The devaluation of the “values-based West” – War instead of peace
Ethically advanced cultures strive to avoid war. This view is rooted in a long and venerable tradition of thought. Many philosophers, writers, and spiritual teachers have emphasized that moral progress is inextricably linked to the renunciation of violence. An ethically advanced culture is often measured by how it resolves conflicts – not by how it wages them.
Violence – and also the violent response to violence – is always a moral bankruptcy. Peace is not the exception, but the mature form of human coexistence. This maturity is currently lacking in the European warmongers in countries like Germany, Great Britain, France, and Poland. These questionable, immoral leaders lack the empathy and reason that, in the long term, ensure the stability of a peaceful human community.
“Peace is not the natural state, but needs to be established.” Immanuel Kant, who saw lasting peace as the goal of reason and as the result of a morally and legally mature society, pointed this out. Albert Einstein understood war as an expression of humanity’s incomplete moral development: “War cannot be justified on human grounds. It is the failure of reason.” Baruch de Spinoza joined the ranks of great pacifist thinkers and said: “Peace is not the absence of war, but a virtue, a state of consciousness, an inclination towards kindness, trust and justice.”
This points of view have been lacking in the “values-based West” for some time now. It has degenerated into a “values-less West”.
Mahatma Gandhi made it clear that peace is not the goal after a struggle, but the basis of every ethical action. “There is no way to peace, peace itself is the way.”
A civilized, ethically advanced society recognizes that cooperation, not war, is the only sensible form of coexistence. Peace does not mean suppressing conflict at any cost, but rather actively shaping structures that guarantee a just peace. Those who respect life in its entirety cannot justify war.
Anyone who takes up a weapon and kills another commits murder, whether as a soldier or a civilian. Anyone who gives the order to do so commits murder. Anyone who wants to force young people through conscription to kill in a crisis commits murder in advance and potentially destroys, irresponsibly, the physical and/or psychological lives of the young person serving as cannon fodder.
True strength lies not in saying that one will take up a weapon to defend one’s country, but in having the courage to say that one will not. Strong people avoid conflict; they do not seek it. Wanting to have or create peace requires strength and self-control.
Warmongers in Germany and Europe
Western governments tend to respond to crises and acts of violence with war. They threaten their demonized adversaries with war, irresponsibly exposing their populations to an increased risk of war. This seems to be the only language these narcissistic tormentors of humanity speak. They often respond to acts of violence by other countries – mostly provoked by the West – with the threat of war, and in some cases, directly with war, instead of attempting to calm the waters through diplomacy.
In 2016 alone, the USA, under President and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Barack Obama, waged war against seven countries. So much for awards in the West: those with the most skeletons in their closets receive the highest prizes to create a semblance of respectability for the disreputable system of the West. Who will receive the Nobel Peace Prize next? One who provokes genocide?
Warmongers insist on the right of the stronger, claiming that Vladimir Putin, for example, can only be dealt with in this way. No other solution is being seriously considered. The reactionary and, in my opinion, no longer credible former German deputy chairman of the Defence Committee, Roderich Kiesewetter, wanted to “bring the war to Russia” in 2024 and recently stated on the German TV program “Hart aber Fair”:
“Ukraine is seeking peace in freedom and self-determination. And Ukraine is also concerned with ensuring that we understand: the law of the jungle does not mean that the rule of law, namely Ukraine’s legal borders, is restricted. And this should also be our lesson from the Second World War: if Russia is not contained, they will continue. They have not had to abandon their goals, and this also means for us that we should do everything possible to ensure that Ukraine has the prospect of retaining its territory. And politically, our goal needs to be for Russia to recognize Ukraine’s right to exist.”
Mr. Kiesewetter obviously wasn’t paying attention in history class, otherwise he would know that Russia didn’t attack Germany, but rather Germany attacked Russia – with devastating consequences: 27 million dead Russians – more than half of them civilians. Perhaps even as a schoolboy, he dreamed of marching on Russia like the equally megalomaniacal Napoleon, instead of paying attention.
