The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / On "Communism"
 All Comments / On "Communism"
    The latest in our series of translations of Russian national-conservative intellectual Egor Kholmogorov. For the first part, see: Russians in the 2oth Century. Part I: Origins to WWII. Incidentally, while counter-mainstream commenters in the West are hardly well compensated, this is unfortunately doubly true in Russia. If you have enjoyed our translations of him, a...
  • @Mikhail

    Depends on the context, I don’t quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.
     
    Crimean War, Congress of Berlin and Russo-Japanese War serve as examples.

    First World War and Revolution come to mind.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    After this, the faithful Mahdi (the Islamic Savior) and Christ will fight together with the forces of Dajjal.
     
    So his Eurasianism leads him to combining Christian and Islamic eschatology?
    Wow, the guy seems to be even madder than I had imagined.

    His dalliance with ‘Islamic eschatology’ coming apparently through a personage who plays the prophets of doom (Sheik Imran Hosein) is baffling, to say the least. The Sheik, who has a no less baffling audience on other ‘Russian’ and ‘Orthodox’ sites, advocates an alliance between Muslims and Russian Orthodox, who allegedly are designated in the Koran (which he interprets in a personal way) as ‘the closest in affection’ to Muslims, against the Western-Zionist Dajjal! He tries to conceal the rabid anti-Christian thrust of all so-called prophecies, which inform the ‘ideology’ of the jihadis in Syria. In those ‘prophecies’ Jesus comes to ‘smash the crosses, kill the pigs, abolish the jizya (by making everyone a Muslim) and finally to submit to the Mahdi!
    Dugin is not a Christian. His philosophy was influenced by the ‘Sufi’ esoterism of Rene Guenon, the famous apostate.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cicero2
    I wish I could have replied a few hours ago, but if you want to read some of Ilyin's essays in English, go to this website.

    https://souloftheeast.org/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    This was how I was introduced to his philosophy several years ago after coming across his wikipedia article. It was good to see the archive is still up for other people to discover.

    In particular, you should start with 'On Forms of Sovereignty' (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia's place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/

    Thanks, that’s great.
    Have read the “On forms of sovereignty” article. Actually sounds pretty sensible imo, hard to object unless one is a mindless democracy fanatic (reminds me somewhat of our own times, where the attempt to introduce democracy in a country like Egypt merely led to the empowerment of intolerant demagogues, and then to military dictatorship again…democratic forms are useless unless the population is sufficiently educated and civic-minded).
    I should have been more sceptical of the image of Ilyin spread by Western msm…as usual it’s apparently gross misrepresentation.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Speaking of Law, two dimensions of it are paramount for Law to be worth its Salt. The first dimension is what Paul mentioned about Ilyin, that being what constitutes the Law. How it’s derived. Are the Laws in and of themselves equitable? Do they promote Egalitarianism? What System do they preserve & protect & perpetuate? The second dimension is the administration of the Law. It’s of paramount importance that the Law be administered fairly & equitably. If you have to pay dearly to navigate the Law, as you do in America and most countries, then the Law is not administered fairly & equitably, and therefore, Justice is compromised and the Society enabled by the Law is imbalanced, favoring one group over another, and that one group, as the history of Civilization has shown, tends to be The Moneyed Class, and in this sense, the Law has tended to keep those not in the Moneyed Class in their place. The Law in that sense has served as a form of incarceration, creating false Barriers to Entry for those who don’t have Means.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @PaulR
    Because I was asked, here goes:

    Like a lot of people on the European political right in the inter-war period, Ilyin initially engaged in a certain amount of wishful thinking concerning fascism, which caused him at first to underestimate its dangers. He also had some sympathy with 1930s authoritarianism, nationalism, and especially anti-communism. But Ilyin was also a firm opponent of totalitarianism. Eventually, the Nazis fired him from his job teaching in Berlin because he refused to include anti-Semitic propaganda in his lectures. He continued lecturing around Germany in defiance of the authorities until in 1938 he fled the country.

    Let's be clear - Ilyin is not a modern Western liberal democrat. There are lots of passages in his work calling for 'dictatorship' etc. If that's all of his work you read, you'll no doubt think the guy is a fascist or something close to it. But, there's also a lot in his work which gives a very different impression. Take, for instance, his attitude to law. For Ilyin, law is not something to be obeyed just because it is law and somebody in authority has dictated it. Formal, 'positive' law, he wrote, should try as much as is possible to reflect natural law, which he defined in terms of the right of every individual to live a worthy, dignified, and autonomous life, independent of external coercion. Formal law exists only for this end. Moreover, the state exists only for this end - ie the sole purpose of the state is securing individuals' rights according to natural law. This is a very liberal point of view, and explains why many Russian conservative philosophers nowadays describe Ilyin as a 'liberal'.

    So which is the real Ilyin? The authoritarian or the liberal? The answer is a complex, often paradoxical, mixture of the two. Ilyin supports authoritarianism over democracy precisely because in his time democracies had a nasty habit of collapsing and turning into totalitarian regimes (whether communist or fascist). This is because of the underdeveloped 'legal consciousness' of the people. Democracy could be stable in countries where legal consciousness was well developed, e.g. Britain, But elsewhere, and particularly Russia, it couldn't. Democracy therefore often did a worse job of protecting people's natural rights than authoritarianism. But the latter is only justified to the extent that it promotes natural rights and ultimately the authoritarian state should develop the people's legal consciousness to the extent that authoritarian rule is no longer necessary.

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples' freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Paul

    Well said.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cicero2
    I wish I could have replied a few hours ago, but if you want to read some of Ilyin's essays in English, go to this website.

    https://souloftheeast.org/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    This was how I was introduced to his philosophy several years ago after coming across his wikipedia article. It was good to see the archive is still up for other people to discover.

    In particular, you should start with 'On Forms of Sovereignty' (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia's place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/

    In particular, you should start with ‘On Forms of Sovereignty’ (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia’s place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/

    Very nice.

    And yet, I suspect, the author would not view Ukraine’s artificial inclusion and forced integration into Russia’s political system so realistically.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Semi-failed academic in precarious employment.


    Must be pretty lonely for you!
     
    Why? Because of my "extreme" views? Well, I usually avoid talking about politics unless I have some idea where the other person stands.

    I wish I could have replied a few hours ago, but if you want to read some of Ilyin’s essays in English, go to this website.

    https://souloftheeast.org/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    This was how I was introduced to his philosophy several years ago after coming across his wikipedia article. It was good to see the archive is still up for other people to discover.

    In particular, you should start with ‘On Forms of Sovereignty’ (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia’s place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/

    Read More
    • Replies: @AP

    In particular, you should start with ‘On Forms of Sovereignty’ (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia’s place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/
     
    Very nice.

    And yet, I suspect, the author would not view Ukraine's artificial inclusion and forced integration into Russia's political system so realistically.
    , @German_reader
    Thanks, that's great.
    Have read the "On forms of sovereignty" article. Actually sounds pretty sensible imo, hard to object unless one is a mindless democracy fanatic (reminds me somewhat of our own times, where the attempt to introduce democracy in a country like Egypt merely led to the empowerment of intolerant demagogues, and then to military dictatorship again...democratic forms are useless unless the population is sufficiently educated and civic-minded).
    I should have been more sceptical of the image of Ilyin spread by Western msm...as usual it's apparently gross misrepresentation.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @PaulR
    Because I was asked, here goes:

    Like a lot of people on the European political right in the inter-war period, Ilyin initially engaged in a certain amount of wishful thinking concerning fascism, which caused him at first to underestimate its dangers. He also had some sympathy with 1930s authoritarianism, nationalism, and especially anti-communism. But Ilyin was also a firm opponent of totalitarianism. Eventually, the Nazis fired him from his job teaching in Berlin because he refused to include anti-Semitic propaganda in his lectures. He continued lecturing around Germany in defiance of the authorities until in 1938 he fled the country.

    Let's be clear - Ilyin is not a modern Western liberal democrat. There are lots of passages in his work calling for 'dictatorship' etc. If that's all of his work you read, you'll no doubt think the guy is a fascist or something close to it. But, there's also a lot in his work which gives a very different impression. Take, for instance, his attitude to law. For Ilyin, law is not something to be obeyed just because it is law and somebody in authority has dictated it. Formal, 'positive' law, he wrote, should try as much as is possible to reflect natural law, which he defined in terms of the right of every individual to live a worthy, dignified, and autonomous life, independent of external coercion. Formal law exists only for this end. Moreover, the state exists only for this end - ie the sole purpose of the state is securing individuals' rights according to natural law. This is a very liberal point of view, and explains why many Russian conservative philosophers nowadays describe Ilyin as a 'liberal'.

    So which is the real Ilyin? The authoritarian or the liberal? The answer is a complex, often paradoxical, mixture of the two. Ilyin supports authoritarianism over democracy precisely because in his time democracies had a nasty habit of collapsing and turning into totalitarian regimes (whether communist or fascist). This is because of the underdeveloped 'legal consciousness' of the people. Democracy could be stable in countries where legal consciousness was well developed, e.g. Britain, But elsewhere, and particularly Russia, it couldn't. Democracy therefore often did a worse job of protecting people's natural rights than authoritarianism. But the latter is only justified to the extent that it promotes natural rights and ultimately the authoritarian state should develop the people's legal consciousness to the extent that authoritarian rule is no longer necessary.

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples' freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Paul

    That’s an excellent response. Thanks. I will chew on it for a day or two. There’s much to consider and ponder.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @PaulR
    Because I was asked, here goes:

    Like a lot of people on the European political right in the inter-war period, Ilyin initially engaged in a certain amount of wishful thinking concerning fascism, which caused him at first to underestimate its dangers. He also had some sympathy with 1930s authoritarianism, nationalism, and especially anti-communism. But Ilyin was also a firm opponent of totalitarianism. Eventually, the Nazis fired him from his job teaching in Berlin because he refused to include anti-Semitic propaganda in his lectures. He continued lecturing around Germany in defiance of the authorities until in 1938 he fled the country.

    Let's be clear - Ilyin is not a modern Western liberal democrat. There are lots of passages in his work calling for 'dictatorship' etc. If that's all of his work you read, you'll no doubt think the guy is a fascist or something close to it. But, there's also a lot in his work which gives a very different impression. Take, for instance, his attitude to law. For Ilyin, law is not something to be obeyed just because it is law and somebody in authority has dictated it. Formal, 'positive' law, he wrote, should try as much as is possible to reflect natural law, which he defined in terms of the right of every individual to live a worthy, dignified, and autonomous life, independent of external coercion. Formal law exists only for this end. Moreover, the state exists only for this end - ie the sole purpose of the state is securing individuals' rights according to natural law. This is a very liberal point of view, and explains why many Russian conservative philosophers nowadays describe Ilyin as a 'liberal'.

    So which is the real Ilyin? The authoritarian or the liberal? The answer is a complex, often paradoxical, mixture of the two. Ilyin supports authoritarianism over democracy precisely because in his time democracies had a nasty habit of collapsing and turning into totalitarian regimes (whether communist or fascist). This is because of the underdeveloped 'legal consciousness' of the people. Democracy could be stable in countries where legal consciousness was well developed, e.g. Britain, But elsewhere, and particularly Russia, it couldn't. Democracy therefore often did a worse job of protecting people's natural rights than authoritarianism. But the latter is only justified to the extent that it promotes natural rights and ultimately the authoritarian state should develop the people's legal consciousness to the extent that authoritarian rule is no longer necessary.

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples' freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Paul

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples’ freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Doesn’t negate the idea of having competent personnel around that single person, with the aforementioned group being very much involved in impacting the decision making process.

    Modern Western liberal democrats“, have some contradictions of their own.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia – does anyone here even disagree?

     

    Depends on the context, I don't quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.
    Have you written about Ilyin in detail before? Is some of his work available in translation, and if so, what should one read to understand his thought?
    I have no doubt that what Western msm and people like Timothy Snyder write about him is hysterical nonsense, but if possible I'd like to see for myself.

    Depends on the context, I don’t quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.

    Crimean War, Congress of Berlin and Russo-Japanese War serve as examples.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Seraphim
    First World War and Revolution come to mind.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield
    Maybe Paul Robinson can address this. It's Ivan Ilyin in his own words.

    Putinism: Rusia and Its Future with the West

    Europe does not understand the Nazi movement. It does not understand it and is afraid. And the more it is afraid, the less it understands. The less it understands, the more it tends to believe all the nagative rumors, all the horror stories of "eyewitnesses," all the frightening predictions. Radical left wingers in virtually all European nations create an atmosphere of ill will and hatred. Unfortunately our Russian [émigré] press is gradually also drawn into this, the [Jewish-liberal] emotions gradually become categories of good and evil.

    To this day European public opinion has failed to understand that National Socialism is by no means radical racialism that does not respect the law. The spirit of National Socialism does not lead to racialism.
     
    I love this excerpt.

    ....National Socialism is by no means radical racialism that does not respect the law.
     
    How clever. He's correct. It can just as easily be read as follows.

    National Socialism is radical racialism that respects the law.
     
    Remember, The Rule of Law is very important to Ilyin. It's a Central Tenet of his Philosophy. So long as its legal, it's virtuous.

    This excerpt also tickles me.

    The spirit of National Socialism does not lead to racialism.
     
    Once again, very clever on his part. He's also correct once again. It should and could read as follows.


    The spirit of National Socialism does not LEAD TO racialism because the spirit of National Socialism IS INHERENTLY racist.
     

    Because I was asked, here goes:

    Like a lot of people on the European political right in the inter-war period, Ilyin initially engaged in a certain amount of wishful thinking concerning fascism, which caused him at first to underestimate its dangers. He also had some sympathy with 1930s authoritarianism, nationalism, and especially anti-communism. But Ilyin was also a firm opponent of totalitarianism. Eventually, the Nazis fired him from his job teaching in Berlin because he refused to include anti-Semitic propaganda in his lectures. He continued lecturing around Germany in defiance of the authorities until in 1938 he fled the country.

    Let’s be clear – Ilyin is not a modern Western liberal democrat. There are lots of passages in his work calling for ‘dictatorship’ etc. If that’s all of his work you read, you’ll no doubt think the guy is a fascist or something close to it. But, there’s also a lot in his work which gives a very different impression. Take, for instance, his attitude to law. For Ilyin, law is not something to be obeyed just because it is law and somebody in authority has dictated it. Formal, ‘positive’ law, he wrote, should try as much as is possible to reflect natural law, which he defined in terms of the right of every individual to live a worthy, dignified, and autonomous life, independent of external coercion. Formal law exists only for this end. Moreover, the state exists only for this end – ie the sole purpose of the state is securing individuals’ rights according to natural law. This is a very liberal point of view, and explains why many Russian conservative philosophers nowadays describe Ilyin as a ‘liberal’.

    So which is the real Ilyin? The authoritarian or the liberal? The answer is a complex, often paradoxical, mixture of the two. Ilyin supports authoritarianism over democracy precisely because in his time democracies had a nasty habit of collapsing and turning into totalitarian regimes (whether communist or fascist). This is because of the underdeveloped ‘legal consciousness’ of the people. Democracy could be stable in countries where legal consciousness was well developed, e.g. Britain, But elsewhere, and particularly Russia, it couldn’t. Democracy therefore often did a worse job of protecting people’s natural rights than authoritarianism. But the latter is only justified to the extent that it promotes natural rights and ultimately the authoritarian state should develop the people’s legal consciousness to the extent that authoritarian rule is no longer necessary.

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples’ freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Paul

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples’ freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.
     
    Doesn't negate the idea of having competent personnel around that single person, with the aforementioned group being very much involved in impacting the decision making process.

    "Modern Western liberal democrats", have some contradictions of their own.

    , @Cold N. Holefield
    That's an excellent response. Thanks. I will chew on it for a day or two. There's much to consider and ponder.
    , @AP
    Well said.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what’s evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.
     
    Tucker Carlson is a Sanctimonious Arch Conservative Prick. What he and his ilk may give with one hand they take back double with the other.

    If you need him as Authority to support your argument, you've already lost your argument. If you don't need him as Authority to support your argument and lend weight to it, then don't give him Billing.

    Who in The West do you really think you're appealing to with this Poor Pious Russia Bullshit?

    I'll tell you who.

    People Like This

    FYI, I can find Russian Writers who speak as equally abysmally of Russia as this author speaks glowingly of it. Russia, like any other Country, is The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, but IT OWNS THAT and no author gets to place the blame for Russia's shortcomings, and it has many, on anyone or anything else but Russia itself.

    The author of the New York Review of Books article I linked to mentions how Putin's recruiting of Ilyin to legitimate his Potemkin Kleptocratic Government is rather ironic when you consider Ilyin's opinion of The Soviet Union and The Communists. But Putin's shrewd and since no one is left in Russia to challenge Putin on his Bullshit, he's able to shamelessly contain Ilyin & Stalin & The Soviets under his Deranged Propaganda Umbrella where Russia, not America, is that Shiing City on the Hill.

