"Truth Is On The Side Of the Oppressed." – Malcolm X
POLITICO hears power draining out of Trump’s White House, but the freedom of a banker to turn down a presidential favor tells us damn little about who can stop a war. From Nixon’s secret bombing of Cambodia through the post-9/11 grants of authority and the surveillance powers Democrats helped renew, Washington spent decades building the... Continue Reading →
Lula’s reelection kept open a fight over who gets to set the terms in South America. Washington wants a hemisphere it can use as a secure base for U.S. power. Brazil has the factories, public banks and political reach to help its neighbors build an independent pole, and China’s industrial rise gives them more room... Continue Reading →
The imperialist façade is cracking as formerly colonized nations wield newfound agency, emboldened by China's socialist rise and BRICS collaboration. However, the narrative masks a grim reality: national sovereignty does not guarantee liberation from domestic exploiters. The struggle continues within, where local elites may replace imperial masters but retain the chains of economic subordination. This interplay reveals that power dynamics hinge on who decisively controls production and profits. As multipolarity expands possibilities, the essential question looms—will the working class finally seize genuine control over the fruits of their labor, or remain spectators in their own liberation? The era demands they reclaim agency—no more invitations.
Putin's charm offensive in Moscow, showcased by forty-eight African delegations, hardly veils the reality that African leaders exist merely as props in a grand stage play. While Russia pitches economic promises, it's the West's narrative that dominates, portraying Africa as a passive recipient. Yet, beneath the political theater, African ambitions for self-sufficiency simmer, illustrated by the African Union's strong call for industrialization and local production. This counter-narrative reveals a continent striving to wrest control from neocolonial shackles, challenging a status quo predicated on dependency. The struggle isn’t merely for trade; it's a fierce reclamation of agency long denied. Africa’s narrative is reshaping, and the stakes are higher than ever.
Saudi Arabia spent years bombing Yemen into ruin, only to confront a resistance capable of threatening the airports, trade routes, and investments sustaining its own economic ambitions. Behind the New York Times’ portrait of a vulnerable crown prince lies a century of struggles over Yemeni land, labor, sovereignty, and foreign domination. From grassroots development and migrant remittances to destroyed farms, contested oilfields, and imperial military assistance, this excavation exposes the material forces driving the conflict. The war Saudi Arabia tried to contain beyond its borders now threatens its capitalist transformation, while Yemen’s struggle for independence remains unfinished.
Eight small military jets at a joint Chinese-Lao training facility become a looming threat in The New York Times, while Laos’ sovereignty and revolutionary history disappear behind Washington’s geopolitical anxieties. Beneath the runway lies the legacy of American covert warfare, colonial devastation, and a socialist-rooted state struggling to build its productive and defensive capabilities. China’s cooperation offers genuine opportunities for national development while exposing contradictions involving debt, labor, land, and economic dependence. Weaponized Information excavates the imperial narrative to reveal the deeper struggle over material sovereignty, working-class interests, and the right of oppressed nations to determine their own future.
UNGA 81 looked like a week of separate crises: Palestine, Iran, Venezuela, artificial intelligence and China. Beneath the speeches, however, each exposed the same unfinished contradiction between formal sovereignty and the unequal material power needed to make sovereignty real. Gaza’s reconstruction, Venezuela’s oil revenues, Iran’s negotiations under coercion, and the Global South’s struggle for technological capacity all reveal how finance, property, military force and infrastructure shape what legal equality can actually deliver. The summit’s real story wasn’t only what leaders said from the podium, but who still controls the machinery that gives those words weight.
NBC presents falling stocks, rising Treasury yields and volatile oil as separate market reactions to war. Put the pieces back together and a deeper political economy appears. The struggle over Hormuz is raising the cost of energy and global circulation while Washington is already refinancing enormous debts under sharply higher real yields. Those pressures don’t fall evenly: workers, indebted households and vulnerable importing countries absorb higher costs while energy producers and concentrated technology capital occupy very different positions. What looks like market turbulence is really a struggle over the rising material and financial cost of American command—and who gets forced to pay the bill.
Michael Hudson's "Super Imperialism" reveals capitalism's peculiar twist: the U.S. transitioned from a great creditor to a dominant debtor, utilizing its debts as leverage in a world where power dynamics are shifting. Post-World War I, American financial institutions crafted a system that exploited other nations through debt, claiming to promote development while actually enforcing dependency. The contradiction lies in the U.S. controlling the world's currency even as its productive supremacy fades. As the global landscape evolves, the implications of dollar dominance become increasingly tenuous, demanding us to confront a crucial question—who ultimately commands the productive forces that money can influence but not generate?
The Gulf monarchies, once loyal to Washington's military dominance, are now scrambling for survival in a world where Iranian aggression opposes their established security framework. The ongoing war has exposed a perilous contradiction: the very American military infrastructure meant to protect the Gulf states has rendered them vulnerable to Iranian strikes. As the U.S. becomes a less reliable ally, these nations are cautiously seeking dialogue with Tehran, marking a seismic shift in regional politics. Their actions aren't a break from American influence but a pragmatic response to an urgent need for stability amidst rising tensions. The question remains—can they navigate this treacherous terrain without abandoning old alliances?
