The Imperial Collapse Playbook

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Dmitry Orlov via Club Orlov blog,

Some people enjoy having the Big Picture laid out in front of them—the biggest possible—on what is happening in the world at large, and I am happy to oblige. The largest development of 2014 is, very broadly, this: the Anglo-imperialists are finally being forced out of Eurasia. How can we tell? Well, here is the Big Picture—the biggest I could find. I found it thanks to Nikolai Starikov and a recent article of his.

Now, let's first define our terms. By Anglo-imperialists I mean the combination of Britain and the United States. The latter took over for the former as it failed, turning it into a protectorate. Now the latter is failing too, and there are no new up-and-coming Anglo-imperialists to take over for it. But throughout this process their common playbook had remained the same: pseudoliberal pseudocapitalism for the insiders and military domination and economic exploitation for everyone else. Much more specifically, their playbook always called for a certain strategem to be executed whenever their plans to dominate and exploit any given country finally fail. On their way out, they do what they can to compromise and weaken the entity they leave behind, by inflicting a permanently oozing and festering political wound. “Poison all the wells” is the last thing on their pre-departure checklist.

• When the British got tossed out of their American Colonies, they did all they could, using a combination of import preferences and British “soft power,” to bolster the plantation economy of the American South, helping set it up as a sort of anti-United States, and the eventual result was the American Civil War.


• When the British got tossed out of Ireland, they set up Belfast as a sort of anti-Ireland, with much blood shed as a result.


• When the British got tossed out of the Middle East, they set up the State of Israel, then the US made it into its own protectorate, and it has been poisoning regional politics ever since. (Thanks to Kristina for pointing this out in the comments.)


• When the British got tossed out of India, they set up Pakistan, as a sort of anti-India, precipitating a nasty hot war, followed by a frozen conflict over Kashmir.


• When the US lost China to the Communists, they evacuated the Nationalists to Taiwan, and set it up as a sort of anti-China, and even gave it China's seat at the United Nations.

The goal is always the same: if they can't have the run of the place, they make sure that nobody else can either, by setting up a conflict scenario that nobody there can ever hope to resolve. And so if you see Anglo-imperialists going out of their way and spending lots of money to poison the political well somewhere in the world, you can be sure that they are on their way out. Simply put, they don't spend lots of money to set up intractable problems for themselves to solve—it's always done for the benefit of others.

Fast-forward to 2014, and what we saw was the Anglo-imperialist attempt to set up Ukraine as a sort of anti-Russia. They took a Slavic, mostly Russian-speaking country and spent billions (that's with a “b”) of dollars corrupting its politics to make the Ukrainians hate the Russians. For a good while an average Ukrainian could earn a month's salary simply by turning up for an anti-Russian demonstration in Kiev, and it was said that nobody in Ukraine goes to protests free of charge; it's all paid for by the US State Department and associated American NGOs. The result was what we saw this year: a bloody coup, and a civil war marked by numerous atrocities. Ukraine is in the midst of economic collapse with power plants out of coal and lights going off everywhere, while at the same time the Ukrainians are being drafted into the army and indoctrinated to want to go fight against “the Muscovites.”

But, if you notice, things didn't go quite as planned. First, Russia succeeded in making a nice little example of self-determination in the form of Crimea: if it worked for Kosovo, why can't it work for Crimea? Oh, the Anglo-imperialist establishment wishes to handle these things on a case-by-case basis, and in this case it doesn't approve? Well, that would be a double-standard, wouldn't it? World, please take note: when the West talks about justice and human rights, that's just noise.

Next, the Russians provided some amount of support, including weapons, volunteers and humanitarian aid, to Ukraine's eastern provinces of Donetsk and Lugansk, which declared themselves People's Republics and successfully fought Ukraine's so-called “anti-terrorist operation” to a stalemate and an imperfect, precarious cease-fire. Very significantly, Russia absolutely refused to get involved militarily, has withheld official recognition of these republics, has refused to consider breaking up Ukraine, and continues to insist on national dialogue and a peace process even as the bullets fly. According to Putin, Ukraine must be maintained as “a contiguous political space.” Thus, the Russians have responded to the Anglo-imperialists' setting up of an anti-Russia in the form of Ukraine by setting up an anti-Ukraine in the form of DPR and LPR, thereby shunting the Anglo-imperialist attempt to provoke a war between Ukraine and Russia into a civil war within Ukraine.