    Breaking News!!

    There is no Shining City on the Hill.

    Tucker Carlson is a Sanctimonious Arch Conservative Prick. What he and his ilk may give with one hand they take back double with the other.

    If you need him as Authority to support your argument, you’ve already lost your argument. If you don’t need him as Authority to support your argument and lend weight to it, then don’t give him Billing.

    Who among US mass media cable TV hosts is more objective on Russia? He makes some cogent point, in addition to having on some quality guests.

    You’ve failed to convince differently. FYI, I don’t exclusively rely on establishment sources – JRL court appointed Russia friendlys included.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield

    What Belarussians want, for obvious reasons, is to avoid the “Ukrainian path”. They are very afraid to be subject of a Maidan-like experiment.
     
    They're smart to be wary. The West hangs its Vassals out to dry. Look at Trump and Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico is a Protectorate.

    The West cannot be trusted. Former Soviet Satellite States that want to remain independent are going to have to be miraculously clever in walking The Independence Tightrope.

    Well, Batka was able to efficiently control “Maidanist viruses” within Belarus. In addition, people seem allergic to take liberal Sirens sings at face value. I think Belarus skillfully managed its post-soviet period and avoided the disease suffered by its two bigger brothers. In the post-soviet space, Kazakhstan and Belarus are the best performers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger
     
    Yeah, that's the standard line, and it's of course true that many Jewish businesses were closed down by the Soviets, bourgeois Jews deported to the Gulag etc.
    But I have my doubts whether it's the whole story.
    Some years ago I read a study about wartime Latvia (Björn Felder, Lettland im Zweiten Weltkrieg). It contained some facts which seemed very explosive to me (e.g. membership of the Latvian Communist party in 1940/41 was mostly Russians and Jews, with only the top level being ethnic Latvians...and even more strikingly: The Soviets made a big show of how they wanted to fight antisemitism, which the author demonstrated by reference to numerous leaflets, newspapers etc.)...and which are in stark contrast to what you generally read about Stalin's Soviet Union in the early 1940s (which supposedly was all about thinly veiled Russian nationalism by then and already well on the way to its later "antisemitism").
    Not that this could be in any way a justification for the mass murders the Germans and some local collaborators later committed. But it did indicate to me that establishment historians like Snyder don't go out of their way to look at issues that might potentially be controversial.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @utu

    I find it ironic you didn’t notice this
     
    I did not read the books. I am familiar only with many reviews and his talks.

    But I guess it’s too controversial for someone like Snyder
     
    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger and he was saying that people believed in Jewish collaboration and that may explain (not justify) their action.

    In Jedwabne which I think Poland still is controversial as many people do buy the now accepted story the so called pogrom began with having Jews marching with the bust of Lenin form the monument that was erected during Soviet occupation. I think that bust Lenin was found during the exhumation that unfortunately was prematurely terminated under the pressure of Jewish religious groups.

    Probably you are right and I should take a second look at him and read his books first. My mistake came from me being still hopeful.

    Now I remember, years ago I bought Bloodlands but then I lent it to an acquaintance before reading it and completely forgot about it. Since then I moved to another country and the still another so I will have to buy it again if I want to read it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @utu

    I find it ironic you didn’t notice this
     
    I did not read the books. I am familiar only with many reviews and his talks.

    But I guess it’s too controversial for someone like Snyder
     
    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger and he was saying that people believed in Jewish collaboration and that may explain (not justify) their action.

    In Jedwabne which I think Poland still is controversial as many people do buy the now accepted story the so called pogrom began with having Jews marching with the bust of Lenin form the monument that was erected during Soviet occupation. I think that bust Lenin was found during the exhumation that unfortunately was prematurely terminated under the pressure of Jewish religious groups.

    Probably you are right and I should take a second look at him and read his books first. My mistake came from me being still hopeful.

    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger

    Yeah, that’s the standard line, and it’s of course true that many Jewish businesses were closed down by the Soviets, bourgeois Jews deported to the Gulag etc.
    But I have my doubts whether it’s the whole story.
    Some years ago I read a study about wartime Latvia (Björn Felder, Lettland im Zweiten Weltkrieg). It contained some facts which seemed very explosive to me (e.g. membership of the Latvian Communist party in 1940/41 was mostly Russians and Jews, with only the top level being ethnic Latvians…and even more strikingly: The Soviets made a big show of how they wanted to fight antisemitism, which the author demonstrated by reference to numerous leaflets, newspapers etc.)…and which are in stark contrast to what you generally read about Stalin’s Soviet Union in the early 1940s (which supposedly was all about thinly veiled Russian nationalism by then and already well on the way to its later “antisemitism”).
    Not that this could be in any way a justification for the mass murders the Germans and some local collaborators later committed. But it did indicate to me that establishment historians like Snyder don’t go out of their way to look at issues that might potentially be controversial.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    Yeah, that’s the standard line
     
    https://www.scribd.com/document/72092745/Collaboration-Of-Polish-Jews-With-Nkvd-and-Soviets
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR.
     
    I didn't find him refreshing at all, his book is very conventional (it's also explicitly and vehemently anti-German in its treatment of the expulsions of Germans in the last chapter...I find it ironic you didn't notice this, given how you constantly accuse me of being a "cuck"). It's just an endless catalogue of atrocities, no original research. I also found his saccharine statement early in the book that he wants to focus on the victims, not on the killers pretty pathetic...that's just another manifestation of the modern Western cult of the victim. What's the point in writing about mass killings when you don't tell us about the perpetrators and their motives?
    He also shied away from dealing in detail with the interaction between Soviet and Nazi crimes in the areas annexed by the Soviets in 1940 (Baltic states and what was then Eastern Poland). From what I've read the Soviets presented themselves as fighters against antisemitism in those areas in 1940/41 and there was noticeable support by Jews for the Soviet occupiers (though other Jews became victims of the Soviets and were deported, that's also true). When the Germans came in 1941, they tried to use that to enlist the local population as participants into their race war. But I guess it's too controversial for someone like Snyder (who clearly wants to be an establishment historian) to deal with that...easier that just to pretend that the Soviet Union by 1940 was just a vehicle for Great Russian chauvinism and Stalin an antisemite.

    I find it ironic you didn’t notice this

    I did not read the books. I am familiar only with many reviews and his talks.

    But I guess it’s too controversial for someone like Snyder

    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger and he was saying that people believed in Jewish collaboration and that may explain (not justify) their action.

    In Jedwabne which I think Poland still is controversial as many people do buy the now accepted story the so called pogrom began with having Jews marching with the bust of Lenin form the monument that was erected during Soviet occupation. I think that bust Lenin was found during the exhumation that unfortunately was prematurely terminated under the pressure of Jewish religious groups.

    Probably you are right and I should take a second look at him and read his books first. My mistake came from me being still hopeful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger
     
    Yeah, that's the standard line, and it's of course true that many Jewish businesses were closed down by the Soviets, bourgeois Jews deported to the Gulag etc.
    But I have my doubts whether it's the whole story.
    Some years ago I read a study about wartime Latvia (Björn Felder, Lettland im Zweiten Weltkrieg). It contained some facts which seemed very explosive to me (e.g. membership of the Latvian Communist party in 1940/41 was mostly Russians and Jews, with only the top level being ethnic Latvians...and even more strikingly: The Soviets made a big show of how they wanted to fight antisemitism, which the author demonstrated by reference to numerous leaflets, newspapers etc.)...and which are in stark contrast to what you generally read about Stalin's Soviet Union in the early 1940s (which supposedly was all about thinly veiled Russian nationalism by then and already well on the way to its later "antisemitism").
    Not that this could be in any way a justification for the mass murders the Germans and some local collaborators later committed. But it did indicate to me that establishment historians like Snyder don't go out of their way to look at issues that might potentially be controversial.
    , @utu
    Now I remember, years ago I bought Bloodlands but then I lent it to an acquaintance before reading it and completely forgot about it. Since then I moved to another country and the still another so I will have to buy it again if I want to read it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @for-the-record
    My central university library

    So you are an academic (or perhaps a perpetual student)? Must be pretty lonely for you!

    Semi-failed academic in precarious employment.

    Must be pretty lonely for you!

    Why? Because of my “extreme” views? Well, I usually avoid talking about politics unless I have some idea where the other person stands.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cicero2
    I wish I could have replied a few hours ago, but if you want to read some of Ilyin's essays in English, go to this website.

    https://souloftheeast.org/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    This was how I was introduced to his philosophy several years ago after coming across his wikipedia article. It was good to see the archive is still up for other people to discover.

    In particular, you should start with 'On Forms of Sovereignty' (1948), which cuts to the heart of how Ilyin perceived the international order and Russia's place in it.

    https://souloftheeast.org/2015/04/24/ivan-ilyin-on-forms-of-sovereignty/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Two of his books actually seem to have been republished in recent years:
    https://www.amazon.de/Wesen-Eigenart-russischen-Kultur-Betrachtungen/dp/393712974X (apparently published in German already in the 1940s)

    https://www.amazon.de/%C3%9Cber-gewaltsamen-Widerstand-gegen-B%C3%B6se/dp/3963210052/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=0KNEV58FDG119KMQB9YB
    (seems to be a new translation)

    My central university library only has some tract by him from the 1920s about private property and communism...but I might try to get hold of that book about Russian culture.

    My central university library

    So you are an academic (or perhaps a perpetual student)? Must be pretty lonely for you!

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Semi-failed academic in precarious employment.


    Must be pretty lonely for you!
     
    Why? Because of my "extreme" views? Well, I usually avoid talking about politics unless I have some idea where the other person stands.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    Try the German national library: http://d-nb.info/gnd/118970054

    Two of his books actually seem to have been republished in recent years:
    https://www.amazon.de/Wesen-Eigenart-russischen-Kultur-Betrachtungen/dp/393712974X (apparently published in German already in the 1940s)

    https://www.amazon.de/%C3%9Cber-gewaltsamen-Widerstand-gegen-B%C3%B6se/dp/3963210052/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=0KNEV58FDG119KMQB9YB

    (seems to be a new translation)

    My central university library only has some tract by him from the 1920s about private property and communism…but I might try to get hold of that book about Russian culture.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    My central university library

    So you are an academic (or perhaps a perpetual student)? Must be pretty lonely for you!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Thanks, I'll have a look at it.
    I wonder about the books Iljin published in German, I suppose they'll be difficult to track down, but maybe I'll try.

    Try the German national library: http://d-nb.info/gnd/118970054

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Two of his books actually seem to have been republished in recent years:
    https://www.amazon.de/Wesen-Eigenart-russischen-Kultur-Betrachtungen/dp/393712974X (apparently published in German already in the 1940s)

    https://www.amazon.de/%C3%9Cber-gewaltsamen-Widerstand-gegen-B%C3%B6se/dp/3963210052/ref=pd_sim_14_1?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=0KNEV58FDG119KMQB9YB
    (seems to be a new translation)

    My central university library only has some tract by him from the 1920s about private property and communism...but I might try to get hold of that book about Russian culture.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @utu

    Timothy Snyder isn’t Jewish
     
    I always assumed that he was. But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR. I have recently spent several hours watching through his lectures and realized that his take is more evolved version of my own take to which I arrived after realizing many years ago that Jews actually were not murdered in Germany as Germany remained to some extent a "country of law" (Rechtsstaat) and countries that were German allies could protect Jews better than countries that were occupied by Germany like Poland and places that were lawless like Ukraine and Belarus. His narrative met some resistance within the canonical Jewish Holocaustians but I think it eventually got accepted though his narrative is not ready yet to be utilized in the pop-history of Hollywood and newspaper headlines in Holocaustian indoctrination because it is too complex. However there are issues that he does not touch like the number of the dead. He also separates himself from Hannah Arendt take on Jewish culpability in Judenrats etc. On the positive side he tries to have a more balanced view on Auschwitz and the fact that it was chiefly a huge prison/labor camps complex and it began to play a role in extermination of Jews much later when the the final solution in East was pretty much completed.

    There is a current political context of his work. Just like Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" of 1993 neatly foreshadowed and prepared the shift of interest of American Empire form the conflict with USSR to to engagement with Islam, Snyder book by stressing Soviet crimes and culpability in Holocaust and explaining conditioning to which Belorussians and Ukrainians were subjected shifted the attention of the American Empire to the conquest of Russia's eastern provinces. Thanks to Snyder "the murderous" Ukrainians can be understood and somewhat justified and thus from being just the Holocaust perpetrators they became also freedom fighters against Russian imperialism and thus can be sought as potential allies in the American Empire's projects. It is possibly this was the main objective of his work. Some writings of Anne Applebaum about the same geographical area served similar purpose, i.e., to warm up the image of Poles, Lithuanias, Belorussians and Ukrainians. It is possible that Applebaum and Snyder sit in the same think tanks or at least are paid from the same sources.

    Academia always served the Empire. It is where from comes the подготовка, the preliminary "media artillery" barrage before the main attack.

    Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[54] She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy.[55] She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting's International Board of Directors.[56] She is a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-leads a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).[57] She is on the editorial board for The American Interest[58] and the Journal of Democracy.[59]
     

    But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR.

    I didn’t find him refreshing at all, his book is very conventional (it’s also explicitly and vehemently anti-German in its treatment of the expulsions of Germans in the last chapter…I find it ironic you didn’t notice this, given how you constantly accuse me of being a “cuck”). It’s just an endless catalogue of atrocities, no original research. I also found his saccharine statement early in the book that he wants to focus on the victims, not on the killers pretty pathetic…that’s just another manifestation of the modern Western cult of the victim. What’s the point in writing about mass killings when you don’t tell us about the perpetrators and their motives?
    He also shied away from dealing in detail with the interaction between Soviet and Nazi crimes in the areas annexed by the Soviets in 1940 (Baltic states and what was then Eastern Poland). From what I’ve read the Soviets presented themselves as fighters against antisemitism in those areas in 1940/41 and there was noticeable support by Jews for the Soviet occupiers (though other Jews became victims of the Soviets and were deported, that’s also true). When the Germans came in 1941, they tried to use that to enlist the local population as participants into their race war. But I guess it’s too controversial for someone like Snyder (who clearly wants to be an establishment historian) to deal with that…easier that just to pretend that the Soviet Union by 1940 was just a vehicle for Great Russian chauvinism and Stalin an antisemite.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    I find it ironic you didn’t notice this
     
    I did not read the books. I am familiar only with many reviews and his talks.

    But I guess it’s too controversial for someone like Snyder
     
    In his talks he addressed the issue of Jewish collaboration with Soviets which he minimized and claimed that non Jewish collaboration was even larger and he was saying that people believed in Jewish collaboration and that may explain (not justify) their action.

    In Jedwabne which I think Poland still is controversial as many people do buy the now accepted story the so called pogrom began with having Jews marching with the bust of Lenin form the monument that was erected during Soviet occupation. I think that bust Lenin was found during the exhumation that unfortunately was prematurely terminated under the pressure of Jewish religious groups.

    Probably you are right and I should take a second look at him and read his books first. My mistake came from me being still hopeful.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @utu

    Timothy Snyder isn’t Jewish
     
    I always assumed that he was. But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR. I have recently spent several hours watching through his lectures and realized that his take is more evolved version of my own take to which I arrived after realizing many years ago that Jews actually were not murdered in Germany as Germany remained to some extent a "country of law" (Rechtsstaat) and countries that were German allies could protect Jews better than countries that were occupied by Germany like Poland and places that were lawless like Ukraine and Belarus. His narrative met some resistance within the canonical Jewish Holocaustians but I think it eventually got accepted though his narrative is not ready yet to be utilized in the pop-history of Hollywood and newspaper headlines in Holocaustian indoctrination because it is too complex. However there are issues that he does not touch like the number of the dead. He also separates himself from Hannah Arendt take on Jewish culpability in Judenrats etc. On the positive side he tries to have a more balanced view on Auschwitz and the fact that it was chiefly a huge prison/labor camps complex and it began to play a role in extermination of Jews much later when the the final solution in East was pretty much completed.

    There is a current political context of his work. Just like Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" of 1993 neatly foreshadowed and prepared the shift of interest of American Empire form the conflict with USSR to to engagement with Islam, Snyder book by stressing Soviet crimes and culpability in Holocaust and explaining conditioning to which Belorussians and Ukrainians were subjected shifted the attention of the American Empire to the conquest of Russia's eastern provinces. Thanks to Snyder "the murderous" Ukrainians can be understood and somewhat justified and thus from being just the Holocaust perpetrators they became also freedom fighters against Russian imperialism and thus can be sought as potential allies in the American Empire's projects. It is possibly this was the main objective of his work. Some writings of Anne Applebaum about the same geographical area served similar purpose, i.e., to warm up the image of Poles, Lithuanias, Belorussians and Ukrainians. It is possible that Applebaum and Snyder sit in the same think tanks or at least are paid from the same sources.

    Academia always served the Empire. It is where from comes the подготовка, the preliminary "media artillery" barrage before the main attack.

    Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[54] She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy.[55] She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting's International Board of Directors.[56] She is a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-leads a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).[57] She is on the editorial board for The American Interest[58] and the Journal of Democracy.[59]
     

    During the war in Yugoslavia the West sided with Croats who until then had pretty bad reputation as being one of the most murderous actors of the WWII and it was the Serbs who were considered the heroes of the WWII fighting for the right cause. Many people, also in Israel, were confused at that time as they instinctively wanted to support the good Serbs and it turned out that Serbs were not good anymore and the bad guys became the good guys. Similar dissonance people suffer in the case of Ukrainians as they are being transformed into good guys and their enthusiastic participation in Holocaust and genocidal massacres of Poles (also Czechs) in Volhynia is supposed to be forgotten.

    This is a good illustration that the narrative is created by power and truth is treated instrumentally. The truth is a rhetorical devices (after Paul Feyerabend). Those who can claim they poses it win. But only in rare case the truth altered the balance of power as it usually power alters the truth, so the winner can also claim the high moral ground.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    the author might be Jewish.
     
    Timothy Snyder isn't Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book...not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I'm not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of "fascism", I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    Timothy Snyder isn’t Jewish

    I always assumed that he was. But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR. I have recently spent several hours watching through his lectures and realized that his take is more evolved version of my own take to which I arrived after realizing many years ago that Jews actually were not murdered in Germany as Germany remained to some extent a “country of law” (Rechtsstaat) and countries that were German allies could protect Jews better than countries that were occupied by Germany like Poland and places that were lawless like Ukraine and Belarus. His narrative met some resistance within the canonical Jewish Holocaustians but I think it eventually got accepted though his narrative is not ready yet to be utilized in the pop-history of Hollywood and newspaper headlines in Holocaustian indoctrination because it is too complex. However there are issues that he does not touch like the number of the dead. He also separates himself from Hannah Arendt take on Jewish culpability in Judenrats etc. On the positive side he tries to have a more balanced view on Auschwitz and the fact that it was chiefly a huge prison/labor camps complex and it began to play a role in extermination of Jews much later when the the final solution in East was pretty much completed.

    There is a current political context of his work. Just like Huntington’s “Clash of Civilizations” of 1993 neatly foreshadowed and prepared the shift of interest of American Empire form the conflict with USSR to to engagement with Islam, Snyder book by stressing Soviet crimes and culpability in Holocaust and explaining conditioning to which Belorussians and Ukrainians were subjected shifted the attention of the American Empire to the conquest of Russia’s eastern provinces. Thanks to Snyder “the murderous” Ukrainians can be understood and somewhat justified and thus from being just the Holocaust perpetrators they became also freedom fighters against Russian imperialism and thus can be sought as potential allies in the American Empire’s projects. It is possibly this was the main objective of his work. Some writings of Anne Applebaum about the same geographical area served similar purpose, i.e., to warm up the image of Poles, Lithuanias, Belorussians and Ukrainians. It is possible that Applebaum and Snyder sit in the same think tanks or at least are paid from the same sources.

    Academia always served the Empire. It is where from comes the подготовка, the preliminary “media artillery” barrage before the main attack.

    Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[54] She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy.[55] She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting’s International Board of Directors.[56] She is a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-leads a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).[57] She is on the editorial board for The American Interest[58] and the Journal of Democracy.[59]

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    During the war in Yugoslavia the West sided with Croats who until then had pretty bad reputation as being one of the most murderous actors of the WWII and it was the Serbs who were considered the heroes of the WWII fighting for the right cause. Many people, also in Israel, were confused at that time as they instinctively wanted to support the good Serbs and it turned out that Serbs were not good anymore and the bad guys became the good guys. Similar dissonance people suffer in the case of Ukrainians as they are being transformed into good guys and their enthusiastic participation in Holocaust and genocidal massacres of Poles (also Czechs) in Volhynia is supposed to be forgotten.

    This is a good illustration that the narrative is created by power and truth is treated instrumentally. The truth is a rhetorical devices (after Paul Feyerabend). Those who can claim they poses it win. But only in rare case the truth altered the balance of power as it usually power alters the truth, so the winner can also claim the high moral ground.
    , @German_reader

    But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR.
     
    I didn't find him refreshing at all, his book is very conventional (it's also explicitly and vehemently anti-German in its treatment of the expulsions of Germans in the last chapter...I find it ironic you didn't notice this, given how you constantly accuse me of being a "cuck"). It's just an endless catalogue of atrocities, no original research. I also found his saccharine statement early in the book that he wants to focus on the victims, not on the killers pretty pathetic...that's just another manifestation of the modern Western cult of the victim. What's the point in writing about mass killings when you don't tell us about the perpetrators and their motives?
    He also shied away from dealing in detail with the interaction between Soviet and Nazi crimes in the areas annexed by the Soviets in 1940 (Baltic states and what was then Eastern Poland). From what I've read the Soviets presented themselves as fighters against antisemitism in those areas in 1940/41 and there was noticeable support by Jews for the Soviet occupiers (though other Jews became victims of the Soviets and were deported, that's also true). When the Germans came in 1941, they tried to use that to enlist the local population as participants into their race war. But I guess it's too controversial for someone like Snyder (who clearly wants to be an establishment historian) to deal with that...easier that just to pretend that the Soviet Union by 1940 was just a vehicle for Great Russian chauvinism and Stalin an antisemite.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • So, rumor grapevine concerning the 24 hour American IRS outage has the following:

    1: Russian SVR was deeply dismayed by Roselkomnadzors clown car antics regarding Telegram, and believed that Russian cyber deterrence was threatened by this public show of incompetence.

    2: IRS was taken down for 24 hours to have some lulz/bragging rights/making someone look more stupid that Roselkomnadzor. One cannot accuse the SVR of setting only modest goals for itself. 2/3 so far.

    3: IRS takedown was also because some SVR affiliated rich guys are pretty displeased with the state of US double taxation. You see, normal rich people have tax optimizers, certain Oligarchs have the SVR.

    4: Replaceing IRS website with a Roselkomnadzor notice “Website taken down for financial scamming” was considered, but not utilized due either a lack of humor or to the prophecies of Kek not being sufficiently advanced.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anatoly Karlin
    Paul Robinson addressed that article pretty thoroughly: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/bandwagon-of-errors/

    I haven't yet written anything systemic about Ilyin on this blog, but if you're interested in the topic, I'd recommend Robinson's archive on this topic: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    Russian conservatism is one of his core specialties and he has a book coming out soon on this topic.

    Thanks, I’ll have a look at it.
    I wonder about the books Iljin published in German, I suppose they’ll be difficult to track down, but maybe I’ll try.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Try the German national library: http://d-nb.info/gnd/118970054
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @AP

    I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews
     
    IIRC some Jewish critics were upset with him because they felt that his focus on Polish and Ukrainian suffering diluted the "unique" suffering of the Jewish people during those times.

    That’s pretty funny, one of the things I found so bizarre about the last chapter of his book was his treatment of characters like Jakub Berman in post-war Poland. The focus was almost entirely on how these people had to live in fear of Stalin’s alleged antisemitism…not on the fact that they were pretty repellent characters themselves who were instrumental in the creation of a communist dictatorship.
    He had similar tendencies in earlier chapters imo (e.g. the striking overrepresentation of Jews among NKVD personnel until 1937/38 only gets mentioned in the context of the Great Terror when they fell victim to a system they had earlier been part of; iirc he also had the usual line about Stalin supporting Great Russian chauvinism).
    And quite apart from that, it’s just a totally unoriginal book, little more than a tedious catalogue of atrocities.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Aedib

    Belarus will eventually accede to Russia,
     
    I don’t think so. What Belarussians want, for obvious reasons, is to avoid the “Ukrainian path”. They are very afraid to be subject of a Maidan-like experiment.

    What Belarussians want, for obvious reasons, is to avoid the “Ukrainian path”. They are very afraid to be subject of a Maidan-like experiment.

    They’re smart to be wary. The West hangs its Vassals out to dry. Look at Trump and Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico is a Protectorate.

    The West cannot be trusted. Former Soviet Satellite States that want to remain independent are going to have to be miraculously clever in walking The Independence Tightrope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Aedib
    Well, Batka was able to efficiently control “Maidanist viruses” within Belarus. In addition, people seem allergic to take liberal Sirens sings at face value. I think Belarus skillfully managed its post-soviet period and avoided the disease suffered by its two bigger brothers. In the post-soviet space, Kazakhstan and Belarus are the best performers.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Maybe Paul Robinson can address this. It’s Ivan Ilyin in his own words.

    Putinism: Rusia and Its Future with the West

    Europe does not understand the Nazi movement. It does not understand it and is afraid. And the more it is afraid, the less it understands. The less it understands, the more it tends to believe all the nagative rumors, all the horror stories of “eyewitnesses,” all the frightening predictions. Radical left wingers in virtually all European nations create an atmosphere of ill will and hatred. Unfortunately our Russian [émigré] press is gradually also drawn into this, the [Jewish-liberal] emotions gradually become categories of good and evil.

    To this day European public opinion has failed to understand that National Socialism is by no means radical racialism that does not respect the law. The spirit of National Socialism does not lead to racialism.

    I love this excerpt.

    ….National Socialism is by no means radical racialism that does not respect the law.

    How clever. He’s correct. It can just as easily be read as follows.

    National Socialism is radical racialism that respects the law.

    Remember, The Rule of Law is very important to Ilyin. It’s a Central Tenet of his Philosophy. So long as its legal, it’s virtuous.

    This excerpt also tickles me.

    The spirit of National Socialism does not lead to racialism.

    Once again, very clever on his part. He’s also correct once again. It should and could read as follows.

    The spirit of National Socialism does not LEAD TO racialism because the spirit of National Socialism IS INHERENTLY racist.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PaulR
    Because I was asked, here goes:

    Like a lot of people on the European political right in the inter-war period, Ilyin initially engaged in a certain amount of wishful thinking concerning fascism, which caused him at first to underestimate its dangers. He also had some sympathy with 1930s authoritarianism, nationalism, and especially anti-communism. But Ilyin was also a firm opponent of totalitarianism. Eventually, the Nazis fired him from his job teaching in Berlin because he refused to include anti-Semitic propaganda in his lectures. He continued lecturing around Germany in defiance of the authorities until in 1938 he fled the country.

    Let's be clear - Ilyin is not a modern Western liberal democrat. There are lots of passages in his work calling for 'dictatorship' etc. If that's all of his work you read, you'll no doubt think the guy is a fascist or something close to it. But, there's also a lot in his work which gives a very different impression. Take, for instance, his attitude to law. For Ilyin, law is not something to be obeyed just because it is law and somebody in authority has dictated it. Formal, 'positive' law, he wrote, should try as much as is possible to reflect natural law, which he defined in terms of the right of every individual to live a worthy, dignified, and autonomous life, independent of external coercion. Formal law exists only for this end. Moreover, the state exists only for this end - ie the sole purpose of the state is securing individuals' rights according to natural law. This is a very liberal point of view, and explains why many Russian conservative philosophers nowadays describe Ilyin as a 'liberal'.

    So which is the real Ilyin? The authoritarian or the liberal? The answer is a complex, often paradoxical, mixture of the two. Ilyin supports authoritarianism over democracy precisely because in his time democracies had a nasty habit of collapsing and turning into totalitarian regimes (whether communist or fascist). This is because of the underdeveloped 'legal consciousness' of the people. Democracy could be stable in countries where legal consciousness was well developed, e.g. Britain, But elsewhere, and particularly Russia, it couldn't. Democracy therefore often did a worse job of protecting people's natural rights than authoritarianism. But the latter is only justified to the extent that it promotes natural rights and ultimately the authoritarian state should develop the people's legal consciousness to the extent that authoritarian rule is no longer necessary.

    This all fits quite well into the Russian liberal-conservative tradition, which believes in autocracy (defined in terms of centralizing power into the hands of a single person) but also believes that autocracy is an inherently limited form of government, justified by its ability to protect peoples' freedoms. Of course, to modern Western liberal democrats these elements are contradictory. But without passing judgement on it, that is what it is.

    Paul
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @El Dato
    Once it becomes obvious that this Soviet legacy has run out the American owners of Ukraine and Belarus will scrap them.

    Who are "the American owners of Belarus"?????

    Belarus will eventually accede to Russia, but Ukraine not so much. It's rather like (todays) Poland in that respect, which is unlikely to reintegrate the Deutschland anytime soon. Maybe it will split in two, only time can tell.

    Belarus will eventually accede to Russia,

    I don’t think so. What Belarussians want, for obvious reasons, is to avoid the “Ukrainian path”. They are very afraid to be subject of a Maidan-like experiment.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield

    What Belarussians want, for obvious reasons, is to avoid the “Ukrainian path”. They are very afraid to be subject of a Maidan-like experiment.
     
    They're smart to be wary. The West hangs its Vassals out to dry. Look at Trump and Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rico is a Protectorate.

    The West cannot be trusted. Former Soviet Satellite States that want to remain independent are going to have to be miraculously clever in walking The Independence Tightrope.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    the author might be Jewish.
     
    Timothy Snyder isn't Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book...not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I'm not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of "fascism", I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    Paul Robinson addressed that article pretty thoroughly: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/bandwagon-of-errors/

    I haven’t yet written anything systemic about Ilyin on this blog, but if you’re interested in the topic, I’d recommend Robinson’s archive on this topic: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    Russian conservatism is one of his core specialties and he has a book coming out soon on this topic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Thanks, I'll have a look at it.
    I wonder about the books Iljin published in German, I suppose they'll be difficult to track down, but maybe I'll try.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    the author might be Jewish.
     
    Timothy Snyder isn't Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book...not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I'm not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of "fascism", I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews

    IIRC some Jewish critics were upset with him because they felt that his focus on Polish and Ukrainian suffering diluted the “unique” suffering of the Jewish people during those times.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    That's pretty funny, one of the things I found so bizarre about the last chapter of his book was his treatment of characters like Jakub Berman in post-war Poland. The focus was almost entirely on how these people had to live in fear of Stalin's alleged antisemitism...not on the fact that they were pretty repellent characters themselves who were instrumental in the creation of a communist dictatorship.
    He had similar tendencies in earlier chapters imo (e.g. the striking overrepresentation of Jews among NKVD personnel until 1937/38 only gets mentioned in the context of the Great Terror when they fell victim to a system they had earlier been part of; iirc he also had the usual line about Stalin supporting Great Russian chauvinism).
    And quite apart from that, it's just a totally unoriginal book, little more than a tedious catalogue of atrocities.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    the author might be Jewish.
     
    Timothy Snyder isn't Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book...not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I'm not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of "fascism", I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    If you don’t get a good answer here, you might try asking this question over at Paul Robinson’s blog:

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield

    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?
     
    Start with this, but BEWARE, I think, GASP!!, the author might be Jewish. Unfortunately, even though you're a German Reader, it's in English. A minor inconvenience, I'm sure. Not ideal by any means, but easily overcome with a modicum of effort.

    Ivan Ilyin, Putin’s Philosopher of Russian Fascism

    An Excerpt from that link.

    Thus this Russian philosopher, whose name was Ivan Ilyin, came to imagine a Russian Christian fascism. Born in 1883, he finished a dissertation on God’s worldly failure just before the Russian Revolution of 1917. Expelled from his homeland in 1922 by the Soviet power he despised, he embraced the cause of Benito Mussolini and completed an apology for political violence in 1925. In German and Swiss exile, he wrote in the 1920s and 1930s for White Russian exiles who had fled after defeat in the Russian civil war, and in the 1940s and 1950s for future Russians who would see the end of the Soviet power.

    A tireless worker, Ilyin produced about twenty books in Russian, and another twenty in German. Some of his work has a rambling and commonsensical character, and it is easy to find tensions and contradictions. One current of thought that is coherent over the decades, however, is his metaphysical and moral justification for political totalitarianism, which he expressed in practical outlines for a fascist state. A crucial concept was “law” or “legal consciousness” (pravosoznanie). For the young Ilyin, writing before the Revolution, law embodied the hope that Russians would partake in a universal consciousness that would allow Russia to create a modern state. For the mature, counter-revolutionary Ilyin, a particular consciousness (“heart” or “soul,” not “mind”) permitted Russians to experience the arbitrary claims of power as law. Though he died forgotten, in 1954, Ilyin’s work was revived after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and guides the men who rule Russia today.
     
    This is instructive in many ways, not just one. It should put to rest the notion that there is any "Virtue" in The Rule of Law or the trope bandied about, A Nation of Laws. Ilyin admired Italian & German Fascism as much for their "Virtue" as for their adherence to The Rule of Law. They both were, respectively, A Nation of Laws and they operated according to The Rule of Law, and yet both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were Sadistic Totalitarian Butchering Regimes and according to their vaunted Law, it was perfectly legal. The belief that they were "Virtuous" gave them a Blank Check to create Laws that enabled & perpetuated Crimes Against Humanity persecuting any & all who refused to believe in, and succumb to, their Bloody Virtue, or who were otherwise ill-fitting (i.e. the Disabled & the Jews).

    the author might be Jewish.

