Historical Reasons Why Russia, China and Iran have Eurasian Mafia Style Governance

 

During recent summit of SCO as well as following Chinese military parade, several anti-western countries, like Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, declared their mutual opposition to Western world order. They cited various vague reasons for their stance, accusing the US and The West of hegemony they intend to oppose. 

If that was true, then countries such as India for example would be inclined to join them. India was present on SCO summit but left before the military parade, unwilling to get themselves entangled into the whole anti-Western plotting of Russia and China.

Nonetheless the block featured countries that at first glance have nothing in common with each other. Can you name a single thing that someone like Iran has in common with China for example?

However, the countries that oppose collective West, has one peculiar trait that not only unites them but also profoundly affect how they are governed even so many hundreds of years after it ended. That trait is the fact that all of them were once part of biggest empires in human history, the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan and his successors.

When people think of Mongol Empire, they often think of a legendary conqueror Genghis Khan, who much like Alexander the Great, conquered a lot but hardly left anything lasting. Someone who flashed through the world like a shooting star, leaving a large trail of epic conquest and destruction, but ultimately disappearing in history without much trace left. That is not true even of Alexander the Great, as two of his Diadochi (deputy commanders) managed to create lasting dynasties in Egypt and Persia, that lasted hundreds of years. 

Mongolian empire maybe broke into pieces rather fast, but Mongols stayed in charge for hundreds of years, shaping the entire generations of people they have conquered. Not only that but model of governance they employed continues to be used in the countries formally ruled by them even today.

Mongols were steppe nomads who knew how fight or live in the steppes but knew little of life of sedentary people they have conquered. However, the people they conquered were typically much wealthy than them and Mongols wanted that wealth for themselves. To get that wealth they used the only thing they knew how to use, violence, coercion and intimidation. 

Thus, Mongols not so much governed, so much plundered the people they have conquered. When firmly in charge, they institutionalised the plunder. Instead of them coming down in force, killing, stealing and burning everything down, they demanded the conquered people to gather a hefty tribute and deliver it to them themselves in exchange for sparing them of killing and burning everything down. The kind of deal you can expect from an armed robber, give them a wallet to avoid catching bullet in the head. Mafia's protection racket also comes in mind. All three work fundamentally the same way.

However, what choice one had? If you do not pay them off, they will simply take if from your cold dead hands. Mongols made it a point to brutally massacre those who refuse to pay to make example to the rest of what happens if you dare to oppose them.

Fight them off? Mongols had composite bow that allowed them to shoot from horseback. Pair that with the tactic of constantly moving around and shooting and you have a foe that is impossible to defeat for most of contemporary armies. Against melee cavalry they can always keep their distance, while firing as they move. It's even easier against melee infantry. Against ranged infantry they could trample them with their horses. The only thing that could stop them was a stone castle, as they could easily burn the wooden one down. Tactics of English Longbowmen, like digging trenches and using wooden spikes and other obstacles to keep cavalry away from them, could also work.

Flee somewhere else? Where to? Most people Mongols have conquered lived on land that was vastly better than everything around them. China is great fertile plains with large rivers that produce more rice than any areas around it. Compare that with nigh barren steppes of Mongolia, where not even grass grows in sufficient quantities to feed a few horses, making Mongols constantly move from place to place. Iran and Central Asia used to profit from the routes of the Silk Road that went through their areas. Even rather modest European Russia still had plenty of land and not too many people to compete for control of it. 

For most people conquered by Mongols, there was no alternative to paying the tribute. As Mongol rule lasted hundreds of years, this tributary system gradually got engrained into the psyche of people who lived under Mongol rule. Even when Mongol rule ended, the new native rules often ruled with the same ruthlessness and plundered their subjects just like Mongols before them.

As for limits of Mongol reach, then while Mongols raided and pillaged as far as Poland, but neither Poland nor Lithuania paid Mongols tribute. Mongol encroachment on Europe was ultimately stopped by Lithuanians somewhere around modern Ukraine and Belarus. Several battles between the two gradually settled a division of Rurikid principalities between the two powers, thought a few border areas, like Smolensk, will remain constantly contested between the two. Lithuania got all of what is now Belarus and northern and western Ukraine. Golden Horde however retained control over lands further east, mostly in modern Russia or south in Crimea and surrounding steppes.