You might also notice that the Anglo-imperialists have been getting very, very angry. They have been doing everything they can to vilify Russia, comparing Putin to Hitler and so on. This is because for them it's all about the money, and they didn't get what they paid for. What the Anglo-imperialists were paying for in corrupting Ukraine's politics was a ring-side seat at a fight between Ukraine and Russia. And what they got instead is a two-legged stool at a bar-room brawl between Eastern and Western Ukraine. Eastern Ukraine accounts for a quarter of the Ukrainian economy, produces most of the coal that had formerly kept the lights on in the rest of the country, and contains most of the industry that had made Ukraine an industrialized nation. Western Ukraine is centered on the unhappy little rump of Galicia, where the political soil is so fertile for growing neo-Nazis. So, paying billions to watch a bunch of Ukrainians fight each other inconclusively while Russia gets to play peacemaker is not what the Anglo-imperialists wanted, and they are absolutely livid about it. If they don't get the war they paid for PDQ, they will simply cut their losses, pack up and leave, and then do what they always do, which is pretend that the country in question doesn't exist, which, the way things are going in the Ukraine, it barely will.

Note that leaving, and then pretending that a place doesn't exist, is something the Anglo-imperialists have been doing a lot lately. When they left Iraq, they did succeed in setting up a sort of anti-Iraq in the form of Iraqi Kurdistan, but that all blew up in their face. Their attempts to set up an anti-Syria or an anti-Libya died in their infancy, and they don't seem to have any plan at all with regard to Afghanistan, unless it is to repeat every single blunder the Soviets made there as carefully and completely as possible.

What's more, it's starting to look like they are about to get kicked out of Eurasia altogether. Most of the major Eurasian players—China, Russia, India, Iran, much of Central Asia—are cementing their ties around the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, to which the United States isn't even admitted as an observer. As for the European Union, the current crop of EU politicians is very much bought and will be paid for upon retirement by the Anglo-imperialists, but the only reason they are still in power is that there are lots of older voters in Western Europe, and older people tend to cling to what they know even after it stops working—for them or, especially, for their kids. If it was up to the young people, the Anglo-imperialists would face open rebellion. In fact, the trends in voting patterns show that their departure from the region is a matter of time.

Here is a preview of possible coming attractions. On their way out, the Anglo-imperialists will of course try to set up an anti-Europe, and the obvious choice for that is Britain. Of all the European nations, it is the most heavily manipulated by their Anglo cousins from across the pond. It would take minimal effort for them to hurt Britain economically, then launch a propaganda campaign to redirect the blame for the bad economy toward the continent. They wouldn't even have to hire translators for their propaganda—a simple “spelling-chequer” (or whatever) would suffice. And so, to make sure that their efforts to provoke a large-scale, hugely destructive, festering conflict between Britain and Europe fail, Europe would do well to set up an anti-Britain within Britain.

And the obvious choice for an anti-Britain is of course Scotland, where the recent independence referendum failed because of... the recalcitrance of older voters. A dividing line between the Anglo empire and Eurasia running through the English Channel/La Manche would be a disaster for Europe and moving it somewhere west of Bermuda would pose a formidable challenge. On the other hand, suppose that line ran along Hadrian's Wall, with the traditionally combative and ornery Scots, armed with the remnants of North Sea oil and gas, aligning themselves with the Continent, while England remains an ever-so-obedient vassal of the Anglo-imperialists? That would reduce the intercontinental conflict to what Americans like to call a “pissing contest”: not worth the high price of admission. Yes, there would be some strong words between the two sides, and some shoving and shouting outside of pubs, and even some black eyes and loose teeth should diplomacy fail, but that should be the extent of the damage. That I see as the best-case outcome.

