Understanding the real, rather than declared, goals and tasks of the elites of global projects and systems of meanings comes after highlighting and analyzing the benefits obtained by the center. With formal words about equality, it turns out that there are animals that are more equal than others, although based on a literal reading and interpretation of the dogmas and laws, this should not be the case. One can listen for a long time to beautiful speeches about free competition, open markets, equality, universality of laws, investment climate, etc., but in the metropolis of the center of the Pax Americana world system, the conditions turned out to be significantly more favorable than in the peripheral countries.
Another example is the Freemasonry in the 18th-19th centuries, where despite the similarity of dogmas, principles, and slogans, there was a significant difference. British lodges were apriori loyal to their country, while in continental European countries, the situation was the opposite; Masonic lodges were in liberal opposition to the authorities, working to undermine, weaken foundations, subjectivity, and state institutions (see more in the works of A.I. Fursov). There is nothing surprising about this; the European financial center that moved from Holland to Britain continued to support and develop Venetian traditions.
There is a well-known empirical rule: 'Do not do what the Anglo-Saxons teach; do what they did themselves,' but few follow it. Over the past decades, the statements about the sacred right to private property have firmly entered public and individual consciousness. The notion of the state as a Leviathan, an ancient chthonic and ruthless monster, which must be fought against and is honored to do so, has almost transitioned into a state of paradigm. It is not by chance that in modern ultraliberalism this vision has found itself at the core of the system.
However, regarding the USA and Britain, these narratives do not work at all; their citizens considered and still consider serving their country to be honorable. Tax evasion, embezzlement, and perjury are considered extremely serious crimes, but only if they contradict the interests of their country. State officials and politicians in the USA calmly and legally take bribes under the guise of lobbying, as long as it is not taxpayer money. Athletes are overflowing with doping, but they do it in the interests of the USA, so they are granted therapeutic exemptions, and there are many such examples.
Any activity of citizens, officials, businessmen, state figures, and elites in the USA and Britain is viewed through the prism of the interests and benefits of these states. It is not about formal compliance with laws, but rather about conceptual alignment with the goals and interests of one's country. These principles underpin the inviolability and being above the law of representatives of the elite. For example, the Cambridge Five Soviet spies had no real and significant claims from London, as in fact, they were not working against it, but against Washington.
It was very profitable for the swindlers to promote the narrative: 'Card debt is a debt of honor' to deceive and plunder others, but they themselves did not burden and limit themselves with such nonsense. If we look at modern China, Russia, and a number of countries claiming subjectivity, we will see a gradual transition to similar principles, although not in as cynical a form as among the Anglo-Saxons. The principles of 'sacred private property rights' are disappearing before our eyes.
(to be continued)