Outline For Developing A Statement Of Work (Sow)-Defining Service Order Requirements: Fill & Download for Free

Treason is actually defined in the US Constitution, Article III, Section 3:“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”There are certainly numerous grounds to charge him on that several times over. An excellent article by the Moscow Project clearly illustrates this point:Putin’s Payout: 12 Ways Trump has Supported Putin’s Foreign Policy Agenda - The Moscow ProjectHere are twelve ways that Putin's foreign policy objectives are met by Trump unreservedly. He made a bet in 2015 and receives his payout daily (the gift that keeps on giving). Below is a large chunk of that article:1. Goal: Weaken and divide the transatlantic alliance.Payout:Trump undermines US relationships with European allies and calls the US’s commitment to NATO into question.2. Goal: Degrade the European Union and foster pro-Russian political movements.Payout:Trump attacks the EU and actively supports anti-EU, Kremlin-backed parties.3. Goal: Disrupt American leadership and dominance of the global economic order.Payout: Trump is eagerly pushing for an all-out trade war with Europe4. Goal: Build global resentment and distrust towards the US and stoke anti-American sentiment.Payout: America’s closest allies are explicitly suspicious and distrusting of the US because of Trump’s rhetoric and actions.5. Goal: Relieve economic and domestic political pressure from US sanctions on Russia.Payout: Trump tries to roll back, impede, and blunt the impact of sanctions at every step.6. Goal: Legitimize his regime in the eyes of the world.Payout: Trump repeatedly praises and defends Putin, lending the credibility of the US presidency to standing.7. Goal: Revive Russia’s status as a great power and gain international recognition for its illegal seizure of Crimea.Payout:Trump publicly says that Crimea is part of Russia and calls for Russia to be welcomed back into the international community with no concessions.8. Goal: Continue to sow discord in Western democracies and avoid repercussions for interfering in American and European elections.Payout: Trump dismisses Russian interference and has done nothing to prevent future interference, putting him at odds with his own intelligence community.9. Goal: Soften America’s adversarial stance toward Russia.Payout: Trump is shifting the Republican Party’s generations-long hawkish views on Russia.10. Goal: Destabilize the US from within.Payout: Trump attacks US institutions while driving divisive politics and eroding democratic norms.11. goal: Advance the Kremlin’s narrative to shape global perceptions.payout: Trump has repeatedly, and inexplicably, parroted Kremlin talking points across a range of global issues.12. goal: Undermine international norms and democratic values abroad.payout: Trump has repeatedly failed to respond to human rights violations or support democracy abroad, creating a more permissive environment for autocrats to crack down.The pattern is clear: Putin has received—and continues to receive—a good payout on his investment in Trump’s campaign. Let's examine all these in greater detail.1) Putin’s Goal: Weaken and divide the transatlantic alliance. Putin views NATO and the broader transatlantic relationship as Russia’s main strategic adversaries. In 2017, the Trump administration released a National Security Strategy outlining this, asserting that, “Russia aims to weaken US influence in the world and divide us from our allies and partners. Russia views the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and European Union (EU) as threats.”Putin’s Payout: Trump undermines US relationships with European allies and calls the US’s commitment to NATO into question.Trump tried to withdraw the US from NATO. Trump reportedly stated his desire to withdraw from NATO several times in 2018, complaining “that he did not see the point of the military alliance.” This move would essentially destroy the alliance that has been the back-bone of transatlantic security for seventy years, creating a serious strategic crisis for the United States. About this revelation, the former supreme allied commander of NATO noted, “Even discussing the idea of leaving NATO — let alone actually doing so — would be the gift of the century for Putin.”Trump attacks specific NATO members that are particularly vulnerable to Russian aggression. Trump has repeatedly attacked Montenegro, a nation whose decision to join NATO provoked sharp criticism from Russia. Trump claimed that Montenegro has “very aggressive people” and undermined Article 5 by questioning why the US should defend Montenegro at all.Trump refused to recommit to NATO’s Article 5 at the opening of the organization’s new headquarters. During his first summit with other NATO leaders, Trump refused to reaffirm America’s commitment to Article 5 of the Atlantic Treaty, which holds that an attack on one NATO member is an attack on all and serves as the foundation of the transatlantic security alliance. Article 5, which has only been invoked once (in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks), is widely considered one of the treaty’s most important tenets. Americans had better remember that the only time it was invoked was in defense of the US. It was subsequently reported that Trump’s national security team had written language explicitly reaffirming Article 5, only for Trump to later reportedly remove the section without informing his national security staff. Trump later walked back his position, eventually committing to Article 5.The Trump White House considered moving US forces away from Russia’s borders. Upon coming into office, a senior Trump appointee to the National Security Council, Kevin Harrington, proposed withdrawing US military forces from Eastern Europe. He reportedly framed the proposal specifically as an overture to Vladimir Putin as part of a strategy to “refram[e] our interests within the context of a new relationship with Russia.”Trump often presents NATO as a protection racket. In an interview with The New York Times, Trump laid out his belief that the US should only defend NATO allies who have “fulfilled their obligations to us.” As the former US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul has explained, this framing misses the entire point of the alliance: “This framing of alliance relationships as protection-racket contracts misses the strategic value of allies to the United States. We want allies to keep the peace, fight alongside us in times of war and defend our common values—long-term strategic objectives that stretch well beyond any debate about national military budgets.”Trump reinstated economic sanctions against Iran, despite protests from European allies. This move, which came in August and November 2018 as part of the US withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, sparked protest from European officials who noted that the sanctions would put pressure on the European economy. In a joint statement, top officials from Britain, France, Germany, and the UK reaffirmed their commitment to “protect European economic operators engaged in legitimate business with Iran.”Trump is withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. The Trump administration announced its plans to leave the treaty in October 2018. Although Russia has repeatedly violated the treaty, the Trump administration’s withdrawal appeared to be more about National Security Adviser John Bolton’s ideological opposition to arms control agreements, shifting the blame for the treaty’s collapse onto the US and worsening tensions with European allies opposed to a unilateral US withdrawal.2) Putin’s Goal: Degrade the European Union and foster pro-Russian political movements. A stable and unified Europe, one that values human rights and liberal democracy, greatly constrains and undermines Russia. The success of a vibrant liberal and democratic EU provides a direct contrast to Putin’s corrupt regime. More tangibly, EU sanctions strangle Russia economically, and European unity hinders Russia’s efforts to bully its neighbors and build alliances with EU members. A divided Europe, on the other hand, would enable Russia to threaten and pressure former Soviet satellite states and expand its influence in Europe.Putin’s Payout: Trump attacks the EU and actively supports anti-EU, Kremlin-backed parties.Trump continually disparages the EU. Trump has repeatedly spoken negatively about the EU, falsely stating that “the European Union, of course, was set up to take advantage of the United States.”The Trump administration downgraded the status of the EU Ambassador to the US. The EU was downgraded from the equivalent of a country to a “head of delegation,” and neither the ambassador nor the EU were informed of the decision.Trump’s new Ambassador in Berlin announced he is explicitly supporting right-wing movements. In a breach of protocol, Trump-appointed ambassador to Germany Richard Grenell gave an interview to Breitbart news where he said “I absolutely want to empower other conservatives throughout Europe,” including right-wing pro-Russian Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz.Trump bluntly tried to persuade France to leave the EU. In April 2018, Trump reportedly asked French President Emmanuel Macron, “Why don’t you leave the EU?” and suggested that the US could offer France a better trade deal. This directly contradicts the US’s stated policy.Case Study: GermanyPutin’s Goal: Degrade German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s influence as the leading voice in the EU. As the head of the largest economy and most powerful country in the EU, Merkel is the foremost custodian of the liberal west. Furthermore, Merkel and Putin have long had a contentious relationship rooted in personal distrust and opposing world views.Putin’s Payout: Trump is destroying America’s relationship with Germany, and personally attacking Chancellor Merkel.3) Putin’s Goal: Disrupt American leadership and dominance of the global economic order. Putin resents the structure of the global economic order and America’s central role in international finance. In addition to the obvious economic and geopolitical benefits to the