A Superstitious War

Today more than ever, hatred toward Russia has never had such dire implications for the world. The fears of yesterday have become the even greater fears of tomorrow. The idea of peace has been waved away as meaningless, and any chance for a peace deal to end the war in Ukraine is not readily entertained, even by formerly peace-loving people.

They firmly believe that any compromise will lead to the annihilation of Ukraine and the entire world. Is this a reasonable perspective? How and why has peace become equated with escalation? Are we really going to save the world by waging war against Russia? Or is this potentially an apparition of sorts?

By the late 1940s, the power of Russian weaponry was on the minds of Americans as a harbinger of future calamities: unstoppable missiles and nuclear-powered planes were just some of the rumored advancements. Even early flying saucer sightings were suspected to be secret Russian technology.

Will the world ever learn from the ghosts of past wars? The dilemma starts here: those calling for war say it’s precisely the lessons learned from previous wars that prove this war must go on. Should the war really not be opposed? The biggest obstacle in understanding this war is the unwillingness to study it beyond newspaper headlines.

Recently, the esteemed American scholar Noam Chomsky was dismissed as a Russian propagandist for emphasizing the necessity of negotiations. Those echoing his thoughts are now the Neville Chamberlains of the world, derided as too simple-minded to see the totality of the situation. American democracy is suffering because unpopular opinions have become enemy propaganda.

Any form of compromise is strongly assumed to be what will erase Ukraine from this planet, but is this rather a confused conclusion? Influenced by decades of fear and worries about a foreign enemy. It is not only Republicans who oppose this war. Opposing the war in Ukraine and supporting the idea of a peace deal will help Ukraine more than arguing for the fighting to continue.

The first thing that should be studied and discussed about this war is whether there is freedom to be won. This is not to say it’s impossible. War proponents have sincerely asked, what are alternatives to the fight for freedom? The question should be, is freedom possible? Because it will not be won through an endless war, it is more likely to be won through dialogue.

More specifically, does democracy even exist in Ukraine? It’s very easy to think of this war as a noble battle for democracy, but democracy must exist first. Despite the appearance of a democratic election, Ukraine unfortunately is not a democracy, therefore it is not fighting for democracy. Ukrainians would need to elect an entirely new leader to even begin to have the possibility of democracy.

Even if Ukrainians were to win the war, they still will not have a democratic government. This puts the war in another light which only proves that the fight for victory is a tragically absurd proposal. To ignore all of this and still want the war to continue is the height of madness. The war in Ukraine has become a superstitious war.

We are losing ourselves in superstition rather than actually trying to understand this war. We will do more harm than good by letting our assumptions get the best of us. If people want to support Ukraine they should be against this war in every way. Ukraine is not saving democracy, Ukraine is not saving the world, no matter how amazing all of that sounds.

Zelensky’s endless demands for more weapons will not magically make things better, but is and will continue to make things worse. Until an agreement is reached, this war will spiral more and more out of control, not the other way around. It is our plunging into superstition which has convinced us that a peace deal will lead to the end of the world. It’s time to wake up.

Edward Alvarez writes from San Diego.

13 thoughts on “A Superstitious War”

  1. March 6, 2022 The Pentagon’s “Ides of March”: Best Month to Go to War?

    Today, the dangers of military escalation are beyond description. What is now happening in Ukraine has serious geopolitical implications. It could lead us into a World War III Scenario. It is important that a peace process be initiated with a view to preventing escalation. The history of this war must be understood.


  2. Jun 11, 2022 In-depth With Russia’s Newly Installed “Government In Ukraine”

    On 24th of Feebuary 2022 Russian forces began to come over the border from Crimea into the Kherson region of Ukraine. Almost imidiatly the Ukrainian forces and government representatives retreated from the region leaving the area in control of the Russian forces. Russian forces installed and new government made up of local pro Russian residents.


    1. You raise an exelent topic. All the Western advisers are left red faced not understanding Russia’s top priority goal,

      Protect Crimea and adress its weaknesses. One, take Kherson and unblock water source that Ukraine so generously blocked to improve patriotic morale of Crimean population. Two, taking Zaporozhie coastal belt is to prevent Ukraine having access to Azov Sea.

      Ukraine never stopped threatening the Crimean bridge, at present the longest European bridge. By having its major port Mariupol on Azov Sea, Ukraine had the right of passage under the bridge, but kept on inventing lroblems, failing to
      notify bridge authorities of the nature of shipling, and constsntly hinting the intention of taking it down. These are mad rantings — as nobody should target civilian bridges with heavy trsin and car traffic.