Even if Kiesewetter didn’t quite reach the top in his bellicose career – perhaps due to his lack of historical knowledge – he has nevertheless become someone whose incompetent voice is frequently printed by the propaganda organs of the elite-controlled political puppets. Historical depth is increasingly being replaced by rhetorical volume, as a dear editor of mine recently described it. Those who speak loudly enough seem less likely to question what they say – or why. It’s as if they’re saying, “How can I know what I think before I hear what I say?”
The intellectual cabaret of political certainties has been booming in recent years. Those who appear particularly resolute sometimes even receive applause – whether their arguments hold water is often secondary.
Annalena Baerbock, arguably the worst German foreign minister of all time, who was “promoted out” and finally landed a job in New York that she’s somewhat suited to – tapping a hammer on the table – stated in her much-mocked former foreign ministry role that we were “at war with Russia.”
This woman clearly didn’t care what her voters thought, as she declared in Prague during her embarrassing tenure for Germany. Germany stood behind Ukraine, come what may, naturally ignoring the background of the Ukraine conflict, such as NATO’s eastward expansion and other “minor details.” Of course, according to this ex-minister’s limited perception, Russia is to blame for everything, probably also for the current bad weather, which the evil Russians are naturally influencing to spoil our good war mood.
In Germany, the words “Never again war” have faded away. Warmongers like Defence Minister Boris Pistorius and Chancellor Friedrich Merz, in the first tier, and Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann and Roderich Kiesewetter, in the second tier, dominate the scene, which has now been made ready for war through manipulation techniques such as fear-mongering, the constant repetition of falsehoods, and the fragmentation of information.
The arms industry, with its deadly weapons, is experiencing its strongest boom since the Second World War. On February 18, 2022, Rheinmetall shares were trading at €96.44; a week later, on February 25, the day after the official start of the war in Ukraine, they had already reached €107.05, and on October 24, 2025, they hit €1,764. Ironically, their highest point was reached on October 3, German Unity Day, at €1,962.50. Apparently, many Germans are “in agreement” that they should once again wage an unwinnable war against Russia – at least the irresponsible, bellicose, elite-instructed politicians among them.
Unofficially, the war in Ukraine began at the latest with the Maidan coup in Kyiv in 2014, orchestrated by the West – as Jens Stoltenberg, then NATO Secretary General, correctly observed.
German Defence Minister – or rather, War Minister – Boris Pistorius gave an interview to the Financial Times on July 14, 2025. Under the headline “German defence minister calls on arms makers to deliver,” the following could be read:
“The German defence minister has called on arms manufacturers to stop complaining and start delivering for Europe’s rearmament. He demanded increased production to meet his country’s booming spending plans. Boris Pistorius told the Financial Times that his government had addressed long-standing industry concerns about cutting hundreds of billions of euros in new military spending. ‘There is no more reason to complain,’ Pistorius said in the FT interview. ‘Industry knows perfectly well that it is now responsible for delivering.’ He said the industrial giants must honour their end of the bargain as Europe tries to fend off Russian aggression in the face of waning US interest in the continent’s security.”
With such statements, Mr. Pistorius joined the ranks of those who, before the last world wars, also boosted Germany’s “war readiness.” In Germany, both before the First and Second World Wars, there were political, military, and economic actors who deliberately worked towards war and/or promoted a war economy.
For example, the Prussian Colonel General and Chief of the General Staff of the German Army (from 1906 to 1914), Helmuth von Moltke the Younger, was convinced that a major war with France and Russia was inevitable. In 1912 he said: “I consider war inevitable, and the sooner the better.” (Source: Fritz Fischer, Germany’s Aims in the First World War, 1961)
Moltke was responsible for the operational implementation and further development of the Schlieffen Plan, which was designed for a two-front war against France and Russia and required logistical and industrial preparation – for example, for rail transport, weapons production and troop mobilization.
Doesn’t this sound familiar, Mr. Pistorius? Aren’t you also heading in the same direction as Helmuth von Moltke the Younger? Just like Moltke, you – like Chancellor Friedrich Merz – are, in my view, pushing for a war of aggression, thereby violating Article 26 of the Basic Law and the UN Charter of 1945, which seeks to prevent precisely the kind of wars that you and your ilk are provoking.