The division was never fully agreed upon, not acknowledged by either side. Both Lithuanians and Mongols seek to take more land and would occasionally re-contest the frontiers. Eventually Muscovy (that later evolved into modern Russia) took former Golden Horde's role of contesting the frontiers against Lithuania. From Lithuanian perspective Muscovy thus was a successor of Golden Horde.

Modern Ukraine and Russia continue to contest this frontier even as I write these lines for my blog.

The frontier however was more than just a border between two neighbors; it was a civilizational divide. Lithuania was Catholic and heavily influenced by European system and European ideas of governance and life in general. Sure, Lithuanians fought against Livonian and Teutonic knights as well, but they were ultimately Europeans. European laws, such as Magdeburg rights, applied throughout the Lithuanian lands.

Golden Horde was different. It originated in Mongolia just north of China, The Horde govern itself and conquered people differently. Horde ruled through fear and extracted tribute from the conquered people. There were no rights and no democracy, there were only obligations to pay tribute and risk of death if you displease the Khan in any way.

Mongolian tribute system, called Mongol Yoke by historians took root in Eastern Principalities and controlled them for several hundred years. Western Principalities like Kingdom of Ruthenia (Galicia-Volhynia) did occasionally paid Mongols tribute, but irregularly mostly seeking to free themselves of Mongol Yoke. In the east however it became an ever-present way of life. Principalities of Rostov-Suzdal-Vladimir, Ryazan-Murom and Tver would be subjects to this system for several centuries.

To play different Rurikid princes against each other, Mongols instituted so called Yarlyk of the Great Prince, where Khan would appoint one of them to be superior to other princes. The appointed Great Prince will have right and obligation to collect tribute from other princes on behalf of the Mongols and later pass it to the Khan. Most of the time, yarlyk of the Great Prince will be given to Princes of Moscow.

Official history traces Moscow (or Muscovy) as a branch principality of the Rostov-Suzdal-Vladimir principality. It was a typical arrangement for Rurikids or elsewhere in Europe. When a prince has several sons, the oldest will get the capital and most of the lands, but his younger brothers will get parts of the principality, centered on second, third and so on biggest city. Moscow was given to the youngest son of Yuri Dolgoruky, whose oldest son got then capital Vladimir (on Klyazma to not confuse it with Volodymir-Volynsky). This branch of Rurikids had many capitals, as they both had many children and needed to provide each with their own capital as well as poor judgement on what would make a good place for a capital. The so-called Golden Ring is a collection of all places they used as their capitals at one point in time.

Compared to other early cities of Rurikid era, Moscow was founded rather late. Early on Moscow was but a tiny wooden fort with no more than 1000 inhabitants. However, its fortunes changed dramatically with advent of Mongol Yoke. For some reasons, Mongols favored Moscow over other principalities and almost always gave them yarlyk to rule over other Rurikid principalities. Only once Muscovy Princes briefly lost it to Princes of Tver, but recovered it over several years time.

Thanks to Mongols Moscow thrived. They likely embezzled some of the tribute they collected for the Khans, allowing them to get richer and richer, as other principalities were getting poorer and poorer. Eventually Muscovy started to grow by buying out lands from other Rurikid Princes. Eventually that left other Princes with not much more, but their capitals surrounded by Muscovy on all sides.

Muscovy did eventually take a stand against the Khans of the Golden Horde. By that time Horde was too weak and constantly plagued by infighting between children of Khans on who gets to be the next ruler. The ultimate end of Mongol Yoke only came after the Grand Stand on Ugra River, more than 250 years after the initial Mongol invasion. There was also a Battle of Kulikovo Field 100 years prior, but Moscow victory there was short lived, as their original ally, they helped to instal as Khan, Tokhtamysh, came to after Moscow, after he consolidated his power in the Horde, and reinstituted the tribute after he took and plundered the city.

Official Russian history celebrates this date, but for other Rurikid Princes, and even other splinter states of the Horde, such as Kazan Khanate, that was hardly a good thing. Very soon after liberation from Golden Horde and sometimes even before that, newly unleashed Muscovy came after them. Unlike the Mongols, Moscow wanted not just tribute, but the entirety of their remaining territories together with their ruling titles and crown jewels. Other principalities under Mongol Yoke, weakened by exploitative tribute, could not offer much resistance and were soon conquered by Moscow. 

