The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
McMeekin: "Was Lenin a German Agent?"
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

In the NYT, historian Sean McMeekin asks:

Was Lenin a German Agent?
Sean McMeekin
RED CENTURY JUNE 19, 2017

… Because he returned home by way of Germany — and with the obvious cooperation of the German High Command — which was then at war against Russia and her Entente allies (France, Britain and, from April 6, the United States), allegations that Lenin was a German agent were immediately hurled by his opponents, a charge that remains controversial to this day.

… For similar reasons, Berlin concocted a public relations ruse around Lenin’s journey across German soil, the notorious sealed train — a convenient myth for Lenin, also, to distance himself from German sponsorship. In reality, the train was not sealed: Lenin got off on several occasions, and stayed overnight in a German hotel at Sassnitz. According to witnesses, Lenin even gave political speeches on German soil at Russian prisoner-of-war camps. …

So was Lenin a German agent?

In his own mind, Lenin could and did justify his actions as tactical maneuvers serving the higher cause of Communism, not the sordid war aims of the German Imperial Government. Fair enough. But it is hard to imagine this defense holding up in trial, if the jury were composed of ordinary Russians while the war was still going on. The evidence assembled by Kerensky’s justice department, much of which has only recently been rediscovered in the Russian archives, was damning. No matter Lenin’s real intentions, it is undeniable that he received German logistical and financial support in 1917, and that his actions, from antiwar agitation in the Russian armies to his request for an unconditional cease-fire, served the interests of Russia’s wartime enemy in Berlin. They also brought about disastrous consequences for Russia herself, from territorial dismemberment in 1918 to decades of agony under the suffocating Bolshevik dictatorship.

Sean McMeekin, a professor of history at Bard College, is the author of “The Russian Revolution: A New History.”

McMeekin’s book is a good read, with some fresh perspectives.

It’s worth recalling the number and scale of the efforts undertaken by the Great Powers in 1917 to redraw the map of the world for short-term advantages in the Great War. For example, Lord Balfour promised Palestine to the Jews while T.E. Lawrence was promising it, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq to the Arabs, while Sykes had already secretly promised Syria and Lebanon to Picot’s French. When the German Foreign Office heard about the Balfour Declaration, they wanted to promise Palestine to the Zionists too, until their Ottoman allies reminded them that they couldn’t give away Ottoman territory. German foreign minister Zimmerman promised Texas to Mexico, but not California because he wanted to promise that to Japan. And so forth and so on.

But Germany’s Lenin Gambit actually worked, which proved disastrous for the world by inflicting Communism on Russia and temporarily on Central Europe in 1918-1919, and by giving Germans a temporary but massive territorial conquest in the East in the late winter of 1918, which made many Germans, such as Corporal Hitler, assume that the great sacrifices of the last four years had been justified by the fruits of victory, only to have Germany “stabbed in the back” by the defeat later that year, a hot potato the blame for which the (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.

So, No Lenin, No Hitler.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. come on nyt ,very old “news”.At the new york times lenin was mr. wonderful back then and now what’s the angle?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/mcmeekin-was-lenin-a-german-agent/#comment-1909607
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. OT here ya go Steve lol

    “Is it barbaric to be the best?”

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    What? No stereotype threat?
    , @Jeff Albertson
    I see one teensy problem with the storyline, possibly explained in the movie ( which I unfortunately won't see); where the black folks at? Or brown or yellow? They all went home already?
    , @Anonymous
    Wow that looks bad lol.
    , @FX Enderby
    Has Brett Stephens seen this flick?
    , @Daniel H
    Bret Stephens' (and the other Wall Street Journal affiliated cucks) fantasy comes to the screen.
  3. Lenin was ALSO a German agent (or taking money from the Germans in order to achieve mutual goals).

    Mainly, though, he was working for Wall Street: https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Sutton_Wall_Street_and_the_bolshevik_revolution-5.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @Grace Jones
    Fun Fact:
    In Chapter IV, the "Schmedeman" who sent the cipher message of Feb. 21, 1918, from the U.S. Embassy at Christiana (Oslo), Norway, advising of the location of the Bolshevik funds in Sweden was Albert G. Schmedeman, a Democrat who supported Wilson, and future Mayor of Madison, Wis. and Governor of the state.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_G._Schmedeman
  4. I’ve always said “No Lenin, then no Stalin, no Hitler, no Mao.” Then many of us reading this wouldn’t be alive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @El Dato

    Then many of us reading this wouldn’t be alive.
     
    Once you change history by the batting of the wings of a butterfly, all of us reading this wouldn't be alive. And it wouldn't even matter.
  5. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The answer has been quite obvious, for many years: Yes he was a paid German agent. If I remember correctly (I’m not quite sure) he was also an Austrian agent at some point.

    Do we know at what point German support for Lenin was cut off? Was it when he achieved power? It must certainly have been before the Finnish civil war.

    However, Lenin was clearly acting, in the main, not in the interests of either the German or the Russian nation, but of the International Revolution, and of course, of V. I. Lenin himself.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jaakko Raipala

    Do we know at what point German support for Lenin was cut off? Was it when he achieved power? It must certainly have been before the Finnish civil war.
     
    No. The German intervention in Finland was primarily about which faction of Whites ends up in power - going against Reds was an excuse to get involved in a war where the Whites already had the upper hand. The very pro-German Senate of Finland betrayed the White Army leaders and invited the German military to take over Helsinki to prevent the very pro-Entente imperial aristocrats leading the White Army from taking it.