So that's the big picture I see heading into 2015, which I am sure will be a most tumultuous year. Not to make a prediction as to timing (don't worry, you won't ever get one out of me!) but 2015 could be the year the Anglo-imperialist franchise finally starts shutting down in obvious ways. We know it will have to shut down eventually, because failing all the time is not conducive to its survival. The bonus question is, what sort of anti-America will these parasites set up inside America before they abandon their host and scatter to their fortified compounds in undisclosed locations around the world? Or will they not even bother, and just provoke a war of all against all?

I would think that they would at least try to leverage their expensively engineered red/blue divide within the United States. This fake cultural/political divide, with all the pseudoliberal/pseudoconservative indoctrination and university- and church-based brainwashing that put it in place, cost them a pretty penny. It was engineered to produce the appearance of choice at election-time while making sure that there isn't any. But could it not be pressed into service in some more extreme manner? How about leveraging it to organize some sort of rabidly homophobic racist fundamentalist separatist enclave somewhere down south? Or perhaps one somewhere in the north, where zoophilia is de rigeur while heterosexual intercourse requires a special permit from a committee stocked with graduates in women's studies? Now, fight, you idiots! Don't you see how well that could work in practice? Would they waste such a nice opportunity to set up a system of controlled mayhem? I think not!

I leave all of that up to you to imagine.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
heywood2's picture

Sigh, more tedious whining from Russian apologists.

Russia invades Ukraine, and somehow America and Britain are the imperialists. World class delusion.

But, hey, as long as the Russian state is paying, I guess they can get anything published.


Hawkey Schtick's picture

Serious, they even have a dating site for elites now...

If you can't beat em', join em'?

Anusocracy's picture

Sigh, more tedious whining from a subhuman supporter of the most murderous and destructive country in the world.

Your mother has a lot to be proud of having a ignorant ass like you for a child.

Manthong's picture

The red-blue divide won’t work because it will not be tumultuous enough. The ”red” side is not particularly disposed towards violence and although the red side is not disposed towards tumultuous protests, vandalism, looting and arson, it does have the political strength of numbers.

Emperor Obama’s fundamental transformation is infecting the country with millions of unscreened and unskilled aliens that do not share or aspire to traditional American values as well as sponsoring a general ethic of victimhood, helplessness, apathy and dependence on the state across a large percentage of the 99%.

The poison is, even today, is a seething jealousy of those who are productive or have any degree of economic security or independence by the lowest of the lazy and non-productive bottom half.

Unless effectively countered on the political arena, the U.S. is a well that will remain poisoned for a long time.


El Vaquero's picture

That, and there are a lot of people who subscribe neither to red nor blue.  That's a wildcard.  A class divide would be easier to play, and there are more than just two classes.  Rich vs poor, black vs white, etc...

OpTwoMistic's picture

Appears the State dept is mentally ill.

Tao 4 the Show's picture

Orlov is obviously insightful, but at the same time either disingenous or blind as a bat. Question: Who walks around endlessly blaming an authority figure while not considering the roles of any other persons or groups?

Answer: a child or, if adult, a generally disposessed person. This kind of thinking is too low to even be called one dimensional.

The world is a complicated place, with many, many aggressive players. Every large country has desires and plans to take over the world. Think the Chinese don't? Think the Russians don't? If you believe it is only the NWO players, you are thinking like a child. They are the easiest target because they are essentially in power now and the consequences of their actions are most obvious.

Look at the history of countries that have been at the crossroads of wars. They are beat up, robbed, raped, etc., by whichever side is present at a given moment. Some countries went fairly crazy during WWII when different armies took turns invading and occupying.

Sorry, life is just not as simple as Orlov makes out. He is so one-sided as to make the reader think that he is more than a cheerleader for the Russians. BTW, Russia has more nuclear weapons than the rest of the world combined. They also have multiple re-entry warheads compared to the U.S., which has decommisioned its MRVs and replaced them with single nuke warheads.

Could there be something more going on than Orlov discusses in his "Big Picture"? Of course there is, and he is either a short-sighted cheerleader for his team, or a paid agent.