Moscovy's treatment of fellow Russians were so brutal, many of them would wonder if it was better under Mongols, who at least kept them safe if they paid tribute. Moscovy's self-declared re-unification of Russian lands was no less brutal than original Mongolian conquest.

Once again only Lithuania could stand against Moscow, just as they did against Mongols in the past. Muscovy found itself fighting Lithuanians back and forth over Smolensk, Kursk and other then border towns. Lithuanian union with Poland further strengthened them, making division between Muscovy and Europe near permanent for many years. 

Many years late Moscow would partition Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth with Prussia and Austria. Russia will laud it as completing re-unification of Russian lands, but people who lived in the Commonwealth will not see it this way. 

Modern war in Ukraine is an echo from these times: Moscow wants to think that common Rurikid past entitles them control over Ukraine and Belarus. However Ukrainian past in Polish Lithuanian commonwealth as well as brief semi-independence during Hetmanate Era weight much stronger on distinct Ukrainian identity.

Back to the original statement with which I begun this article. Russian governance in modern times is essentially transformation of original Mongolian one. Mongolian system of tribute collection gradually evolved into a system of undercover corruption, used in modern Russia, and very likely also China and Iran. 

The system is a large hierarchical pyramid of power, where more senior officials demand constant payoffs from their subordinates while themselves paying off their own superiors. Just like back in the days Khans used to demand tribute from Great Prince who in turn collected from other princes, who had to collect from their population. Of how mafia runs protection racket.

The system continuous existence is a sticking point of Russia's internal politics, Russia's relationship with its neighbors and with a collective West at large. More educated Russian citizens want it to be gone altogether and replaced with Western liberal democracy and generally Western way of doing things. Eastern Europe, that was plundered by USSR during Cold War era, just like Mongol Khans used to plunder eastern Rurikid principalities, do not want Russia to return and plunder again. Because of that they are hawkish on Russia and willing to make sacrifices to defend themselves and defeat Russia for good if possible. Finally collective West with their liberal democratic system, that gives Russian liberals the inspiration that things can be done better that Mongol way, for the very same reason annoys Russia power pyramid, or vertical how Putin calls it.

These systemic differences are what drives current war in Ukraine, but not only. Pretty much every conflict since WWII was about these systemic differences. Even recent SCO summing and an alliance between China, Russia, Iran and North Korea is also about that. They agreed to fight against continued existence of liberal democracy and in favor of continued neo-Mongolian governance in their countries.

Historically the trend was always in favor of democracy. Because of that Europeans feel optimistic and count years before Russia too will be democratic as well as member of the EU and NATO. Kremlin, Beijing and Iran in contrast feel apprehensive and take every protest like it's a last stand and they will die fighting rather than surrender.

Because of the above, there is no simple resolution to the Ukrainian conflict. Only change of mentality in Kremlin can move things towards peace. I was writing in many of my articles, its reduction of land and moving capital further east that can help Russia stabilise itself and avert democratization at least temporarily. They are doing exact the opposite, hoping to defeat what is impossible to defeat. Ultimate victory of Mongolian way of course impossible, there is only a question of how much damage they will cause before they go down.

Corruption in Russia is the Reason Why People Hate Russia

 

Corruption is one of the most talked about issues in Russia. Most seem to agree that it is bad, activists, government, anti-government (anti-system) opposition and even general public talk about eliminating it and more. Despite all that corruption endures and perpetrates, making it the usual punch bag of nearly any political discourse.

What corruption is or how to eliminate it however varies between who is talking about it. Just like phrase "cost of living" lost any concrete meaning and now used in support of vastly different measures, corruption in Russia is also mean different things to different people, as government too wishes to shift goalposts from systemic change to occasional public lynching of few scapegoats.

In legal terminology there is no offence called corruption. Instead, there are variety of different offences based on what exact form the corruption takes. It can be, bribery, where a person gives someone cash in exchange for a favor they are not entitled to, embezzlement, were official misuses public funds for personal use, extortion where officials use their position of power to demand money from common people, probably more, but I will leave it at that.