    White leader Mannerheim wanted to take Finland into the Russian Civil War, to negotiate for British intervention to attack Petrograd through Finland and to have Russia ruled by generals to the conclusion of the World War. Supporting the pro-German puppet leader Svinhufvud in Finland and exiling imperial aristocrats like Mannerheim are perfectly consistent with Germany still wanting Lenin to remain in power.

    Things are also consistent to the other direction. The Finnish Civil War started very much as a result of Lenin personally pressuring the Finnish Left towards revolution but once Germany got involved, it sent a note to Lenin demanding an end to Russian support for Finnish Reds and Lenin simply acceded. Russians that were already fighting on the side of Finnish Reds remained but Lenin forbade sending any further support.

    On the other hand, Russian Reds may have simply been calculating that Finland is a lost cause for them and that a Finland as a German puppet state would be preferable to a Finland ruled by a White general. Whatever the truth is, Lenin gave personal attention to Finland far beyond what you'd expect for a place with such a tiny population but then during the Civil War when the Reds were supposed to reap the fruits of his years of activism in Finland he still took care to avoid stepping on German interests.

  6. I read “History’s Greatest Heist” and found it very informative. I’ll be putting this on my reading list.

    Read More
  7. Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the “one weird trick” explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don’t think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can’t do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.
    , @Taco
    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.
    , @Abe

    The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky.
     
    Russians, Turks, Arabs, and other wogs are certainly good at this sort of "4-dimensional chess"- certainly much better than guileless Americans. Yet such intelligence (and I cannot believe there is not some real spatial intelligence at work when keeping all these conspiracies-within-conspiracies straight in one's head) does not seem to translate into better social institutions or economic prosperity.

    To wit, one reason for the the Russian Imperial Army's pretty poor performance in WWI was the infighting between the traditional professional officer corps of ethnic Baltic Germans (Rennenkampf, etc.) and the officer corps of new Slav up-and-comers (diversity is our strength, yeah!) Anyway, one of these ethnic Slav generals before the war made the argument that the bayonet charge was not obsolete in the age of massive, machine-gun fire. The fact that there had not been any successful bayonet charges in the last 20 years only proved how effective they were- because no army in the world had yet shown the steel nerves to stand up to one! In terms of perverse logical brilliance this is almost jaw-dropping, yet in its practical effect...

    Actually, I'm starting to get a queasy feeling in my stomach right now noting how familiar such consequences-free, no-skin-in-the-game sophistry sounds to pretty much everything I hear today ("removing ISIS's ability to strike on US soil by instituting a Muslim travel ban is what they WANT us to do; by winning we are playing right into their hands")

    , @Anonymous
    Many historians believe the Zimmerman telegram was one of the many false flag tricks done by the British to sucker us into WW1.
    , @utu
    "Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can’t do spying because of their nature."

    Yes, there is something to it. They can't do a good provocation or a false flag either. Gleiwitz incident (assuming that it really took place) is a perfect example. Or look at the trial after the Reichstag fire. Some accused were acquitted. Can you imagine in post 9/11 America somebody get acquitted when put on trial on terrorism. Or look at the case of Herschel Grynszpan. They had him in prison and were unable to make a show trial.
  8. Lenin was basically the Bin Laden of the times.

    Blowback was enormous and actually started in 1920 with an attack of the Red Army with direction Berlin (stopped by the Poles before Warshaw) and Rome (ineffectual, gave up)

    The (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.

    This is rather well explained in Hindenburg: Icon of German Militarism. The sly fox managed to blame everyone including the Jews for his suicidal decision to go for “total war” and abrade the german nation and industrial base in the search for victory. He even managed to not show up during signature of the Versailles Treaty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hail

    Lenin was basically the Bin Laden of the times.
     
    If Bin Laden had gotten the slave-master's whip over hundreds of millions of souls and a land area twice the size of the USA...
  9. @dearieme
    I've always said "No Lenin, then no Stalin, no Hitler, no Mao." Then many of us reading this wouldn't be alive.

    Then many of us reading this wouldn’t be alive.

    Once you change history by the batting of the wings of a butterfly, all of us reading this wouldn’t be alive. And it wouldn’t even matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Don't know about you, but I shudder to think of a world without Genious Tennessee Coates!
    , @Dieter Kief
    "...all of us reading this wouldn't be alive. And it wouldn't even matter."

    Not to us, then, ok. But, who kwows, to this butterfly - or to the wings of this very butterfly? Allmighty butterfly-wings: Could become the origin of a new cult. - Or couldn't, because it exists already?

  10. “In his own mind, Lenin could and did justify his actions as tactical maneuvers serving the higher cause of Communism”

    Yeah, and you may have noticed they kept on using that justification for far worse things than accepting German help and consigning a good portion of the country to German conquest in the event it won the war. For instance, the murder of tens of millions. But that’s because he was bloodthirsty…I mean, a humanitarian in a hurry.

    I’d much rather hear whether the Bolsheviks were agents of Wall Street and the International Money Power, frankly. The machinations of the Kaiser interest me less.

    Read More
  11. Today, we look at the relationship Jews had with Germany through the prism of the Holocaust, and believe it was nothing but painful and acrimonious. But up until the Third Reich, Jews had a fairly good relationship with Germany, certainly when compared to Russia and even France. (In fact, the Dreyfuss Affair was sparked by the charge Dreyfuss, a Jew, had given military intelligence to the German army.)

    Throughout the German Empire, Jews were integrated into German life and most Jews were proud to be part of Germany. They fought in WWI bravely on behalf of the German army.

