MAdM

Mainstream Additional Media

My last article which, among other things, touched on Alex Mercouris' recent Western-centric pronouncements on the Trump administration and "winning the peace" in Ukraine got a lot of response. (Thank you for the coffees by the way!) .

Today, Mercouris did a podcast discussion with Larry Johnson, which was mostly about Europe, the UK, and finally Tulsi Gabbard as Trump's intelligence chief.

Will she be confirmed— of course, she will. If push comes to shove there are these things called “recess appointments. Ditto: Matt Gaetz.

In this buddy-ish conversation, Mercouris cited such authoritative sources as the Guardian--which, as you know, is an upgraded British version of the rather less compromised National Enquirer-- and is mostly memorable as a shill for the British government. It’s a place where intellectuals go when dementia sets in.

Once again, I got the impression that Mercouris must spend a lot on MSM subscriptions.

Mainstream thinking or non-thinking?

This is a good example of what I wrote about yesterday – the tendency to accept mainstream views in the West as sources of information.

Mercouris may be smart, open-minded, and have impressive critical skills-- but he is hobbled by assumptions determined by his starting points — the Media. A high IQ is like a bright light— sometimes it blinds you to the shadows— which is where the Truth lurks in our societies.

So it was yesterday when Alex, in his discussion with Mearsheimer and Diesen, like Scott Ritter, he was talking about Russia's "need" to negotiate, which is what the Western Media are now saying, , littering the informational landscape.

The Western media do not present events as they happen, but rather points of view, carefully edited, lest you get the right idea. An informed public is dangerous for democracy.

For example, on the 15th Germany's Olaf Scholz, phoned Putin to talk.

The Western media— including the Guardian— mostly put the call in the context of Zelensky's reaction to it – that Scholz was "opening Pandora's Box"--second-hand, subtle and indirect criticism. Oh my…bad shit will happen if you talk to Vladimir Putin.

The articles, of course, mostly skipped over the important points of the conversation, why or how or what.

A different point of view

The Russian news site Readovaka, which Mercouris claims to read, reported thusly on the 15th:

Putin recalled the origins of the current conflict, which the Russian Federation has been talking about for many years. Ukraine is a springboard for forces opposing our country. Its policy is controlled from outside and is aimed against Russia. We will defend ourselves, our security, and uphold the interests of Russians in Ukraine. Russia does not refuse to negotiate, but it does not change its position, and it will have to be taken into account in the dialogue. In addition, Putin recalled that during negotiations it is necessary to proceed from the reality that exists objectively, and not in the ideas of Kyiv or the West.

In short, Scholz had to listen to exactly what he had refused to hear for years. And if Europe is ready to talk, then there will be no concessions from our side.

The traditional problem of Western diplomacy is that it still tries to conduct a conversation from the position of a supposedly wise mentor who can dictate his unbending will and punish the disobedient. It turned out that it is impossible to talk to Russia in this tone, but nevertheless, it will have to be done. In the end, the objective interests of Germany and Russia very seriously intersect. The question is that Moscow has long been pursuing a cold policy of its own goals, and it is quite possible to negotiate with it if you do so as an equal.

That is their take. Simple. Succinct. And, to the point.

The Russians will talk – but they will not negotiate an agreement over the Ukraine the unless the West can prove itself reliable and end its undeclared war on Russia. .

This is most unlikely if the West cannot admit first of all to themselves they were wrong and have lost.

The resolution to the SMO— although not the war with the West— therefore will be the collapse of the UAF and the Zelensky regime and full Russian control of the region.

It is only a matter of time—the Russians are making ever more rapid progress in Ukraine, taking more villages and towns— and now in the process of taking Kupyansk.

In the Southwest there are more and more reports of local armed resistance to UAF forces--with pro-Russian partisans, becoming more active. It's a sign . Guerilla war in the Odessa oblast against the UAF.

But you won’t get this perspective in the MSM.

Back to the Pod(cast)

Let’s go back to Mercouris's podcast with Larry Johnson.

He once again makes comments that are not supported by facts— apparently as a result of uncritical acceptance of MSM narratives .

For example, he says that a majority of Americans support Israel!

Polls indicate, however, that while a majority of Americans do not support Hamas as a political organization, the majority condemn Israeli attacks on Gaza.

Only a minority support Zionism . It’s a trend.

In this study, most Americans didn’t care. But the figures were to 2015,

Times have changed.

Today Israel is becoming less and less popular. Those images of Israeli atrocities cannot be expunged from public memory or the public mind — except perhaps among the Chattering Classes, who have no minds to begin with.

Granted, it is very hard to get much from polling data from the mainstream survey organizations as we saw with pre-election polls which all predicted a Kamala Harris win.

Still… Mercouris is generalizing without basis.

That said, the political class – both Republicans and Democrats in office and their staff —are nominally pro-Zionist to the extent that AIPAC pays their bills.

