COMING SOON!!!: A SLAVIC CIVILIZATION LED BY RUSSIA

[Wunder-Zeichen]

COMING SOON!!!: A SLAVIC CIVILIZATION LED BY RUSSIA

FP: Whether or not China and Russia are fully invested in this ideological troika, it is clear Iran’s regime is all in. Khamenei sees an Islamic civilization led by Iran, a Russo-Slavic civilization led by Russia, and a Confucius-communist civilization led by China all at war with Western civilization—and he thinks now is the best chance they’ve had in decades to uproot the West. Khamenei’s close circle and the IRGC genuinely believe the U.S.-led liberal world order is collapsing and a new anti-Western order led by China, Russia, and Iran is taking shape. As recent as November 2022, Khamenei outlined a vision of a new order based on “the isolation of the United States, the transfer of power to Asia, [and] the expansion of the [anti-West] resistance front” led by the Islamic Republic.

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7698724

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...=1#post7698748

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...44#post7698744

[Annihilus]

Hmm, bit difficult since majority of muslims don't consider Khamenei to be a real muslim.

It would be like the pope leading the orthodox church.

[Wunder-Zeichen]

Hmm, bit difficult since majority of muslims don't consider Khamenei to be a real muslim.

It would be like the pope leading the orthodox church.

He probably thinks he is the most "authentic" Muslim. He's entitled to that opinion and to think what he likes, of course. But are we comparing apples and oranges here? To begin with, we must first ensure that we are comparing Apples with Apples and Oranges with Oranges. As explained by Grismer (2007), we can not compare apples with oranges or oranges with apples and expect to achieve an even valuation that can be understood by the average common sense person. The bottom line is that we compare a red delicious apple with another red delicious apple and make a determination which one we want to own based on their size, weight, eye appeal, freshness and perceived level of ripeness. But even though apples are different than oranges, that doesn't mean, Cuddy (2011) rightly says, that we can't compare them. Covering values are the values we employ when we make a comparison between two or more things, and a covering value typically is used to compare two things that are similar in some ways but different in others.

Face it, nothing brings two people together faster than having to team up to defend themselves against an external threat, as noted by Bornstein (2008). "Nothing brings a group together like a common enemy," according to Ezra Klein. "In tribal mode, we seem to go blind to arguments and information that challenge our team's narrative," according to Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. In Political Tribes, Yale law professor Amy Chua called this the darkest side to the tribal instinct: the ease with which we dehumanize outsiders and the satisfaction we derive from doing so. In every book and movie that has a conflict involving multiple warring factions, nothing, as McCoy (2014) also observed, brings peace and unity like teaming up against a common enemy. People, Russomanno (2020) rightly observes, act in ways that both reinforce their status within tribes and exclude non-members. This results in an us-versus-them thinking. Not only is a common enemy important in the forming and maintenance of a tribe, it serves as a motivating factor. As he points out, to seek and form "tribes" is a deep-seated instinct. This really should go without saying, but the degree to which tribalism is part of us cannot be overstated. Russomanno admits that it is universal and the instinct is deep-seated. More significantly, it is not merely one aspect of human existence, but the default mode.

[VIK LEWA]

Saudi-Iranian Rapprochement
Has Failed to Bring De-escalation

From Syria to Israel's borders to the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian de-escalation is nowhere to be found

Greater dialogue and cooperation between the Saudis and Iranians is positive, of course. Yet despite the planned exchange of ambassadors and an invitation from Saudi King Salman to Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi to visit Saudi Arabia, de-escalation has not happened. A tour around the region, from Syria to Israel’s borders to the Strait of Hormuz, indicates the opposite. It is early, of course. The Beijing-brokered agreement is only three months old. But so far, it looks like the Iranians are leveraging normalization to press their regional advantage rather than diminish tensions. The greatest promise of the Iran-Saudi Arabia normalization is peace in Yemen. The Saudis want to end their military intervention there and have sought help from Tehran, which has become a patron of Riyadh’s antagonists, the Houthis. But so far, normalization has not had a dramatic impact on the situation on the ground.