Lore's picture

The fact that this article attracts so much glib, indefensible criticism tells you the author is making some important points, well expressed and accurately contextualised. Troll somewhere else, whores.

malek's picture

Rhetorical questions: How many superpowers do we have, today and during the last 20+ years? Are accusations they would do the same if they could in any way helpful except as the lamest of excuses? What significance do MRVs have if a conflict in which they would be used wouldn't have a winner?

The point is while pretending to dislike oversimplification, you are pursuing exactly that with the arguments you presented above, while at the same time ignoring the much deeper reaching thoughts of Orlov.

Element's picture

Spot on Tao. I looked at the content and level of reason, analysis and rank presumption/assumption, plus the usual team-slav nonsense ... boy, how does such muck clarify things for him, or for any reader? What's the point? Echo chamber delight? Who can't laydown 10 paragraphs of over the top rancid blah-blah and call it an 'article'.

Well, happy you know, ... like, 2015 'n stuff ... yeah, feeble init? :D

ThirteenthFloor's picture

Tao -> while impossible to cover 100 years history in one article. I think Orlov main point when empires begun to collapse they do a lot of damage on the way down. I do not read this article about Russia vs. US, what I read here is Western Alliance via it's failing system will not be part of the next system, which most likely will be Eurasia. If Germany or OPEC countries or both join the Shanghai Corporation in 2015 or so,most
Likely dollar as trade settlement device is gone and US is a third world state, with inability to import goods. There will be a lot of toilet paper called treasury bonds.

The western press likes to say Russia economy is in trouble, ruble is down but so is oil, which nets no change to Russia which is light to zero on debt. The rising dollar and falling oil is more of a bad moon rising for US economy, which less we forget has 18 trillion of 'foreign held debt'. Shale industry was adding increment in middle US economy and will go dark now in 2015. Looks to me Russia is securing imports with US treasuries, that is absent is western press. Which is smart, giving the economic climate.

As far as war waging machines, the US seems to be the leader here as of late. And the more I read valid history, I feel we have been to understate it 'mis-led' in the US.

Anusocracy's picture

@ Tao 4 the Show

You are stupid.

No country outside of the US is anywhere near creating a world government.

New World Chaos's picture

"This is a public service announcement for our FSA minions who we love so much.  All the racist white hoarders and small business owners are conspiring to make your EBT cards not buy jack shit.  You be OWED, bitchez!  Now go out there and fuck shit up.  Make them beg for an even nastier police state.  And keep whitey pinned down while we escape to our hollowed-out volcano lair and plot our next giant scam!"

And speaking about poisoning the well, fracking will haunt us for thousands of years.  Rural people in particular will lose a lifeline of self-sufficiency.  They might just have to go back on the grid and be serfs again.

1984's picture

OK.  He had me until the last paragraph.  Why would they abandon the seat of their power, where they have total control, where they have successfully relegated the opposition to fringe paranoic lunatics? 


ThirteenthFloor's picture

Red-blue is already exposed as a fraud. Turn out in 2012 of real voters was only about 27-30%. That is why red and blue import so much amnesty and hand out voter cards. Another failing system being kept alive in the Anglo-Imperial system.

indygo55's picture

heywood ja fuck off!! 17 weeks and you are fanning flames? Hows the pay in your goverment job? Are you paid in hookers and blow? 

El Vaquero's picture

Putin could be Stalin reincarnated, and it would not excuse the shit that we have pulled in any way, shape or form.  We fomented that coup in Ukraine and the evidence to prove it is in the public domain.  Pay attention to what your own government is doing, because a lot of it is some bad shit.

DaddyO's picture

Right you are, and there is much evidence and implication of the CIA as the main spoon in the  pot.

I am going to make some bold predictions in the next few days, chief among them is that 2015 will see a huge acceleration in the push towards woar.

There is absolutely no way to make the CB debt go away and the age old play is to go to war and settle the books.

The fallout of this lead up is going to be unrest in the US the likes of which we haven't seen since 1968, it was a very hot summer with riots all around.

2015 is going to see the US start to really come apart at the seams.