Similar to Moltke, you work like a Minister of War, collaborating with the arms industry and taking care of resource mobilization in terms of material, personnel and financial resources.
They don’t explicitly say that war is inevitable, but they always imply that it would be if Europe and Germany didn’t rearm. You and I know that Russia isn’t aggressive; rather, it’s NATO – which until the end of 2024 was dominated by the imperialist USA – that is waging a proxy war in Ukraine.
It was NATO that steadily encroached on Russia’s eastward expansion – not the other way around. The potential integration of Ukraine into NATO was the last straw for the Russians. After all, who wants missiles deployed right on their doorstep?
Friedrich Merz and Boris Pistorius have joined the ranks of European warmongers. French President Emmanuel Macron emphasizes that Europe is living in a new era of security policy, in which military strength is once again a central consideration. His call for a “war economy” and increased defence spending clearly has bellicose characteristics – it views deterrence and the projection of power as prerequisites for peace. What a low blow from this now-unpopular French Napoleon 2.0, intended to distract from the country’s self-inflicted economic and social problems!
Here are a few quotes from this dangerous warmonger, along with my brief comments:
“Since 1945, freedom has never been so threatened – and never so seriously.” (AP News) – That’s right, and it’s due to you Western warmongers who have pledged your foolish loyalty to the NATO aggression pact.
“To be free in this world, we need to be feared. And to be feared, we must be strong.” (The Times) – The thinking of a first-grader, Mr. Macron! And this is the kind of person who leads the second strongest economy in Europe. Oh, the times! Oh, the customs!
“We have entered a war economy, in which I believe we will remain for a long time.” (Journal de Bruxelles) – Because you and your ilk have driven the economies of your countries into the ground, you are now relying on a war economy – a damning indictment that puts citizens in grave danger.
“For the past three years, the Russians have been spending 10% of their GDP on defence. We must prepare for what’s to come – with the goal of reaching 3 to 3.5% of our GDP.” (Politico EU) – Don’t talk such utter nonsense, Mr. Macron! NATO has a tenfold advantage over Russia in conventional weapons and is at least its equal in the nuclear field. What will occur if Russia is pressured even further and inevitably loses in conventional weapons in a real conflict? You can probably figure that out on your own!
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer also has an active-military understanding of security policy. The British, as a former world power – a status they still dream of today – have always held this view. In Britain, a hatred of Russia has taken root that is unparalleled. Starmer openly expresses military readiness and sees support for Ukraine as a defence of Europe. In his words, Starmer emphasizes strength, presence, and leadership. Here are his quotes with my commentary:
“We are ready and willing to deploy British troops on the ground – together with other Europeans and under the right conditions.” (Pravda UA) – That would be a declaration of war against Russia and could potentially trigger another world war – and you know it! Is the next step for you warmongering, anti-citizen British political puppets to just drop one of your more than 200 atomic bombs?
“This is not just about the front line in Ukraine. This is the front line of Europe – and also of the United Kingdom. We must strengthen our joint response in Europe.” (Reuters) – Nonsense! Russia has 65,000 kilometres of its own borders to defend, parts of which are threatened by the West, which deliberately crossed a red line with the prospect of Ukraine’s NATO membership. Russia would be damned if it attacked a NATO country – and you know that too, Mr. Starmer, yet you still treat the population of your increasingly autocratic country like idiots to distract from your massive domestic problems.
“This means stabilizing the front and providing the equipment and training they [Ukraine] need. That’s why the United Kingdom will provide more military support this year than ever before.” (Politico EU) – And who ultimately pays for all this senseless warmongering? The average citizen, already stripped to their underwear – and in a worst-case scenario, they will pay with their blood. Your blood and the blood of your children will not flow, but the blood of other innocent young people who bear no responsibility for your monstrous megalomania. What the European warmongers are waging is a war against their own people.
Colour revolutions
The Euromaidan 2014 – the trigger for the Ukraine conflict – was just one of many so-called colour revolutions with which the “values-based West” eliminates undesirable governments.