    Timothy Snyder isn’t Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book…not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I’m not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of “fascism”, I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary

    I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.
     
    If you don't get a good answer here, you might try asking this question over at Paul Robinson's blog:

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/
    , @AP

    I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews
     
    IIRC some Jewish critics were upset with him because they felt that his focus on Polish and Ukrainian suffering diluted the "unique" suffering of the Jewish people during those times.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Paul Robinson addressed that article pretty thoroughly: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2016/05/12/bandwagon-of-errors/

    I haven't yet written anything systemic about Ilyin on this blog, but if you're interested in the topic, I'd recommend Robinson's archive on this topic: https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/tag/ivan-ilyin/

    Russian conservatism is one of his core specialties and he has a book coming out soon on this topic.
    , @utu

    Timothy Snyder isn’t Jewish
     
    I always assumed that he was. But I found him refreshing that he managed to change parts of Holocaust narrative and put it in wider context of butchery that was going on in the East were many actors were involved and that he does not neglect the role of the USSR. I have recently spent several hours watching through his lectures and realized that his take is more evolved version of my own take to which I arrived after realizing many years ago that Jews actually were not murdered in Germany as Germany remained to some extent a "country of law" (Rechtsstaat) and countries that were German allies could protect Jews better than countries that were occupied by Germany like Poland and places that were lawless like Ukraine and Belarus. His narrative met some resistance within the canonical Jewish Holocaustians but I think it eventually got accepted though his narrative is not ready yet to be utilized in the pop-history of Hollywood and newspaper headlines in Holocaustian indoctrination because it is too complex. However there are issues that he does not touch like the number of the dead. He also separates himself from Hannah Arendt take on Jewish culpability in Judenrats etc. On the positive side he tries to have a more balanced view on Auschwitz and the fact that it was chiefly a huge prison/labor camps complex and it began to play a role in extermination of Jews much later when the the final solution in East was pretty much completed.

    There is a current political context of his work. Just like Huntington's "Clash of Civilizations" of 1993 neatly foreshadowed and prepared the shift of interest of American Empire form the conflict with USSR to to engagement with Islam, Snyder book by stressing Soviet crimes and culpability in Holocaust and explaining conditioning to which Belorussians and Ukrainians were subjected shifted the attention of the American Empire to the conquest of Russia's eastern provinces. Thanks to Snyder "the murderous" Ukrainians can be understood and somewhat justified and thus from being just the Holocaust perpetrators they became also freedom fighters against Russian imperialism and thus can be sought as potential allies in the American Empire's projects. It is possibly this was the main objective of his work. Some writings of Anne Applebaum about the same geographical area served similar purpose, i.e., to warm up the image of Poles, Lithuanias, Belorussians and Ukrainians. It is possible that Applebaum and Snyder sit in the same think tanks or at least are paid from the same sources.

    Academia always served the Empire. It is where from comes the подготовка, the preliminary "media artillery" barrage before the main attack.

    Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.[54] She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy.[55] She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting's International Board of Directors.[56] She is a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-leads a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE).[57] She is on the editorial board for The American Interest[58] and the Journal of Democracy.[59]
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    You should really read up on him
     
    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?

    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?

    Start with this, but BEWARE, I think, GASP!!, the author might be Jewish. Unfortunately, even though you’re a German Reader, it’s in English. A minor inconvenience, I’m sure. Not ideal by any means, but easily overcome with a modicum of effort.

    Ivan Ilyin, Putin’s Philosopher of Russian Fascism

    An Excerpt from that link.

    Thus this Russian philosopher, whose name was Ivan Ilyin, came to imagine a Russian Christian fascism. Born in 1883, he finished a dissertation on God’s worldly failure just before the Russian Revolution of 1917. Expelled from his homeland in 1922 by the Soviet power he despised, he embraced the cause of Benito Mussolini and completed an apology for political violence in 1925. In German and Swiss exile, he wrote in the 1920s and 1930s for White Russian exiles who had fled after defeat in the Russian civil war, and in the 1940s and 1950s for future Russians who would see the end of the Soviet power.

    A tireless worker, Ilyin produced about twenty books in Russian, and another twenty in German. Some of his work has a rambling and commonsensical character, and it is easy to find tensions and contradictions. One current of thought that is coherent over the decades, however, is his metaphysical and moral justification for political totalitarianism, which he expressed in practical outlines for a fascist state. A crucial concept was “law” or “legal consciousness” (pravosoznanie). For the young Ilyin, writing before the Revolution, law embodied the hope that Russians would partake in a universal consciousness that would allow Russia to create a modern state. For the mature, counter-revolutionary Ilyin, a particular consciousness (“heart” or “soul,” not “mind”) permitted Russians to experience the arbitrary claims of power as law. Though he died forgotten, in 1954, Ilyin’s work was revived after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and guides the men who rule Russia today.

    This is instructive in many ways, not just one. It should put to rest the notion that there is any “Virtue” in The Rule of Law or the trope bandied about, A Nation of Laws. Ilyin admired Italian & German Fascism as much for their “Virtue” as for their adherence to The Rule of Law. They both were, respectively, A Nation of Laws and they operated according to The Rule of Law, and yet both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were Sadistic Totalitarian Butchering Regimes and according to their vaunted Law, it was perfectly legal. The belief that they were “Virtuous” gave them a Blank Check to create Laws that enabled & perpetuated Crimes Against Humanity persecuting any & all who refused to believe in, and succumb to, their Bloody Virtue, or who were otherwise ill-fitting (i.e. the Disabled & the Jews).

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    the author might be Jewish.
     
    Timothy Snyder isn't Jewish, but iirc of gentile North European (Dutch?) ancestry. I do get the impression though that he caters strongly to the interests and prejudices of American Jews (read his Bloodlands book...not impressed, and the very last chapter strongly irritated me).
    In any case, I'm not interested in hysterical hit pieces accusing Ilyin of "fascism", I want to know if some representative sample of his work is available in English, German or French, so I can judge for myself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail
    I'm understandably not alone in negatively assessing your input here.

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what's evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what’s evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.

    Tucker Carlson is a Sanctimonious Arch Conservative Prick. What he and his ilk may give with one hand they take back double with the other.

    If you need him as Authority to support your argument, you’ve already lost your argument. If you don’t need him as Authority to support your argument and lend weight to it, then don’t give him Billing.

    Who in The West do you really think you’re appealing to with this Poor Pious Russia Bullshit?

    I’ll tell you who.

    People Like This

    FYI, I can find Russian Writers who speak as equally abysmally of Russia as this author speaks glowingly of it. Russia, like any other Country, is The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, but IT OWNS THAT and no author gets to place the blame for Russia’s shortcomings, and it has many, on anyone or anything else but Russia itself.

    The author of the New York Review of Books article I linked to mentions how Putin’s recruiting of Ilyin to legitimate his Potemkin Kleptocratic Government is rather ironic when you consider Ilyin’s opinion of The Soviet Union and The Communists. But Putin’s shrewd and since no one is left in Russia to challenge Putin on his Bullshit, he’s able to shamelessly contain Ilyin & Stalin & The Soviets under his Deranged Propaganda Umbrella where Russia, not America, is that Shiing City on the Hill.

    Breaking News!!

    There is no Shining City on the Hill.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    Tucker Carlson is a Sanctimonious Arch Conservative Prick. What he and his ilk may give with one hand they take back double with the other.

    If you need him as Authority to support your argument, you’ve already lost your argument. If you don’t need him as Authority to support your argument and lend weight to it, then don’t give him Billing.
     

    Who among US mass media cable TV hosts is more objective on Russia? He makes some cogent point, in addition to having on some quality guests.

    You've failed to convince differently. FYI, I don't exclusively rely on establishment sources - JRL court appointed Russia friendlys included.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cicero2
    You should really read up on him, Ilyin was one of the great conservative philosophers of the 20th century. As others had mentioned, he was no Eurasianist but rather someone who tried to balance what he felt was the best of the European legal tradition with the potential and challenges of modernity.

    In so far as Putin quoting him, that seems to be related to Putin's own belief that he is following in the course of Ilyin's "Third Way" for Russia that combines respect for national tradition with caution towards liberal democracy, while denouncing despotism and total centralization of power.

    Personally, I think Ilyin would hate what Russia has become. He would accuse Putin of putting on a big show of being a responsible leader with very little action to back it up. Someone who puts up the front of being an enlightened ruler who defends the conscience of law, but has only a hazy understanding of what that law means.

    You should really read up on him

    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield

    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?
     
    Start with this, but BEWARE, I think, GASP!!, the author might be Jewish. Unfortunately, even though you're a German Reader, it's in English. A minor inconvenience, I'm sure. Not ideal by any means, but easily overcome with a modicum of effort.

    Ivan Ilyin, Putin’s Philosopher of Russian Fascism

    An Excerpt from that link.

    Thus this Russian philosopher, whose name was Ivan Ilyin, came to imagine a Russian Christian fascism. Born in 1883, he finished a dissertation on God’s worldly failure just before the Russian Revolution of 1917. Expelled from his homeland in 1922 by the Soviet power he despised, he embraced the cause of Benito Mussolini and completed an apology for political violence in 1925. In German and Swiss exile, he wrote in the 1920s and 1930s for White Russian exiles who had fled after defeat in the Russian civil war, and in the 1940s and 1950s for future Russians who would see the end of the Soviet power.

    A tireless worker, Ilyin produced about twenty books in Russian, and another twenty in German. Some of his work has a rambling and commonsensical character, and it is easy to find tensions and contradictions. One current of thought that is coherent over the decades, however, is his metaphysical and moral justification for political totalitarianism, which he expressed in practical outlines for a fascist state. A crucial concept was “law” or “legal consciousness” (pravosoznanie). For the young Ilyin, writing before the Revolution, law embodied the hope that Russians would partake in a universal consciousness that would allow Russia to create a modern state. For the mature, counter-revolutionary Ilyin, a particular consciousness (“heart” or “soul,” not “mind”) permitted Russians to experience the arbitrary claims of power as law. Though he died forgotten, in 1954, Ilyin’s work was revived after collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, and guides the men who rule Russia today.
     
    This is instructive in many ways, not just one. It should put to rest the notion that there is any "Virtue" in The Rule of Law or the trope bandied about, A Nation of Laws. Ilyin admired Italian & German Fascism as much for their "Virtue" as for their adherence to The Rule of Law. They both were, respectively, A Nation of Laws and they operated according to The Rule of Law, and yet both Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were Sadistic Totalitarian Butchering Regimes and according to their vaunted Law, it was perfectly legal. The belief that they were "Virtuous" gave them a Blank Check to create Laws that enabled & perpetuated Crimes Against Humanity persecuting any & all who refused to believe in, and succumb to, their Bloody Virtue, or who were otherwise ill-fitting (i.e. the Disabled & the Jews).
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Anatoly Karlin
    He was against Soviet expansionist and repeatedly condemned its occupation of Eastern Europe.

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia - does anyone here even disagree? - which was however enough to transform him into "Putin's Fascist Philosopher" in the American MSM.

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia – does anyone here even disagree?

    Depends on the context, I don’t quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.
    Have you written about Ilyin in detail before? Is some of his work available in translation, and if so, what should one read to understand his thought?
    I have no doubt that what Western msm and people like Timothy Snyder write about him is hysterical nonsense, but if possible I’d like to see for myself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    Depends on the context, I don’t quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.
     
    Crimean War, Congress of Berlin and Russo-Japanese War serve as examples.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This Holefield fellow is a nutjob.

    https://catcherinthelie.wordpress.com/2018/02/07/russian-trolls-chumps/

    I suggest not feeding the troll.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Gottendamerung
    It has been a great mistake for the EU to admit so many irrelevant and toxic countries such as the Baltics , Poland , Chekia , Slovakia , Hungary , Romania ,Bulgaria , as well as to foster a coup d`Etat and a civil war in toxic Ucraina .

    This will be the end of the EU .

    Historic and poweful european countries like France , Italy , England , Spain . feel marginalized by Brussels ( by Germany ? ) , in benefit of the toxics . England already voted out of the EU , and the anger towards this EU is growing in Italy , France and Spain .

    The EU should have stablished just trade agreements with the toxics , and with Russia too , which is the most important , historic , and reliable country of eastern europe . But the Americans blind with hegemonism and russophobia would not tolerate it , what will lead to the end of the EU , and of Nato , or worse to an atomic war that will finnish with what remains of the white race .

    great mistake for the EU to admit so many irrelevant and toxic countries

    agreed, you just make a mistake of causality – the toxicity spreads from your lands to ours. All the EU money brought only problems to our lands: discord, corruption and misallocation of capital. Now you only drag us down ideologically with your dying senility and decadence. I am all for exiting this travesty. We are the engine of your growth, we are the future, you don’t deserve us.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield
    Previous to my comment, he knew nothing about Ivan Ilyin (sorry I screwed up his name earlier and accidentally typed an extra "l"). How do we know? Because he said "Who?". Now he's an Expert. He's a Quick Learner, I'll give him that.

    I have read almost all of Ilyin’s postwar articles and can state confidently that you’re full of shi- American MSM op-eds. (From the same people who also think that Dugin is Putin’s favorite “philosopher”).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it's not the whole story.

    He was against Soviet expansionist and repeatedly condemned its occupation of Eastern Europe.

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia – does anyone here even disagree? – which was however enough to transform him into “Putin’s Fascist Philosopher” in the American MSM.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia – does anyone here even disagree?

     

    Depends on the context, I don't quite see how Tsarist Russia was a victim of Western machinations.
    Have you written about Ilyin in detail before? Is some of his work available in translation, and if so, what should one read to understand his thought?
    I have no doubt that what Western msm and people like Timothy Snyder write about him is hysterical nonsense, but if possible I'd like to see for myself.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cicero2
    You should really read up on him, Ilyin was one of the great conservative philosophers of the 20th century. As others had mentioned, he was no Eurasianist but rather someone who tried to balance what he felt was the best of the European legal tradition with the potential and challenges of modernity.

    In so far as Putin quoting him, that seems to be related to Putin's own belief that he is following in the course of Ilyin's "Third Way" for Russia that combines respect for national tradition with caution towards liberal democracy, while denouncing despotism and total centralization of power.

    Personally, I think Ilyin would hate what Russia has become. He would accuse Putin of putting on a big show of being a responsible leader with very little action to back it up. Someone who puts up the front of being an enlightened ruler who defends the conscience of law, but has only a hazy understanding of what that law means.

    Ilyin might sympathize with Putin on the belief that the latter has limits in terms of what can be reasonably done.

    Another great 19th century conservative Russian thinker:

    https://orientalreview.org/2015/06/21/pobedonostsev-personalist-populist-perennialist-patriot-peacenik/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Some conservative/nationalist Russian philosopher of strong anti-Western bent from the early 20th century. Putin is supposedly a fan of him and quotes him occasionally.
    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn't get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound...but given our pressing issues, this can only be a minor concern.

    A view which also completely fails to correlate with what Ilyin actually wrote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Seraphim
    One may scratch his head till blood comes out, but he won't be able to understand what 'great harm' did Solzhenitsyn do to his people and motherland? The disparaging of Solzhenitsyn is a purely 'Western' affair. They hate him.

    As do many, if not most, if not all sovoks.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    He is a publicist and this is activism aimed at a Russian audience
     
    I know, and that's why I find his arguments potentially quite dangerous. Peoples that base their identity on a narrative of their total innocence and victimisation at the hands of others tend to be insufferable and lash out in rather excessive ways.
    Russians certainly have many legitimate grievances and are right not to trust the West in its present configuration. I have my doubts though whether Mr Kholmogorov's ideological myth-making can play any positive role.

    Peoples that base their identity on a narrative of their total innocence and victimisation at the hands of others tend to be insufferable and lash out in rather excessive ways.

    Oy Vey!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The main manifestations of the Russian Revival were the protection and partial restoration of Russia’s medieval architectural legacy (first and foremost, Orthodox churches) and the spread of a vogue for everything Old Russian, which became something of a marker of ethnic Russianness.

    It’s parodied in the movie Afonya (1975). Soviet home decor, Old Russian style: a samovar, a Zhostovo tray, a Gzhel vase, some folk figurines, “log” panels on the walls… combined with proudly exhibited foreign alcohol and canned food.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its “near abroad” (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.
     
    Yes, that view seems pretty accurate to me, as I wrote I attribute the major part of the blame for the present state of Russian-Western relations to Western policy-makers.
    I just took issue with some of Ilyin's statements that seemed too black-and-white to me. But since I haven't really read any of his works, I'm obviously not really qualified to judge his thought in all its intricacies.

    You should really read up on him, Ilyin was one of the great conservative philosophers of the 20th century. As others had mentioned, he was no Eurasianist but rather someone who tried to balance what he felt was the best of the European legal tradition with the potential and challenges of modernity.