US, America is also able use its unique position to leverage access to its capital markets, which makes tools such as economic sanctions so impactful. Putin seeks to disrupt this system and weaken America’s hand.Putin’s Payout: Trump is eagerly pushing for an all-out trade war with Europe.4) Putin’s Goal: Build global resentment and distrust towards the US and stoke anti-Americanism. Putin sees the US as Russia’s geopolitical rival. Therefore, he believes that undermining the US’s reputation abroad advances Russia’s interests. As the US and its allies have become increasingly critical of each other, longstanding partnerships based on shared values have been strained. This leaves Russia poised to create new, more transactional alliances with other Western nations.Putin’s Payout: America’s closest allies are explicitly suspicious and distrusting of the US because of Trump’s rhetoric and actions.5) Putin’s Goal: Relieve economic and domestic political pressure from US sanctions on Russia. American and European sanctions against Russia have seriously damaged the Russian economy and have personally impacted the Russian officials on whom Putin’s support depends. Putin’s 2015 national security strategy explicitly stated the goal of creating a “favourable external environment that would allow Russia’s economy to grow steadily and become more competitive;” sanctions repeal would be a necessary step towards achieving this goal.Putin’s Payout: Trump tries to roll back, impede, and blunt the impact of sanctions at every step.The Trump administration decided to lift sanctions on three companies linked to Oleg Deripaska, a powerful Russian oligarch and Putin ally with ties to the Russia investigation. The sanctions were originally intended as retaliation for election interference, and the Trump administration’s decision to lift these sanctions further serves to benefit Deripaska and his business empire. Deripaska helped fund former Trump campaign manager Paul Manfort’s work on behalf of Russian interests for years, and Manafort reportedly tried to use his position on Trump’s campaign to repay his debts to Deripaska in 2016.Trump issued an executive order effectively undermining proposed sanctions legislation. In September 2018, under pressure for not doing enough to protect America’s election infrastructure, Trump signed an executive order (EO) establishing a process by which the Director of National Intelligence can investigate foreign interference in US elections and outlining mandatory sanctions that will go into effect if such interference is found. While on the surface the EO appeared to be action in the face of ongoing Russian interference, it prompted pushback from both sides of the aisle, with members of Congress arguing that the order “fell short and that only legislation could force tough action against Moscow.” Specifically, the executive order undermined momentum behind the Deter Act, which would immediately impose mandatory and severe economic sanctions in response to Russian election interference. One sponsor of the bill, Senator Chris Van Hollen, called the executive order a version of the Deter Act “without the teeth.”The Trump administration has repeatedly delayed sanctions required by law for use of chemical weapons. The Trump administration originally ignored its obligation to trigger sanctions against Russia under the 1991 Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare Elimination Act for its use of Novichok agent in the attempted assassination of former GRU agent and dissident Sergei Skripal. The State Department only moved forward after the lead Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee , Ed Royce (R-CA) formally requested that the administration comply with the law. The second, more severe, round of sanctions was due to go into place in November, however no details about the administration’s progress have been announced, prompting Rep. Royce to declare, “It is unacceptable that the administration lacks a plan – or even a timeline – for action on the second round of mandatory sanctions required by US law.”Trump immediately tried to repeal Obama-era sanctions upon taking office. Almost immediately after entering the White House, Trump officials tasked the State Department with developing a plan to lift existing sanctions against Russia, return diplomatic compounds from which the Obama administration had expelled Russian diplomats in retaliation for the Kremlin’s interference in the 2016 election, and implement additional steps to placate Moscow. These efforts alarmed State Department officials, who immediately began lobbying congressional leaders to pass legislation to block the move. State Department Sanctions Coordinator Ambassador Dan Fried reportedly grew so concerned that he contacted allies on Capitol Hill to urge them to quickly pass legislation that would “codify” Obama-era sanctions, making it difficult for Trump to lift them.Trump vigorously opposed Congressional sanctions legislation. Congress did not share Trump’s eagerness to lift sanctions, and soon put forward the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA), bipartisan legislation that enacted additional sanctions against Russia in response to Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. The Trump administration forcefully lobbied against the bill.After CAATSA passed in both houses with overwhelming majorities, Trump issued a signing statement opposing the bill, calling it “seriously flawed” and suggesting that sections of the legislation are unconstitutional.Trump failed to properly implement sanctions legislation. The Trump administration delayed sanctions implementation and missed a key implementation deadline, which it ultimately only met after intervention by congressional leaders. The Trump administration also made a mockery of an important report on Russian oligarchs required by CAATSA, originally intended to map out a network of Russian oligarchs and regime insiders.Those placed on this list could face significant sanctions, including having their visas banned and US-based assets frozen. Despite serious work by career officials to develop the required list, the administration instead released a list that was simply copied from the Forbes ranking of the wealthiest Russians and Russian government websites. The lack of methodology combined with the broad scope of inclusion essentially made the list pointless: a list where everyone is included means no one is included.CAATSA also required the Treasury Department to write a report outlining the impact of additional sanctions on Russian sovereign debt and derivatives. The goal was to preempt future attempts to meddle in the 2016 election by outlining a “nuclear option” that would severely damage the Russian economy. Instead, the administration released a report concluding that imposing such sanctions would be too dangerous, thereby reassuring rather than deterring Russia.The sanctions that were eventually announced were extremely limited. The administration sanctioned five entities and nineteen individuals in March 2018 for their interference in the 2016 election, but because most of these individuals and entities were already under sanctions and/or had been previously been indicted by the Special Counsel, this round of sanctions was meaningless. Early in April 2018, the Treasury Department finally issued new sanctions against seven Russian oligarchs and twelve companies they own or control, as well as seventeen Russian government officials. While the sanctions against these individuals were forceful, this round of sanctions was clearly incomplete, and there have yet to be any significant additional sanctions announced. Instead the administration has dedicated energy to reducing the burden on Oleg Deripaska, sometimes called “Putin’s oligarch”.Trump has continued to advocate for Putin’s views on US sanctions. Following a meeting with Putin in Vietnam on the sidelines of the 2017 APEC conference, Trump said, “People don’t realize Russia has been very, very heavily sanctioned. They were sanctioned at a very high level, and that took place very recently. It’s now time to get back to healing a world that is shattered and broken. Those are very important things. And I feel that having Russia in a friendly posture, as opposed to always fighting with them, is an asset to the world and an asset to our country, not a liability.” This occurred while Trump was facing criticism at home for not implementing the sanctions legislation.6) Putin’s Goal: Legitimize his regime in the eyes of the world. Russia’s reputation on the world stage has plummeted in recent years. From the state-sponsored doping scandal during the Sochi Olympics, to the illegal annexation of Crimea from Ukraine and the resulting conflict, to Russia’s horrific human rights record, the rest of the world, and especially Western countries, have come to view Russia in a harsh light. Putin is now seeking to legitimize himself and his regime, in order to preserve his sphere of influence both domestically and internationally.Putin’s Payout: Trump repeatedly praises and defends Putin, lending the credibility of the US presidency to Putin’s standing.Trump has actively sought to hide the content of at least five meetings with Putin from U.S. government officials. After a 2017 meeting in Hamburg, Trump reportedly confiscated notes from his interpreter and instructed him to not tell any other officials what happened in the meeting. During the 2018 G20 in Argentina, Trump met with Putin for a brief conversation without a translator or note taker.Trump attended a summit in Helsinki that was a clear diplomatic coup for Putin. On July 16, 2018, the world watched, stunned, as President Donald Trump declined to affirm his loyalty to his country and the rule of law and instead aligned himself with the head of a hostile foreign power who ordered an unprecedented attack on American democracy. The Helsinki Summit between Trump and Putin brought to the surface a concern best expressed by The Washington Post-editorial board: “In Helsinki, Mr. Trump again insisted ‘there was no collusion’ with Russia. Yet in refusing to acknowledge the plain facts about Russia’s behavior, while trashing his own