Colleagues, the advertising board, as you understand, has fallen. My tentative plan for posts for the week is this: today we will talk about the logic of various "London" and the country of Great Britain. Tomorrow, Tuesday 03.11 - "hypotheses and assumptions". And the post about the Middle East depends on the situation: either 04.11., or on Thursday. More likely on Wednesday, and as for the elections - on Thursday. Some of the US election results will be announced on Wednesday. But the real situation will become clear later. And honestly, I don't want to get into the crowd of commentators. What motivated me to write this text was the apparent rift between the British ruling bureaucracy and "global London". This fault must be taken into account in any contact where a British "trace" or "trail" is identified. In the past, I, and not only I, got away with the fact that Britain as a country is an instrument of "Old World London", ie. network and "shadow" parts of the British Empire. Contrasted with "neo-global London", which has more flexibility and presence within the UK, without being critically dependent on it. But important nuances emerged that amazingly reflect the nature of the current historical era. Great Britain as a country is ruled not by the British aristocracy, which was reduced to pieces by the beginning of the 21st century, but by the British bureaucracy, which, like the aristocracy, began to take on hereditary characteristics. It was the gradual replacement of the depleted British aristocracy with the "service class", partly with the bureaucracy (like that R. Moore, the author of the famous manifesto) that allowed the "Old World London" not only to take advantage of the weakening of the United States and the processes of decontrol of America within the larger "Euro-A" framework, but also to stop it. The strengthening of "neo-global London", which actively crushed the early version of post-imperial British globalism. But now different times are coming. Now the British state is in crisis, but is looking for opportunities to maintain its position in the conflict with Russia.

Colleagues, the advertising board, as you understand, has fallen. My tentative plan for posts for the week is this: today we will talk about the logic of various "London" and the country of Great Britain. Tomorrow, Tuesday 03.11 - "hypotheses and assumptions". And the post about the Middle East depends on the situation: either 04.11., or on Thursday. More likely on Wednesday, and as for the elections - on Thursday. Some of the US election results will be announced on Wednesday. But the real situation will become clear later. And honestly, I don't want to get into the crowd of commentators. What motivated me to write this text was the apparent rift between the British ruling bureaucracy and "global London". This fault must be taken into account in any contact where a British "trace" or "trail" is identified. In the past, I, and not only I, got away with the fact that Britain as a country is an instrument of "Old World London", ie. network and "shadow" parts of the British Empire. Contrasted with "neo-global London", which has more flexibility and presence within the UK, without being critically dependent on it. But important nuances emerged that amazingly reflect the nature of the current historical era. Great Britain as a country is ruled not by the British aristocracy, which was reduced to pieces by the beginning of the 21st century, but by the British bureaucracy, which, like the aristocracy, began to take on hereditary characteristics. It was the gradual replacement of the depleted British aristocracy with the "service class", partly with the bureaucracy (like that R. Moore, the author of the famous manifesto) that allowed the "Old World London" not only to take advantage of the weakening of the United States and the processes of decontrol of America within the larger "Euro-A" framework, but also to stop it. The strengthening of "neo-global London", which actively crushed the early version of post-imperial British globalism. But now different times are coming. Now the British state is in crisis, but is looking for opportunities to maintain its position in the conflict with Russia.