The corruption that plagues Russia most is of course extortion, closely followed by embezzlement. At least these are what annoy people most. Extortion is a reverse bribery, where bribe is not offered to official, but instead demanded by them. It's akin to a protection racket where mafia demands money from a shopkeeper to keep the shop safe, often vaguely threatening to destroy it if shop owner refuses. 

In a mafia state such as Russia, its government officials that extort money from shop keepers or citizens. For example, when a public prosecutor opens a criminal case against someone and then asks for a fat stack of cash for it to be closed, threatening to send it to court if victim refuses. In a less corrupt country isolated case like that can often be dealt by complain to higher ups or sometimes by just attending the court and arguing for one's innocence. In Russia however that will not work. Why you ask? It's because in Russia managers and supervisors are corrupt too. 

In Russia director of public prosecution is himself corrupt and demands bribes from his subordinates if they want to keep their jobs, leaving subordinates no choice by to extort money from ordinary businessmen and citizens. It's the same in other government jobs too. There was even a video (I could not find the full video, so I linked the video about that video) where police officer complained about the amount his police boss expected from him, arguing that it's impossible to raise that much no matter how many ordinary citizens he will harass. 

What did government did about it, jailed that officer for corruption and tried to silence the whole affair. Corruption is the de-facto secret real system that exist underneath the nominal system of law enforcement in Russia. According to nominal rules that exist in Russia the officer should be lauded like Fitzgerald for exposing the corruption. However, the de-facto rules use mafia style "law of omerta", and thus per these mafia rules the officer was punished for breaking law of omerta and speaking out about the secretive dealings withing the government structures.

Needless to say, the secret but omnipresent mafia rules, that spread to nearly every aspect of life in Russia is unpopular with many ordinary citizens. People are fed up with fat government officials bleeding them dry of their already meagre salaries. That is the reason why videos about Putin palace, made by Navalny produce so much interest from Russian public. When people see just how opulent the life the highest ranked public officials is, they are filled with anger. People whose position of power allows them to extort bribes, live life that will put Hollywood stars to shame in a country where most people do not have sewage in their homes and have to use outhouse over latrine pit. 

People occasionally do protest and demand systemic change. Such protests are often dispersed by riot police while government TV accuses Americans and "collective West" of inciting the protestors. <irony>Because who could possibly be outraged when public prosecutor demands many months of their salary to close a criminal case against them? Surely, they must be paid by Americans and George Soros to oppose the system that allows such abuses. </irony>

Irony aside, people do not like to be robbed by public officials and if they cannot vote on the ballot for a system change, they vote with their feet and leave Russia for places where that does not happen. Nonetheless not everyone can go and so demand for change hangs over the heads of Russian government officials like a grim reaper. In their nightmares they see Navalny becoming president and instituting a lustration against corrupt officials, which makes them wake up in cold sweat.

Needless to say, those who left Russia are not at all patriotic about their country. Even in Ukraine or Latvia for every pro-Russian Russian there is often more than one pro-European Russian who much prefer European way of life and government that does not extort bribes to Russian language and culture of Russki Mir. That is why Ukraine, that got chance to ditch the Russian mafia style governance for European rule of law, fights so hard to protect their future from Russification. There are other reasons too, but this one is very often overlooked.

That is why Ukrainians will not surrender. Russians in Western countries will not return to Russia. And protests demanding dismantling of mafia system and replacing it with European rule of law will continue in Moscow until that change will happen.

Russia has only its own plundering mafia style governance to blame for that. People do not want to be robbed by corrupt government officials; people want them gone. 

I will write a separate article about historical reasons for mafia governance in Russia and why it's different from Europe, Baltic States and even Ukraine.

For Anti-tax People who Hate Homeless People

To all those wealthy people who are concerned with taxes and think they can spend their money better than the government. Let's face it: you will not get out of your way and use your money to buy a homeless person a house. However homeless people need homes. Without homes they will live in parks, stink, drink, do drugs and pollute common spaces.  You do not like when they do that, don't you? However, you cannot do anything about it, just complain.