    The British, from around 1917 onward, believed that Jews were loyal to the German Empire, and that Bolshevism was just a Germanic ideological weapon to destabilize and overthrow their opponents, with German support for Lenin being a case in point. They also thought the Young Turks were agents of Jewish influence (another iSteve topic!), hence the wartime alliance between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.

    Part of the reason why Britain supported Zionism was to try to entice Jews to support Britain, or at least put a damper for their support for Britain.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Haysom
    I'm not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn't really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.
    , @German_reader
    Yes, Jews were seen as pro-German by many in Britain at the time (e.g. for examples from popular culture John Buchan's 39 steps had one character imply that some sinister Jewish mastermind was orchestrating German plots against Britain). The alliance with anti-Jewish Czarist Russia also played a role in these perceptions...Britain's elite thought it necessary to offer Jews (which they regarded as a powerful organized force) something to end their alleged support for the central powers.
    , @nebulafox
    It is rather surprising given the legacy of the Holocaust, but yes, that's true: the German Jews were more German in many ways than the Germans themselves, which often led to them being derisively dismissed by many of their more Orthodox Eastern counterparts as "Hofjuden"-Court Jews. (The disdain was fully mutual-the often far poorer eastern Jewish migrants to Germany were not popular with most middle-class German Jews, and the same dynamic developed in the US.) Not for nothing did Joachim Fest label the declassed Jews of Germany, stoically bearing their lot before emigration to the US, as the last real Prussians.

    Nor was it wasn't limited to Germany proper. Middle class bourgeois Jews of Central and Eastern Europe in general, especially in the Hapsburg lands, usually were quite Germanophlic prior to 1933, Germany being the home of *Hochkultur*. one reason among many they tended to be unpopular with their Slavic neighbors. Yiddish being more or less mutually intelligible with German helped, obviously.

    With that said, however, it was a one-sided love affair, in many ways. For every Dreyfus Affair, there was a Judenzahlung. Zionism became a political movement in part because some Jews realized that, no matter how much they assimilated, they remained Jews in the eyes of a lot of Germans, and really Europeans in general. It was a similar calculus that led a lot of refuseniks to leave Russia, no matter how much they still identified with Russian culture. (Israel is now one of the biggest Russophonic nations on Earth.)

  12. @J.Ross
    Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the "one weird trick" explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don't think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can't do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Who says WASPs aren't sneaky people too? Not all the people of the Anglosphere are sneaky but the Anglo-American haute bourgeoise and bureaucracy? No question they've got the skills needed to sneak with the best of them. It's one of their least charming characteristics.
    , @Abe

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War
     
    Well, CIA did have technological advantages (queue Steve's rhapsody over U2 and Blackbird spy planes). Plus the US was still run by actual grown-ups at the time. And then when you think about all the operations that went BLEEWEY!- Bay of Pigs- plus then all the operations that were hailed as smashing successes but later went on to haunt the US for decades afterward as grist for negative foreign and internal propaganda- coup in Iran, coups in Latin America- I'm not so sure...

    Consider Russian hacking activities during the election last year which- no matter which side you are on politically- have to be recognized as so elegant they qualify as works of art. Vidy, oh my brothers:

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    * they release said emails through a hip, admired intermediary (WIKILEAKS)
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide
    * college students, Bernie bros, repulsed by usual Clinton dirty tricks, stay home and probably hand the election to Trump

    But here is the really elegant part (turning the Russian trick from a pedestrian double-axle to a magnificent triple lutz)-

    * Russians make kissy-eyes at Trump after the election
    * Democrats and their scum media allies, enrage and humiliated by losing to a man whose own party chief was telling him to drop out, run with this "evidence" of Trump-Russia collusion, thus while dialing up the anti-Russia hysteria to 11, actually doing Putin's bidding by paralyzing the US Executive with endless investigations, talk of impeachment, etc. while Russia gets a free hand abroad

    Brilliant! I'd even say that it would not surprise me at all that Putin baited Flynn (who I'll accept is not a Russian agent, but simply thought better Russia relations were in the US's overall interest) into the premature sanctions talk, then planted that evidence for the US Creep State to find, thus launching the investigations that'd paralyze the President.

    , @Desiderius

    they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB
     
    I wouldn't be so sure about that, nor did/does the cooperation only go one direction.
    , @FX Enderby
    What? The CIA surely co-opted far more left wing organizations in the West and elsewhere than the KGB ever did. And they are still at it 25 years after the Soviets collapsed!
    , @Cagey Beast
    The CIA did seem to like the French New Left:

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/876059738383036416

    Lenin had his "sealed train" but did Foucault and Derrida have their sealed planes to the University of California?
  13. @Sid
    Today, we look at the relationship Jews had with Germany through the prism of the Holocaust, and believe it was nothing but painful and acrimonious. But up until the Third Reich, Jews had a fairly good relationship with Germany, certainly when compared to Russia and even France. (In fact, the Dreyfuss Affair was sparked by the charge Dreyfuss, a Jew, had given military intelligence to the German army.)

    Throughout the German Empire, Jews were integrated into German life and most Jews were proud to be part of Germany. They fought in WWI bravely on behalf of the German army.

    The British, from around 1917 onward, believed that Jews were loyal to the German Empire, and that Bolshevism was just a Germanic ideological weapon to destabilize and overthrow their opponents, with German support for Lenin being a case in point. They also thought the Young Turks were agents of Jewish influence (another iSteve topic!), hence the wartime alliance between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.

    Part of the reason why Britain supported Zionism was to try to entice Jews to support Britain, or at least put a damper for their support for Britain.

