Northwest

In a traditional, feudal society, absolute wealth is minimised, while relative inequality is accentuated, especially between families (castes), clans, and extended kin, as well as between master and slave/servant/serf, though relations are more personalised and atomisation is nonexistent. Movement between classes and stations is largely unheard of. Wealth is centred on landholdings rather than production, and superfluities are less extravagant. Economies are localised, self-sufficient, and decentralised. Barter is common, and banking, if any, is circumscribed. Currency is in a fixed commodity such as gold or silver rather than paper (fiat). This reduces the overall volume and circulation of money in society, except as needed. Speculative activity is practically impossible. Globalisation, whether enforced through public or private entities, is essentially absent. The priestly and military functions reign supreme, in descending order, over those of the farmer, merchant, lender, labourer, and so on. Feudal landowners are considered superior to investors, including financiers, as well as manual workers. Mercantile activity is restricted to serving the needs of the feudal landowners, as opposed to mass production (industry) and social services. Spiritual rather than material considerations prevail. In this environment the machine serves man rather than vice versa, while man, in his stead and according to his individuated capacity, serves the Divine Will, while acting within a strictly regimented socio-spiritual hierarchy, including one’s foreordained station (status) in life, ordained by Providence from birth. Each caste, clan, kinship network, class, and station can focus on perfecting its role, down to the man, rather than succumb to greed or indolence. The feudal regime is impervious to bargaining, being impregnable, so Divine Will, hence Law, prevails. There is no free movement of labour. There are no modern ideologies, technologies, or synthetic “solutions.” Traditional remedies, customs, and religions are sufficient. Classical feudalism tends toward monotheism, which expresses the fixed “chain of being,” or the organically interlocking relationships, duties and obligations that comprise feudal society. Feudal society is corporatist, based on primogeniture, and organises activity into hereditary occupations, including guilds. Feudal society brings out and suppresses the innate virtues and vices, respectively, of each man’s lineage. Feudal society is based on sacred oral tradition as well as the written Law, mediated and interpreted by priests or scholars. A divinely appointed figurehead stands at the summit of and encapsulates the offices of feudal society. The basic feudal structure, worldview, and tenor was similar in all societies, from Christian Europe to India and Japan: Source Several Shia narrations suggest that agriculture, on balance, is superior to all other occupations, suggestive of feudalism: Source Source Source Thoughts?

To be brutally frank, Iran should not fall into the false dichotomy that the Western liberal Establishment is presenting: either the Taliban or postmodernist “woke” degeneracy. The Taliban and “woke” are two sides of the same proverbial coin, funded and backed by the same “hidden hands.” The problem with many critiques of the Taliban is that they sound more like Western agitprop than anything from an Islamic or even social-conservative background. During the twenty-year-long NATO-led occupation of Afghanistan, the “post-Taliban” puppet regime in Kabul, while secretly coddling the Taliban and Co. vs. Shias (and everyone else), sought to divide the population into Taliban supporters and anti-Islamic liberal reformists. For example, during the late 1990s many people criticised the Taliban for banning musical instrumentation and heroin, when according to my research Islam seemingly bans both of these. Western feminist influence also seemed particularly strong under both Karzai and Ghani, both of whom patronised liberal Western journalists and NGOs. (Of course, those same Western journalists and organisations always found ways to justify the Taliban as well when the “chips were down.”) So much of the anti-Taliban discourse revolves around Western liberal constructs such as feminist views of women’s rights, music, alcohol, dress codes, and so on. Very little attention is focussed on the Taliban’s crimes against Shia Hazara and other non-Taliban, non-Pashtun minorities, nor is much of an effort made to criticise the Taliban from an Islamic rather than Western liberal worldview. As a mere outsider looking in, I find Iranian media’s perspectives on the Taliban to be very inconsistent and contradictory, much like Iran’s dealings with allegedly “moderate” Sunni Islamists such as the Ikhwanis (Muslim Brothers) and their ilk such as Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (AKP). Quite frankly, all too often outlets such as PressTV et al. merely sound like the Democratic Party’s overseas apparatus, with its support for the Sunni Ikhwanis as a supposed “alternative” to Daesh et al., even though the MB’s fronts, including the Turkish-based “FSA,” served as conduits for Western/Zionist arms to those very Takfiri outfits in Libya, Syria, Egypt, et al. One also sees all the usual anti-Trump talking points and mindless support for BLM/ANTIFA, open borders in the West, etc. even though those very groups/agendas tie in with anti-Islamic globalist forces, including Sunni Takfiri and Zionist, that are no less dangerous to Iran. For example, very few Iranian sources have have mentioned Khashoggi’s very close ties to the CIA/MI6/Mossad, pro-Ikhwani Saudi factions, Turkey/Qatar, Osama bin Laden (the West’s Operation CYCLONE in Afghanistan), and other anti-Shia, sectarian, Wahhabi–Salafi circles for decades prior to his “assassination.” Yet in the geopolitical maelstrom Khashoggi has seemingly been turned into some sort of saintly martyr vs. the evil Saudis, even though he was always tied to the Western liberal Establishment and MIC through Soros and Bezo’s pro-Clinton/-Obama rag The Washington Post, which is hardly any less Zionist—arguably more homogeneously so—than the less influential pro-Trump factions within the bipartisan U.S. elite. One would think that Iranian media would be less Westernised and naïve, but for whatever reason that does not seem to be the case.