Worry no more though as government can solve homeless problem for you and remove all these pesky homeless people from your parks. They can build public housing cheaply and efficiently; it will cost you much more if you try to do that yourself. Yes, tax will increase, but it will still be much less than to pay for a house out of your own pocket. For just a little tax increase there will be no more homeless polluting your parks and you can come back to enjoy your morning strolls like in good old times.

Finally, if you do not vote for more public housing, then homeless themselves will, they can vote too after all. As homelessness ever growing, homeless people will soon be majority. Just imagine what a government of homeless will look like. So, give homeless homes before it's too late.

Russians and Russophilia in Ukraine

 Russians in Ukraine

One of the reasons for Russian invasion of Ukraine was a claim that ethnic Russians are persecuted by government in Kyiv. While ethnic Russians do exist in Ukraine, they are by far a minority, heavily concentrated in Crimea, Donbas, Kharkiv and southern Zaporizhya oblast. 

In the original 1991 (1922) borders Russians were 17% of the population, but if you exclude Crimea and Donbas this number will easily fall into single digits. And if you also exclude Kharkiv and Melitopol area, the number of Russians will drop to miniscule numbers. 

Fate of these border Russian communities can justify a border adjustment, but not a whole country takeover. Most of these areas are already under Russian control.

The rest of the country consists of people who do not see themselves as Russians and do not want to be part of Russia. 

Not only that but some people who identify as Russians or speak Russian language do not want to be part of Russia and would prefer to join EU and NATO instead. I myself grew up in Moscow in Russia, but do not want to live in Russia and much prefer NATO to Russian system.

Russophilia in Ukraine

Another claim Putin likes to make is that Russians and Ukrainians (and Belarussians for that matter) are so called "brother people". This "brother people" is a Soviet propaganda cliche that most people in Ukraine do not believe in. I would argue they did not believe it even in Soviet times, but there was censorship so we cannot know for sure. 

Regardless of if Ukrainians use to believe they are close to Russians or not, nowadays most Ukrainians see themselves as Europeans who are much closer to Poles or Slovaks than to Russians. Ukrainian language also has more in common with Polish than with Russian. Ukrainian culture and way of life is European, not Eurasian or whatever Putin likes to call its anti-democratic and anti0-liberal system they use. Many Russians in Moscow itself do not believe in this Eurasian system and protest to demand real democracy, one cannot expect this Eurasian system will be any more popular further West.

Nowadays Ukrainians see Russia as hostile state that wants to destroy its culture, language, identity and assimilate them into Russia. Not only that, but most Ukrainians now see Russia as a country with strong Turkic and Mongolic influences, that are alien to all Europeans and Ukrainians in particular. Russia's own interpretation of history does not acknowledge Mongolic influence, but as someone who knows history well, I can confirm that these claims are far from groundless.

There some in Ukraine who disagree with the idea that Ukrainians and Russians have little in common. They insist they feel closer to Russia than to Europe, oppose NATO and EU, and view West with hostility - the kind of views that Russia likes to repeat often. However, such Russophiles are a minority of total population. Just like ethnic Russians, Russophiles are heavily concentrated in Crimea and Donbas regions.

Actual Data of pro-Russian Sentiment

However, why speculate on levels of pro-Russian sentiment when we have actual data. Ukraine is not Russia where levels of public support of Alexei Navalny is heavy guarded secret, that Kremin fears more than nuclear war. Ukraine is a democracy and public support for near any issue is public knowledge.

Before Russian 2022 invasion, there was a pro-Russian opposition party that opposed NATO and advocated closer ties to Russia instead. This party was an outlet for those who does not support Ukraine's current course and instead wish to have closer ties to Russia.

As you can easily see from this map, the party's results are heavily varied based on the region. In few eastern areas they easily get more than half of total vote, but in most of the country they do not get more than 5% of the vote. 

Even certain mostly Russophone areas like Dnipro. Kherson, Mykolaiv or Odesa do not actually want to be part of Russia and would much rather join EU and NATO. A sour pill for Russian patriots to swallow, but a lot of Russians hate this Eurasian anti-western Russia Putin has created. That is by far dominant opinion among in Russian diasporas in Western countries.

Even if you look at older results of Yanukovych era Party of Regions, they show broadly the same picture. These results however have to be analysed critically as Party of Regions was not explicitly Russophile and instead advocated regionalism to get more support from areas that felt neglect by Kyiv.