    I’m not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn’t really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    It's unfortunate that he veers into talking about France because everything else in that comment is good. We cannot today easily imagine France before WWII, which was one of the most openly anti-Semitic countries in Europe. A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he'd heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.
    , @Sid
    I didn't argue that the French believed that Jews were agents of German hegemony the way the British did during WWI. The point was that Germany around the turn of the last century was a relatively good place for Jews, if imperfect.
    , @mukat

    It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

     

    Who let the non-revisionist commenter into Unz.com?

    The Affair was a "we're the #1 victims ever" manuever by Jews. His guilt or innocence is debatable but the Affair was a Lugenpresse power move, the first of many, many more to come.

    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Dreyfus Affair
    ...
    It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

     

    Same thing with the Rosenbergs. It was common knowledge at the time that they were innocent and were railroaded by those anti-Semitic Americans.
  14. @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    Who says WASPs aren’t sneaky people too? Not all the people of the Anglosphere are sneaky but the Anglo-American haute bourgeoise and bureaucracy? No question they’ve got the skills needed to sneak with the best of them. It’s one of their least charming characteristics.

    Read More
  15. @J.Ross
    Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the "one weird trick" explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don't think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can't do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    "Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic." Indeed he did.

    The German soldiers were excellent but led by dunderheads who made one error of policy or strategy after another. The same is true for the second war too.
    , @J.Ross
    The British always find these pat, perfect things. There is no other government that is constantly happening upon Guy Fawkes just in time. Not except for dictatorships setting up political rivals. I can't argue it better, but I read all these novelesque coincidences involving the united confession and comeuppance of an enemy of Albion, like Haman weeping on Esther's bed, and got to a point where I just cannot accept that sort of thing as believable.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

     

    What's the big outrage over the Zimmerman telegram? It was a proposal that if the USA declares war on Germany, Mexico would become an ally of Germany and join the war on their side. It is not as if it was a plan for a pre-emptive invasion.
  16. @Taco
    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

    “Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.” Indeed he did.

    The German soldiers were excellent but led by dunderheads who made one error of policy or strategy after another. The same is true for the second war too.

    Read More
  17. I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin to break the Russian Empire. Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?

    Personally, I think it’s similar to today in that Barack Obama – a Leninische figure in his own right – was and remains immensely popular with Germans, who really are not so much American allies as commonly assumed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    "I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin"

    It is.

    "Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?"

    I don't think so. It's hard to tell just what the purpose of this article is. To raise the question of the propriety of Bolshevik tactics? To explore philosophically what constitutes being an agent? Just to flap gums about an interesting piece of history? I dunno.

    My instinct was to guess somehow it would tie into Trump being a Russian agent. Maybe that'll be in future installments.
    , @Eagle Eye

    Personally, I think it’s similar to today in that [Barry] Obama – a Lenin[] figure in his own right – was and remains immensely popular with Germans,
     
    Like the measles, Barry was in reality an Old World virus to which the American body politic had not developed any resistance: the prototype (indeed cartoon) of the smirking, snarky, homosexual, Third-Worldy, "progressive," atheist, 1970s Euro-socialist backed by shady but invariably wealthy interests: George Soros, Nadhmi Auchi (shady Iraqi billionaire), Exelon (nuclear energy company, sponsored Barry in Illinois, was finally RICHLY rewarded in December 2016, a mere 4 weeks after the election), etc.

    http://www.utilitydive.com/news/illinois-passes-sweeping-energy-bill-with-support-for-exelon-nuclear-plants/431521/

    As regards Germany itself (and indeed all of Western Europe), there certainly seems to have been an element of thumb-in-the-eye in Europe's early (and ongoing) enthusiastic support for "OBAMA." (Like Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov himself, Barry Dunham prefers to be known by a romantic nom de guerre.) In "Barack Obama," the Euros had finally found the man to reshape their own caricature of uncouth, gun-toting, redneck America in the image of soi-disant European elites.

    During the later years of the Obama reign, Germany seems to have become something of a support base for broader Barry-affiliated Deep State "stay-behind" operations in the U.S. itself aimed at finally putting the kibosh on silly democratic aspirations by an unruly American populace. It is less clear to what extent Barry is still a serious force within this organization - some of his more recent pronouncements suggest he is little more than of a sock puppet.

    What seems clear is that the broader "Barry Organization" was instrumental - with massive support from intelligence services including the Comey-FBI's intelligence arm - in depriving Hillary Rodham Clinton of the presidency, the better to resume control in a post-Hillary landscape while undermining and co-opting the upstart Trump team.

  18. @Taco
    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

    The British always find these pat, perfect things. There is no other government that is constantly happening upon Guy Fawkes just in time. Not except for dictatorships setting up political rivals. I can’t argue it better, but I read all these novelesque coincidences involving the united confession and comeuppance of an enemy of Albion, like Haman weeping on Esther’s bed, and got to a point where I just cannot accept that sort of thing as believable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    Guy Fawkes was discovered because one of the conspirators realised that if you blow up King, Lords and Commons, you'll kill Roman Catholic Lords too. So he tipped off one of them who, very sensibly, blabbed.
  19. @Cagey Beast
    Who says WASPs aren't sneaky people too? Not all the people of the Anglosphere are sneaky but the Anglo-American haute bourgeoise and bureaucracy? No question they've got the skills needed to sneak with the best of them. It's one of their least charming characteristics.

    The phrase Perfidious Albion comes to mind.