    In so far as Putin quoting him, that seems to be related to Putin’s own belief that he is following in the course of Ilyin’s “Third Way” for Russia that combines respect for national tradition with caution towards liberal democracy, while denouncing despotism and total centralization of power.

    Personally, I think Ilyin would hate what Russia has become. He would accuse Putin of putting on a big show of being a responsible leader with very little action to back it up. Someone who puts up the front of being an enlightened ruler who defends the conscience of law, but has only a hazy understanding of what that law means.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Ilyin might sympathize with Putin on the belief that the latter has limits in terms of what can be reasonably done.

    Another great 19th century conservative Russian thinker:

    https://orientalreview.org/2015/06/21/pobedonostsev-personalist-populist-perennialist-patriot-peacenik/
    , @German_reader

    You should really read up on him
     
    Do you have recommendations what I should read by/about him?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Китайский дурак
    The fundamental question for Russia in 21st century is: survival of nation and civilization, in the face of deliberate attacks from a western elite which has ceased to be rational or competent, period.

    Nitpicking about genetic DNA, memorized quarrels over textbooks in Lithuania or Tartarstan, ignorant small minded oprobriums against Mr. Dugin, mask but do not manage a conceal a fundamental inadequacy and smallness of intellect.

    And Solzhenitsyn, an great man, epic chronicler of Soviet tragedies, and a fool limited by his fatal, forgivable, and fortunately not life long provincialism in outlook. He was right, and wrong. He did great harm to his people and his motherland. And he would have readily owned up to this bit of repentance himself, because in the end, he was a man with a noble soul. The article’ lavish quoting of Solzhenitsyn’s totally unrealistic and dreamy proposal without adding a somber footnote was also lamentable.

    One may scratch his head till blood comes out, but he won’t be able to understand what ‘great harm’ did Solzhenitsyn do to his people and motherland? The disparaging of Solzhenitsyn is a purely ‘Western’ affair. They hate him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    As do many, if not most, if not all sovoks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Michael Kenny
    What’s being described here is the slow but inevitable collapse of the Russian Empire. The Russian Federation is now the last of the “white man’s empires” and it’s hard to imagine that it won’t go the way of all the other European empires. Naturally, the dominant colonial ethnicity, which, almost by definition, sees itself as a master race, is trying to hang on. The British, French and Portuguese, Dutch and Spanish empires went through the same process and that’s to say nothing of “intra-European” colonialism which persists in certain European states, not least the Russian Federation itself. Thus, what we learn is that Russians are just a typically European people, doing the typically European things that all Europeans do. Even the “Russian v European” argument is typically European. We all see our continent as “us v them”. We are unique but all the others are clones of each other and, naturally, are ganging up on us! When a European country suffers a major defeat, you always get a revisionist about 15 – 20 years down the road who wants to return to the status quo ante, to “make X great again”, to borrow a phrase. Germany had Hitler, France had De Gaulle, England (and I say “England” advisedly) had Thatcher and Russia has Putin. For Hitler, it was the 1918 defeat, for De Gaulle, it was the 1940 defeat, for Thatcher, it was the loss of the world’s largest empire and for Putin, it’s the collapse of the Soviet Union. Thus, the good news is that Putin is just a perfectly normal and typically European passing phenomenon. The bad news is that if he continues to use military force, he will bring down a second, far more devastating, defeat on his own country, as Hitler did.
    By the way, the author’s claims about Ukraine are totally false and Russians make up only about 1/3 of Transnistria’s population.
    And, of course, I’d still love to know what a mere translator feels the need to conceal their identity.

    ‘Europe’ is waiting for the ‘inevitable collapse’ of Russia (not of Russian so-called ‘Empire’) since Batu-Khan. It must be recognized that Europe had a formidable patience and it will exercise it for a long time to come.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail
    Once again, Ilyin lived in the West. I don't believe he was anti-Western. One can like the opposite sex, while not seeking to become that sex. Ilyin opposed the anti-Russian influences evident in the West.

    An example is how a good number in the West seem to think think that the history of Poland and Russia is analogous to Ireland and Britain. Ireland never came close to threatening Britain in the way Poland has threatened Russia.

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its "near abroad" (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.

    Once again noting that the West shouldn't be strictly viewed as neocon to neolib to flat out anti-Russian leaning preferences.

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its “near abroad” (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.

    Yes, that view seems pretty accurate to me, as I wrote I attribute the major part of the blame for the present state of Russian-Western relations to Western policy-makers.
    I just took issue with some of Ilyin’s statements that seemed too black-and-white to me. But since I haven’t really read any of his works, I’m obviously not really qualified to judge his thought in all its intricacies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cicero2
    You should really read up on him, Ilyin was one of the great conservative philosophers of the 20th century. As others had mentioned, he was no Eurasianist but rather someone who tried to balance what he felt was the best of the European legal tradition with the potential and challenges of modernity.

    In so far as Putin quoting him, that seems to be related to Putin's own belief that he is following in the course of Ilyin's "Third Way" for Russia that combines respect for national tradition with caution towards liberal democracy, while denouncing despotism and total centralization of power.

    Personally, I think Ilyin would hate what Russia has become. He would accuse Putin of putting on a big show of being a responsible leader with very little action to back it up. Someone who puts up the front of being an enlightened ruler who defends the conscience of law, but has only a hazy understanding of what that law means.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia
     
    Well yes, but Poles would probably say this was a reaction to Russia having been a driving force behind the dismemberment of the Polish Commonwealth.
    I obviously can't claim to know and understand Ilyin's thought and all its details, but in some ways it seems a bit like a mirror image of Western Russophobes to me...the West as an eternally unchanging monolith, relentless in aggressive hostility against Holy Russia. Viewing conflict between Russia and the West in such civilizational, almost metaphysical terms (the religious imprint on Ilyin's thought seems very strong) is pretty dangerous imo.

    Once again, Ilyin lived in the West. I don’t believe he was anti-Western. One can like the opposite sex, while not seeking to become that sex. Ilyin opposed the anti-Russian influences evident in the West.

    An example is how a good number in the West seem to think think that the history of Poland and Russia is analogous to Ireland and Britain. Ireland never came close to threatening Britain in the way Poland has threatened Russia.

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its “near abroad” (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.

    Once again noting that the West shouldn’t be strictly viewed as neocon to neolib to flat out anti-Russian leaning preferences.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its “near abroad” (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.
     
    Yes, that view seems pretty accurate to me, as I wrote I attribute the major part of the blame for the present state of Russian-Western relations to Western policy-makers.
    I just took issue with some of Ilyin's statements that seemed too black-and-white to me. But since I haven't really read any of his works, I'm obviously not really qualified to judge his thought in all its intricacies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail
    Russians had good reason to fear Poland, given its imperialist activity in the mid 1500s thru early part of the 1600s and how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia - an especially high number back then.

    Western liberals shouldn't be confused with the West at large.

    Ilyin doesn't seem like he'd strongly disagree that

    - WW I was unnecessary
    - with the Russian government not prosecuting that war in an effective manner.

    WW I essentially strengthened the Nazi and Communist movements which he didn't support.

    how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia

    Well yes, but Poles would probably say this was a reaction to Russia having been a driving force behind the dismemberment of the Polish Commonwealth.
    I obviously can’t claim to know and understand Ilyin’s thought and all its details, but in some ways it seems a bit like a mirror image of Western Russophobes to me…the West as an eternally unchanging monolith, relentless in aggressive hostility against Holy Russia. Viewing conflict between Russia and the West in such civilizational, almost metaphysical terms (the religious imprint on Ilyin’s thought seems very strong) is pretty dangerous imo.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Once again, Ilyin lived in the West. I don't believe he was anti-Western. One can like the opposite sex, while not seeking to become that sex. Ilyin opposed the anti-Russian influences evident in the West.

    An example is how a good number in the West seem to think think that the history of Poland and Russia is analogous to Ireland and Britain. Ireland never came close to threatening Britain in the way Poland has threatened Russia.

    As Communism was collapsing, there was a sincere popular pro-Western orientation in Russia. That changed on account of the kind of Western robber baron types that left a bad impression in Russia, as well as hypocritically biased actions which included the bombing of Yugoslavia and preachy neocon-neolib manner on how Russia should behave in Chechnya and in its "near abroad" (former Soviet republics). Downplayed in that condescension, is the fault-lines of the Gamsakkurdias, Saakashvilis, Yushchenkos, Dudayevs and Maskhadovs.

    Once again noting that the West shouldn't be strictly viewed as neocon to neolib to flat out anti-Russian leaning preferences.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    What’s the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?
     
    I was referring primarily to history. National-minded Poles had good reason to resent Tsarist Russia (and Germany) in the 19th/early 20th century. Western liberals in the 19th century had good reason to dislike Russia, because its role as the gendarme of European reaction was quite real at times.
    I also find some of Ilyin's statements in the quote above extremely one-sided...like "dragging Russia into destructive wars at inconvenient times", as if Russia had had no agency of her own and was just subject to Western machinations. Well, one of the most destructive wars (not least for old Russia) was WW1, and imo Russian elites were far from innocent in bringing about that catastrophe.
    However, these are mostly historical issues now. Regarding the last 30 years, I'd actually agree that the overwhelming blame for the deterioration of Russian-Western relations lies with the Western powers, primarily the triumphalist Americans with their exceptionalist delusions, and secondarily their European satraps who are unable to present an alternative model for constructive relations with Russia.

    Russians had good reason to fear Poland, given its imperialist activity in the mid 1500s thru early part of the 1600s and how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia – an especially high number back then.

    Western liberals shouldn’t be confused with the West at large.

    Ilyin doesn’t seem like he’d strongly disagree that

    - WW I was unnecessary
    - with the Russian government not prosecuting that war in an effective manner.

    WW I essentially strengthened the Nazi and Communist movements which he didn’t support.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia
     
    Well yes, but Poles would probably say this was a reaction to Russia having been a driving force behind the dismemberment of the Polish Commonwealth.
    I obviously can't claim to know and understand Ilyin's thought and all its details, but in some ways it seems a bit like a mirror image of Western Russophobes to me...the West as an eternally unchanging monolith, relentless in aggressive hostility against Holy Russia. Viewing conflict between Russia and the West in such civilizational, almost metaphysical terms (the religious imprint on Ilyin's thought seems very strong) is pretty dangerous imo.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield
    By virtue of providing Billing for Tucker Carlson, you have discredited yourself as someone who is objective.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.
     
    Yeah, sure, if you say so. This statement reads to me as follows.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective and give equal weight or full weight to Russian Propaganda versus Western Propaganda..
     

    I’m understandably not alone in negatively assessing your input here.

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what’s evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what’s evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.
     
    Tucker Carlson is a Sanctimonious Arch Conservative Prick. What he and his ilk may give with one hand they take back double with the other.

    If you need him as Authority to support your argument, you've already lost your argument. If you don't need him as Authority to support your argument and lend weight to it, then don't give him Billing.

    Who in The West do you really think you're appealing to with this Poor Pious Russia Bullshit?

    I'll tell you who.

    People Like This

    FYI, I can find Russian Writers who speak as equally abysmally of Russia as this author speaks glowingly of it. Russia, like any other Country, is The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, but IT OWNS THAT and no author gets to place the blame for Russia's shortcomings, and it has many, on anyone or anything else but Russia itself.

    The author of the New York Review of Books article I linked to mentions how Putin's recruiting of Ilyin to legitimate his Potemkin Kleptocratic Government is rather ironic when you consider Ilyin's opinion of The Soviet Union and The Communists. But Putin's shrewd and since no one is left in Russia to challenge Putin on his Bullshit, he's able to shamelessly contain Ilyin & Stalin & The Soviets under his Deranged Propaganda Umbrella where Russia, not America, is that Shiing City on the Hill.

    Breaking News!!

    There is no Shining City on the Hill.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it’s not the whole story.
     
    What's the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?

    I'm reminded of Sam Kiley, who is now CNN's man in Moscow.

    Sam Kiley has a noticeably Anglo-centric, anti-Russian bias, which is quite collapsible.

    Within a 24 hour period last week, Kiley said that Russia's:

    - reaching out to the US was an attempt to drive division between Washington and London
    - emphasis on international law in Syria is hypocritical, because of Moscow's "annexation" (reunification) with Crimea.

    Actually, the Trump administration has expressed a willingness to seek better ties with the Kremlin. How sincere that statement is and whether such will happen is another story. There's a basis for improved US-Russian ties, which has NOTHING to do with trying to screw the UK.

    In reply to Kiley, it can be counter-claimed that Theresa May, Boris Johnson and some others in the UK, seek to thwart attempts at improved Russia-West ties.

    As for Crimea, Kiley doesn't note the hypocrisy in bashing Russia over that area, when compared to how the likes of Christiane Amanpour and himself (relative to Crimea) don't mention the severing of Kosovo from Serbia and the comparative lack of a fuss made over Turkey's position in northern Cyprus.

    I sense what Amanpour and Kiley might say in reply and in turn have a valid counter-reply to their likely follow-up - the type of discourse typically lacking in the "free press".

    This morning Kiley and the US based CNN host Natalie Allen (a hack) clearly favored the idea that the Syrian government did launch a chemical attack, with Russia and the Syrian government casting doubt thru misinformation. Never mind the numerous non-Russian Western sources noting otherwise.

    In short, it's inaccurate to cast the likes of Kiley and Allen as the West. Their clout relates to this piece:

    https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/theatre-syrien/

    What’s the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?

    I was referring primarily to history. National-minded Poles had good reason to resent Tsarist Russia (and Germany) in the 19th/early 20th century. Western liberals in the 19th century had good reason to dislike Russia, because its role as the gendarme of European reaction was quite real at times.
    I also find some of Ilyin’s statements in the quote above extremely one-sided…like “dragging Russia into destructive wars at inconvenient times”, as if Russia had had no agency of her own and was just subject to Western machinations. Well, one of the most destructive wars (not least for old Russia) was WW1, and imo Russian elites were far from innocent in bringing about that catastrophe.
    However, these are mostly historical issues now. Regarding the last 30 years, I’d actually agree that the overwhelming blame for the deterioration of Russian-Western relations lies with the Western powers, primarily the triumphalist Americans with their exceptionalist delusions, and secondarily their European satraps who are unable to present an alternative model for constructive relations with Russia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Russians had good reason to fear Poland, given its imperialist activity in the mid 1500s thru early part of the 1600s and how close to 100,000 Poles joined Napoleon in his attack on Russia - an especially high number back then.

    Western liberals shouldn't be confused with the West at large.

    Ilyin doesn't seem like he'd strongly disagree that

    - WW I was unnecessary
    - with the Russian government not prosecuting that war in an effective manner.

    WW I essentially strengthened the Nazi and Communist movements which he didn't support.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail
    Despite all of the hypocritically arrogant and ignorant biases predominate against Russia in the West, a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.

    Tucker Carlson isn't alone. A good number of mainstream Americans and other Westerners (who aren't so reared on establishment elite prejudices) are willing to consider such an approach.

    By virtue of providing Billing for Tucker Carlson, you have discredited yourself as someone who is objective.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.

    Yeah, sure, if you say so. This statement reads to me as follows.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective and give equal weight or full weight to Russian Propaganda versus Western Propaganda..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    I'm understandably not alone in negatively assessing your input here.

    On Russia and some other issues, Tucker Carlson has been far more objective than what's evident at CNN and MSNBC, as well as much of Fox News.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it's not the whole story.

    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it’s not the whole story.

    What’s the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?

    I’m reminded of Sam Kiley, who is now CNN’s man in Moscow.

    Sam Kiley has a noticeably Anglo-centric, anti-Russian bias, which is quite collapsible.

    Within a 24 hour period last week, Kiley said that Russia’s:

    - reaching out to the US was an attempt to drive division between Washington and London
    - emphasis on international law in Syria is hypocritical, because of Moscow’s “annexation” (reunification) with Crimea.

    Actually, the Trump administration has expressed a willingness to seek better ties with the Kremlin. How sincere that statement is and whether such will happen is another story. There’s a basis for improved US-Russian ties, which has NOTHING to do with trying to screw the UK.

    In reply to Kiley, it can be counter-claimed that Theresa May, Boris Johnson and some others in the UK, seek to thwart attempts at improved Russia-West ties.

    As for Crimea, Kiley doesn’t note the hypocrisy in bashing Russia over that area, when compared to how the likes of Christiane Amanpour and himself (relative to Crimea) don’t mention the severing of Kosovo from Serbia and the comparative lack of a fuss made over Turkey’s position in northern Cyprus.

    I sense what Amanpour and Kiley might say in reply and in turn have a valid counter-reply to their likely follow-up – the type of discourse typically lacking in the “free press”.

    This morning Kiley and the US based CNN host Natalie Allen (a hack) clearly favored the idea that the Syrian government did launch a chemical attack, with Russia and the Syrian government casting doubt thru misinformation. Never mind the numerous non-Russian Western sources noting otherwise.

    In short, it’s inaccurate to cast the likes of Kiley and Allen as the West. Their clout relates to this piece:

    https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/theatre-syrien/

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    What’s the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?
     