Lore's picture

Yep, the psychopaths are trying very hard to ramp up hate locally, domestically and internationally.  But I think Europe shatters first.  Last and hardest to collapse will be the heart of the dollar-sphere.

Steal Your Face's picture

"We" didn't do anything. They did it. We are part of the victims, not the victimizers.






El Vaquero's picture

And what did you do to stop it from happening?  If nothing, then you are complicit.  I include myself in that category.  Yes, we very well did do it. 

Conax's picture

B But I din do nuffins.

Mama: He a goot boy. Trine turn his life around.

Radical Marijuana's picture

El Vaquero, I do as much as I can, but that nevertheless ends up being practically nothing. All of my efforts amount to something like 0.0000001% of what should be done. That is not quite nothing, but still practically nothing.

I do not regard that as being complicit, but rather the result of attempting to resist a collective group of trillionaire mass murderers, when the surplus that I can devote to do that is merely measured in thousands. They already have the power to legally make more "money" out of nothing, as debts for everyone else, while I would have to exchange my labour for their "money" in order to do anything to try to participate in the political processes.

Worrying about the nuclear arms race between the USA and the USSR, which reached a previous peak in 1986, was what motivated me to become involved in the political processes, because the funding of politics is the focus point with the maximum leverage. However, the more I learned about that, the worse it looked.

How is anyone supposed to compete against an established system in which a handful of enormous mass media corporations dominate more than 90% of the "news" that people get? The established systems are already entrenched. There are no practical ways to compete with those who already own and control the mass media, as well as every other social institution that one may look at.

On a more theoretical level, there is practically nothing but controlled opposition groups that one could join with, to attempt to resist the established systems. However, one then ends up trapped within the same basic bullshit world view that is the underlying problem.

kchrisc's picture

Compliance is our complicity.

Their crimes of theft and violence are funded from our backs. Funded from our labors, efforts and production.

Stop complying. Turn away, and withdraw one's back from their support structure, and their ponzi of graft and violence will tumble down upon them.

The banksters need to repay us.


No need to huff-and-puff. Just quit producing the straw, wood, and bricks they need to withstand the onslaught of the blowback they have created and nutured.

ThirteenthFloor's picture

What country's intelligence agency has assassinated or ousted 42 leaders since it was started, which country's intelligence agency covers it expenses with narco dollars, one hint it ain't Russia's.

aiaiai's picture

Nice job Brother.I am gonna recommend to  the authority  to increase your paycheck.I got a hike yesterday.

Ignatius's picture

Pretty quick on the draw there, partner, you propagandist ass-wipe.

mvsjcl's picture

Pure troll. Best to simply ignore. We seem to be attracting lots of such creatures these days, don't you find?

ebworthen's picture

"Russia invades Ukraine..." Really?  When did that happen? 

I do recall that Victoria Nuland was there, and John McCain.

tired1's picture

In a way it's more like Russia invades the USSR.

Russia is reasserting herself after being infected by the tribe for 70+ years.

MrPalladium's picture

"Russia is reasserting herself after being infected by the tribe for 70+ years"

Bingo!! Nailed it!!

Scarlett's picture

Nuland, "Fuck the EU".


Start from there, grasshopper.

IridiumRebel's picture

Sigh, more tedious whining from an American apologist.

CIA invades Ukraine, and somehow Russia and Putin are the imperialists. World class delusion.

But, hey, as long as the American taxpayer is paying, I guess they can get anything published.




El Vaquero's picture

It's a false delimma.  It's the idea that you are either rooting for Russia or you are rooting for the US.  That is the unsaid part of "you're either for us or you are against us."  It is the failure to even consider the possibility that there may be other options.  Like being on my own fucking side.  Seriously.  Fuck the FSB and fuck the CIA.  They're corrupt and they are looking out for their own best interests and the best interests of the uberwealthy.  They don't give a shit about you and I.  Nor the statist troll up above, unless he is employed by .gov.

IridiumRebel's picture

I am on my daughters' side. I could give fuckall about Putin, Obama, Heywood Jablome or who's nuclear chicken with shackles and chains for you, me and ours. 