    Read More
    • Agree: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    I wonder sometimes whether Perfidious Albion developed its skills during all the back and forth over religion and the throne from the time of Henry VIII until the sneaky little gradualists managed to get a statue of Oliver Cromwell* put up in front of Westminster in the 1890s? Sneaky little crypto-Dissenters, crypto-Catholics and crypto-others all having to get along with one another on that island. The fictional Vicar of Bray knew how the game was played:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray

    The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky and they too had the wars of religion steam roll over them for quite some time.

    * It's worth noting that Putin unflatteringly compared Oliver Cromwell to Stalin during one of his interviews with Oliver Stone. Putin pointed out there are statues of Cromwell despite his bad behaviour. More anti-WASPism from the Kremlin.

  20. @Pat Casey
    OT here ya go Steve lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5lc8OUwNU

    "Is it barbaric to be the best?"

    What? No stereotype threat?

    Read More
  21. @Sam Haysom
    I'm not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn't really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    It’s unfortunate that he veers into talking about France because everything else in that comment is good. We cannot today easily imagine France before WWII, which was one of the most openly anti-Semitic countries in Europe. A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he’d heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    Everybody and his brother were openly anti-semitic in Europe before it became illegal. Do you ever wonder why Jews have never won a popularity contest anywhere in the world?
    , @Anonymous
    French anti-semites at the time of the Dreyfus case used to taunt Jews with references to the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre
    , @Dieter Kief

    A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he’d heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.
     
    This aspect of the European history is hardly understood at all. In the holocaust-history up to today, you'll find this obvious difference between Germany and France hardly explained (=made sense of).

    German scocietal reaction to the fast and strong economic rise of jews - roughly from 1870 on - reaching quite some hights in the Weimar period, resulting in lots of envy and hatred, might well have been inadequate.

    I think, that this is no cynical argument.

    There's some intellectuals in Germany, who did notice this omission in the usual explanations of the holocaust. Acclaimed literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki, who survived the holocaust, because (Christian) polish regular folks hid him in their home), did mention the rise of envy, caused by the jewish economic progress made in the Weimar period. A few years back, Siegfried Kohlhammer wrote an interesting essay about this subject, but got very few reactions.

    Eminent Weimar journalist and writer Kurt Tucholsky - an early public loather of Hitler and erverything Nazi as well as Bolschewik - accused the German Jews to be blind to the Nazi-threat, because they had lost their critical distance to their hosts by ages of symbiotic relationships - and therefor did not understand the danger, that lied ahead of them and did not act according to this danger - while there was still time to do so.
    Erich Fromm later on - in his great tome Anatomy of Human Destructiveness - emphasised the destructive nature of symbiotic relationships.


    PS - If the name of the Holocaust historian you mentioned comes to your mind - please let me know.

    I've come across the very same thought in a biography of the German lawyer, chameleon-journalist and writer Kurt Hiller - an incredible figure, often times accused of anti-semitism, who embodied left positions, right-wing positions (pro Mussolini...), socialist, capitalist, anarchist positions and therefor made lots of interesting observations and experiences (met literally all kinds of people). He just never managed to focus his wide-angle views. An outsider, if ever there was one. An army of Angels helped him to survive the "Third Reich".
    At the end of his (long) life, he supported Social Democrat Willy Brandt.

  22. @Bill P
    I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin to break the Russian Empire. Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?

    Personally, I think it's similar to today in that Barack Obama - a Leninische figure in his own right - was and remains immensely popular with Germans, who really are not so much American allies as commonly assumed.

    “I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin”

    It is.

    “Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?”

    I don’t think so. It’s hard to tell just what the purpose of this article is. To raise the question of the propriety of Bolshevik tactics? To explore philosophically what constitutes being an agent? Just to flap gums about an interesting piece of history? I dunno.

    My instinct was to guess somehow it would tie into Trump being a Russian agent. Maybe that’ll be in future installments.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Captain Tripps

    Just to flap gums about an interesting piece of history?
     
    Most likely. This is the 100th anniversary of the period between Lenin's arrival at the Finland Station in April 1917 and the October Revolution. As Lenin famously said of this period, "There are decades when nothing happens, and then there are weeks when decades happen."
  23. @El Dato

    Then many of us reading this wouldn’t be alive.
     
    Once you change history by the batting of the wings of a butterfly, all of us reading this wouldn't be alive. And it wouldn't even matter.

    Don’t know about you, but I shudder to think of a world without Genious Tennessee Coates!

    Read More
  24. @Pat Casey
    OT here ya go Steve lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5lc8OUwNU

    "Is it barbaric to be the best?"

    I see one teensy problem with the storyline, possibly explained in the movie ( which I unfortunately won’t see); where the black folks at? Or brown or yellow? They all went home already?

    Read More
  25. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Pat Casey
    OT here ya go Steve lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5lc8OUwNU

    "Is it barbaric to be the best?"

    Wow that looks bad lol.

    Read More
  26. @guest
    The phrase Perfidious Albion comes to mind.

    I wonder sometimes whether Perfidious Albion developed its skills during all the back and forth over religion and the throne from the time of Henry VIII until the sneaky little gradualists managed to get a statue of Oliver Cromwell* put up in front of Westminster in the 1890s? Sneaky little crypto-Dissenters, crypto-Catholics and crypto-others all having to get along with one another on that island. The fictional Vicar of Bray knew how the game was played:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray

    The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky and they too had the wars of religion steam roll over them for quite some time.

