Aggregator

Russia's Lavrov Admits That Anchorage Only Bought Time For Ukraine To Rearm

Zero Rss
1 month 2 weeks ago
Russia's Lavrov Admits That Anchorage Only Bought Time For Ukraine To Rearm

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

Lavrov sheepishly said during a roundtable event last week that “I do not even want to suspect that Alaska, like the actions of the Europeans, was designed to buy time to rearm the Kyiv regime. I don’t even want to think about it. But in reality, things turned out the way they did.”

 

This came three and a half years after former German Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted in December 2022 that the Minsk Accords were just a ruse to buy time for Kiev to rearm.

Putin famously responded a month later that “We endured for a long time, tried to reach an agreement for a long time. But, as it turns out now, we were simply led by the nose, deceived. It’s not the first time this has happened.” Given that he cautioned Russia’s strategic forecasters against indulging in “wishful thinking” during a speech at the headquarters of his country’s Foreign Spy Service in summer 2022, it was widely assumed among “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” that he wouldn’t fall for a similar ruse.

Lo and behold, that’s precisely what happened after Trump reneged on the “Spirit of Anchorage”, which an RT contributor described as him having agreed to coerce Zelensky into withdrawing from Donbass in exchange for Putin then declaring a ceasefire. It’s a matter of speculation whether Trump intended to dupe Putin or whether he just caught too caught up in retrospect planning Maduro’s capture and the Third Gulf War. The outcome, nevertheless, is the same since Trump didn’t do what he promised Putin.

Trump is now “escalating to de-escalate” through a “war of attrition” because he senses weakness from Russia due to the new “cordon sanitaire” around it and thus believes that strengthening Ukraine’s strike capabilities, imposing more sanctions, and provoking unrest can coerce energy-related concessions. The Wall Street Journal reported on the aforementioned three-phase strategy last fall so Russia would have presumably been aware of it but still maintained hope that Trump would implement his deal with Putin.

This “wishful thinking” has now been shattered after he signed the G7 joint statement calling for more arms to Ukraine and sanctions on Russia, which preceded a report that he told Zelensky to act “more boldly” against Russia after being impressed by its recent US-backed strategic strikes. To be sure, Russia had realized even before this that something was wrong after Putin’s close advisor Yuri Ushakov played dumb about the “Spirit of Anchorage” last month, but now it’s indisputable that it no longer exists.

Seeing as how there’s no longer any credible hope that Trump will coerce Zelensky into withdrawing from Donbass by cutting off arms, funds, and intel to Ukraine, not even in exchange for a resource-centric strategic partnership with Russia, only three options remain for Russia.

  1. It can either decisively “escalate to de-escalate” in its own right to swiftly end the conflict on as many of its terms as possible,

  2. carry on as usual amidst this new “war of attrition” at tremendous risk to itself,

  3. or freeze the conflict.

Unless he’s bluffing about “escalating to de-escalate” and abruptly implements his half of the “Spirit of Anchorage”, which is unlikely after all that’s recently happened, then it would mean that the past year since their meeting achieved nothing at all other than getting Russia’s guard down. Even if they agreed on that quid pro quo, however, Russia would have probably kept the same tempo. Now that its “spirit” is discredited, Russia has the pretext for ramping everything up, but it’s still unclear whether Putin will.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/26/2026 - 23:25
Tyler Durden

The Average Asian American Household Makes More Than Double That Of Blacks

Zero Rss
1 month 2 weeks ago
The Average Asian American Household Makes More Than Double That Of Blacks

Median household income differs significantly across racial and ethnic groups in the United States, with one group sitting well above the rest.

In 2024, Asian households reported a median income of $121,700, nearly $30,000 higher than White alone, non-Hispanic households and more than double the median income of Black households.

These differences reflect a mix of factors, including education, geography, occupation, household composition, immigration patterns, and historical inequalities.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Bruno Venditti, ranks median household income by race and Hispanic origin in 2024, using inflation-adjusted dollars.

The data for this visualization comes from the U.S. Census Bureau.

Asian Households Lead by a Wide Margin

Asian households had the highest median income in 2024, at $121,700. This was well above every other group shown in the Census dataset.

White alone, non-Hispanic households ranked second, with a median income of $92,530. Hispanic households followed at $70,950.

American Indian and Alaska Native households had a median income of $59,050, while Black households had the lowest among the listed groups at $56,020.

Asian households had a median income that was $29,170 higher than White alone, non-Hispanic households in 2024.

This group has ranked at the top of the dataset for every year shown, from 2002 to 2024.