country’s justice system, Mr. Trump in fact was openly colluding with the criminal leader of a hostile power.” To make matters worse, the pronouncements coming out of Helsinki may very well have been tempered due to the fact that the Special Counsel indicted 12 Russian military intelligence officers only two days beforehand, which would have made any pro-Russian announcements politically impossible.Trump considered Putin’s request to hand over American officials to the Russian government. During the summit in Helsinki, Putin suggested that in exchange for allowing the special counsel to interview indicted Russians about their role in the 2016 election interference campaign, Russian officials could be allowed to question US officials the Kremlin has accused of interfering in its own affairs. Trump called this an “incredible offer,” and White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders initially refused to rule it out. Current and former US officials were outraged that Trump would consider such a proposition, and the State Department called the idea “absolutely absurd.” Former US ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul, who was named on the list, demanded that the president defend American citizens against these Russian attacks. The White House eventually spoke out against the idea just immediately before the Senate voted 98 to 0 to approve a resolution stating that no US official should be interrogated by the Russian government.Trump invited the Russian foreign minister into the Oval Office where he disclosed classified intelligence at the expense of Israel. In May 2017, prior to the NATO summit, Trump met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and then-Russian Ambassador to the US Sergey Kislyak in the Oval Office. Trump reportedly told Lavrov and Kislyak that he had fired then-FBI Director James Comey, who he called a “nut job,” and told his guests that he “faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.” During the meeting, Trump also reportedly leaked highly classified intelligence shared by Israeli security forces to his guests. Israel had not authorized the US to share the intelligence, which pertained to a Syrian bomb-making effort and was obtained, in part, through a cyber operation. As one unnamed US official put it, Trump “revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.” As a result of this, Israel changed its intelligence sharing protocols with America. No US press were allowed to attend the meeting. The only news outlet present was TASS, a Russian state-owned agency. This was an inexplicable breach of protocol that allowed Russia to control the public’s access to the images and content of the meeting.Trump’s decision to brag about firing Comey is also telling. After spending months pressuring Comey to drop the investigation into former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, Trump fired Comey and later admitted that the firing was due to “this Russia thing.”7) Putin’s Goal: Revive Russia’s status as a great power and gain international recognition for its illegal seizure of Crimea. Western leaders denounced Putin’s illegal 2014 annexation of Crimea, implementing sanctions that crippled Russia’s economy and expelling Russia from the G8. Putin has great incentive to push for international recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. This would serve to further legitimize his regime and his claim that he seeks to reunite territory that he and his supporters argue belong to Russia. Russia’s 2015 national security strategy explicitly stated that one of the country’s goals is to “[consolidate] the Russian Federation’s position as a centre of influence in today’s world.”Putin’s Payout: Trump publicly says that Crimea is part of Russia and calls for Russia to be welcomed back into the international community without concessions.Trump called Crimea part of Russia. Trump’s rhetoric on Crimea has been shockingly similar to Putin’s. At the June 2018 G7 summit in Canada, Trump reportedly told other G7 leaders that “Crimea is Russian because everyone who lives there speaks Russian.” In a public press conference, Trump, rather than blaming the Russian government for invading Crimea, blamed Obama for his perceived inability to prevent the Russian invasion. He made similar comments during the 2016 campaign.Trump suggested that Russia be readmitted to the G7. At the 2018 summit of international powers, Trump argued for Russia’s reinstatement, saying, “we should have Russia at the negotiating table.” Trump claimed that allowing Russia to rejoin the organization would profit not just Russia but also the US, all G7 countries, and the world at large, eliciting heavy resistance from both US allies and lawmakers.Trump attended a meeting with Putin with a list of concessions, and no other American was in the room. Ahead of the 2017 G20 summit, Trump instructed his team to come up with possible concessions to offer at his first bilateral meeting with Putin. The plan to have a formal meeting with Putin, let alone to offer concessions, was met with strong resistance by State Department and NSC officials who feared it would signal acceptance of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and the annexation of Crimea. Trump and Putin also held a second meeting during the G20, which was initially not disclosed, and neither his National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster nor the Senior Director for Europe and Eurasia Fiona Hill, who has been a Putin critic, were present. Only the Kremlin’s interpreter was present for the meeting, which means that no other US official has a record of what occurred.8) Putin’s Goal: Continue to sow discord in Western democracies and avoid repercussions for interfering in American and European elections. In January 2017, the US intelligence community released an assessment concluding that “Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election.” Despite this unprecedented attack by a foreign adversary, the Trump administration has actively undercut the tools that America would use to respond to the attacks and defend against future ones.Putin’s Payout: Trump dismisses Russian interference and has done nothing to prevent future interference, putting him at odds with his own intelligence community.Trump has stayed quiet even as Russian cyber interference efforts continued on his watch. In early 2018, the Democratic National Committee claimed that it was likely attacked by a Russian intelligence-linked hacking group following the 2018 midterms. Trump has thus far failed to condemn the attack. Furthermore, in October 2018, the US Justice Department indicted Russian citizen Elena Khusyaynova, alleging she works as the chief accountant at Project Lakhta. The indictment described Project Lakhta as “a Russian umbrella effort” funded by Yevgeniy Prigozhin and focused on sowing political discord in the US political system, including influencing elections. The Commander-in-Chief has continued to be silent on this subject, even as the U.S. intelligence community’s 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment clearly stated that U.S. adversaries are “looking to the 2020 US elections as an opportunity to advance their interests.”Trump sided with Putin over his own intelligence community at the Helsinki summit. Trump has repeatedly called into question the conclusion of US intelligence community, even explicitly saying he believes Putin when he says no election interference occurred. In Helsinki, while the world was watching, Trump not only failed to dispute Putin’s denial that the Kremlin was responsible for the hacking and release of Democratic emails in 2016, but he also repeatedly condemned the investigation into that attack and strongly suggested that he believes Putin over his own intelligence community. In an attempt to walk back his statement and reaffirm his belief in his own intelligence community, Trump went on to excuse Russia by saying that other countries may also have been responsible.The Trump administration undermined America’s ability to combat Russian disinformation. Despite the fact that the 2017 US national security strategy explicitly warned about Russian use of media “to undermine the legitimacy of democracies,” the Trump administration has consistently undermined the US government’s main tool for combatting Russian disinformation, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC). GEC was specifically “tasked with countering Moscow’s disinformation campaign.” However, under the Trump administration, the center has suffered from a lack of Russian speaking analysts, a hiring freeze, and budgetary restraints, and there is still no permanent head of the center.Trump has diminished America’s cyber defenses and even proposed cyber cooperation with Russia. While Russia deployed multiple cyber weapons against the US in the 2016 election, the Trump administration has limited the government’s ability coordinate a coherent policy. The State Department tried to shutter the Office of Cybersecurity Coordinator until Congress intervened. Former National Security Agency head Admiral Mike Rogers stated he had not been granted the authority by the White House to counter Russian cyber operations “where they originate.” Trump even discussed forming a “Cyber Security unit” with Putin when they met at the Hamburg G20 summit in July 2017. Putin reportedly again suggested a cybersecurity working group at the Helsinki summit.Trump gutted the sanctions-coordination team. The American government’s primary tool to respond to Russian interference has been applying sanctions, yet Trump has gutted the team responsible for implementing that policy. In October 2017, the administration shuttered the State Department’s sanctions office, eliminating the Coordinator for Sanctions Policy. The office was previously led by Ambassador Daniel Fried, one of the most senior and well-respected career foreign-service officers at the State Department and a former Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Eurasia. Now the responsibilities of this office once led by a veteran diplomat with a five-person team have been moved to a single mid-level staff member who works on the topic part time.9) Putin’s Goal: Soften America’s adversarial stance on Russia. For the past 70 years, the Republican Party was the party of Russia hawks, advocating a hard line against the Soviet Union and Russia on issues ranging from nuclear posture, human rights, missile defense, and NATO enlargement. These positions were not just vestiges of the Cold War era. In 2012, Mitt Romney, then the Republican Party’s nominee for president, famously asserted that Russia was “without question our number one geopolitical foe.”Putin’s Payout: Trump is shifting the Republican Party’s generations-long hawkish views on Russia.Republicans helped lift sanctions on a Russian oligarch. Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bid to force the Treasury Department to keep sanctions on three Russian companies linked to oligarch Oleg Deripaska that the Trump administration was trying to remove. Deripaska is under U.S. sanctions, and he is a central figure in the Special Counsel investigation because of his close ties to Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort. This move comes less than two years after the Senate voted 98-2 to implement further Russia sanctions in retaliation for Russian election interference.Trump granted Putin the honor of an invitation to the White House even as Putin was actively interfering in the midterm elections. In October 2018, National Security Advisor John Bolton formally invited Putin to Washington, D.C. for a White House visit just as Trump’s own administration determined that Russia is actively interfering in the 2018 midterms. This was the Trump administration’s second attempt at scheduling a follow-up visit after the Helsinki Summit. The first, immediately following the summit, fell through because of the intense backlash, but Trump apparently feels enough time has lapsed to re-extend the invitation.With a three-word change, Trump successfully rolled back a crucial GOP criticism of Obama, radically shifting the RNC’s platform from an aggressive stance towards Russia to a curiously weaker one. Trump’s constant campaigning on behalf of Russia appears to have had a lasting effect on the Republican electorate. According to a 2017 Gallup poll, Republicans’ views on Putin jumped by a dramatic twenty points from 2015 to 2017, from a 12% favorable rating to 32%. Polling from YouGov shows that Republicans who viewed Putin unfavorably “shrank from 51 percent in July 2014 to just 14 percent in December 2016.” According to Politico, fewer Republicans than Democrats consider Russia “a major national security risk.” A May 2017 poll showed that 49 percent of Republicans consider Russia an ally, despite clear evidence that Russia interfered in the 2016 election.10) Putin’s Goal: Destabilize the US from within. Russia seeks to sow political, cultural, and social divisions inside America, which the Kremlin views as a way to distract and weaken its adversaries. This is not a new strategy; Russia has historically sought to undermine rivals by stoking preexisting internal divisions.Putin’s Payout: Trump attacks US institutions while driving divisive politics and eroding democratic norms.Trump has decried the press as the “enemy of the people.” Since taking office, Trump has taken an incredibly hostile stance toward the press, denouncing journalists as “the enemy of the American people” and popularizing the term “fake news” to demean credible institutions like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN. This is the same type of language that is used by dictators around the world.Trump has publicly defended neo-Nazis and repeatedly used racially-charged rhetoric. He has repeatedly decried African-American athletes who protest against police brutality during the performance of the National Anthem, disinviting members of the champion Golden State Warriors and Philadelphia Eagles over the subject. In November 2017, Trump retweeted three propaganda videos from a British hate group which falsely claimed to depict Muslim migrants attacking white citizens. When asked to defend the retweets, Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders argued that the veracity of the videos didn’t matter so long as the videos promoted Trump’s agenda.Trump has actively instituted discriminatory policies. The administration’s first major policy initiative was to deliver on the campaign promise of a “Muslim ban,” blocking entry into the US from several Muslim-majority countries. Trump has also advocated creating a database of Muslim citizens in the US. Finally, the Trump administration has implemented a “zero-tolerance” policy toward migrants from Central and South America, which resulted in thousands of children being separated from their parents at the southern border.Trump has advanced conspiracy theories that undermine the democratic process. Trump has repeatedly asserted, with no evidence, that he only appeared to lose the popular vote in the 2016 election because millions of people voted illegally. He empaneled a commission to “investigate” his baseless allegations, only to disband the group in January 2018 when it proved unable to find significant evidence of voter fraud.Trump has rejected and violated democratic norms and principles. Trump’s political life has largely been defined as a deviation from the established norms and rules of democracy. After entering politics by repeatedly advancing the racist “birther” conspiracy alleging that Obama was not an American citizen, Trump spent his campaign repeatedly advocating for the investigation and imprisonment of his political opponent Hillary Clinton, which he has continued to do since becoming president. He has also claimed that he can pardon himself and anyone for any reason, thus declaring his power to be above the law; that the job of the Attorney General is to protect the president; and that he can make immigration decisions with “no judges or court cases.”Trump has lobbed political attacks against the Justice Department, intelligence agencies, and law-enforcement officers. From advancing conspiracy theories about a deep state out to undermine his presidency, to rejecting the findings of the intelligence community’s assessment of Russian interference, to his attacking the FBI for its investigation into his associates, Trump has been feeding a narrative of distrust in American institutions.11) Putin’s goal: Advance the Kremlin’s narrative to shape global perceptions. The Kremlin works aggressively to advance a distinct narrative of its actions and of global events. This is an effort not only to cast Russia in a positive light but is designed to advance key Russian policy goals.Putin’s payout: Trump has repeatedly, and inexplicably, parroted Kremlin talking points across a range of global issues.Trump seemingly took Putin’s suggestion to suspend American military exercises with South Korea. At his June summit with North Korean leader Kim Jung Un, Trump announced that the US would suspend military exercises with South Korea, a move previously considered unimaginable. Trump reportedly came up with the idea “after speaking to Russian President Vladimir Putin.” What’s more, Trump also referred to the military exercises as “war games.” This phrase is deliberately not used by US officials, but is used by North Korea and Russia.Trump repeated Kremlin talking points on Afghanistan that directly conflict with stated US positions. In a televised cabinet meeting that was widely covered by networks, Trump stated that the Soviet Union fell apart after it “went bankrupt fighting in Afghanistan,” claiming that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan was due to terrorism and that the Soviet Union was “right to be there.” While these statements have no basis in history, they are very similar to the Kremlin’s revisionist talking points, that are part of part of an effort by Putin to rehabilitate Soviet history. Trump’s points contradict the stance of U.S. State Department historians and are taken straight from the Kremlin.Trump’s White House directed national security staff to look into fake events that only appeared as part of a Kremlin-directed propaganda campaign. Trump aides reportedly “sought information about Polish incursions in Belarus.” However, no such incursions occurred. These events only exist in the form of a disinformation campaign by the GRU against Poland – whose nationalist government is anti-Russian – on behalf of Belarus – Russia’s closest ally.At the 2018 United Nations General Assembly, Trump effectively delivered Putin’s talking points on sovereignty. Despite the Trump administration’s continuous refusal to protect American democracy against blatant Russian interference, Trump’s 2018 UNGA speech focused primarily on the idea of protecting national sovereignty — a favorite position of Putin’s and other dictators around the world who worry about international interference in their domestic crackdowns. As further proof that America’s stature has fallen in the eyes of world leaders, Trump’s boast that his administration “has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country” prompted actual laughter from the audience.Case Study: SyriaPutin’s Goal: Expand Russian influence in the Middle East. As Russia seeks to expand its global influence, it has paid special attention to increasing its presence in the Middle East. Russia has long backed Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, putting Russian forces in conflict with the U.S.