    * It’s worth noting that Putin unflatteringly compared Oliver Cromwell to Stalin during one of his interviews with Oliver Stone. Putin pointed out there are statues of Cromwell despite his bad behaviour. More anti-WASPism from the Kremlin.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Perfidious Albion" is a constitutional rather than ethical issue. Britain had parliamentary government at a time when most European nations were led by absolutist monarchs. That meant that British foreign policy changed (sometimes radically) with every election when the ruling party changed. This was exasperating to foreign diplomats.
    , @utu
    "The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky"

    Oh yes. But when they know they can get away with murder they do it in open.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8kh_X-7ojY
  27. @Sam Haysom
    I'm not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn't really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    I didn’t argue that the French believed that Jews were agents of German hegemony the way the British did during WWI. The point was that Germany around the turn of the last century was a relatively good place for Jews, if imperfect.

    Read More
  28. Lenin made quite a show of not accepting money from suspicious sources. There is no evidence that he ever did. If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services; an a subsequent German government – e.g. Hitler – would’ve published these records for propaganda effect. “Haha, look at you your Lenin.” But no.

    From the beginning of the WWI, Lenin took the position that all true Marxists must work to defeat their own governments in order to achieve the just peace. This made his an extremist, as virtually no other Marxists agreed with him. They all turned from internationalists to patriots overnight in 1914. So the German command had a bright idea to send Lenin to Russia and see what damage he could do. The problem was that the idea that was marginal and unpopular in 1914 had become super popular in 1917, including in Germany itself. In 1917, Lenin gained a lot of credibility, both in Russia just by saying I told you so. Add to this the land reform program, and the Bolsheviks had become unstoppable.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MBlanc46
    I guess you don't count bank robberies as "suspicious" sources.
    , @dearieme
    "If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services": not necessarily. A sensible spy service will "sweep" its archives regularly and destroy anything that's likelier to do harm than good.
  29. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I asked Richard Spencer and he said it was impossible for someone to gain the leadership of a political movement yet be a govt. agent. So, there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.
  30. As Churchill aptly put it, the Germans sent Lenin into Russia like you would a particularly nasty vial of typhoid or cholera into the well of a great medieval city you happen to be besieging.

    It worked exactly as intended: the treaty of BL was a complete victory for the Central Powers by any standard, enabling the Germans to launch their massive Spring Offensive in the West. But with long-term consequences that would haunt Berlin forever…

    Read More
  31. @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War

    Well, CIA did have technological advantages (queue Steve’s rhapsody over U2 and Blackbird spy planes). Plus the US was still run by actual grown-ups at the time. And then when you think about all the operations that went BLEEWEY!- Bay of Pigs- plus then all the operations that were hailed as smashing successes but later went on to haunt the US for decades afterward as grist for negative foreign and internal propaganda- coup in Iran, coups in Latin America- I’m not so sure…

    Consider Russian hacking activities during the election last year which- no matter which side you are on politically- have to be recognized as so elegant they qualify as works of art. Vidy, oh my brothers:

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    * they release said emails through a hip, admired intermediary (WIKILEAKS)
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide
    * college students, Bernie bros, repulsed by usual Clinton dirty tricks, stay home and probably hand the election to Trump

    But here is the really elegant part (turning the Russian trick from a pedestrian double-axle to a magnificent triple lutz)-

    * Russians make kissy-eyes at Trump after the election
    * Democrats and their scum media allies, enrage and humiliated by losing to a man whose own party chief was telling him to drop out, run with this “evidence” of Trump-Russia collusion, thus while dialing up the anti-Russia hysteria to 11, actually doing Putin’s bidding by paralyzing the US Executive with endless investigations, talk of impeachment, etc. while Russia gets a free hand abroad

    Brilliant! I’d even say that it would not surprise me at all that Putin baited Flynn (who I’ll accept is not a Russian agent, but simply thought better Russia relations were in the US’s overall interest) into the premature sanctions talk, then planted that evidence for the US Creep State to find, thus launching the investigations that’d paralyze the President.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    I belive Xymphora's explanation of the Bay of Pigs. The emigres were always going to be sacrificed, that's why they were so badly supplied and prepared. In the vicinity at the time there just happened to be a Marine expeditionary unit capable of regime change. The idea was, the CIA knew that Kennedy would not sign on to an invasion, but he might sign on to a rescue or salvage, like with escalation in Vietnam. So instead of proposing an invasion, they would sacrifice the doomed emigres, then run to Kennedy and say, by the way, we just happen to have assets an hour away that can save those men. A lot of US foreign policy starts to make sense if this was not a one-off.
    , @Cagey Beast
    I'm a big fan of Putin but I don't believe it. I don't think the DNC leak was an outside hack by the Russians but rather was an inside job by a Bernie Bro. Podesta's Gmail phishing "hack" was the sort of thing a high school kid could do. On the other hand, the Russians have been great at trolling the Atlanticists over the last few years. That said, I think the vast majority of online trolls are who they say they are, rather than being "paid Putinbots". Paid Russian trolls are surplus to requirements now.
    , @Eagle Eye

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    ...
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide


     

    NICE TROLLING, but facts don't fit despite the nicely crafted narrative. Guess they don't teach much computer science at Georgetown.

    Government-level hackers do NOT rely on "phishing" but penetrate entire computer networks, email servers, intermediary routers etc.

    Remember that thanks to decades of diligent efforts by the NSA and its blackmailees on the Hill, almost all email (even at Hillary's level) was sent and stored unencrypted. This means it can easily be intercepted in transit at any of several computer systems between sender and recipient.