Bioscale's picture

The most recent documentary covering the fights in Donetsk and Donbas, very well made with english subs. A Max Fadeyev movie 1 hour long:

STP's picture

I watched the whole thing.  You get a perspective that is unavailable from the MSM.  They know who's behind all of the destruction.  Its one thing to read about it, but another to see the indiscriminate shelling of a large city.  And Its not only the direct hits, but the concussion breaking windows of the other houses and apartments.  It is very cold and they try to patch with plastic sheeting, but it's not the same.  The interviews with the various militia members is telling.  They volunteered and are made up of many ethnicities and even, religions.  They fight for freedom.  They fight against the Nazis.  The one soldier said, there are a hundred ways to get the Russian Bear out of his lair, but there is no way to get the bear, back in, once it's out....


darteaus's picture

Simple question:

1) Was the Crimea within the Ukrainian border [Hint: Yes],and whose army is in ther now [Hint: Not NATO]?

So, I'm NOT saying you are wrong about the CIA, but there is an actual invading army within the former border of the Ukraine - a border recognized by treaty by Russia.

You don't find that significant?

mvsjcl's picture

Ummm. There's that self-determination aspect that you seem to be avoiding.

darteaus's picture

Yes, the old "referendum" trick.  Same way Chavez, the billionaire 'defender of the poor' became president for life:

I'm holding a referendum in my house.  I counted the votes, and [gasp!] I won!!

I'm declaring my house and property an independent country, and I ask Russian troops in to help secure my independence!

Please forward military, humanitarian and financial aid.

malek's picture

It seems you somehow forgot to respond to Orlov's explicit example of Kosovo.

darteaus's picture

check again, and

Here are the irrefutable facts (whch many can't accept):

1) Crimea was part of Ukraine.

2) Russian Federation troops now occupy and control that territory.

3) All done in violation of treaties and international law.

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Would you be kind enough to provide some details regarding your third 'irrefutable fact'? Which specific treaties and international laws have been violated?


Ghordius's picture

Stooge, what's your angle? "International Law" is a bit of a misnomer

But the treaties among Ukraine and Russia are a long, complex affair, which nevertheless always saw Ukraine as a separate sovereign

even in 1922, both Russia and Ukraine were seen as the two founding members of the Soviet Union. at the UN, Ukraine always had a separate delegation

on April 2010, for example, the two countries signed a treaty about Sevastopol, assigning it for further 25 years as a Russian Federation base. A lease

it is an accepted principle that if two sovereigns have a treaty, they are at peace and do recognize the inviolability of their borders... even if they still have claims on territories or populations

the claim on a territory or a population is a recognized, legitimate "casus belli", i.e. reason for (legitimate) war. yet it would warrant a declaration of war, or an ultimatum asking for redress before a war

what is internationally not recognized is the "grab" of a territory without (old style) an ultimatum/declaration or without (new style) a UN authorization

Russia did not follow the old style and did not follow the new style of internationally accepted norms of sovereign territorial dispute. in part in protest of neither the old or the new style being internationally enforced. In a way, Russia is asking for clarity, like "folks, which rules do you really want? the new ones aren't working, and the old ones neither"

nevertheless, Russia is an aggressor with a somewhat legitimate casus belli though waging an undeclared conflic according to the old style, the "Old World Order" (or pre-UN order) I know, there is always a danger on blogs that if you cite Hitler the whole thing degenerates, but that is the exact same problem when Germany defended the rights of German populations outside it's borders, which lead to a lot of confusion and the grab of territories beyond the scope that would be seen as legitimate, at least in part

again, what's your angle?

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Too early in the day for an angle, as I haven't even had any coffee yet.

I agree regarding international law. My observation is that the inconsistency and double standards of the US government regarding international law exceed by at least an order of magnitude the already volatile standards it applies to the "rule of law" domestically.

I asked for specifics simply because over the years I've seen more than a few claims of 'irrefutable facts' turn out to be at least somewhat refutable.

pendragon's picture

your angle is head between putin's legs - tongue out

TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Oh, look, the first fappar* of the day.

Let's wait for the next round of entertainment.


*fairies against President Putin and Russia