On April 24th, the online magazine Manova published one of my articles on the topic of “colour revolutions”. The editors of this independent online publication wrote the following apt introduction:
“How does one bring a country under control with as little bloodshed as possible, for example, to assume a leading role as a grey eminence, eliminate disruptive or competing regional powers, secure markets, or exploit a country’s raw materials? The USA has the most experience in this area. In addition to its illegal wars, which have cost approximately 30 million lives since 1945, the USA has recently been using so-called colour revolutions, a soft form of coup, to bring about regime change and make countries compliant. With the help of its intelligence services, covert operations, the funding of domestic and foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs), dubious foundations, and the like, US imperialists stage coups in other states to subject them to their hegemony. There is much to suggest that the recent events in Serbia are no exception.”
An aspect of this type of coup, aimed at ultimately imposing one’s will, is its relatively “gentle” nature, even if it often didn’t succeed without bloodshed. Nevertheless, colour revolutions have something fascist about them, which is incompatible with the values of supposed democracies. When other ways of thinking are not accepted, and one’s own inflated, narcissistic worldview is imposed on others, this constitutes a fascist mode of thought and behaviour.
Characteristic features of these predominantly peaceful forms of protest, mostly driven by enthusiastic young people and NGOs, include the use of colours, symbols, or flowers as identifying marks for the protest unit, which aims to enforce its demands for democracy, the rule of law, and fair elections through the use of modern communication methods. Here only a few of the nearly 20 colour revolutions that have taken place will be briefly mentioned:
The Rose Revolution of 2003 in Georgia aimed to overthrow President Eduard Shevardnadze and bring about the rise to power of former Justice Minister Mikheil Saakashvili, who called for civil disobedience against the Shevardnadze regime. The government under Shevardnadze, accused of corruption and cronyism, was ousted. A renewed Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2019, this time against pro-Russian policies, led to a government reshuffle.
Unlike the Euromaidan, the Orange Revolution of 2004/2005 in Ukraine was bloodless and a protest against alleged election fraud, leading to a re-election resulting in a victory for Viktor Yushchenko, the presidential candidate desired by the USA and the EU.
The blue-and-yellow “Revolution of Dignity,” the Euromaidan in Ukraine in 2013/2014, led to the overthrow of the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych and to Ukraine’s shift towards the EU. The result was, and remains, a divided country, on whose territory the West, once led by the “democratic” US political puppet Joe Biden, is waging war against Russia, ideally to bring about regime change in Moscow as well.
The Euromaidan, this US-orchestrated coup against an elected president, triggered the war in Ukraine, which began not on February 24, 2022, but with the Maidan coup in Kyiv. Since then, the US has been waging a proxy war in Ukraine – if necessary, to the death of the last Ukrainian – which Donald Trump now wants to end. In his opinion, enough is enough with the bloodshed. However, the European warmongers do not share this view.
The trigger for the Euromaidan was the Ukrainian, Russophile government’s surprising announcement in November 2013 that it would not sign the planned Association Agreement with the European Union. This, of course, did not sit well with the US and the EU. So, the pro-Russian government was overthrown in a coup and replaced by a pro-US one. The incited and enraged demonstrators demanded the removal of the pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych, early presidential elections, and the signing of the Association Agreement with the European Union. Unlike the bloodless Orange Revolution of 2004, the Euromaidan claimed more than 100 lives. Yanukovych fled and was declared deposed. Oleksandr Turchynov was appointed interim president and tasked with forming a transitional government under Arseniy Yatsenyuk.
To name just a few examples, the Tulip Revolution of 2005 in Kyrgyzstan, the Cedar Revolution of 2005 in Lebanon, the Saffron Revolution of 2007 in Myanmar, the suppressed “Green Movement” of 2009 in Iran, the Jasmine Revolution of 2010/2011 in Tunisia, the (colourless) January 25, 2011 Revolution in Egypt, the unsuccessful White Ribbon Revolution of 2011/2012 in Russia, the Sunflower Movement of 2014 in Taiwan, the Yellow Umbrella Movement of 2014 in Hong Kong, the “Velvet” Revolution of 2018 in Armenia, the White Robe Revolution of 2019 in Sudan, and the unsuccessful Revolution of Dignity of 2020 in Belarus should all be mentioned here, all of which followed more or less the same pattern.