  32. @Sid
    Today, we look at the relationship Jews had with Germany through the prism of the Holocaust, and believe it was nothing but painful and acrimonious. But up until the Third Reich, Jews had a fairly good relationship with Germany, certainly when compared to Russia and even France. (In fact, the Dreyfuss Affair was sparked by the charge Dreyfuss, a Jew, had given military intelligence to the German army.)

    Throughout the German Empire, Jews were integrated into German life and most Jews were proud to be part of Germany. They fought in WWI bravely on behalf of the German army.

    The British, from around 1917 onward, believed that Jews were loyal to the German Empire, and that Bolshevism was just a Germanic ideological weapon to destabilize and overthrow their opponents, with German support for Lenin being a case in point. They also thought the Young Turks were agents of Jewish influence (another iSteve topic!), hence the wartime alliance between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.

    Part of the reason why Britain supported Zionism was to try to entice Jews to support Britain, or at least put a damper for their support for Britain.

    Yes, Jews were seen as pro-German by many in Britain at the time (e.g. for examples from popular culture John Buchan’s 39 steps had one character imply that some sinister Jewish mastermind was orchestrating German plots against Britain). The alliance with anti-Jewish Czarist Russia also played a role in these perceptions…Britain’s elite thought it necessary to offer Jews (which they regarded as a powerful organized force) something to end their alleged support for the central powers.

    Read More
  33. @Sam Haysom
    I'm not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn't really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    Who let the non-revisionist commenter into Unz.com?

    The Affair was a “we’re the #1 victims ever” manuever by Jews. His guilt or innocence is debatable but the Affair was a Lugenpresse power move, the first of many, many more to come.

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    I never understood the Affair, until I started to think of it like all the other leftist cause celebres I've experienced. In that case they were right, but so what? It was just one guy; why was his injustice so meaningful? Couldn't we do the same with, I don't know, George Zimmerman, honorary white?

    If we had their megaphone, yes.
  34. @Pat Casey
    OT here ya go Steve lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5lc8OUwNU

    "Is it barbaric to be the best?"

    Has Brett Stephens seen this flick?

    Read More
  35. @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB

    I wouldn’t be so sure about that, nor did/does the cooperation only go one direction.

    Read More
  36. @Sid
    Today, we look at the relationship Jews had with Germany through the prism of the Holocaust, and believe it was nothing but painful and acrimonious. But up until the Third Reich, Jews had a fairly good relationship with Germany, certainly when compared to Russia and even France. (In fact, the Dreyfuss Affair was sparked by the charge Dreyfuss, a Jew, had given military intelligence to the German army.)

    Throughout the German Empire, Jews were integrated into German life and most Jews were proud to be part of Germany. They fought in WWI bravely on behalf of the German army.

    The British, from around 1917 onward, believed that Jews were loyal to the German Empire, and that Bolshevism was just a Germanic ideological weapon to destabilize and overthrow their opponents, with German support for Lenin being a case in point. They also thought the Young Turks were agents of Jewish influence (another iSteve topic!), hence the wartime alliance between Germany and the Ottoman Empire.

    Part of the reason why Britain supported Zionism was to try to entice Jews to support Britain, or at least put a damper for their support for Britain.

    It is rather surprising given the legacy of the Holocaust, but yes, that’s true: the German Jews were more German in many ways than the Germans themselves, which often led to them being derisively dismissed by many of their more Orthodox Eastern counterparts as “Hofjuden”-Court Jews. (The disdain was fully mutual-the often far poorer eastern Jewish migrants to Germany were not popular with most middle-class German Jews, and the same dynamic developed in the US.) Not for nothing did Joachim Fest label the declassed Jews of Germany, stoically bearing their lot before emigration to the US, as the last real Prussians.

    Nor was it wasn’t limited to Germany proper. Middle class bourgeois Jews of Central and Eastern Europe in general, especially in the Hapsburg lands, usually were quite Germanophlic prior to 1933, Germany being the home of *Hochkultur*. one reason among many they tended to be unpopular with their Slavic neighbors. Yiddish being more or less mutually intelligible with German helped, obviously.

    With that said, however, it was a one-sided love affair, in many ways. For every Dreyfus Affair, there was a Judenzahlung. Zionism became a political movement in part because some Jews realized that, no matter how much they assimilated, they remained Jews in the eyes of a lot of Germans, and really Europeans in general. It was a similar calculus that led a lot of refuseniks to leave Russia, no matter how much they still identified with Russian culture. (Israel is now one of the biggest Russophonic nations on Earth.)

    Read More
  37. @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    What? The CIA surely co-opted far more left wing organizations in the West and elsewhere than the KGB ever did. And they are still at it 25 years after the Soviets collapsed!

    Read More
  38. @J.Ross
    Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the "one weird trick" explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don't think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can't do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky.

    Russians, Turks, Arabs, and other wogs are certainly good at this sort of “4-dimensional chess”- certainly much better than guileless Americans. Yet such intelligence (and I cannot believe there is not some real spatial intelligence at work when keeping all these conspiracies-within-conspiracies straight in one’s head) does not seem to translate into better social institutions or economic prosperity.