This is the reality of pro-Russian sentiment of Ukraine. A few localities in the east have pro-Russian local majorities while most of the rest of the country sees Russia as enemy instead. 

These pro-Russian localities however produce a very desirable optics for Putin's regime in Moscow, as they play well into Russian narrative of Russians oppressed by mythical Nazis. Not only that but people from these areas are willingly playing their part in Kremlin's spectacle by going to Moscow and asking Putin to interfere against Kyiv on their behalf. 

They call their opponents Nazi, but reality is that their enemy is pretty much the entire 80% of the entire country. If you exclude Crimea and other occupied areas, then it will be more than 90% of the rest of the country. 

Conclusion

This is reality of popular opinion in Ukraine. Majority of Ukrainians hate Russia as an evil incarnate that tries to destroy their country, culture and language. Russia further seeks to deprive them of dignity of live Europe has to offer and replace it with its own abusive Eurasian system that neglect human rights and treats people like shit.

There is but a small minority in the east that looks up to Russia, because they feel attached to Russian culture or fear 'Banderites', NATO, EU and the West.

There are historical reasons for both of these opinions. That is why I advocated for different borders that better reflect the reality of public opinion in many of my past articles.

Nonetheless the new borders will be not a border between "brotherly nations" but a border between bitter enemies that have very little in common with each other. They will be heavily fortified as they will also be borders between the collective West and Putin's Eurasia. 

If we are lucky, we can also get a European Belarus and European Russia for those Russians and Belarussians who do not want to live like a Eurasian. I will cover Eurasia and history of Russia in a separate article.

The Living Space for the 21st Century

 

Ever since Financial Crisis of 2008 life on this planet was a miserable mess. Politicians promised us speedy recovery and return to normal within a few years maximum. As of 2025 that return to normal did not happen. If anything, things only getting worse and worse. Despite automation making manufacturing cheaper and cheaper, prices are only getting higher and higher. Housing availability is so low that people live in cars and sleep in parks, there are entire tent cities in some localities. Why is so?

The answer is overpopulation. Ever since beginning of the 19th century global population have constantly grew and grew. However recently growth reached the ridiculously high pace. Back in 2000 population was 6 billion, 25 years later its more than 8 billion. Look for more data here. 

Where will all these extra people live? What will they eat? Who is going to pay for all that? There is no answer. Everyone closes their eyes and looks the other way. After all, if you have a home and a stable job it's not your problem. Until these things are gone. Then all you will get it the ostrich response from those who still have these things and prefer to not think about hard things. 

Not only that but some truly misguided idiots or downright malicious people actually think that world is dying out and encourage people to have more children. What they do not say however is answers any of the questions from the above paragraph, because there are no answers. Children you will have today, tomorrow will have no place to live, no income to afford food. Their options are welfare, charity, prostitution, begging, crime or death. Do you really want children you will spend so much effort money and time rising, to choose between these? No.

The plain and simple truth is that our planet, pictured above, have a finite space, resources, and other things vital for human life. So, for any more people being born on this planet to have space to live, this space has to be taken from those who currently already live here. So long as global population keeps increasing, life for everyone on this planet will keep getting worse and worse. 

There is little point in building fences, borders and such things, people can bypass them and still get in. For every honest guard there will be those who will look the other way. What we need is population reduction, world has to go back towards the 1 billion it had back in early 19th century.

Here is a second map that can help you understand the problem better. Compare it with another one. One is fertility rate and the other is GDP per capita. You can easily see the parallels here, the higher is fertility, the poorer is the country and the other way around. The lower is fertility, the higher is prosperity. 

There is also another clear trend here. Most of the world has rather sustainable birth rates. There is but one area of African hinterland that produces all the population surplus that everyone else has to deal with. My question is why we should fix this problem, that is caused by a few problem countries?

When you look closer on these high birthrate countries, you can clearly notice that they are some of the most dysfunctional fail-states in the world. Somalia has one of the highest birth rates in the world and a never-ending civil war to pair it with. Another high birth rate country, Central African Republic, is so dysfunctional that 2000 Wagner Group mercenaries effectively control the entire country. Other countries in the group, like Chad, Niger, Mali, Democratic Republic of Congo are not much better.