This is interesting, as it implies that the “Panjshir Resistance” was being backed by the U.S., in order to undermine China and its partner Pakistan, in line with the possibility that I mentioned previously. Many members of the “Panjshir Resistance” seem to have strong ties to Western liberal MSM, and the West is currently eager to provoke splits within the Taliban, including by sponsoring Takfiri sectarian elements such as Daesh (ISIS)-K, along with other anti-China, anti-Taliban forces such as the Uighur ETIM, the Uzbek IMU, and the Pakistani Taliban (TTP). The West is clearly hoping to break up Afghanistan along sectarian, ethnic, and tribal lines, in order to prevent China’s BRI from linking Pakistan, Iran, and Russia’s neighbours via Afghanistan. So maybe the U.S. and its proxies are simultaneously supporting the “Panjshir Resistance” and Takfiri elements in order to facilitate the destabilisation and partition of Afghanistan, thereby undermining the Taliban in Kabul and also creating problems for Afghanistan’s neighbours, while forcing the Taliban to rely more on their old GCC backers than on China. Clearly, the West is aghast at its defeat in Afghanistan, and resents the fact that China now has more clout than NATO does in Afghanistan, along with the fact that Pakistan is now more fully in China’s orbit than the GCC‘s. This also explains the recent uptick in anti-Chinese terrorism against Chinese-led infrastructure projects in Pakistani Baluchistan (e.g., that which links to the Port of Gwadar, a centrepiece of CPEC). There is nothing the U.S. resents more than the fact that China now has more sway over the Taliban than the GCC. So the U.S. and Company may for once be manipulating the Uzbek/Tajik forces in the north as well as anti-Taliban, Wahhabi–Salafi, foreign-backed “splinters” in the south, in order to prevent the Taliban from coming under China’s sway, as well as to pressure Pakistan into siding with the GCC as opposed to China. Basically, the U.S. wants to synergise all the anti-Taliban forces in Afghanistan in order to score geopolitical points vs. China and also undermine the growing ties between Pakistan and Iran, while sidelining Russia’s successful role in the region. So far, however, China and its “friends” seem to be winning the battle vs. the U.S. and its lackeys in Afghanistan. This outcome would be preferable for minorities in Afghanistan, and better for Pakistan, Iran, and Russia, as opposed to the West. The old unipolar Zionist hegemony of the West is dead, and a new multipolar order is de facto ascendant, both regionally and globally. Ironically, China is now the primary champion of free trade and industrial capitalism, not the “woke,” anti-industrial, “cultural-‘Marxist‘” West.

Source It is interesting to note that the bourgeoisie promoted not just capitalism, but also later, socialistic ideologies.

It is interesting to note that both Saleh and Massoud (below) have been participating in selected interviews with Western “journalists” and their MSM affiliates. Saleh, like Massoud, is an ethnic Tajik and, along with Massoud and Abdullah Abdullah, is loosely affiliated with the National Coalition of Afghanistan, in Saleh’s case via Basej e-Milli. The NCR, as part of the so-called “Panjshir Resistance,” is now also seeking the Uzbek general Abdul Rashid Dostum’s support. Well prior to the collapse of the Kabul regime, the U.S. was actively negotiating with Tajikistan and Uzbekistan over the possible hosting/leasing of NATO military bases, a move likely encouraged to undermine the growing rapprochement between the Taliban and China vis-à-vis Pakistan. The attack on Kabul was carried out by Daesh (ISIS)-K, which is now forging an anti-Taliban, anti-China alliance with the Uighur ETIM, the Uzbek IMU, and the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), each of which is tied to al-Qaida as well as Daesh. Notably, both Hezbollah and Syria recently hailed the fall of Kabul as a defeat for the U.S., and Russia, China, and Iran still maintain their respective embassies in Kabul, while the Taliban have apparently concurred with China on the need for BRI’s investment in Afghanistan, as well as to crack down on al-Qaida-and-Daesh-affiliated groups such as the ETIM, IMU, and TTP, to not mention Daesh (ISIS)-K itself. So the U.S. may try to split the Taliban by sponsoring these Takfiri groups, undermining Pakistan as well as Iran. Maybe the U.S. now wants to manipulate anti-Taliban groups, including ex-Taliban who have joined Daesh et al., into undermining the new government in Kabul, by sponsoring both Tajik/Uzbek separatism in the north and anti-Taliban Wahhabi–Salafi sectarianism elsewhere, including attacks on Shia Hazara that can be blamed on the Taliban. By synergising these forces, the U.S. can undermine stability in Afghanistan, weaken China’s BRI in the region, and also destabilise Russia’s neighbours in Central Asia, as well as weaken both Pakistan and Iran. @lover Aren’t the sexes separated in public educational facilities, including higher education, in Iran? Also, doesn’t Shiism ban all music, given that music, by definition, involves instrumentation?

