War and Foreign Policy

While the battlefield results are mixed, much of the action in the Russia-Ukraine war is happening beyond the warring countries.

From globalization to sanctions, to international institutions like the UN, the US is leading a small global fragment that's little more than NATO and a handful of friends. Meanwhile, two-thirds of the global economy isn't signing on.

Ryan McMaken and Tho Bishop discuss how American taxpayers are subsidizing European militaries.

Beijing only ever really wanted Moscow around as a way to balance against Washington. But with the US being seen to overtly seek to punish Beijing, this will now only move it closer to Moscow.

Europe would have been immeasurably better off had its regimes chosen compromise instead of "countering aggression" in 1914. Sometimes this lesson is heeded, as when the US refused to intervene in 1956 and 1968.

The states of Europe have more than enough wealth and military potential to deal with a second-rate power like Russia. The American taxpayers, on the other hand, deserve a break from Europe's grifting. 

There are only two ways human cooperation occurs: through voluntary means or through coercion. The free market stands for voluntary cooperation; coercion and violence are the means of the state.

The United States is no longer in any position to remake the world in its image. It's not 1945 or even 1970. Yet the US seems to be gearing up to bully half the world into compliance with the US Russia sanctions.

Rothbard the historian explained so well how the true progressive goal was always to remake America domestically by promoting war.

A funny thing has happened on the way to accepting the standard ruling-class narrative on the war in Ukraine: inconvenient and unpleasant facts about the region and its recent history.