    I was referring primarily to history. National-minded Poles had good reason to resent Tsarist Russia (and Germany) in the 19th/early 20th century. Western liberals in the 19th century had good reason to dislike Russia, because its role as the gendarme of European reaction was quite real at times.
    I also find some of Ilyin's statements in the quote above extremely one-sided...like "dragging Russia into destructive wars at inconvenient times", as if Russia had had no agency of her own and was just subject to Western machinations. Well, one of the most destructive wars (not least for old Russia) was WW1, and imo Russian elites were far from innocent in bringing about that catastrophe.
    However, these are mostly historical issues now. Regarding the last 30 years, I'd actually agree that the overwhelming blame for the deterioration of Russian-Western relations lies with the Western powers, primarily the triumphalist Americans with their exceptionalist delusions, and secondarily their European satraps who are unable to present an alternative model for constructive relations with Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    Names are holy, your language is not.
    I do not intend to make my English flawless.

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second

    Names are holy, your language is not.

    Obviously, by virtue of this comment, you are yourself very much an Ilyinist whether you’re witting to it or not. Ilyin describes you perfectly.

    Names derive from language so your Arrogant Statement implies that Cyrillic is Holy by virtue of your assertion that names derived from it are Holy. The second half of your statement cements your Superiority Complex.

    Let me know if my “Demonic Constructions” are making you and Mother Russia sick, and if so I’ll ease up a bit so you can recover your Former Glory.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Secondly, his "strong anti-Western bent" is just a recognition of the reality of Western hostility against Russia.

    Wherever we Russian national émigrés are dispersed we should remember that other peoples do not know us and do not understand us, that they fear Russia, do not sympathize with it and are happy to seek it weakened it every way.
     

    Europe’s fundamental attitude to Russia is that it is an enigmatic, semi-barbaric ‘void’; it needs to be ‘evangelized’ or converted to Catholicism, ‘colonized’ (literally) and civilized; if necessary, it can and should be used for trade and for Western European objectives and intrigues; nevertheless, it is always necessary to weaken it. How?

    By dragging it at an inconvenient moment into destructive wars; by not allowing it access to the seas; if possible, by dismembering it into small states; if possible, by reducing its population (for instance, by supporting Bolshevik terror, which was the policy of Germany from 1917 to 1938); if possible, by sowing revolution and civil war (as in China); and then by installing international agents in Russia, by stubbornly imposing Western European forms of republicanism, democracy, and federalism which the Russian people cannot stand, by political and diplomatically isolating it, but insistently exposing its ‘imperialism’, its imaginary ‘reactionary nature’, its ‘lack of culture’ and its ‘aggression’.

    We should all understand this and never forget it. Not in order to respond to our enemy with hatred, but in order to accurately predict events and not to surrender to the sentimental illusions so characteristic of the Russian soul.

    We need sobriety and vigilance.

    There are peoples, states, governments, churches, secret organizations, and individuals who are hostile to Russia, particularly Orthodox Russia, and even more Imperial, undivided Russia. Just as there are ‘Anglophobes’, ‘Germanophobes’, and ‘Japanophobes’, the world has an abundance of ‘Russophobes’, enemies of national Russia, who have promised themselves to crush it, humiliate it, and weaken it. We must never forget this.

    Consequently, we must vigilantly and soberly measure whomsoever we speak to and whomsoever we address, by measure of his sympathy and intentions with regard to a united, national Russia, and should not expect any salvation from the conqueror, any help from the partitioner, any sympathy and understanding from the religious seducer, any goodwill from the destroyer, or any truth from the slanderer.

    Politics is the art of knowing your enemy and rendering him harmless. Whoever is unable to do this should stay out of politics.
     
    Translation of Against Russia (1948) - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/against-russia/

    Love of country was a central part of his philosophy. Russians he felt, should put Russian interests first. This contrasted with the internationalist philosophy of the communists. Furthermore, every nation, Ilyin said, should develop in its own way. Thus the West had no right to tell Russians how to run their own country; conditions in Russia weren’t the same as in the West. ‘Western Europe, which doesn’t know Russia, has not the slightest basis for imposing any political forms whatsoever on us,’ Ilyin declared.
     
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/putins-philosopher/

    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound
     
    About the real-existing Russia, sure.
    But not about Ilyin and his writing.

    Despite all of the hypocritically arrogant and ignorant biases predominate against Russia in the West, a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.

    Tucker Carlson isn’t alone. A good number of mainstream Americans and other Westerners (who aren’t so reared on establishment elite prejudices) are willing to consider such an approach.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cold N. Holefield
    By virtue of providing Billing for Tucker Carlson, you have discredited yourself as someone who is objective.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.
     
    Yeah, sure, if you say so. This statement reads to me as follows.

    a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective and give equal weight or full weight to Russian Propaganda versus Western Propaganda..
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Some conservative/nationalist Russian philosopher of strong anti-Western bent from the early 20th century. Putin is supposedly a fan of him and quotes him occasionally.
    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn't get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound...but given our pressing issues, this can only be a minor concern.

    I wouldn’t characterize Ilyin as anti-Western. He lived in the West, which he preferred over the USSR. There’re conservative Western monarchists.

    If alive today, Ilyin would undoubtedly oppose modern day neocons and neolibs, who shouldn’t be confused with the West at large.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Hack
    But that doesn't square at all with your preposterous statement:

    He can be used as a punching bag example for anti-Russian leaning advocates – never minding the more objectively intelligent pro-Russian take, that’s not as easy to refute and is (let’s face it) downplayed for that very reason.
     
    which implies that anybody critical of Kholomogorov or his opinions is somehow less 'objectively intelligent' than somebody that isn't critical of him. Ridiculous!

    (or perhaps, your statement really is just another 'Averkoism', impossible to understand and fraught with structural peculiarities?)...

    But that doesn’t square at all with your preposterous statement:

    “He can be used as a punching bag example for anti-Russian leaning advocates – never minding the more objectively intelligent pro-Russian take, that’s not as easy to refute and is (let’s face it) downplayed for that very reason.”

    which implies that anybody critical of Kholomogorov or his opinions is somehow less ‘objectively intelligent’ than somebody that isn’t critical of him. Ridiculous!

    You once again fail to accurately comprehend what was clearly presented and followed up on.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    Names are holy, your language is not.
    I do not intend to make my English flawless.

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second

    lol, nice one…thanks for making me laugh!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield

    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.
     
    Second off, it's off, not "of". Two can play that childish game.

    Names are holy, your language is not.
    I do not intend to make my English flawless.

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second
     
    lol, nice one...thanks for making me laugh!
    , @Cold N. Holefield

    Names are holy, your language is not.
     
    Obviously, by virtue of this comment, you are yourself very much an Ilyinist whether you're witting to it or not. Ilyin describes you perfectly.

    Names derive from language so your Arrogant Statement implies that Cyrillic is Holy by virtue of your assertion that names derived from it are Holy. The second half of your statement cements your Superiority Complex.

    Let me know if my "Demonic Constructions" are making you and Mother Russia sick, and if so I'll ease up a bit so you can recover your Former Glory.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • For elaboration, see this comment from another thread.

    https://www.unz.com/plang/the-neocons-are-selling-koolaid-again/#comment-2299601

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Secondly, his "strong anti-Western bent" is just a recognition of the reality of Western hostility against Russia.

    Wherever we Russian national émigrés are dispersed we should remember that other peoples do not know us and do not understand us, that they fear Russia, do not sympathize with it and are happy to seek it weakened it every way.
     

    Europe’s fundamental attitude to Russia is that it is an enigmatic, semi-barbaric ‘void’; it needs to be ‘evangelized’ or converted to Catholicism, ‘colonized’ (literally) and civilized; if necessary, it can and should be used for trade and for Western European objectives and intrigues; nevertheless, it is always necessary to weaken it. How?

    By dragging it at an inconvenient moment into destructive wars; by not allowing it access to the seas; if possible, by dismembering it into small states; if possible, by reducing its population (for instance, by supporting Bolshevik terror, which was the policy of Germany from 1917 to 1938); if possible, by sowing revolution and civil war (as in China); and then by installing international agents in Russia, by stubbornly imposing Western European forms of republicanism, democracy, and federalism which the Russian people cannot stand, by political and diplomatically isolating it, but insistently exposing its ‘imperialism’, its imaginary ‘reactionary nature’, its ‘lack of culture’ and its ‘aggression’.

    We should all understand this and never forget it. Not in order to respond to our enemy with hatred, but in order to accurately predict events and not to surrender to the sentimental illusions so characteristic of the Russian soul.

    We need sobriety and vigilance.

    There are peoples, states, governments, churches, secret organizations, and individuals who are hostile to Russia, particularly Orthodox Russia, and even more Imperial, undivided Russia. Just as there are ‘Anglophobes’, ‘Germanophobes’, and ‘Japanophobes’, the world has an abundance of ‘Russophobes’, enemies of national Russia, who have promised themselves to crush it, humiliate it, and weaken it. We must never forget this.

    Consequently, we must vigilantly and soberly measure whomsoever we speak to and whomsoever we address, by measure of his sympathy and intentions with regard to a united, national Russia, and should not expect any salvation from the conqueror, any help from the partitioner, any sympathy and understanding from the religious seducer, any goodwill from the destroyer, or any truth from the slanderer.

    Politics is the art of knowing your enemy and rendering him harmless. Whoever is unable to do this should stay out of politics.
     
    Translation of Against Russia (1948) - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/against-russia/

    Love of country was a central part of his philosophy. Russians he felt, should put Russian interests first. This contrasted with the internationalist philosophy of the communists. Furthermore, every nation, Ilyin said, should develop in its own way. Thus the West had no right to tell Russians how to run their own country; conditions in Russia weren’t the same as in the West. ‘Western Europe, which doesn’t know Russia, has not the slightest basis for imposing any political forms whatsoever on us,’ Ilyin declared.
     
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/putins-philosopher/

    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound
     
    About the real-existing Russia, sure.
    But not about Ilyin and his writing.

    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Second off, it’s off, not “of“. Two can play that childish game.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    Names are holy, your language is not.
    I do not intend to make my English flawless.

    Schreiben First, Bedenken Second
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it's not the whole story.

    Previous to my comment, he knew nothing about Ivan Ilyin (sorry I screwed up his name earlier and accidentally typed an extra “l”). How do we know? Because he said “Who?”. Now he’s an Expert. He’s a Quick Learner, I’ll give him that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anatoly Karlin
    I have read almost all of Ilyin's postwar articles and can state confidently that you're full of shi- American MSM op-eds. (From the same people who also think that Dugin is Putin's favorite "philosopher").
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it's not the whole story.

    German with Russian background.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Secondly, his "strong anti-Western bent" is just a recognition of the reality of Western hostility against Russia.

    Wherever we Russian national émigrés are dispersed we should remember that other peoples do not know us and do not understand us, that they fear Russia, do not sympathize with it and are happy to seek it weakened it every way.
     

    Europe’s fundamental attitude to Russia is that it is an enigmatic, semi-barbaric ‘void’; it needs to be ‘evangelized’ or converted to Catholicism, ‘colonized’ (literally) and civilized; if necessary, it can and should be used for trade and for Western European objectives and intrigues; nevertheless, it is always necessary to weaken it. How?

    By dragging it at an inconvenient moment into destructive wars; by not allowing it access to the seas; if possible, by dismembering it into small states; if possible, by reducing its population (for instance, by supporting Bolshevik terror, which was the policy of Germany from 1917 to 1938); if possible, by sowing revolution and civil war (as in China); and then by installing international agents in Russia, by stubbornly imposing Western European forms of republicanism, democracy, and federalism which the Russian people cannot stand, by political and diplomatically isolating it, but insistently exposing its ‘imperialism’, its imaginary ‘reactionary nature’, its ‘lack of culture’ and its ‘aggression’.

    We should all understand this and never forget it. Not in order to respond to our enemy with hatred, but in order to accurately predict events and not to surrender to the sentimental illusions so characteristic of the Russian soul.

    We need sobriety and vigilance.

    There are peoples, states, governments, churches, secret organizations, and individuals who are hostile to Russia, particularly Orthodox Russia, and even more Imperial, undivided Russia. Just as there are ‘Anglophobes’, ‘Germanophobes’, and ‘Japanophobes’, the world has an abundance of ‘Russophobes’, enemies of national Russia, who have promised themselves to crush it, humiliate it, and weaken it. We must never forget this.

    Consequently, we must vigilantly and soberly measure whomsoever we speak to and whomsoever we address, by measure of his sympathy and intentions with regard to a united, national Russia, and should not expect any salvation from the conqueror, any help from the partitioner, any sympathy and understanding from the religious seducer, any goodwill from the destroyer, or any truth from the slanderer.

    Politics is the art of knowing your enemy and rendering him harmless. Whoever is unable to do this should stay out of politics.
     
    Translation of Against Russia (1948) - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/against-russia/

    Love of country was a central part of his philosophy. Russians he felt, should put Russian interests first. This contrasted with the internationalist philosophy of the communists. Furthermore, every nation, Ilyin said, should develop in its own way. Thus the West had no right to tell Russians how to run their own country; conditions in Russia weren’t the same as in the West. ‘Western Europe, which doesn’t know Russia, has not the slightest basis for imposing any political forms whatsoever on us,’ Ilyin declared.
     
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/putins-philosopher/

    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound
     
    About the real-existing Russia, sure.
    But not about Ilyin and his writing.

    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it’s not the whole story.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    German with Russian background.
    , @Cold N. Holefield
    Previous to my comment, he knew nothing about Ivan Ilyin (sorry I screwed up his name earlier and accidentally typed an extra "l"). How do we know? Because he said "Who?". Now he's an Expert. He's a Quick Learner, I'll give him that.
    , @Mikhail

    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it’s not the whole story.
     
    What's the other part of the story? That Russia is partly to blame?

    I'm reminded of Sam Kiley, who is now CNN's man in Moscow.

    Sam Kiley has a noticeably Anglo-centric, anti-Russian bias, which is quite collapsible.

    Within a 24 hour period last week, Kiley said that Russia's:

    - reaching out to the US was an attempt to drive division between Washington and London
    - emphasis on international law in Syria is hypocritical, because of Moscow's "annexation" (reunification) with Crimea.

    Actually, the Trump administration has expressed a willingness to seek better ties with the Kremlin. How sincere that statement is and whether such will happen is another story. There's a basis for improved US-Russian ties, which has NOTHING to do with trying to screw the UK.

    In reply to Kiley, it can be counter-claimed that Theresa May, Boris Johnson and some others in the UK, seek to thwart attempts at improved Russia-West ties.

    As for Crimea, Kiley doesn't note the hypocrisy in bashing Russia over that area, when compared to how the likes of Christiane Amanpour and himself (relative to Crimea) don't mention the severing of Kosovo from Serbia and the comparative lack of a fuss made over Turkey's position in northern Cyprus.

    I sense what Amanpour and Kiley might say in reply and in turn have a valid counter-reply to their likely follow-up - the type of discourse typically lacking in the "free press".

    This morning Kiley and the US based CNN host Natalie Allen (a hack) clearly favored the idea that the Syrian government did launch a chemical attack, with Russia and the Syrian government casting doubt thru misinformation. Never mind the numerous non-Russian Western sources noting otherwise.

    In short, it's inaccurate to cast the likes of Kiley and Allen as the West. Their clout relates to this piece:

    https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/theatre-syrien/
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    He was against Soviet expansionist and repeatedly condemned its occupation of Eastern Europe.

    To be sure, he had cynical views about Western policies towards Russia - does anyone here even disagree? - which was however enough to transform him into "Putin's Fascist Philosopher" in the American MSM.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Some conservative/nationalist Russian philosopher of strong anti-Western bent from the early 20th century. Putin is supposedly a fan of him and quotes him occasionally.
    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn't get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound...but given our pressing issues, this can only be a minor concern.

    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Secondly, his “strong anti-Western bent” is just a recognition of the reality of Western hostility against Russia.

    Wherever we Russian national émigrés are dispersed we should remember that other peoples do not know us and do not understand us, that they fear Russia, do not sympathize with it and are happy to seek it weakened it every way.

    Europe’s fundamental attitude to Russia is that it is an enigmatic, semi-barbaric ‘void’; it needs to be ‘evangelized’ or converted to Catholicism, ‘colonized’ (literally) and civilized; if necessary, it can and should be used for trade and for Western European objectives and intrigues; nevertheless, it is always necessary to weaken it. How?

    By dragging it at an inconvenient moment into destructive wars; by not allowing it access to the seas; if possible, by dismembering it into small states; if possible, by reducing its population (for instance, by supporting Bolshevik terror, which was the policy of Germany from 1917 to 1938); if possible, by sowing revolution and civil war (as in China); and then by installing international agents in Russia, by stubbornly imposing Western European forms of republicanism, democracy, and federalism which the Russian people cannot stand, by political and diplomatically isolating it, but insistently exposing its ‘imperialism’, its imaginary ‘reactionary nature’, its ‘lack of culture’ and its ‘aggression’.