-backed opposition rebels.Putin’s Payout: Trump decided to withdraw US troops from Syria, leaving room for Russia to exert further influence.Trump’s decision will allow Russia to consolidate control over the region. Withdrawing US troops from Syria leaves Russia and Iran as the major power players in the conflict. One Russian political commentator noted that Putin’s goal was always “to establish himself as the global authority to prevent regime change,” and the absence of US troops leaves a vacuum that Putin will be eager to fill.Trump’s insistence on moving forward with such a blatantly pro-Russia foreign policy move sparked Mattis’ resignation. The withdrawal announcement led to Defense Secretary Mattis’ resignation, and he noted in his resignation letter that Russia seeks to “shape a world consistent with [its] authoritarian model” and to “promote [its] own interests at the expense of [its] neighbors.”Trump used Putin’s own excuse to withdraw troops. In December 2017, Putin declared victory over ISIS in Syria and announced a partial withdrawal of troops. This declaration was met with great skepticism from the US. A White House National Security Council spokeswoman called the declaration of victory “premature,” and Russian forces have since remained extremely active in Syria. In a strikingly similar statement, Trump credited his own decision to withdraw to the defeat of ISIS as well, agreeing with Putin over the US intelligence community, and his own party on the issue. Putin praised him for using the same reasoning, stating that he “generally agree[d]” with Trump’s evaluation of ISIS.Trump’s decision to withdraw from Syria sparked praise from Putin. Putin immediately praised the decision, as “correct,” restating the belief that US troops should have never been in Syria to begin with. Putin stated that unlike the Russian troops, US troops were never invited, and denounced US involvement in Syria as illegitimate.12) Putin’s goal: Undermine international norms and democratic values abroad. Putin seeks to create an international environment that is more permissive of repression, especially against dissidents that may threaten autocratic regimes.Putin’s payout: Trump has repeatedly failed to respond to human rights violations or support democracy abroad, creating a more permissive environment for autocrats to crack downTrump failed to hold Saudi Arabia accountable for the murder of a Washington Post journalist by an autocrat. Although the CIA concluded that the crown prince of Saudi Arabia authorized the brutal murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, Trump refused to publicly condemn the killing. Instead, he stated “It could very well be that the crown prince had knowledge of this tragic event — maybe he did and maybe he didn’t!” Many congressional members, including Republicans, condemned the murder, although Russia was noticeably silent on the matter. US silence over the murder of an American-based journalist, creates a more permissive environment for autocratic leaders to commit future abuses.The Trump administration has attacked the International Criminal Court (ICC). John Bolton chose his first major public address as National Security Adviser to announce that the US would seek to sanction and prosecute International Criminal Court (ICC) officials in retaliation for the ICC’s demand for an investigation into potential war crimes committed by US troops in Afghanistan. Bolton called the ICC “illegitimate” and “a threat to American sovereignty and national security,” and threatened retaliation against any other countries that cooperated with the Afghanistan probe. Putin opposes the international institution dedicated to human rights, withdrawing Russia’s membership in 2016 after the ICC released a report classifying the annexation of Crimea as an occupation.The Trump administration has repeatedly been silent on issues human rights abuses around the world. The Trump administration has always been clear that human rights are not a priority. During Trump’s first year in office, then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson failed to hold a press conference to roll out the State Department’s annual human rights report, and Tillerson later implied that prioritizing human rights might create “obstacles” for the U.S. Furthermore, the Trump administration’s policy of refusing to condemn international human rights abuses is weakening international democratic standards: Trump is silent about the human rights violations committed by China against the ethnic Uighur population, his administration has refused to speak out against the violent persecution of the Rohingya in Myanmar, and he stood by as far-right Hungarian leader Viktor Orban forced the liberal Central European University out of Hungary.Case Study: Lethal Aid to UkraineThe Trump administration in late 2017 approved a deal providing lethal aid to Ukraine. However, the context of the decision is important to keep in mind. The debate over lethal assistance during the Obama administration was largely over how Russia would interpret such assistance. When President Obama decided against providing lethal assistance, he did so out of concern that Russia would interpret such a move as a hostile, escalatory act, which could provoke Russia to intensify its military activities. Under Trump, however, Putin had every reason to interpret the White House’s decision as neither hostile nor escalatory, given Trump’s overall pro-Russian stance.Furthermore, providing lethal assistance lost much of its military significance by the time the Trump administration made the decision. In 2014-2015, when the front lines of the conflict were constantly changing and there were fears that Russia would expand its invasion to other parts of Ukraine, a weapon like the anti-tank Javelin missile could have done significant damage to the Russian tanks that spearheaded Russia’s counter-offensive against Ukrainian forces. By late 2017, the defensive lines had been established. While fighting is still fierce and ongoing, the conflict is considerably more stable and may be settling into another “frozen conflict” on Russia’s periphery. The current low-intensity combat is not defined by battles involving heavy weaponry like tanks. The structure of the arms deal was also not as beneficial as it could have been. The weapons reportedly were not delivered on the line of conflict. Instead, they were to be stored in training centers in western Ukraine away from the combat and would be monitored by American soldiers, thus reducing access and effectiveness. Finally, reporting in The New York Times suggests that the Ukrainian government ceased cooperating with Mueller’s investigative team shortly after the Trump administration approved the sale of lethal weapons, raising the possibility that the decision was part of a quid-pro-quo arrangement to reduce the legal pressure on the president.Case Study: Response to the Skripal PoisoningIn March 2018, Russia poisoned Sergei Skripal, a former Russian spy living in the United Kingdom. British authorities later determined that the chemical nerve agent used in the poisoning originated in Russia. This attack was described by British Prime Minister Theresa May as an “unlawful use of force” on British soil. Although then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson was quick to follow in May’s footsteps in denouncing Russia’s involvement in the poisoning, the Trump White House initially stayed quiet, avoiding naming Russia as the likely perpetrator of the attack. When Trump finally spoke on the matter, he initially wavered on Russia’s involvement, saying “it sounds to me like they believe it was Russia,” and adding, “if we agree with them [the UK], we will condemn Russia or whoever it may be.” Trump’s rhetoric here undermined the transatlantic alliance by calling Britain’s assertion into doubt and refusing to immediately back them up in condemning Russian actions. Eventually, White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders did release a statement naming Russia as the perpetrator.By then, however, the global reaction had grown from statements to action: More than 20 countries expelled over 100 Russian diplomats as a result of the poisoning. As part of this international response, the Trump administration expelled 60 Russian diplomats and closed the Russian consulate in Seattle. This decision appeared to contradict Trump’s reported demand that the US “match [the] numbers [of expelled diplomats]” of its European allies. “We’re not taking the lead,” Trump insisted, “We’re matching.” When the US did finally announce its expulsion of 60 officials, Trump was reportedly furious that France and Germany were each only expelling four Russian diplomats and that the US appeared to be more forward-leaning in its response than its European partners.Conclusion:Since the very beginning, the Trump White House has demonstrated a clear and consistent pattern of behavior towards Russia, helping to fulfill many of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s most important foreign policy objectives.Trump’s decisions have repeatedly benefited Russian foreign policy goals often at the cost of his own country’s priorities or the priorities of traditional US allies. This is despite the fact that Russia conducted an unprecedented political assault on America, an assault that is ongoing and continues to target American elections.This raises the question: Whose interests is Trump serving? If these are not treasonous actions, I don’t know what “consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort” means.

