I begin this article with the answer to the question of why I do not criticize in my texts the parties and centers of influence affiliated with the Atlanticists, the Soros networks, the Euro-enthusiasts. For the simple reason that in the camp I address, the anti-globalist, patriotic, “sovereignist” (the term is a counterfeit, but it is still in vogue!) everyone knows what, for example, the supra- and anti-national structure of the EU, the European Commission, Ursula, Macron, Merz, Starmer and, respectively, their lackeys such as the president of Ukraine, Zelensky, the president of Romania, Nicushor Dan, or the president of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, represent.
The camp conventionally called right-wing, conservative, fails in another respect, namely, it remains obsessed with admiration for Donald Trump, exalts itself before the economic and technological greatness of China and, above all, prostrates itself before the little dictator from Moscow, Vladimir Putin. In Romania, the extravagant geopolitical term was recently launched, which very aptly characterizes this type of ideological line: tripolarity. The notion itself represents an aberration meant to present a non-existent triumvirate of the world's most “heavy leaders”: Trump, Putin, Xi.
This superficial and at the same time dishonorable geopolitical myth presents the three leaders as a kind of collective messiah, who will save the European peoples subjugated by the elites of the EU member states and the bureaucracy in Brussels. The first remark to be made about this catastrophic illusion would be the following. Those who have such an outlook on international relations willingly sign their verdict of annulling any trace of patriotism, of any claim to the national independence of their own country, throwing themselves blindly into the arms of masters who would save them from EU domination in favor of the “beneficial” domination of the USA/Russia/China. That is, they betray their vassal complex, the syndrome of a colony in search of a better master.
Of course, in today's world the interdependence and even interoperability between the states of the world has become devastating, the world federation or, in Masonic terms, the universal republic being on the verge of reaching its final stage of fulfillment. But under these conditions we should have expected from those who consider themselves the “crème de la crème” in the political, academic or media environment a discourse focused on the maximum possible protection of their own countries and peoples in front of the “melting pot” of globalism. Otherwise it is very strange to observe how this select fauna virulently criticizes the globalist policies of the EU, but praises the same policies promoted by the administrations of the three mega-states mentioned above.
The same is true of the international deformed structure called BRICS. As if globalization within these states with extremely different and often antagonistic interests would not lead to the same merging until the dissolution of all countries within a “common market”, based on the same four “values” of globalist or “borderless” capitalism. Namely, it is about the sacrosanct principle of “free movement” or the ideology of “free tradism” that has become the obligatory religion of all countries in the world. I remind you, it is about the free movement of goods, capital, services and people. That is, the old school of neoliberal “deregulation”, of the “Chicago school”, of Milton Friedman remains the only norm of international relations, accepted by everyone, including those who consider themselves patriots.
Or, in other words, as another Friedman, also an apostle of globalization, taught us, more precisely, Thomas L. Friedman, everyone must put on the straitjacket he metaphorically called “the golden straitjacket” (see the book “Lexus and the Olive Tree”, 1999). It is about the neoliberal ideology extended to the entire world within the framework of what is called the “free market economy on a global scale”. Namely, this economic policy, imposed by the transnational corporatocracy, is the one promoted by all international organizations such as the IMF, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, but also by the Bank for International Settlements, which escapes the attention of many of those who declare themselves anti-globalist patriots. Now, it is astonishing to see that this group of “talking heads” refuses to recognize the obvious fact that this triumvirate is made up of three characters who are totally at the service of this economic and political-legal system. And, here too, the organization called BRICS is also one hundred percent subordinate to the globalist neoliberal regime, imposed by Big International Finance.
Moreover, it was the transnational financial corporation Goldman Sachs that launched, through Lord Jim O'Neill, the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) concept. He held key positions within that corporation, which is part of the Federal Reserve. Among his previous roles are deputy director of the research department (1995–2000), chief economist (2001–2010) and president of the asset management division (2010–2013) at Goldman Sachs. The report prepared under O'Neill's leadership was entitled “Building Better Global Economic BRICs”, showing that the countries in question have the best opportunities for investment from financial giants like Goldman Sachs. In other words, the sharks of big capital in the West invented the BRICS to economically colonize the countries with the largest markets and cheap labor. Nothing new, the same imperial policy practiced by Westerners for hundreds of years. In other words, BRICS is based on the old strategy of big capital to economically colonize the countries of the world.