It is important to note that these are median household figures, not individual earnings. Household income can be affected by the number of earners in a household, local cost of living, age distribution, educational attainment, and where people live and work.

A Persistent Income Gap

The gap between the highest and lowest median household incomes was $65,680 in 2024.

That difference compares Asian households at $121,700 with Black households at $56,020. In practical terms, the top group’s median income was more than double the lowest group’s.

The long-term trend also shows that these gaps have persisted across multiple economic cycles. While incomes have generally risen since 2002 in inflation-adjusted terms, the distance between the highest- and lowest-income groups remains substantial.

Hispanic Household Income Continued to Rise

Hispanic households had a median income of $70,950 in 2024.

That was up from $67,240 in 2023, and well above the 2002 level of $54,670 in 2024 dollars.

The Census Bureau defines Hispanic as people of Hispanic or Latino origin, regardless of race. This means Hispanic households can include people who identify with any racial group.

If you enjoyed today’s post, check out Number of Indian Tribes in the US on Voronoi.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/26/2026 - 23:00
Tyler Durden

The Other Problem With Socialism

Zero Rss
1 month 2 weeks ago
The Other Problem With Socialism

Authored by Chris Talgo via American Thinker,

In 1976, Margaret Thatcher said during a television interview, "Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They always run out of other people's money."

Over the years, that quote has been whittled down to the renowned proverb: The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.

This is a powerful argument against socialism. Even better, it has been validated time and time again, most notably when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics collapsed in 1991. The Soviet Union was an economic basket case, and the whole world witnessed its demise.

But socialism has an even bigger problem: it is immoral.

Even if it did somehow work efficiently and effectively at an economic level, it would still be immoral.

A broad definition of "moral" is "conforming to a standard of behavior that is considered right and good by most people." Morality is synonymous with truth, honor, honesty, fairness, righteousness, and virtue.

Immorality is the antithesis of morality. It is synonymous with wickedness, callousness, evil, sin, vileness, viciousness, darkness, and ruthlessness.

Socialism, in its depraved but effective way, appeals to people's worst instincts and impulses. It presents the world as a zero-sum game in which there are winners and losers. It pits groups of people against each other based on arbitrary measures. For the narrow-minded, it makes sense.

It embodies most of the seven deadly sins.

Pride: Socialists have zero humility because they reject the fallibility of humanity. They can micromanage an entire society. They can create a centralized, one-size-fits-all, command-and-control utopia. They know all and know best.

Envy: Taking one's property because they have too much to give to others who have less is not noble; it is theft. Stealing with state-sanctioned approval is unjust. The sheer resentment that some have more, better, or bigger material possessions is the driving force of socialist ideology.

Wrath: Socialist doctrine fuels anger, rage, violence, and a desire for vengeance against the so-called oppressors. Instead of mimicking the successful, the people turn their ire toward them.

Sloth: Because socialism is about passing the buck and the blame, it excuses idleness and promotes laziness. It allows one to shirk personal duties and retards personal growth.

The above is far from a comprehensive list of socialism flaws or features, depending on where one sits on the moral relativity scale.

For those who outright reject moral relativism, deconstructionism, postmodernism, and critical theory in favor of universal truth, reason, logic, and fairness, socialism is obviously not up your alley.

Alas, for millions of Americans, especially Americans born after the Cold War, socialism has been branded very differently. Socialism has been presented to them with a smile. For America's youth, socialism is like a happy meal because it brings nothing but joy.

I know this from first-hand experience in several public schools over the years. It is no big secret that the K-12 education system leans left.

However, it is a well-kept secret that young Americans have been, and are being, indoctrinated that socialism is just, fair, and good in public schools. In the meantime, they are being purposely miseducated about American history, especially the nation's founding.

Such is why young Americans are champing at the bit to vote for socialists.

The left's long march through the institutions has created a culture that champions socialism under the misguided assumption that it is moral.

This is incredibly dangerous because these young minds are also unaware that socialism, as Thatcher said, leads to bankruptcy.

If socialism can be rebranded as morally wholesome despite its undisputed track record of mass murder, misery, and poverty, it can rise from the ashes in the United States.

It would be tragic if the United States, which fought on the side of freedom throughout the Cold War, succumbed to socialism in the end. I worry the rising tide of suicidal empathy, coupled with a lack of knowledge about socialism's history and sheer immorality, could bring a socialist revolution to the United States. I hope I am wrong.

Chris Talgo (ctalgo@heartland.org) is editorial director at The Heartland Institute.

Tyler Durden Fri, 06/26/2026 - 22:35
Tyler Durden

zero rss