It is the illusion of every epoch that it will last forever. Currently, the illusion of control is dominating politics and institutions. Deceptive framing is manipulating the true facts by fabricated imagery. Private wealth is going up while capital is going down. Weak market captured governments are openly allowing priority to financialization interested in corporate predation and malfeasance, through rent-seeking corruption of capital. They are making more out of its political investments rather than productive investment for the good of the many. We can have a few people with great wealth, or we can have democracy - we can’t have both.An invisible “Shadow System” drives the global economy: Wealth inequality has reached truly epic proportions — with 62 individuals amassing the same aggregate wealth as 3.7 billion. Most of us intuitively sense that this outcome was rigged by design by a global elite. Governments’ are being blackmailed and held to account by the financial terrorists - a mafia - of financialization who bankroll them for power to conduct legislation for their own benefit.Here in the United States we know about things like Citizens United (those with money can influence elections) and the Koch Brothers (part of the cabal that purchased this little piece of legislation). We get that the bankers who collapsed the financial system made out like bandits, quite literally. Those unlucky enough to be born anyplace where the tornado of colonialism touched down have been taught that “our people” should blame themselves for the personal character flaw of being on the receiving end of conquest and pillage.What we’ve been lacking is a name for this integrated system of tax havens, corporate handouts, gutted governments, privatized lands held in common, and so forth. The phrase global architecture of wealth extraction, effectively describes here how it makes up the core of political systems around the world.Neo liberalization through Capitalism in the form of neo-capitalism is essentially failing, because of pernicious greed and corruption by a comparatively small section of wealth extracting asset speculators. Every social system believes that it represents the only possible form of existence for human beings; that its institutions, its religion, its morality are the last word that can be spoken. That is what the cannibals, the Egyptian priests, Marie Antoinette and Tsar Nicholas all fervently believed. And that is what the bourgeoisie (the destructive wealth extracting, asset speculators who are only interested in markets and short term-ism of profit) and its apologists today wish to demonstrate when they assure us, without the slightest basis, that the so-called system of “free enterprise” is the only possible system – just when it is beginning to show all the signs of senile decay.The capitalist system today under the banner of neoliberalism, resembles the Sorcerer’s Apprentice who conjured up powerful forces which he could not control. (This is now through a feudalistic democracy of deliberate growing worker insecurity) Most of the policies are total disenchantment of politics usurped by economics -essentially that of financial markets. The fundamental contradiction of capitalist society is the antagonism between the social nature of production and the private form of appropriation. From this central contradiction many others arise. This contradiction is expressed by periodic crises, as Marx explains:“In these crises, a great part not only of the existing products, but also of the previously created productive forces, are periodically destroyed. In these crises, there breaks out an epidemic that, in all earlier epochs, would have seemed an absurdity — the epidemic of over-production. Society suddenly finds itself put back into a state of momentary barbarism; it appears as if a famine, a universal war of devastation, had cut off the supply of every means of subsistence; industry and commerce seem to be destroyed; and why? Because there is too much civilization: too much means of subsistence, too much industry, too much commerce. The productive forces at the disposal of society no longer tend to further the development of the conditions of bourgeois property; on the contrary, they have become too powerful for these conditions, by which they are fettered, and so soon as they overcome these fetters, they bring disorder into the whole of bourgeois society, endanger the existence of bourgeois property. The conditions of bourgeois society are too narrow to comprise the wealth created by them. And how does the bourgeoisie get over these crises? On the one hand by enforced destruction of a mass of productive forces; on the other, by the conquest of new markets, and by the more thorough exploitation of the old ones. That is to say, by paving the way for more extensive and more destructive crises, and by diminishing the means whereby crises are prevented.” (The Communist Manifesto)Marx’s general ideas about society are known as his theory of historical materialism. Materialism is the basis of his sociological thought because for Marx material conditions or economic factors affect the structure and development of society. His theory is that material conditions essentially comprise technological means of production and human society is formed by the forces and relations of production.Marx’s theory of historical materialism is historical. It is historical because Marx has traced the evolution of human societies from one stage to another. It is called Materialistic because Marx has interpreted the evolution of societies in terms of their material or economic bases. Materialism simply means that it is matter or material reality, which is the basis for any change.According to Friedrich Engels, the theory of historical materialism was discovered by Karl Marx, but Marx thought it was Engels who has conceived the materialist formulation of history independently. Possibly it should be said: that both of them used this theory, to quote Marx, as the “guiding thread” of all their works.Materialism means the materialist structure of society. It is how the super structure of society is based on economic infrastructure. Marx’s theory of historical materialism is the materialistic interpretation of the history of societies. All the societies have experienced similar pattern of history and every history is built upon its materialist foundations.Marx has tried to suggest that all society passes through uni-linear evolution, every society progresses stage by stage and every society has marched ahead. He has suggested about the history of society, i.e.Primitive Communism → Slavery → Feudalism→ Capitalism →Socialism →CommunismHistorians recorded history in the manner it is found. But Marx had a vision for future, how is history taking man through time. Each stage sows the seeds of its own destruction. One will go and other will come. Such precision and succession will continue till the ultimate i.e. communism is reached.Marx’s theory sought to explain all social phenomena in terms of their place and function in the complex systems of society and nature. This was without recourse to what may be considered as metaphysical explanations clearly outlined in those early writings of Hegal and his followers. This eventually became a mature sociological conception of the making and development of human societies.Basic Assumptions: Historical materialism is based upon a philosophy of human history. But it is not strictly speaking, a philosophy of history. It is best understood as sociological theory of human progress. As a theory it provides a scientific and systematic research programme for empirical investigations. At the same time it also claims to contain within it a revolutionary programme of intervention into society. It is this unique combination of scientific and revolutionary characters which is the hall mark of Marx’s original formulation.Marx’s views on human society and human nature:1. Society as an interrelated whole.2. Changeable nature of society.3. Human nature and social relationships.1. Marx views human society as an interrelated whole. The social groups, institutions, beliefs and doctrines within it are integrally related. Therefore, he has studied their interrelations rather than treating them separately2. Marx views society as inherently mutable, in which changes are produced largely by internal contradictions and conflicts. Such changes if observed in a large number of instances, according to Marx, show a sufficient degree of regularity to allow the formulation of general statements about their causes and consequences. Both these assumptions relate to the nature of human society.3. There is one other basic assumption behind historical materialism without which the theory cannot be held together. This relates to the concept of man in general. According to Marx, there is no permanent persistence of human nature. Human nature is neither originally evil nor originally good, it is in original potential.If human nature is what human beings make history with, then at the same time, it is human nature which they make. And human nature is potentially revolutionary. Human will is not a passive reflection of events, but contains the power to rebel against circumstances in the prevailing limitations of human nature.It is not that people produce out of material greed or the greed to accumulate wealth, but the act of producing the essentials of life engages people into social relationships that may be independent of their will. In most of human history according to Marx, these relationships are class relationships that create class struggle.The Theory of Historical Materialism:The clearest exposition of the theory of historical materialism is contained in Marx’s ‘preface’ to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy (1859). Here he says that the actual basis of society is its economic structure. For Marx, economic structure of society is made of its relations of production. The legal and political super structure of society is based on relations of production. Marx says that relations of production reflect the stage of society’s forces of production.Marx’s theory of Historical Materialism states that all objects, whether living or inanimate are subject to continuous change. The rate of this change is determined by the laws of dialectics. Marx says that new developments of productive forces of society came in conflict with existing relations of production.When people become conscious of the state of conflict, they wish to bring an end to it. This period of history is called by Marx the Period of Social Revolution. The revolution brings about resolution of conflict. It means that new forces of production take roots and give rise to new relations of production.For Marx it is the growth of new productive forces which outlines the course of human history. The productive forces are the powers society uses to produce material conditions of life. So for Marx, human history is an account of development and consequences of new forces of material production. This is the reason why his view of history is given the name of Historical Materialism.The terms mentioned in Marx’s theory of Historical materialism:1. Social relations, over and above individuals:Marx says that as a general principle, the production of material requirements of life, which is a very basic necessity of all societies; compel individuals to enter into definite social relations that are independent of their will. This is the basic idea of Marx’s theory of society. He stresses that there