While I am quite receptive to “alternative” means of treating SARS-CoV-2, one thing that puzzles me is that Ivermectin, like HCQ, is specifically known to treat fungal and bacterial infections, not viral. Viruses are not living organisms per se, unlike fungi and bacteria. Given that viruses differ from fungi and bacteria, it is unclear as to why Ivermectin would necessarily be efficacious in treating SARS-CoV-2. So far no one has been able to put forth a presentable hypothesis as to why Ivermectin would be as effective against viruses as it is against fungi and bacteria. Even the studies that suggest Ivermectin could be used to treat SARS-CoV-2 have not explained why Ivermectin supposedly works under certain conditions. Unless someone can account for this, prescribing Ivermectin seems just as much a chimerical “cure-all” as the conventional vaccines.

My point is that you criticise elites for advocating lockdowns, masks, social distancing, and vaccines, yet Iranian elites, including the Supreme Leader himself, also promote some of the same basic policies. It would be inconsistent to exclude Iranian elites from your perspective. So far Iranian elites have not openly spoken about the so-called “Great Reset” and its relation to COVID-19. As far as conspiracies are concerned, the various “alternative” theories about COVID-19 are useless, given that they cannot even agree on the nature and origin of the alleged virus, i.e., whether it actually exists, is caused by 5G and/or environmental toxicity, is related to vaccines, and so on. The same sources that claim COVID-19 is a hoax also advocate Ivermectin and HCQ to treat the “nonexistent” virus. (If COVID-19 were actually caused by 5G, I fail to see how antimalarial drugs, much less vaccines, would treat its symptoms.) I do not trust the mainstream and/or the Establishment, but I am also skeptical of the alternative sources, given that they are just as contradictory and inconsistent.

Source

If COVID-19 is a scam/hoax, then the Iranian elites must be “in on it“ as well, given that they also advocate mask-wearing, social distancing, and vaccines.

At 2:00 the speaker mentions Hazara militiaman Abdul Hakim Shujayi and his alleged crimes in Uruzgan. Here is the truth: Source The Taliban continue to make false accusations about Hazara commanders’ “crimes” against Pashtuns (other Taliban?).

Russia and China also seem to be colluding with the U.S. on the matter of Afghanistan in order to appease the West and deflect its attention. For example, Putin’s presidential envoy to Afghanistan flatly denied claims that the West and the Taliban were working together to stage the takeover of Kabul. (Russia is also claiming that the Taliban fight Daesh, while Afghans on the ground tell a completely different story.) On the contrary, the head of Hezbollah lends credence to those claims. Certain “political” figures in the Iranian civil government are also disingenuously claiming that the Taliban are distinct from al-Qaida and Daesh. Ayatollah Safi has sided with Hezbollah and criticised the so-called “international community,” implicitly including Iran’s so-called “friends” Russia and China, for being willing to negotiate with and recognise the new Taliban-run regime in Kabul. Any party that is willing to tolerate the Taliban will soon receive a rude awakening, in my view. Russia and China, to not mention India, will soon face regrets, once the Taliban begin sponsoring terrorism abroad.