    We should all understand this and never forget it. Not in order to respond to our enemy with hatred, but in order to accurately predict events and not to surrender to the sentimental illusions so characteristic of the Russian soul.

    We need sobriety and vigilance.

    There are peoples, states, governments, churches, secret organizations, and individuals who are hostile to Russia, particularly Orthodox Russia, and even more Imperial, undivided Russia. Just as there are ‘Anglophobes’, ‘Germanophobes’, and ‘Japanophobes’, the world has an abundance of ‘Russophobes’, enemies of national Russia, who have promised themselves to crush it, humiliate it, and weaken it. We must never forget this.

    Consequently, we must vigilantly and soberly measure whomsoever we speak to and whomsoever we address, by measure of his sympathy and intentions with regard to a united, national Russia, and should not expect any salvation from the conqueror, any help from the partitioner, any sympathy and understanding from the religious seducer, any goodwill from the destroyer, or any truth from the slanderer.

    Politics is the art of knowing your enemy and rendering him harmless. Whoever is unable to do this should stay out of politics.

    Translation of Against Russia (1948) – https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/against-russia/

    Love of country was a central part of his philosophy. Russians he felt, should put Russian interests first. This contrasted with the internationalist philosophy of the communists. Furthermore, every nation, Ilyin said, should develop in its own way. Thus the West had no right to tell Russians how to run their own country; conditions in Russia weren’t the same as in the West. ‘Western Europe, which doesn’t know Russia, has not the slightest basis for imposing any political forms whatsoever on us,’ Ilyin declared.

    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/putins-philosopher/

    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound

    About the real-existing Russia, sure.
    But not about Ilyin and his writing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Ok, you seem to know a lot more about him than me (are you actually Russian yourself?).
    From the quotes you cited above it still seems like an extremely one-sided, maybe even paranoid interpretation of history. By selective choice of materials you could write much the same about many other countries (certainly about Germany).
    Western hostility to Russia is often real and a problem (certainly true today), but it's not the whole story.
    , @Cold N. Holefield

    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.
     
    Second off, it's off, not "of". Two can play that childish game.
    , @Mikhail
    Despite all of the hypocritically arrogant and ignorant biases predominate against Russia in the West, a good number of mainstream Russians still seek good Russia-West relations, on the premise that the West en masse will get more objective.

    Tucker Carlson isn't alone. A good number of mainstream Americans and other Westerners (who aren't so reared on establishment elite prejudices) are willing to consider such an approach.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Greasy William
    I'm lost

    Check his blog. He’s almost certainly mentally ill.

    He probably can’t bang 8s or even 6s.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mitleser
    What are you talking about?

    >Ivan Illyin

    Who?

    Some conservative/nationalist Russian philosopher of strong anti-Western bent from the early 20th century. Putin is supposedly a fan of him and quotes him occasionally.
    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound…but given our pressing issues, this can only be a minor concern.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    First of, his name is Ivan Ilyin.

    Secondly, his "strong anti-Western bent" is just a recognition of the reality of Western hostility against Russia.

    Wherever we Russian national émigrés are dispersed we should remember that other peoples do not know us and do not understand us, that they fear Russia, do not sympathize with it and are happy to seek it weakened it every way.
     

    Europe’s fundamental attitude to Russia is that it is an enigmatic, semi-barbaric ‘void’; it needs to be ‘evangelized’ or converted to Catholicism, ‘colonized’ (literally) and civilized; if necessary, it can and should be used for trade and for Western European objectives and intrigues; nevertheless, it is always necessary to weaken it. How?

    By dragging it at an inconvenient moment into destructive wars; by not allowing it access to the seas; if possible, by dismembering it into small states; if possible, by reducing its population (for instance, by supporting Bolshevik terror, which was the policy of Germany from 1917 to 1938); if possible, by sowing revolution and civil war (as in China); and then by installing international agents in Russia, by stubbornly imposing Western European forms of republicanism, democracy, and federalism which the Russian people cannot stand, by political and diplomatically isolating it, but insistently exposing its ‘imperialism’, its imaginary ‘reactionary nature’, its ‘lack of culture’ and its ‘aggression’.

    We should all understand this and never forget it. Not in order to respond to our enemy with hatred, but in order to accurately predict events and not to surrender to the sentimental illusions so characteristic of the Russian soul.

    We need sobriety and vigilance.

    There are peoples, states, governments, churches, secret organizations, and individuals who are hostile to Russia, particularly Orthodox Russia, and even more Imperial, undivided Russia. Just as there are ‘Anglophobes’, ‘Germanophobes’, and ‘Japanophobes’, the world has an abundance of ‘Russophobes’, enemies of national Russia, who have promised themselves to crush it, humiliate it, and weaken it. We must never forget this.

    Consequently, we must vigilantly and soberly measure whomsoever we speak to and whomsoever we address, by measure of his sympathy and intentions with regard to a united, national Russia, and should not expect any salvation from the conqueror, any help from the partitioner, any sympathy and understanding from the religious seducer, any goodwill from the destroyer, or any truth from the slanderer.

    Politics is the art of knowing your enemy and rendering him harmless. Whoever is unable to do this should stay out of politics.
     
    Translation of Against Russia (1948) - https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/against-russia/

    Love of country was a central part of his philosophy. Russians he felt, should put Russian interests first. This contrasted with the internationalist philosophy of the communists. Furthermore, every nation, Ilyin said, should develop in its own way. Thus the West had no right to tell Russians how to run their own country; conditions in Russia weren’t the same as in the West. ‘Western Europe, which doesn’t know Russia, has not the slightest basis for imposing any political forms whatsoever on us,’ Ilyin declared.
     
    https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/putins-philosopher/

    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn’t get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound
     
    About the real-existing Russia, sure.
    But not about Ilyin and his writing.
    , @Mikhail
    I wouldn't characterize Ilyin as anti-Western. He lived in the West, which he preferred over the USSR. There're conservative Western monarchists.

    If alive today, Ilyin would undoubtedly oppose modern day neocons and neolibs, who shouldn't be confused with the West at large.
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    A view which also completely fails to correlate with what Ilyin actually wrote.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield
    The author could have just as easily been Ivan Illyin, because Illyin couldn't have said it better himself.

    For you in The West subscribing to this Self-Righteous Mythological Nonsense, you are a Demonic Construction that must be eliminated, in case you don't know. As part of that process, The Illyinists will pretend to be your friend in your fight with The Western Establishment just as The Imams & Mullahs pretended to be friends with The Left in their Common Struggle to depose The Shah. Today, there effectively is no Left (yes, once upon a time there was a significant Marxist/Communist presence in Iran) left (haha) in Iran. The Religious Theocracy has all but eliminated The Left in Iran, something even The Shah, ruthless as he was, could not accomplish.

    Ponder that. If you were to succeed in your struggle against The Western Establishment with substantial aid from the Illyinists, you will be no more within a few short years of accomplishing your goal.

    A Struggle not done effectively and for the right reasons is not only doomed to fail but it will also destroy you and your aspirations in the process.

    Choose your Bedfellows carefully.

    I’m lost

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Check his blog. He's almost certainly mentally ill.

    He probably can't bang 8s or even 6s.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Cold N. Holefield
    The author could have just as easily been Ivan Illyin, because Illyin couldn't have said it better himself.

    For you in The West subscribing to this Self-Righteous Mythological Nonsense, you are a Demonic Construction that must be eliminated, in case you don't know. As part of that process, The Illyinists will pretend to be your friend in your fight with The Western Establishment just as The Imams & Mullahs pretended to be friends with The Left in their Common Struggle to depose The Shah. Today, there effectively is no Left (yes, once upon a time there was a significant Marxist/Communist presence in Iran) left (haha) in Iran. The Religious Theocracy has all but eliminated The Left in Iran, something even The Shah, ruthless as he was, could not accomplish.

    Ponder that. If you were to succeed in your struggle against The Western Establishment with substantial aid from the Illyinists, you will be no more within a few short years of accomplishing your goal.

    A Struggle not done effectively and for the right reasons is not only doomed to fail but it will also destroy you and your aspirations in the process.

    Choose your Bedfellows carefully.

    What are you talking about?

    >Ivan Illyin

    Who?

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Some conservative/nationalist Russian philosopher of strong anti-Western bent from the early 20th century. Putin is supposedly a fan of him and quotes him occasionally.
    Basic advice that Western dissidents shouldn't get too enthusiastic about Russia is probably sound...but given our pressing issues, this can only be a minor concern.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The author could have just as easily been Ivan Illyin, because Illyin couldn’t have said it better himself.

    For you in The West subscribing to this Self-Righteous Mythological Nonsense, you are a Demonic Construction that must be eliminated, in case you don’t know. As part of that process, The Illyinists will pretend to be your friend in your fight with The Western Establishment just as The Imams & Mullahs pretended to be friends with The Left in their Common Struggle to depose The Shah. Today, there effectively is no Left (yes, once upon a time there was a significant Marxist/Communist presence in Iran) left (haha) in Iran. The Religious Theocracy has all but eliminated The Left in Iran, something even The Shah, ruthless as he was, could not accomplish.

    Ponder that. If you were to succeed in your struggle against The Western Establishment with substantial aid from the Illyinists, you will be no more within a few short years of accomplishing your goal.

    A Struggle not done effectively and for the right reasons is not only doomed to fail but it will also destroy you and your aspirations in the process.

    Choose your Bedfellows carefully.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mitleser
    What are you talking about?

    >Ivan Illyin

    Who?
    , @Greasy William
    I'm lost
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    And you’re quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet ‘bigoted’ to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior – but you’re not fooling anybody here.
     
    You inaccurately suggested that I back any pro-Russian view. In turn, I corrected you.

    But that doesn’t square at all with your preposterous statement:

    He can be used as a punching bag example for anti-Russian leaning advocates – never minding the more objectively intelligent pro-Russian take, that’s not as easy to refute and is (let’s face it) downplayed for that very reason.

    which implies that anybody critical of Kholomogorov or his opinions is somehow less ‘objectively intelligent’ than somebody that isn’t critical of him. Ridiculous!

    (or perhaps, your statement really is just another ‘Averkoism’, impossible to understand and fraught with structural peculiarities?)…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    But that doesn’t square at all with your preposterous statement:

    "He can be used as a punching bag example for anti-Russian leaning advocates – never minding the more objectively intelligent pro-Russian take, that’s not as easy to refute and is (let’s face it) downplayed for that very reason."

    which implies that anybody critical of Kholomogorov or his opinions is somehow less ‘objectively intelligent’ than somebody that isn’t critical of him. Ridiculous!
     

    You once again fail to accurately comprehend what was clearly presented and followed up on.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @DNC
    Disagree. Their situation is not optimal, but it's understandable why the natives wanted to distance themselves from a group which they never welcomed in the first place. I'm not aware of any repatriation programs being undertaken in the 90s and perhaps much more should have been done in that respect.

    >>>why the natives wanted to distance themselves from a group which they never welcomed in the first place

    Damn. First you disagree, then you reiterate what amounts to “Whites deserve whatever is thrown at them because natives have fee-fees”.

    >>>not aware of any repatriation programs being undertaken in the 90s

    There were none. The Russian government turned a complete blind eye to the plight of Russians in the newly independents states, and only remembered about them to further some immediate geopolitical agenda. Basically behaving the typical Soviet way.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Hack
    And you're quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet 'bigoted' to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior - but you're not fooling anybody here.

    And you’re quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet ‘bigoted’ to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior – but you’re not fooling anybody here.

    You inaccurately suggested that I back any pro-Russian view. In turn, I corrected you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    But that doesn't square at all with your preposterous statement:

    He can be used as a punching bag example for anti-Russian leaning advocates – never minding the more objectively intelligent pro-Russian take, that’s not as easy to refute and is (let’s face it) downplayed for that very reason.
     
    which implies that anybody critical of Kholomogorov or his opinions is somehow less 'objectively intelligent' than somebody that isn't critical of him. Ridiculous!

    (or perhaps, your statement really is just another 'Averkoism', impossible to understand and fraught with structural peculiarities?)...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wally


    Given the fact that the '6M Jew, 5M others, & gas chambers' have been shown to be easily debunked frauds / scams, your "crypto-Nazi" childishness does not hold water.

    The '6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers' are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the 'holocaust' scam debunked here:
    http://codoh.com
    No name calling, level playing field debate here: http://forum.codoh.com

    "I owe my permission to submit the Zionist plan for the final solution of the Jewish Question."

    - 'Father of political Zionism' Theodor Herzl, letter to the Czar, November 22, 1899.
     

    Do you know what Hitler has in common with Lucia of Fatima?

    They both suck cocks in hell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail
    What your said:

    Kholmogorov’s great lament for the natural contraction and return of the Russian language and culture back to its ethnic homeland and roots does not resonate much in the lands where Russian imperialism dominated for many centuries. In fact, the words ‘imperialism’ and ‘Russian’ never once cross or surface in this made for hire article representing modern day Russian propaganda. It’s a song of lament not unheard of before by dying empires – the song of the vanquished conqueror. Boo, hoo…
     
    My reply:

    Captive Nations Committee (CNC) propaganda, as evidenced by the sentiment in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – entities where Russia is more preferred over the former Soviet republics claiming them.

    Elsewhere, numerous Romanians and Hungarians, as well as a noticeable number of Poles, aren’t so gung ho in supporting nationalist influenced Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.
     
    What you said:

    As long as Ukrainian citizenry is for an independent state, the opinions of Poles, Hungarians, Russians and any other sorry Central Asians is meaningless. Especially yours! It’s telling that you’re still caught up in the old cold war mentality of your sovok fellow travellers – the CNC has long since disolved, and you should take their cue you aging dinosaur.

     

    My reply:

    I’m neither Sovok, Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian.

    The CNC bias live on.

     

    And I replied:

    I never accused you of being “Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian’? You’ve brought up the topic of the preferences of other ethnicities, not I

    So?…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    What kind of a reply is this? You only accept points of view that are ‘pro-Russian’, as if there’s nothing to criticize within Russia? You’ve finally reached the bottom of the pit of inarticulation.
     
    Not true. You're quite poor at accurately assessing views which you don't agree with and don't like.

    "Pro-Russian" can include bigoted views - something evident with other types of pro-national advocacy. I clearly don't go along with such.

    And you’re quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet ‘bigoted’ to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior – but you’re not fooling anybody here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    And you’re quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet ‘bigoted’ to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior – but you’re not fooling anybody here.
     
    You inaccurately suggested that I back any pro-Russian view. In turn, I corrected you.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Hack

    The one that doesn’t leave itself open to the kind of criticism we see at this thread, while making valid pro-Russian points.
     
    What kind of a reply is this? You only accept points of view that are 'pro-Russian', as if there's nothing to criticize within Russia? You've finally reached the bottom of the pit of inarticulation. Keep it up Mickey, we're just about due for another one of your famous 'Averkoisms' :-)

    What kind of a reply is this? You only accept points of view that are ‘pro-Russian’, as if there’s nothing to criticize within Russia? You’ve finally reached the bottom of the pit of inarticulation.

    Not true. You’re quite poor at accurately assessing views which you don’t agree with and don’t like.

    “Pro-Russian” can include bigoted views – something evident with other types of pro-national advocacy. I clearly don’t go along with such.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    And you're quite unbelievable in your own portrayal of yourself as some sort of beacon of objectivity. You think that by throwing around the epithet 'bigoted' to others, you somehow cloak your own biased opinions as superior - but you're not fooling anybody here.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mr. Hack
    I never accused you of being "Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian'? You've brought up the topic of the preferences of other ethnicities, not I:

    Captive Nations Committee (CNC) propaganda, as evidenced by the sentiment in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – entities where Russia is more preferred over the former Soviet republics claiming them.

    Elsewhere, numerous Romanians and Hungarians, as well as a noticeable number of Poles, aren’t so gung ho in supporting nationalist influenced Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.
     

    What your said:

    Kholmogorov’s great lament for the natural contraction and return of the Russian language and culture back to its ethnic homeland and roots does not resonate much in the lands where Russian imperialism dominated for many centuries. In fact, the words ‘imperialism’ and ‘Russian’ never once cross or surface in this made for hire article representing modern day Russian propaganda. It’s a song of lament not unheard of before by dying empires – the song of the vanquished conqueror. Boo, hoo…

    My reply:

    Captive Nations Committee (CNC) propaganda, as evidenced by the sentiment in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – entities where Russia is more preferred over the former Soviet republics claiming them.

    Elsewhere, numerous Romanians and Hungarians, as well as a noticeable number of Poles, aren’t so gung ho in supporting nationalist influenced Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.

    What you said:

    As long as Ukrainian citizenry is for an independent state, the opinions of Poles, Hungarians, Russians and any other sorry Central Asians is meaningless. Especially yours! It’s telling that you’re still caught up in the old cold war mentality of your sovok fellow travellers – the CNC has long since disolved, and you should take their cue you aging dinosaur.