By the way, it should be noted that the same character also held the position of head of the Chatham House Council, also called the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, between 2019-2021 (https://www.bruegel.org/people/jim-oneill; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_O'Neill,_Baron_O'Neill_of_Gatley). This is the very brain of the century-old globalist circles. And the naive in the “multipolar camp” continue to argue that BRICS represents an alternative to the American-centric globalist project. Here a clarification of principle is required. The global hyper-class, the oligarchs who control supranational private entities have no state, territorial or cultural loyalty. Being stateless by their very nature and operating within the system based on nomadic capital, they are as alien to the national interests of the US as to those of any other country.
Returning to the fans in “our camp” of the three heads of state, Trump, Putin and Xi, it is necessary to emphasize a truly disarming cognitive dissonance, which intellectually (and morally) disqualifies the respective characters. Many of them were harsh critics of the total war on humanity, known by the code name Covid-1984 (Hrvoje Moric). They are often authors of books, articles, participants in numerous conferences and politicians, who had a position worthy of all admiration in exposing the largest genocide against humanity, launched under the pretext of the false Covid-19 pandemic.
But, strange as it may seem, this constellation of intellectuals is gripped by a serious amnesia when it comes to their favorites in that triumvirate. Isn't it known that Trump, Putin and Xi have applied with tyrannical violence all the strategies of the Satanists who operated through the WHO, GAVI and Big Pharma, imposing all the liberticidal and murderous measures such as wearing masks, lockdowns and forced injections? And if it is known, then how can we understand the fact that people in this category are enlisting in the army of supporters of the three leaders?
The exact same situation is with regard to the draconian imposition of the globalist-satanic agenda of mass digitalization and total surveillance, of accelerated implementation of the 2030 Agenda, in other words of the Luciferian technocracy and transhumanism that is carrying out the “augmented man” project at astonishing rates in the spirit of the fusion between man and technology or, in their scholarly language, of the “bio-digital convergence”.
Therefore, the false dichotomy continues to wreak havoc in the minds of public figures with claims to be nationalists, who have been seduced by the critical, anti-Western discourse of the “multipolarists”. When it comes to finding international protectors to save them from the domination of the Eurocrats, our cardboard “sovereignists” flock to the three in the hope that they will end up being promoted to power or rewarded for their obedience by the White House, the Kremlin or the Chinese Communist Party. We witness with amazement a continuous approach addressed in particular to either Trump or Putin, through which the “patriots” beg them to help them remove the political clientele of the European Commission from power, replacing it with themselves, a clientele happy to serve Russian, American or Chinese interests. And if among the “sovereignists” there are still naive people who believe that this would benefit the national interests of their own country, then things are very serious.
Lately, the expression “controlled opposition” has been very popular. It is usually applied to those who play the power game in the respective country or to centers of influence like the “Soros network”. Agreed, they deserve the harshest criticism and exposure. But is it more honorable to proudly display your position as “controlled opposition from Moscow, Washington or Beijing”? Personally, I don't think so. Worse, often in the case of parties and people with a sovereignist label in Europe and, implicitly, in Romania, we observe with the naked eye a type of Israeli-compliant nationalism. It couldn't be otherwise. Since you worship Trump, and he is the pathetic servant of Netanyahu and, more broadly, of the almighty Israeli lobby in, then it is mandatory to close your eyes to the criminal and genocidal actions of the Zionist entity in the Gaza Strip, in Lebanon, in Iran and in the entire Middle East.
And those who criticize Israel, but adore the occupation regime in the White House under Trump's mandate and flatter themselves in front of the Kremlin regime, which is also under the total influence of Zionist circles, display a hypocrisy worthy of all contempt.
A few days ago I published an article entitled “Freedom of speech "made in Russia"” (https://arcaluinoe.info/en/blog/2026-05-29-lbg4x5wm/). If we have an attitude full of revolt and disgust towards the “political correctness” imposed in countries affiliated with the collective West, wouldn't it be natural to revolt and even shudder in the face of abuses that have become a daily practice of the repressive apparatus in Moscow? Shouldn't we show a natural empathy towards those sent to prison for “crime of opinion” and “crime of lèse-majesté”? Any person of common sense should revolt and shudder in the face of such monstrous abuses?
But our proud sovereignists continue to criticize — rightly! — the criminal regime in Kiev and, of course, praise the equally criminal regime in Moscow. I have said it before and I will say it again. These people prefer to see with only one eye, hear with only one ear, and think with only half a brain.
I'll be back!