      The real questjon is — how did Russia manage to take all this strategically important territory — in the first couple of weeks?
      Because Russia succesdfuly sold the faint of moving on Kiev.

      Once phase I mission was accomplished, on to Phase II. And it is embarrasing to claim that Ruussia pulled from Kiev, as it wac beaten back by defenders! What a memmory loss. Russia first took Chernobil from Ukraine managers. Than called IAEA to manage. Prevent some nuts
      from finding some contsminsted material. Then a functioning nuclear power plant bas been taken over.. Ukrainian staff is still managing it, but no crazies can come in, Mission accomplished.

      Yes, Western advisors surely screewed up by advising defense of Kiev to be paramount. And did nothing to prevent taking strategically most
      valuable geography.

      Zelenski claims that traitors are responsible. Perhaps. These ares are not pro-Russian but ethnically Russian aeas.

      Since Zenski regime was VERY explicit about not wanting anything Russian in his state, ethnic Russians had one suggestion: if Zenski Ukraine does not want Russians that is fine. But you do
      not get to annihilate undesirable people ,— but keep the land they live on?

      The notion that there are Ukrsinians and they are one, happy family is — absurd.

      The example of CNN not getting it, Be it iMariupol Azivstal plant, or now chemical plant in Severodonetsk — civilians are not hiding inside.
      Those are both ethnic Russian majority areas. and civilians are hostages, This is now one
      more hostage situation.

      Remember when civilians came out of Mariupol Azovstal plant — Reuters and AP did not want to publish what they heard from civilians, That they were held against their will. Poor kids clutching their dogs and cats,

      Yet, we still hear of mythical Ukrainians, Besides ethnic Russians, there are Russian speaking Ukrainians with Ukrainian Rusdian dialect, anc
      Wesr Ukrainians witn Ukrainian Polish dislect.
      And this one is touted as the only pure Ukrainian.

      1. If the move on Kyiv was a feint, then they certainly wasted a lot of materiel and people in the process. Only logical that it should have actually been a primary objective. There are also a good many ethnically Russian Ukrainians who oppose Russia’s aggression & genocide, and they are not “mythical.”

  3. The fact that anyone is even speculating about ending the war with “dialogue” is lunatic. There is no one to talk to. The US, NATO and Ukraine are delusional, and the Russians have had enough of their crap. There will be no peace until Ukraine’s military are destroyed.

  4. The war is easy to understand. What is hard to understand is NATO’s reaction to Russia’s actions if you look at it from a moralistic point of view.

    Of course, if you look at it from a raw power angle, then Russia basically pissed the Mafia Don is you will.

  5. The US suffered 750,000 deaths fighting against itself 1861-65. Russia suffered 20,000,000 deaths fighting Nazi Germany in the mid-20th century.

    Whenever the US has that much skin in the game, perhaps we’ll “get it.” Of course, if that realization ever happens, it will be too late.

  6. “The first thing that should be studied and discussed about this war is” the reality that Ukraine has zero chance of winning it. Any analysis that proceeds from any other assumption is not worth reading. The only question is what the loss will look like, how many dollars and lives it will cost, and whether it will go nuclear. Russia has overwhelming numerical superiority, overwhelming firepower, absolute air superiority, and strategic initiative. To repeat, there is absolutely zero chance Ukraine will prevail in anything remotely resembling a conventional war with Russia, and people who believe politicians claiming otherwise should stop. You are being lied to.

  7. The US’s so called War on Terror did not turn the Middle East into a long lasting prosperous democracy and neither did the Arab Spring. The war between Russia and the Ukraine will not make either country a long lasting prosperous democracy. Just because Putin is not the West’s ally doesn’t mean the West is doing the right thing by supporting Zelensky.
    The US supported the Taliban during the Russian Invasion of Afghanistan but the Taliban became one of America’s enemies after they gained power. The West is an enemy of Assad but that doesn’t make Assad’s enemies in Syria its allies.

    1. This was first contact in 1979 under Carter.

      Zbigniew Brzezinski Taliban Pakistan Afghanistan pep talk 1979

      In 1979 Carters National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski went into Pakistans border regions with Afghanistan to give a little pep talk to some prospective majehadeen (Holy Warriors).


Comments are closed.