims: states are destabilized, institutions collapse, and populations suffer. Noam Chomsky has long emphasized that democracy in U.S. foreign policy is largely conditional, โ€œacceptable only when it aligns with strategic interestsโ€ (Chomsky, 1999). Latin America offers particularly illustrative examples. Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua have faced sanctions, economic blockades, and covert attempts at regime change for pursuing independent political and economic paths. Simultaneously, the U.S. supports authoritarian regimes elsewhere โ€” in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Philippines โ€” whenever strategic interests dictate. Democracy, in this sense, is instrumentally applied: a rhetorical tool justifying intervention and undermining sovereignty, rather than a consistent principle of governance. --- ### Economic Imperialism in the 21st Century While twentieth-century U.S. imperialism relied heavily on overt military force, contemporary hegemony increasingly relies on economic coercion. Through control of the global financial system โ€” the U.S. dollarโ€™s dominance, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank โ€” Washington exerts influence that often destabilizes other nations without firing a shot. Sanctions are a primary instrument of this economic warfare. Ostensibly aimed at promoting accountability, they frequently inflict disproportionate harm on civilian populations while leaving the ruling elites relatively unscathed (Parenti, 2002). Venezuela exemplifies this dynamic. U.S. sanctions deliberately targeted the countryโ€™s oil sector, exacerbating humanitarian crises and providing justification for political intervention. Here, economic warfare becomes both the method and the rationale of imperial control: destabilization generates a moral narrative that legitimizes further interference. The modern empire, in this sense, operates through networks of financial, digital, and media power โ€” a form of colonialism by algorithm, rather than by boots on the ground. --- ### Military Power and the Reflex of Decline Declining empires rarely yield power gracefully. Paul Kennedyโ€™s concept of โ€œimperial overstretchโ€ highlights how states extending their power beyond sustainable limits invite internal and external pressures that accelerate decline (Kennedy, 1987). The U.S. exhibits classic symptoms of overstretch: over 750 military bases worldwide, soaring defense expenditures, and domestic socioeconomic inequality that undermines the stateโ€™s internal cohesion. Externally, the rise of China, Russia, and a resurgent multipolar world challenges U.S. hegemony. Washingtonโ€™s responses โ€” erratic policy, militarized coercion, and selective enforcement of international norms โ€” are reflexive attempts to maintain control. Rather than demonstrating strength, these behaviors reveal strategic insecurity. Aggression, in this context, is both defensive and performative: a projection of power masking a fear of irrelevance. --- ### Rogue Behavior and Moral Hypocrisy To label the United States a โ€œrogue nationโ€ is analytically justified. Traditionally, the term describes states that flout international law and norms. By its own record โ€” unilateral invasions of Iraq and Grenada, targeted assassinations, extrajudicial drone strikes, and withdrawal from critical international treaties โ€” the U.S. fits this description (Mearsheimer, 2019). Its selective adherence to norms erodes the legitimacy of international law, as other states interpret U.S. actions as precedent for their own violations. The contradiction extends to morality and law. The U.S. maintains the rhetoric of a โ€œrules-based international orderโ€ while exempting itself from compliance. This hypocrisy fuels global cynicism and instability, undermining the very institutions designed to prevent conflict. The U.S., in effect, erodes the norms it claims to uphold, creating a feedback loop of disorder that intensifies as its unipolarity wanes. --- ### Death Throes of Unipolarity The decline of unipolarity is not merely a geopolitical phenomenon but a civilizational one. It involves a confrontation with the moral and material costs of empire. U.S. attempts to maintain control โ€” whether through sanctions, military interventions, or diplomatic coercion โ€” reflect the desperation of a hegemon struggling to reconcile ambition with declining capacity. This reflexive aggression accelerates instability, as other states adapt, resist, or challenge Washingtonโ€™s authority. Yet multipolarity also offers a potential corrective. Plurality in global governance can facilitate regional autonomy, alternative development models, and cooperative problem-solving. The challenge lies not in restraining other powers but in restraining the reflexive impulses of an empire accustomed to unchallenged dominance. The transition from unipolarity to multipolarity is therefore both structural and normative: a reassessment of how power should be exercised in the modern world. --- The United States today exhibits the hallmarks of a rogue nation: unilateralism, selective enforcement of law, economic coercion, and military interventionism. These behaviors are symptomatic of imperial decline โ€” a superpower facing the erosion of its authority and responding with aggression and moral exceptionalism. Washingtonโ€™s interventions, from Venezuela to the Middle East, are not expressions of benevolence but of anxiety: defensive maneuvers by a hegemon confronting the end of its unipolar moment. Recognizing this decline is not an indictment of the U.S. people or culture, but a critical assessment of structural and systemic forces. The challenge of the twenty-first century lies in moving beyond the reflexive chaos of empire toward a more cooperative and pluralistic international order. If the United States fails to confront the limits of its power, it risks hastening the very decline it seeks to prevent. The death throes of unipolarity are not merely a geopolitical transition; they are a moral and strategic reckoning with the consequences of centuries of global dominance. --- **References (for citation in full academic style):** * Chomsky, N. (1999). *Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order*. * Kennedy, P. (1987). *The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers*. * Krauthammer, C. (1990). โ€œThe Unipolar Moment.โ€ *Foreign Affairs*, 70(1). * Mearsheimer, J. (2019). *The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities*. * Parenti, M. (2002). *The Assassination of Julius Caesar: The Roots of American Empire*. #rougue #usa #unipolar #multipolar #empire #decline #brics #nostr #bitcoin #freepalestine ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ
โ†‘