Source Source Source

Source Source Source

The U.S., as usual, likes to distance itself from its own strategy by voicing concern and blaming its own clients. Pakistan has merely been following the orders of its Western masters since the days of General Zia. The U.S. allowed—nay, ordered—Pakistan to protect bin Laden for a decade and resupply the Taliban and Company, courtesy of Saudi petrodollars. Bush and Cheney covertly intervened to prevent the Northern Alliance from apprehending a number of Pakistani operatives in northern Afghanistan during NATO’s invasion in October 2001. Bush and Cheney allowed many ISI-linked Taliban and Qaida, bin Laden included, to escape via Pakistani military transport. They facilitated this because many of these Taliban and Qaida operatives were also linked to the CIA, MI6, and Mossad via Pakistan’s military-intelligence apparatus. The onetime head of the ISI himself, General Mahmud Ahmed, was involved in transferring cash to 9/11 accomplices prior to the attacks. His conduit, Ahmed Omar Said Sheik, had ties to the CIA and MI6 as an informant inside al-Qaida. This is one reason why the U.S. could not afford to put bin Laden on trial, because doing so would expose the U.S. and Company’s role in 9/11, and also further illuminate the ties between U.S. energy interests in South-Central Asia and the Taliban up until 9/11. For instance, note how many of the alleged “hijackers” and “plotters” were also informants/double agents with ties to Western/Saudi/Pakistani/Israeli intelligence, including Special Forces, as well as to the West’s own proxy al-Qaida. See Atta, Jarrah, Ali Mohamed, Awlaki, et al. The U.S. did not “fail” in Afghanistan. The past two decades of chaos were the intended results of occupation.

In the short term, however, I think that these factions place anti-Shia unity on a higher pedestal than sectarianism, so that your hope for intra-Sunni fighting disrupting the anti-Shia coalition may prove to be rather forlorn. I suspect that their strategy, dictated to them by their handlers, is to exterminate the Shia and other rivals first, before turning against one another. Currently I see a vast anti-Shia coalition including all the sectarian/chauvinist Sunni powers, the U.S., the EU, and Israel. The Sunni-dominated Muslim Brotherhood is playing a major role in financially sponsoring any and all anti-Shia movements and proxies. Therefore, Saudi Arabia, along with Qatar, is financing Turkey’s pan-Sunni, pan-Turkic agenda, in order to better contain Iran, as well as to further the West’s aims against Russia, China, and India. During the 1980s and 1990s Saudi Arabia also financed Turkey and facilitated Turkey’s arming and training of Saudi-backed Sunni Islamists to serve the West and Israel’s agenda against Russia, China, Iran, and India, including in such arenas as the Balkans, the Caucasus, and South-Central Asia. Saudi Arabia also served as Israel’s liaison to the “Sunni NATO,” including Turkey, during the West’s intervention in Syria. Turkey is also backing the Taliban and their Pakistani sponsors in Afghanistan, Kashmir, and the rest of South-Central Asia, including Xinjiang. The West is also backing the MB to undermine Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, and a handful of other “secular, pluralistic” Sunni powers that do not adhere to NATO member Turkey and the GCC’s Saudi-Qatari-Emirati-sponsored, sectarian, Wahhabi–Salafi agenda. The West, inclusive of Israel, wants to salvage the Sunni-chauvinist MB and its “Arab Spring” in order to further sectarianism in the Muslim world, thereby dividing and weakening potential centres of resistance to Western imperialism. Israel also supports the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan and the resumption of the foreign-facilitated “civil war” in Afghanistan, in order to discredit the entire Muslim world as just another bastion of extremism, terrorism, and backwardness. As far as Russia and China are concerned, I do not think that either of these powers is willing to get involved militarily in Afghanistan, given the risks involved and the fact that the Afghans themselves are too divided to serve as reliable local partners against the Taliban and Company. India is also subject to American influence and is under heavy Western pressure to accept the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan. Plus, a substantial part of the BJP/RSS/Hindutva is allied to the same Zionist and Sunni forces that sponsor Pakistan and its proxies, so Modi has little room to manoeuvre between the financially lucrative West and a rising China. (Recently a number of Hindu nationalists in India have been exposed as having ties to Pakistan’s ISI, which in turn is controlled by the CIA/MI6/Mossad/Pentagon, so many Hindu and Wahhabi–Salafi extremists work together under NATO and Israel’s sponsorship. During the 2008 Mumbai attacks, Indian investigators and various media also exposed ties between one of the suspects, David Headley, and the Pakistani military-intelligence apparatus. Headley also had ties to the DEA and thus the CIA, which often uses “counter-narcotics” as a front for drug trafficking and sponsorship of terrorist proxies, including Wahhabi–Salafi.) Even during the 1990s India, like Russia and to some extent Iran, only provided token assistance to Massoud and his anti-Taliban Northern Alliance, so Afghans should not expect Russia, China, or India to “bail them out.” Other contributors here have succinctly mentioned the innumerable constraints that prevent Iran from ensconcing itself in Afghanistan as well. So at this point Afghans are primarily to blame for being their own worst enemies, thus rendering themselves exploitable, including by foreign and foreign-sponsored actors. As far as the “Pashtun problem” is concerned, the Afghans need to eliminate the British-installed Durand Line.