are social relations which impinge upon individuals irrespective of their preferences. He further elaborates that an understanding of the historical process depends on our awareness of these objective social relations.2. Infrastructure and Super-structure:According to Marx, every society has its infrastructure and superstructure. Social relations are defined in terms of material conditions which he called infrastructure. The economic base of a society forms its infrastructure. Any changes in material conditions also imply corresponding changes in social relations. Forces and relations of production came in the category of infrastructure. Within the superstructure figure the legal, educational and political institutions as well as values, cultural ways of thinking, religion, ideologies and philosophies.3. Forces and relations of production:The forces of production appear to be the capacity of a society to produce. This capacity to produce is essentially a function of scientific and technical knowledge, technological equipment and the organisation of labour force. The relations of production arise out of the production process but essentially overlap with the relations in ownership of means of production.At certain points in time, Marx speaks in terms of transformation of society from one stage to another. In explaining the process of transformation, Marx has given us a scheme of historical movement.4. Social change in terms of social classes:Marx elaborates the significance of the infrastructure of society by tracing the formation of the principal social classes. He develops the idea of social change resulting from internal conflicts in a theory of class struggles. For Marx, social change displays a regular pattern. Marx constructs in broad terms, a historical sequence of the main types of society, proceeding from the simple, undifferentiated society of “primitive communism” to the complex class society of modern capitalism.He provides an explanation of the great historical transformation which demolished old forms of society and created new ones in terms of infrastructural changes which he regards as general and constant in their operation. Each period of contradiction between the forces and relations of production is seen by Marx as a period of revolution.Dialectical relationship between the forces and relations of production:In revolutionary periods, one class is attached to the old relations of production. These relations hinder the development of the forces of production. Another class, on the other hand, is forward looking. It strives for new relations of production.The new relations of production do not create obstacles in the way of the development of the forces of production. They encourage the maximum growth of those forces. This is the abstract formulation of Marx’s ideas of class struggle.Revolutions and the history of societies:The dialectical relationship between the forces of production and relations of production also provides a theory of revolution. In Marx’s reading of history, revolutions are not political accidents. They are treated as social expression of the historical movement. Revolutions are necessary manifestations of the historical progress of societies.Revolutions occur when the conditions for them mature. For example: Feudal society developed capitalist relations of production. When these relations of production reached a degree of maturity in Europe came the French revolution. Marx here spoke of another process of transformation from capitalism to socialism. This is how Marx interpreted historical movement of societies.Social reality and consciousness:Marx has made a distinction between infrastructure and superstructure. At the same time he has also distinguished social reality and consciousness. For Marx, reality is not determined by human consciousness. According to him, social reality determines human consciousness.This results in an overall conception in which ways of human thinking must be explained in terms of the social relations of which they are a part. Besides the forces and relations of production, Marx has spoken about the mode of production. Accordingly he has described stages of human history in terms of the four modes of production; namely the Asiatic, the Ancient, the Feudal and the Capitalist.1. The Ancient mode of production is characterized by slavery.2. The Feudal mode by serfdom.3. The Capitalist mode by wage earning.They constitute three distinct modes of exploitation of human labour. Asiatic mode of production which does not constitute a stage in western history is distinguished by the subordination of all people to the state or the state bureaucracy.Four Modes of Production:1. Asiatic mode of Production:The concept of Asiatic mode of production refers to a specific original mode of production. This is distinct from the ancient slave mode of production or the feudal mode of production. It is characterized by primitive communities in which ownership of land is communal. These communities are still partly organised on the basis of kinship relations. State power which expresses the real or imaginary unity of these communities controls the use of essential economic resources and directly appropriates part of the labour and production of the community.This mode of production constitutes one of the possible forms of transition from classless to class societies. It is also perhaps the most ancient form of this transition. It contains the contradiction of this transition, i.e. the combination of communal relations of production with emerging forms of the exploiting classes and of the state.The concept of Asiatic mode of production is inadequate because there was no class; no concept of private property. The entire property is owned by the society. So that no individual has access to it—so no clashes of classes. Resources were low and there was low population.Gradually towards the end of primitive communism there were certain group of people who were physically strong and so towards its end the concept of private property came into being. So primitive communism could not survive and there emerged a different type of society.2. Ancient mode of Production:According to Marx, every part of history has its end point. So primitive communism was to go and slavery came into being. People who had physical, political and material strength had authority over others. So two classes were found and this is where the concept of private property emerged. There were two classes—the owning class, they are the masters, and non-owning class, they were the slaves.Marx has tried to suggest that in course of time different people grabbed certain plots of land as a result of which there was grabbing and as a result of which a large number were left wretched. So they had to depend on these owners in order to make a living and it went on rising and so when they would not pay their debts they were sold and engaged under the so called masters.The Inclosures now known as Enclosures in the16th and 17th Century Britain in what is known as the Enclosure Movement. And it laid the groundwork for capitalization and a massive colonial empire to grow as the British and other imperial powers spread this logic of wealth extraction across the globe.The architecture of wealth extraction had to be carefully built up in waves of creative destruction over the span of several hundred years. In the earliest days, a suite of business innovations (double-entry accounting, the joint-stock company, etc.) were combined with a systematic policy of kicking people off commonly managed lands so that a system of “rent seeking” could be built up for wealthy people to extract money from the working poor. IInstead of the current neoliberal fraudulent ideology of private luxury for the few asset-speculators - who are intent on destroying our communities and even our national heritage for profit - allowing even bare public sufficiency; for this is the common practice by Conservative governments and others of all colours for their own selfish enrichment and self aggrandizement policies: Instead, we should now be having: PRIVATE SUFFICIENCY AND PUBLIC LUXURY; and this enjoyment of natural wealth should be for the benefit for all and every generation. We must therefore eliminate this inordinate inequality and the catalyst of outrageous disparity in remuneration by some CEO’s, which is now reaching a humongous 2.5 thousand times the lowest wage earner. Such fraudulent capitalism is forging an entirely consumerism-driven economy for the few, but which has created a parlous system, by which success is only possible through exhorting passive consumers to continually make irrational choices to buy often totally unsustainable products and services to give them ever greater profit, which through financial engineering is often untaxed.This format of infinite growth promoted by weak government is an imbecilic cancerous requirement for a planet which only has a finite capacity, and it is truly, madness personified. The whole of society is being treated as a corporation by government controlled by financialization: Society must regain The Commons to prevent asset speculation of land and property. Commonality v the Market; Land should be under the control of a particular community not government. In other words, land and property should be under the control of the majority and not the few.The first wave of mass poverty in modern times was the British and French peasantry. When these societies overthrew corrupt leaders and established democracies, the elites had to find more subtle ways to keep syphoning off wealth (thus growing social inequality) that didn’t conclude with rolling heads at the guillotine. So they invaded foreign lands and did their rent-seeking there.Slaves were mere chattels. They had no right and were used like commodities that could be bought and sold. So individuals were slaves and it went on resulting in a family of slaves and masters were masters. So it became very heinous of people worked without any voice, even if the torture was unbearable. Slaves were made to work under stringent physical conditions. They were engaged in agricultural, menial and physical labour, and in many instances