Clearly world will lose nothing if any of these countries will just disappear. Far from it, world will be able to breathe a sigh of relief.

So, if removing these states will solve the problem, then what are we waiting for. We have powerful enough weapons to wipe the entire populations of CAR or Somalia of the face of the earth. The space they will vacate can then be settled by people who will make much better use of it.

This will solve many of the problems world currently faces. Surplus of population from more developed nations can be used to settle former fertility blackholes. They will transform these areas into prosperous states like South Africa and Rhodesia were before and much how current post-colonial states are. 

We do not need to genocide the entire Africa either. More functional states, like Kenia and Tanzania can co-exist with the new colonial ones. They too will sigh the relief as they will no longer deal with their more troublesome neighbors. African wars do often spill over the borders, and a functioning African state can get harassed and even partially occupied by militants from an unstable neighbor.

Recently Russia, a country with a long history of creating misery and exploitation of downtrodden, pivoted into the region and sponsored pro-Russian coups. Russia and Belarus are now using people from this region to flood Europe and the US with illegal migrants to ruin democracy and destroy life in 1st world countries. They probably used them even before these coups.

Do not forget that it was USSR and China who sponsored many of communist coups in Africa. They financed and armed ZANU and ANC that destroyed Rhodesia and turned it into dysfunctional failed state Zimbabwe, that Kremin plundered dry. They continue to bleed South Africa dry, all so that Putin can have even bigger palace and Roman Abramovich even bigger Yacht.

Now China and Russia plot to use their African puppets to destroy the rest of the Western world. We need to stop them.

As much as I wish to destroy Russia and its inhuman governing system, doing that to a country armed with nuclear weapons is problematic and risky. We can instead wait until they collapse on their own, like Ottomans before them. However, that will take time, and migrant crisis happens now, and we need a solution the sooner the better.

Machiavelli correctly said that people either must be treated nicely or exterminated completely. Misery in select few African countries contradict this principle. By now this misery begins to spill out of these countries borders and cause problems for the world that failed to either develop these people into prosperity or genocide them out of existence. Now that it came to that genocide is the only option left. I hope some humanitarian reservations will not stop what must be done.

To solve all of the above problems we need to cull population of Africa's problem belt, a few countries that are source of many of the world and most of Africa's own problems. That will solve overpopulation problem, open this region for development, end African civil wars, remove pressure from Africa more stable countries, solve migration crisis and resulting danger to Europe and the prosperity of the 1st world and finally foil Russian evil plans to drown world in misery. We have to do what must be done.

Why Europe Should Deploy Troops to Ukraine

Europe should agree to send troops to Ukraine. 

Putin is evil but he is not stupid. Putin is just as afraid to start WWIII as any European. If he really was willing to risk WWIII, he would have attacked the Baltic States that annoy Russian patriots a lot more than Ukraine. However, he attacked Ukraine because Ukraine has no Article 5 or equivalent to protect it. This made Ukraine into a target.

Putin is careful and calculating, he will test the ground before committing to attack. The only reason he committed to the invasion was because he was certain he will get away with it. It was the same with Crimea back in 2014, unmarked troops (Little Green Men) could have been easily disowned by Kremlin if serious consequences would emerge. 

Yes, Russian officials throwing words, like: 'any European troops presence or NATO membership is unacceptable' and vow to retaliate, but there are just empty words. They will not act on them if there is real risk of their own nuclear annihilation. None of them wants to die.

Generally, USSR and Russia have a clear history of using words as tools of war. However, these are empty words, and they cannot hurt by themselves, and Russians have no troops to back these words with action. Remember peace talks in Korean War, trained by Russians, North Koreans pulled so many dirty tricks, but all that amounted to nothing.

Ultimately Putin only playing a game of chicken. He just bet that Europeans chicken out first and leave Ukraine to its fate. All these threats are mere extension of this game. He will not fight nuclear armed France or UK, no matter how much people like Lavrov say they would. 

He would not have done it even if he really was winning on the battlefield, but Russian army struggles with Ukraine's military alone, they physically cannot take on two more militaries at the same time. All they can do is growl at evil West from their corner. 