    My reply:

    I’m neither Sovok, Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian.

    The CNC bias live on.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    And I replied:

    I never accused you of being “Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian’? You’ve brought up the topic of the preferences of other ethnicities, not I
     
    So?...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    I’m not the one trolling here.
     
    I didn't accuse you of trolling, I wanted to say that I'm not trolling, but asking a genuine question.
    K=Kholmogorov? Ok, I'll have a look at the earlier thread.

    Okay.

    But even this one has some criticism (if I correctly offhand recall without checkking from top to bottom again), which wouldn’t fly with a more careful pro-Russian advocacy.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Greasy William

    I’m not the one trolling here.
     
    He's trying to say that he's not trolling. He isn't accusing you of trolling. You need to practice your English.

    He’s trying to say that he’s not trolling. He isn’t accusing you of trolling. You need to practice your English.

    Nothing especially wrong with my English troll. Do you speak for him? He wasn’t clear enough IMO.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Thorfinnsson
    With the possible exceptions of Poland and Armenia, the victims of Russian imperialism are completely irrelevant countries with no history or culture worth mentioning. In some cases these victims are completely fictitious countries as well, such as Belarus and the Ukraine.

    As such there is no reason whatsoever to regret or oppose historical Russian imperialism.

    On the contrary, its revival would be quite welcome as it would free up parking spaces in New York City by getting rid of a dozen or so alleged countries currently represented in the United Nations.

    the victims of Russian imperialism are completely irrelevant countries with no history or culture worth mentioning.

    Where have I heard this before?
    Oh yeah, just replace ‘Russian’ with ‘Israeli’.
    You sound just like them.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader

    With the tacit approval of the European Union, the Baltic states maintain discriminatory policies against their “non-citizens”.
     
    That's one thing Russian nationalists really whine too much about, most Russians in the Baltic states are descendants of Soviet era-settlers, their treatment is totally reasonable and humane when compared with the historical standard in such situations (e.g. "suitcase or the coffin" for the Europeans in Algeria). Russians who are unable to learn the local languages after having lived there for decades should just relocate to Russia.
    Bit much of a resentful victimhood narrative in this article. I don't get how one can complain that Russians' "national habitat" has shrunk when Russia is still the largest country on earth.

    a godless enthusiast of science and progress, almost devoid of aesthetic feelings that were replaced with futuristic optimism
     
    That sounds a bit like a description of AK tbh. How does one reconcile enthusiasm for transhumanism and other futurist ideas with all this talk of Orthodox Christianity as the basis for national identity?

    One question: what does the part about the "genetic deficiency" of Russians which is supposedly claimed in some Russian media refer to?

    Don’t project your Jewish whininess on Russians. Similar to the ridiculous pretense of the Jews on “superior morality,” which made Israel’s banality of evil all the more visible, the supposed universality of the EU slogan “liberté, égalité, fraternité” exposed the hypocrisy of Brussels’ bureaucrats supporting the open discrimination against Russians living in the Baltic states.
    As a result, “Baltic states pay the price for Russophobic policies:” http://www.pravdareport.com/business/finance/15-09-2016/135633-baltic-0/
    “Being deprived of European allowances, the Baltic states will have a deficit of the state balance of payment worth 20-25% of the budget. Taking into account reduction of the Russian transit and closure of market for their own goods in Russia, the case is about a default which will surpass the well-known Great Depression in the US many times:” http://www.pravdareport.com/business/finance/15-09-2016/135633-baltic-0/
    More: “It should be noted that [in Latvia] the infrastructure was built in the USSR. ‘Russian occupiers’ saved the backward republics, developed their ports, transit infrastructure, and often to the detriment of its own ports.”
    —You see, Russians do not whine — they made proper commercial decisions re the ungrateful midgets: “Russia’s decision was a political one and it’s an absolutely justified response to those indecencies against Russians and their President, which are constantly being heard from the Baltic presidents and PMs.”
    — This is what the US cowardly Congress is still not able to do — to cut off the ungrateful midget state in the Middle East from the US taxpayers money.

    See more at http://www.pravdareport.com/business/finance/15-09-2016/135633-baltic-0/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anon[352] • Disclaimer says:

    https://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fpbs.twimg.com%2Fmedia%2FCuQ73iPWgAEMtEf.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fhistoryfacts247%2Fstatus%2F784818074251919361&docid=pHRqHBP8FM7IWM&tbnid=AEX0HaVNe3YrYM%3A&vet=1&w=1200&h=672&source=sh%2Fx%2Fim

    That was 1480, dwindling population of Golden Horde led by King Ahmed faced Russian Ivan , the Grand Duke whose population was exploding .
    Rest is history . Golden Horde from China is moving again . Diaspora from Stan and Caucasus are moving looking for resources , following the footsteps of the Ivan’s hungry army

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @DNC
    Disagree. Their situation is not optimal, but it's understandable why the natives wanted to distance themselves from a group which they never welcomed in the first place. I'm not aware of any repatriation programs being undertaken in the 90s and perhaps much more should have been done in that respect.

    Quite so, the Latvians and Estonians should have been repatriated to Germany.

    Or to hell.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    What’s the more intelligent pro-Russian take?
     
    The one that doesn't leave itself open to the kind of criticism we see at this thread, while making valid pro-Russian points.

    The one that doesn’t leave itself open to the kind of criticism we see at this thread, while making valid pro-Russian points.

    What kind of a reply is this? You only accept points of view that are ‘pro-Russian’, as if there’s nothing to criticize within Russia? You’ve finally reached the bottom of the pit of inarticulation. Keep it up Mickey, we’re just about due for another one of your famous ‘Averkoisms’ :-)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    What kind of a reply is this? You only accept points of view that are ‘pro-Russian’, as if there’s nothing to criticize within Russia? You’ve finally reached the bottom of the pit of inarticulation.
     
    Not true. You're quite poor at accurately assessing views which you don't agree with and don't like.

    "Pro-Russian" can include bigoted views - something evident with other types of pro-national advocacy. I clearly don't go along with such.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Calling reiner Tor!

    Hungarian protesters rally for ‘press freedom & Orban regime change’ (PHOTOS, VIDEOS)

    https://www.rt.com/news/424792-hungary-protests-orban-soros/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    As long as Ukrainian citizenry is for an independent state, the opinions of Poles, Hungarians, Russians and any other sorry Central Asians is meaningless. Especially yours! It’s telling that you’re still caught up in the old cold war mentality of your sovok fellow travellers – the CNC has long since disolved, and you should take their cue you aging dinosaur.
     
    I'm neither Sovok, Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian.

    The CNC bias live on.

    I never accused you of being “Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian’? You’ve brought up the topic of the preferences of other ethnicities, not I:

    Captive Nations Committee (CNC) propaganda, as evidenced by the sentiment in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – entities where Russia is more preferred over the former Soviet republics claiming them.

    Elsewhere, numerous Romanians and Hungarians, as well as a noticeable number of Poles, aren’t so gung ho in supporting nationalist influenced Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    What your said:

    Kholmogorov’s great lament for the natural contraction and return of the Russian language and culture back to its ethnic homeland and roots does not resonate much in the lands where Russian imperialism dominated for many centuries. In fact, the words ‘imperialism’ and ‘Russian’ never once cross or surface in this made for hire article representing modern day Russian propaganda. It’s a song of lament not unheard of before by dying empires – the song of the vanquished conqueror. Boo, hoo…
     
    My reply:

    Captive Nations Committee (CNC) propaganda, as evidenced by the sentiment in Transnistria, South Ossetia and Abkhazia – entities where Russia is more preferred over the former Soviet republics claiming them.

    Elsewhere, numerous Romanians and Hungarians, as well as a noticeable number of Poles, aren’t so gung ho in supporting nationalist influenced Kiev regime controlled Ukraine.
     
    What you said:

    As long as Ukrainian citizenry is for an independent state, the opinions of Poles, Hungarians, Russians and any other sorry Central Asians is meaningless. Especially yours! It’s telling that you’re still caught up in the old cold war mentality of your sovok fellow travellers – the CNC has long since disolved, and you should take their cue you aging dinosaur.

     

    My reply:

    I’m neither Sovok, Polish, Hungarian or Central Asian.

    The CNC bias live on.

     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who’s making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.
     
    I'm not the one trolling here. Anti-Russian bias is a very real situation that's regularly downplayed. Going thru this thread and the other one dealing with K, reveal the criticisms against him.

    I’m not the one trolling here.

    I didn’t accuse you of trolling, I wanted to say that I’m not trolling, but asking a genuine question.
    K=Kholmogorov? Ok, I’ll have a look at the earlier thread.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Okay.

    But even this one has some criticism (if I correctly offhand recall without checkking from top to bottom again), which wouldn't fly with a more careful pro-Russian advocacy.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Greasy William
    so wait, you aren't Catholic or Orthodox? Are you an evangelical? I thought that you worked for the Catholic Church?

    Neither. I am open-minded, if Joshua can do it, then why not Mary?
     
    Well I personally believe the entire Book of Joshua is extremely stylized and not meant to be taken at face value.

    And keep in mind that Pope Pius XII, at the precise time he was infallibly deciding on the correctness of the Assumption also bore witness to phenomenon:
     
    I think we're kinda pushing it here.

    ...

    Hilariously enough, it turns out that The Saker wrote a post attacking Fatima as being part of a thousand year Papist conspiracy against the Russian people: https://thesaker.is/debunking-the-fatima-hoax/

    I found that by accident while looking for more information on Fatima.

    No, I’m not evangelical, and I have indeed done a fair amount of work for an organisation affiliated with the Custody of the Holy Land, and on occasion for various other Catholic charitable organisations.

    I guess we can safely assume that Saker was not a member of the Blue Army of Our Lady of Fátima, nor was he a fan of the Consecration of Russia .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who’s making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.
     
    I'm not the one trolling here. Anti-Russian bias is a very real situation that's regularly downplayed. Going thru this thread and the other one dealing with K, reveal the criticisms against him.

    I’m not the one trolling here.

    He’s trying to say that he’s not trolling. He isn’t accusing you of trolling. You need to practice your English.

    Read More
    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    He’s trying to say that he’s not trolling. He isn’t accusing you of trolling. You need to practice your English.
     
    Nothing especially wrong with my English troll. Do you speak for him? He wasn't clear enough IMO.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @for-the-record
    Neither. I am open-minded, if Joshua can do it, then why not Mary? And keep in mind that Pope Pius XII, at the precise time he was infallibly deciding on the correctness of the Assumption also bore witness to phenomenon:

    Pius XII’s note says that he saw the miracle in the year he was to proclaim the dogma of the Assumption, 1950, while he walked in the Vatican Gardens.

    He said he saw the phenomenon various times, considering it a confirmation of his plan to declare the dogma.

    The papal note says that at 4 p.m. on Oct. 30, 1950, during his “habitual walk in the Vatican Gardens, reading and studying,” having arrived to the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes, “toward the top of the hill […] I was awestruck by a phenomenon that before now I had never seen.”

    “The sun, which was still quite high, looked like a pale, opaque sphere, entirely surrounded by a luminous circle,” he recounted. And one could look at the sun, “without the slightest bother. There was a very light little cloud in front of it.”

    The Holy Father’s note goes on to describe “the opaque sphere” that “moved outward slightly, either spinning, or moving from left to right and vice versa. But within the sphere, you could see marked movements with total clarity and without interruption.”

    Pius XII said he saw the same phenomenon “the 31st of October and Nov. 1, the day of the definition of the dogma of the Assumption, and then again Nov. 8, and after that, no more.”

    https://zenit.org/articles/pius-XII-saw-miracle-of-the-sun/
     
    On the other hand, if it really happened one would expect everyone in the area to remember it, not a select few.

    so wait, you aren’t Catholic or Orthodox? Are you an evangelical? I thought that you worked for the Catholic Church?

    Neither. I am open-minded, if Joshua can do it, then why not Mary?

    Well I personally believe the entire Book of Joshua is extremely stylized and not meant to be taken at face value.

    And keep in mind that Pope Pius XII, at the precise time he was infallibly deciding on the correctness of the Assumption also bore witness to phenomenon:

    I think we’re kinda pushing it here.

    Hilariously enough, it turns out that The Saker wrote a post attacking Fatima as being part of a thousand year Papist conspiracy against the Russian people: https://thesaker.is/debunking-the-fatima-hoax/

    I found that by accident while looking for more information on Fatima.

    Read More
    • Replies: @for-the-record
    No, I'm not evangelical, and I have indeed done a fair amount of work for an organisation affiliated with the Custody of the Holy Land, and on occasion for various other Catholic charitable organisations.

    I guess we can safely assume that Saker was not a member of the Blue Army of Our Lady of Fátima, nor was he a fan of the Consecration of Russia .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @German_reader
    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who's making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.

    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who’s making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.

    I’m not the one trolling here. Anti-Russian bias is a very real situation that’s regularly downplayed. Going thru this thread and the other one dealing with K, reveal the criticisms against him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William

    I’m not the one trolling here.
     
    He's trying to say that he's not trolling. He isn't accusing you of trolling. You need to practice your English.
    , @German_reader

    I’m not the one trolling here.
     
    I didn't accuse you of trolling, I wanted to say that I'm not trolling, but asking a genuine question.
    K=Kholmogorov? Ok, I'll have a look at the earlier thread.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Greasy William
    so you don't believe it? Are you Catholic or Orthodox?

    mass suggestion wouldn't explain why people 40km away saw it. Although it is possible that such accounts are the product of hysteria spreading and people misremembering after the fact. It's not like things were well documented in 1917 rural Portugal.

    Neither. I am open-minded, if Joshua can do it, then why not Mary? And keep in mind that Pope Pius XII, at the precise time he was infallibly deciding on the correctness of the Assumption also bore witness to phenomenon:

    Pius XII’s note says that he saw the miracle in the year he was to proclaim the dogma of the Assumption, 1950, while he walked in the Vatican Gardens.

    He said he saw the phenomenon various times, considering it a confirmation of his plan to declare the dogma.

    The papal note says that at 4 p.m. on Oct. 30, 1950, during his “habitual walk in the Vatican Gardens, reading and studying,” having arrived to the statue of Our Lady of Lourdes, “toward the top of the hill […] I was awestruck by a phenomenon that before now I had never seen.”

    “The sun, which was still quite high, looked like a pale, opaque sphere, entirely surrounded by a luminous circle,” he recounted. And one could look at the sun, “without the slightest bother. There was a very light little cloud in front of it.”

    The Holy Father’s note goes on to describe “the opaque sphere” that “moved outward slightly, either spinning, or moving from left to right and vice versa. But within the sphere, you could see marked movements with total clarity and without interruption.”

    Pius XII said he saw the same phenomenon “the 31st of October and Nov. 1, the day of the definition of the dogma of the Assumption, and then again Nov. 8, and after that, no more.”

    https://zenit.org/articles/pius-XII-saw-miracle-of-the-sun/

    On the other hand, if it really happened one would expect everyone in the area to remember it, not a select few.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Greasy William
    so wait, you aren't Catholic or Orthodox? Are you an evangelical? I thought that you worked for the Catholic Church?

    Neither. I am open-minded, if Joshua can do it, then why not Mary?
     
    Well I personally believe the entire Book of Joshua is extremely stylized and not meant to be taken at face value.

    And keep in mind that Pope Pius XII, at the precise time he was infallibly deciding on the correctness of the Assumption also bore witness to phenomenon:
     
    I think we're kinda pushing it here.

    ...

    Hilariously enough, it turns out that The Saker wrote a post attacking Fatima as being part of a thousand year Papist conspiracy against the Russian people: https://thesaker.is/debunking-the-fatima-hoax/

    I found that by accident while looking for more information on Fatima.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Dmitry
    My post was writing about Kholmogorov, not Dugin.

    Obviously Dugin is such a phenomenon, and I would legitimate just from entertainment purposes - that he is entertaining people.

    Kholmogorov I would not say is crazy (my impression is he is usually trying to be thoughtful), even if he advocates equally things like imperialism and religion.

    My post was writing about Kholmogorov, not Dugin.

    Obviously Dugin is such a phenomenon, and I would legitimate just from entertainment purposes – that he is entertaining people.

    Kholmogorov I would not say is crazy (my impression is he is usually trying to be thoughtful), even if he advocates equally things like imperialism and religion.

    I’m aware that you were referring to K. I was noting how his loose take can get bashed by Russia bashers in a way that’s counter-productive (IMO) to confronting anti-Russian biases. This observation seems to relate to some of the replies at this thread.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Mikhail

    What’s the more intelligent pro-Russian take?
     
    The one that doesn't leave itself open to the kind of criticism we see at this thread, while making valid pro-Russian points.

    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who’s making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    Yes, but could you give some examples or tell us who’s making such arguments?
    Not trolling, could be genuinely interesting for some of the readers here.
     
    I'm not the one trolling here. Anti-Russian bias is a very real situation that's regularly downplayed. Going thru this thread and the other one dealing with K, reveal the criticisms against him.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.