life-endangering.If the society has experienced a heinous system at any point of time, it is slavery. So it was to go and another stage was to come. So, towards its end, a sort of internal struggle was found so that the slaves, peasants started a revolution against the masters so as to release certain slaves from the clutches of the masters. Slavery is called the stage of initial agriculture.So agricultural capitalism was to come. Agricultural innovations would take place. Technology was applied to agriculture. People started to understand the dignity of labour and the stage came, i.e. Feudalism or Agricultural capitalism.3. Feudal Mode of Production:At this stage as Marx said throughout the pages of history we find two classes. They were feudal lords and serfs. Lords owned the land in their favour, and their job was to lease land and employ agricultural labour on their lands. The owners who were leased had to pay certain taxes and the labourers were given minimum wages.This heinous system was invariably exacerbated through the lords exploiting them by not even paying the labour its due. So Marx said that this stage was also exploitative in character. Heavy taxes were imposed on serfs. This stage could not grow much as industries were growing and people sought their job in industries and in cities. So the serfs fought against the lords. With the spreading of industries, urbanization grew, so emphasis was on industries and came the next stage, i.e. Industrial capitalism.4. Capitalistic mode of production:Marx was very much bothered about this stage, because this represented the most heinous and migration was found from rural to urban areas. Those who worked in agricultural lands shifted to industries. There were two classes— the working classes, the proletariat and the bourgeoisie.Marx wanted to champion the cause of the proletariat and he wanted this, so that the exploitative character must go and equality instead be established. So Marx it could be said was Futuristic. Socialism is the stage where the society is classless and it is based on the principle of equality. Marx had experienced socialism and there was a spread of socialism based on his ideas.Communism is the ultimate final stage, where there is presumed to be prevalence of equality among all. Everybody works according to his capacity and gets according to his due. But when capitalism goes, and communism comes into being, there are some elements found in some form or another of capitalism in socialism.As per Marx, socialism is the initial communism and communism is the later socialism because everybody is equal and can stand in the same queue and communist society is thoroughly equal and no concept of private property ownership.In socialism, there are two ownership structures:1. State ownership2. Ownership by co-operatives.But under communism there is single ownership; i.e. State /Community ownership. Everybody gets as per his due and works as per his capacity. This stage was difficult to find. So we find that with spread of Marx’s ideas we find communism in Russia and China. It is little better than capitalism, In fact, it is essentially state capitalism for the few But co-operative socialism is the gap that still remains, and has never been fully discussed, let alone entertained (although: Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell within their initial party manifesto, introduced it, and intended to create a new form of fresh systems of government for all the people. Before that is, they were vilified by right wing media billionaires consorting with the Tory party, terrified of the majority of the electorate wanting to learn more and to give them a chance of instigating such an audacious new form of governance, which would have immediately eliminated all the unjustly given privileges and subsidies given by the state, and made many of them very much less prosperous).CO-OPERATIVE SOCIALISM: would essentially dissipate neo-capitalism and the financial and corporate markets of financialization: through DEMOCRACY AT WORK. Where each individual within their workplace would have a: ONE PERSON - ONE VOTE - ONE SHARE of the interests of that business with all the concomitant advantages of control and working for oneself - but also, for the country community via the established government partnership. We could then resolve to re-create the community in all its diverse forms. We could bring about a shared world of cultural and economic reference within points of commonality. It is either this, or the opposite of almost where we are now: drifting off into a separateness.This would require the re-creation of civil society and it would by no means be easy: taming the feral young, the gangs, the children deprived of language and moral compass by neglect and the absence of fathers; of fairness and justice from a comparative minority sector of wealth extraction asset speculators intent on private property, and for which any discussion of equality is an anathema, for this would necessarily substantially reduce their self-enrichment, private property prosperity, which currently destroys any semblance of justice, fairness and equality for all.

DEFINING YOUR PROJECT1. Demonstrate the project need and feasibilityProduce a document confirming the need for the project deliverables and describing, in broad terms: the deliverables, means of creating the deliverables, costs of creating and implementing the deliverables, benefits to be obtained by implementing the deliverables.2. Obtain project authorization§ A go/no go decision is made by the Sponsor (Company).§ A Project Manager is assigned.§ A “Project Charter” is created which:§ Formally recognizes the Project.§ Communicates the success factors.§ Details the scope of the project and its deliverables.§ Is used as a communication document throughout the project.3. Appraise fully all aspects of the Project§ Outline the various ways the project objectives can be met.§ Conduct a comprehensive risk analysis:§ Include Technical, Commercial, Environmental and Safety.§ Document all risks within the Project Risk register.PLANNING YOUR PROJECT4. Describe Project scopeThis includes:§ A Statement of Project Scope§ A Scope management plan§ A Work Breakdown Structure5. Define and sequence project activities§ Develop an activity list (A list of all activities that will be performed on the project).§ Give updates to the work breakdown structure (WBS).§ Design a Project Network diagram.6. Estimate durations for activities and resources required§ Get estimate of duration for each activity and assumptions related to each estimate.§ Produce a statement of resource requirements.§ Update the activity list.7. Develop a Project Schedule§ Include Gantt Charts, network diagrams, milestone charts, or text tables.§ Use supporting details, such as resource usage over time, cash flow projections, order/delivery schedules, etc.8. Estimate costs§ Get cost estimates for completing each activity.§ Give supporting detail, including assumptions and constraints.§ Include cost management plan describing how cost variances will be handled.9. Build a budget and spending plan§ A cost baseline or time-phased budget for measuring/monitoring costs.§ A spending plan, telling how much will be spent on what resources at what time.10. Create a formal quality plan§ This is a quality management plan, including operational definitions.§ Make sure you have quality verification checklists.11. Create a formal Project Communications Plan§ A communication plan includes:§ Collection structure.§ Distribution structure.§ Distribution structure of information to be disseminated.§ Schedules listing when information will be produced.§ A method for updating the communications plan.12. Organize and acquire staff§ Define role and responsibility assignments.§ Create a staffing plan.§ Produce an organisational chart with detail as appropriate.§ Acquire Project Staff.§ Create a Project Team Directory.13. Identify risks and plan to respond§ Design a document describing potential risks, including their sources, symptoms, and ways to address them.14. Plan for, and acquire, outside resources (if required)§ Use a procurement management plan describing how contractors will be obtained.§ Produce a Statement Of Work (SOW) or Statement Of Requirements (SOR) describing the item (product or service) to be procured.§ Create Bid documents, such as RFP (Request For Proposal), IFB (Invitation For Bid), etc.§ Identify evaluation criteria – means of scoring contractor’s proposals.§ Put in place a contract with one or more suppliers of goods or services.15. Organise the project plan§ Put together a comprehensive project plan that pulls together all the outputs of the preceding project planning activities.16. Close out the project planning phase§ Get the Project Plan approved, in writing, by The Client, and obtain a “green light” or okay to begin work on the project.17. Revisit the Project Plan and re-plan if needed§ This gives confidence that the detailed plans to execute a particular phase are still accurate and will effectively achieve results as planned.EXECUTION OF YOUR PROJECT18. Execute project activities§ Work results (deliverables) are created.§ Change requests (ie, based on expanded or contracted project) are identified.§ Periodic progress reports are created.§ Team performance is assessed, guided, and improved if needed.§ Bids/Proposals for deliverables are solicited, contactors (suppliers) are chosen, and contracts are established.§ Contracts are administered to achieve desired work results.19. Control project activities§ This includes:§ Decision to accept inspected deliverables.§ Corrective actions such as rework of deliverables, adjustments to work process, etc.§ Updates to project plan and scope.§ Improved quality.§ Completed evaluation checklists (if applicable).CLOSING YOUR PROJECT20. Close out project activities§ Get formal acceptance, documented in writing, that the Sponsor has accepted the product of this phase or activity.§ Give formal acceptance of contractor work products and updates to the contractor’s files.§ Update the project records prepared for archiving.§ Put together a list of lessons learned.§ Produce a plan for follow-up and/or hand-off work.