The same scenario is currently unfolding in Serbia. Since late 2024/early 2025 – triggered in part by the collapse of a train station roof in Novi Sad, which killed several people – there have been nationwide protests. President Aleksandar Vučić, in office since May 31, 2017, and maintaining close ties with Russia, is under immense pressure. Students, teachers, and activists from all walks of life are demanding, among other elements, early elections, a crackdown on corruption, and greater democratic accountability from the government. The government has responded with police operations, arrests, media criticism, and rhetoric alleging “foreign interference.”
Negotiations? A no-go for European warmongers!
When the first form of government – one that at least approximated a true democracy – was established in Athens under Pericles around 2,500 years ago, it was the willingness to think differently that made this new form of society possible. This flexible way of thinking and acting, which the Greeks displayed back then, this willingness to think differently, no longer seems to be in demand today.
Angela Merkel provided a very good example of this during the corona pandemic. She seriously claimed that lockdowns and all the other nonsense that people were being told were without alternative. Nothing in this world is without alternative. Anyone who says something like that is absolutely wrong. And Angela Merkel is intelligent enough to know that. The outrageous measures taken during the corona pandemic were deliberately and knowingly implemented against the citizens, not for them.
European warmongers, in particular, hardly consider whether other conflict resolution options are viable. They have committed themselves to confrontation and a war economy. Shame on these value-destroying and life-endangering warmongers! Their response to violence is, in their narrow thinking, more violence, which then escalates the conflict.
They are the ones who wilfully and knowingly make a mountain out of a molehill. Five weeks after the start of the Ukraine conflict, the “values-driven West” had the power to end it in Istanbul, but “the West was not ready to end the war,” as the belligerent British Prime Minister Boris Johnson declared at the time. So it was the “values-driven West” that wanted a further escalation of the war.
Currently, warmongering European leaders like Friedrich Merz, Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, and Ursula von der Leyen are playing the big shot and want to risk an unwinnable war that could and likely will reduce Europe to rubble if these irresponsible, incompetent warmongers, who are driving their countries’ economies into the ground and acting ruthlessly towards European citizens, are not stopped.
Thank God there are still responsible political leaders in Europe like Viktor Orbán, who calls for peace movements. Naturally, a pacifist is a thorn in the side of warmongers. Orbán has repeatedly demanded that the conflict between Ukraine and Russia be ended through a swift ceasefire and immediate negotiations. He spoke of a “peace mission,” visited Moscow and Beijing, and at a large rally in Budapest in October 2025, he proclaimed: “We do not want to die for Ukraine.”
Ukrainian President and former comedian – which he remains – Volodymyr Zelensky, sharply criticized Orbán’s proposals. He used the words “nonsense” and “harmony” because, in his view, they ignore Ukraine’s actual security interests. As far as his personal security interests are concerned, Zelensky is certainly right. Peace will not be easy for the still-serving president.
Criticism also arose within the EU. The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, declared that peace is not simply the absence of war, thereby indirectly implying that Orbán’s initiatives were incompatible with European values. Frankly, I can’t think of anyone in Europe who has destroyed even remotely as many European values as Ursula von der Leyen. This thoroughly unethical person has absolutely no place at the helm of Europe and would be better off behind bars. Last but not least, in my view, Ursula von der Leyen helped to overturn the democratic elections in Romania by misrepresenting the facts, because the potential winner, Călin Georgescu, didn’t fit into her warped worldview.
When I think that the EU, which is currently drumming up support for war and rearming, received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012, it simply makes me sick! The Nobel Committee recognized at the time that the EU had contributed to reconciling former enemies like Germany and France after the Second World War and had created a peace project through economic and political integration over decades. Is there actually a Nobel Prize for effective and efficient warmongering? If so, the increasingly autocratic, belligerent EU, which is dissolving nation-states, would richly deserve it.
I would like to conclude this article with two quotes from thinking and feeling people:
“Those who start wars are rarely those who have to fight them.” – Voltaire
“Humanity needs to put an end to war, or war will put an end to humanity.” – Erich Kästner
Author: Uwe Froschauer
yogaesoteric
November 14, 2025