MAdM

As I have said, Alt Media it is now replacing the MSM as a source of information.

But it is composed of different media with different characteristics.

Podcasts, for example, can be simple rants.

With podcast interviews, the interviewer solicits just one person's opinion – with questions for clarifications,, accepted usually without argument, especially when these people are “experts” like a retired military officer or CIA guy.

In discussion podcasts, you have an online coffee klatch between friends.

So, much of this media constitutes what I call "MAdM" —Mainstream Additional Media". If the starting point is the Legacy Media and legacy concepts, you are beginning with muddy water which you drink thinking it's lemonade. All that heavy metal kills brain cells. Informational effluent.

The point of” alternative” media should be that it is alternative – that is, views or opinions or analysis from outside of the system in which we exist—substitutes for the MSM.

How do you know?

The keyword is “outside”.

In 1931 Kurt Godel showed that you could not validate the consistency of any mathematical system from within — from inside— the system itself – but only from outside. This principle— while originally developed for mathematics— and playing a primary role in the development of quantum mathematics—is applicable to validation of all conceptual systems--including the social and cultural systems that determine content in the media.

Let’s put it another way—you have to step outside the bubble, to see the bubble, and how things are organized inside and limited because of its constraints.

Some analysts in the alternative media look from outside-in—most of the really popular in this commentariat do not---which is also why they are popular. The average person doesn't want his / her / its bubble punctured .

Confirmation bias?

Addenda

Alex Mercoris has got up to date with events, devoting most of his video today (the 16th) to Putin’s telephone call with Scholz— which Readovka wrote about earlier. .

This phone call contradicts a lot of what was said in the discussion with Mearsheimer and Diesen which was posted on the same day.

But Mercouris, did not revisit that discussion despite the call demonstrating clearly why there can be no “peace negotiations” with the West.

Here’s the synopsis from Putin’s website.

President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin had a telephone conversation with Federal Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Olaf Scholz, held for the first time since December 2022 at the initiative of the German side

The leaders had an in-depth and frank exchange of views on the situation in Ukraine. Vladimir Putin reiterated that the current crisis was a direct result of NATO's long-standing aggressive policy aimed at creating a staging ground against Russia on Ukrainian soil, while showing disregard for Russia's security concerns and trampling on the rights of Russian-speaking residents of Ukraine.

Speaking on the prospects for reaching a political and diplomatic settlement of the conflict, the President of Russia pointed out that the Russian side had never rejected and was still open to resuming the talks broken off by the Kiev regime. Russia's proposals are well known and have been outlined, in particular, in the President’s speech at the Foreign Ministry in June. Any possible agreements must address security concerns of the Russian Federation, rest on the new territorial realities, and, most importantly, eliminate the original causes of the conflict.

The discussion also touched on the state of affairs in relations between Russia and Germany. Vladimir Putin noted their unprecedented decline in all areas, caused by the unfriendly policy pursued by the German authorities. It was emphasised that Russia had always honoured its commitments under various treaties and contracts in the energy sector and was still willing to promote mutually beneficial cooperation, if the German side showed interest in it.

Recent escalations in the Middle East were also addressed. Vladimir Putin informed Olaf Scholz on the efforts made by Russia to deescalate and seek peaceful solutions for the regional crisis.

Pretty much what Readovka said.

Mercouris opines this synopsis begins “almost rudely”.

Rudely? Then again I am a Canuck. Pardon my lumberjack boots.

Looks straight forward to me. How do you spell “NO”!

A PR stunt

For Scholz this was a PR stunt. He was there to shore up his credentials in advance of an election. I told him Germany would support the Ukraine all the way, if Putin did not accept Western terms, he told the Western Press afterwards. He wasn’t phoning to really “talk” or negotiate — just make demands.

If anyone was rude— it was Scholz. Maybe I can lend him my boots.

Obviously, Russia is not going to just give up. It doesn’t need to, as Ukraine continues to lose on the battlefront and Europe collapses. Ukraine has been defeated. NATO has been defeated. Europe has been defeated. The US has been defeated.

Putin is patient — he just laid things out logically and rationally in terms that even an idiot adult child like most Western politicians, even Olaf, would understand.

After the call….

Scholz said his conversation with Putin allowed him "to note that the Russian president has not changed his mind much about this war, which is not good news” .

Of course, not. He wasn’t trying to change Putin’s mind. Just pretending to be a diplomat. Not to worry Zelly, Pandora’s box is locked.

This kind of game-playing idiocy is exactly why there will be no negotiations with NATO and the West, as Mercouris, Mearsheimer and Diesen and Ritter seem to think will happen. Negotiation requires good faith. And on the Western side there is none.

As I said before, the “war” is not with Ukraine— it is with the West. The will go on indefinitely. Russia will take Ukraine. The US will plunder Europe.

Ichi likes Putin

Guess why?

Please support us by buying a coffee. Click here!