Talking to Putin will never amount to anything. He knows that talks like these cannot hurt him. So, he will attend any peace talks it's just to fool around and demand unreasonable things like for NATO destroyed itself from within. So long as Europeans are too afraid to actually do anything, the war will continue.

Sure, there are sanctions but being perpetually in war does not hurt Putin personally in any way. Million Russians died but he will not care even if 10 or 20 million die. Russia is no Europe where people of military age can be useful for economy, in Russia they are only risk of uprising against Putin's continued rule so he will not cry as he sends them to certain death. Economically wars tend to cause prices of oil and gas to rise, and these are coincidentally the main Russian exports. Yes, there are sanctions but there are also creative ways of bypassing them.

On the other hand, for Europe and the US war is bad for economy. Putin not only knows that but more than willing to deliberately exploit. He will stay in this war for as long as possible just to cause more harm to EU and America.

Only a risk of actually dragging more nations into a war that is already not going well, will make Putin pause and think. Europe should present him with just such risk and positioning troops in Ukraine together with warning of retaliation if any of them get hurt by Russian attacks. Only a setup like this can really put breaks on Russian invasion.

As for actual deployment, then Europeans should position their troops just far enough from the frontlines to avoid accidental fire, but on clearly identifiable positions, close enough to front. That will make the real red line that Putin will not dare to cross. Putin will rant about such interference, but he will not dare to actually attack them. 

That is the only way to achieve peace at all. Everything else will just cause war to drag on. 

Short of escalating war into something Russian military could no longer handle, Putin has no other insensitive to end war. Thus, to end the war, Europe needs to make possibility of escalation real by deploying troops in Ukraine.

Free Travel and EU

 

JD Vance in one of his unwarranted and uninformed criticisms of EU mentioned that free travel to EU will destroy it. These comments showed JD Vance's lack of understanding of what EU is and how it works. 

Yes, EU has the 4 Freedoms as part of its principles, but that do not mean everyone can just travel to EU and get in without any issues. Far from it, for most people in the world EU is one of the hardest places to get into.

The above mentioned 4 Freedoms only apply to members of EU. They are the reason to join EU in the first place. EU is closed club with huge benefits to members; free travel is one of them. It's the same how you do not need passport to move between states of the US. You still need passport and visa to get into US and so is to get into EU. EU avoids country like terminology because certain people still hold out towards their national identity and not willing to embrace union completely. However, especially when it comes to economy, EU operates like a single federal country.

EU members also get other benefits too, for example they trade within EU without any border checks tariffs or paperwork. (To remove border checks you need to join Schengen Agreement after joining the EU.) In contrast nonmembers are burdened with hefty tariffs, loads of bureaucracy, complex requirements for Schengen visa to allow travel to EU and more. EU is an exclusive club with lots of members-only privileges. 

All that gives clear insensitive to join as those who stay out miss out by a lot. That is why Brexit was such a stupid idea. From no paperwork and tariffs to all trade to EU they went towards these tariffs, border checks and paperwork. I destroyed the entire industries that used to export into EU but after Brexit could no longer do so due to paperwork and tariffs. 

Courtiers that aspire to join the EU, like Ukraine or Moldova get a trial version of these benefits: removal or some tariffs as well as free travel for 3 month every half year. You can come and see for yourself how awesome it is but then have to go back to finish the accession process. OECD countries like the US, Canada or Japan get above mentioned 3-month travel as well. That is reciprocal as EU citizens also get visa free travel to these countries.

For most of the rest of the world however, entry to EU is only through complex Schengen Visa process where you have to bring a lot of documents to convince EU officials that you should be allowed to enter. If you have criminal record, did not bought return ticket or your bank account does not have sufficient money to spend in EU, you will not get the visa. It is business and they only want those who have enough money to spend on their Cote d'Azur vacay.

There are also refugees, but they are governed by UN rules and get processed by institutions to determine if they qualify for refugee status. Smugglers often misuse these UN rules as they are the more permissive and laxer compared to national polices. However, UN rules are only guidelines rather than laws and nations can choose to ignore them.

EU admission policy is rather strict. Probably only Australia has even tougher visa system. It is far from come anyone. Do not misunderstand.