    To wit, one reason for the the Russian Imperial Army’s pretty poor performance in WWI was the infighting between the traditional professional officer corps of ethnic Baltic Germans (Rennenkampf, etc.) and the officer corps of new Slav up-and-comers (diversity is our strength, yeah!) Anyway, one of these ethnic Slav generals before the war made the argument that the bayonet charge was not obsolete in the age of massive, machine-gun fire. The fact that there had not been any successful bayonet charges in the last 20 years only proved how effective they were- because no army in the world had yet shown the steel nerves to stand up to one! In terms of perverse logical brilliance this is almost jaw-dropping, yet in its practical effect…

    Actually, I’m starting to get a queasy feeling in my stomach right now noting how familiar such consequences-free, no-skin-in-the-game sophistry sounds to pretty much everything I hear today (“removing ISIS’s ability to strike on US soil by instituting a Muslim travel ban is what they WANT us to do; by winning we are playing right into their hands”)

    Read More
  39. @Abe

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War
     
    Well, CIA did have technological advantages (queue Steve's rhapsody over U2 and Blackbird spy planes). Plus the US was still run by actual grown-ups at the time. And then when you think about all the operations that went BLEEWEY!- Bay of Pigs- plus then all the operations that were hailed as smashing successes but later went on to haunt the US for decades afterward as grist for negative foreign and internal propaganda- coup in Iran, coups in Latin America- I'm not so sure...

    Consider Russian hacking activities during the election last year which- no matter which side you are on politically- have to be recognized as so elegant they qualify as works of art. Vidy, oh my brothers:

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    * they release said emails through a hip, admired intermediary (WIKILEAKS)
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide
    * college students, Bernie bros, repulsed by usual Clinton dirty tricks, stay home and probably hand the election to Trump

    But here is the really elegant part (turning the Russian trick from a pedestrian double-axle to a magnificent triple lutz)-

    * Russians make kissy-eyes at Trump after the election
    * Democrats and their scum media allies, enrage and humiliated by losing to a man whose own party chief was telling him to drop out, run with this "evidence" of Trump-Russia collusion, thus while dialing up the anti-Russia hysteria to 11, actually doing Putin's bidding by paralyzing the US Executive with endless investigations, talk of impeachment, etc. while Russia gets a free hand abroad

    Brilliant! I'd even say that it would not surprise me at all that Putin baited Flynn (who I'll accept is not a Russian agent, but simply thought better Russia relations were in the US's overall interest) into the premature sanctions talk, then planted that evidence for the US Creep State to find, thus launching the investigations that'd paralyze the President.

    I belive Xymphora’s explanation of the Bay of Pigs. The emigres were always going to be sacrificed, that’s why they were so badly supplied and prepared. In the vicinity at the time there just happened to be a Marine expeditionary unit capable of regime change. The idea was, the CIA knew that Kennedy would not sign on to an invasion, but he might sign on to a rescue or salvage, like with escalation in Vietnam. So instead of proposing an invasion, they would sacrifice the doomed emigres, then run to Kennedy and say, by the way, we just happen to have assets an hour away that can save those men. A lot of US foreign policy starts to make sense if this was not a one-off.

    Read More
  40. @Sam Haysom
    This doesn't seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War- and they had the disadvantage of not being able to co-opt left wing organizations in an open society like the KGB.

    The CIA did seem to like the French New Left:

    Lenin had his “sealed train” but did Foucault and Derrida have their sealed planes to the University of California?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Foucault etc should cause revulsion about all the sealed brains poisoned by their weaponized musings. Students need to be taught how to Notice, so that they may recognize the techniques.
    See the following from The Center for Media Literacy as one of many similar resources:
    http://MediaLit.org
  41. @J.Ross
    It's unfortunate that he veers into talking about France because everything else in that comment is good. We cannot today easily imagine France before WWII, which was one of the most openly anti-Semitic countries in Europe. A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he'd heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.

    Everybody and his brother were openly anti-semitic in Europe before it became illegal. Do you ever wonder why Jews have never won a popularity contest anywhere in the world?

    Read More
  42. @Taco
    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

    Zimmerman acknowledged that the telegram was authentic.

    What’s the big outrage over the Zimmerman telegram? It was a proposal that if the USA declares war on Germany, Mexico would become an ally of Germany and join the war on their side. It is not as if it was a plan for a pre-emptive invasion.

    Read More
  43. @Abe

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War
     
    Well, CIA did have technological advantages (queue Steve's rhapsody over U2 and Blackbird spy planes). Plus the US was still run by actual grown-ups at the time. And then when you think about all the operations that went BLEEWEY!- Bay of Pigs- plus then all the operations that were hailed as smashing successes but later went on to haunt the US for decades afterward as grist for negative foreign and internal propaganda- coup in Iran, coups in Latin America- I'm not so sure...

    Consider Russian hacking activities during the election last year which- no matter which side you are on politically- have to be recognized as so elegant they qualify as works of art. Vidy, oh my brothers:

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    * they release said emails through a hip, admired intermediary (WIKILEAKS)
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide
    * college students, Bernie bros, repulsed by usual Clinton dirty tricks, stay home and probably hand the election to Trump

    But here is the really elegant part (turning the Russian trick from a pedestrian double-axle to a magnificent triple lutz)-

    * Russians make kissy-eyes at Trump after the election
    * Democrats and their scum media allies, enrage and humiliated by losing to a man whose own party chief was telling him to drop out, run with this "evidence" of Trump-Russia collusion, thus while dialing up the anti-Russia hysteria to 11, actually doing Putin's bidding by paralyzing the US Executive with endless investigations, talk of impeachment, etc. while Russia gets a free hand abroad

    Brilliant! I'd even say that it would not surprise me at all that Putin baited Flynn (who I'll accept is not a Russian agent, but simply thought better Russia relations were in the US's overall interest) into the premature sanctions talk, then planted that evidence for the US Creep State to find, thus launching the investigations that'd paralyze the President.

    I’m a big fan of Putin but I don’t believe it. I don’t think the DNC leak was an outside hack by the Russians but rather was an inside job by a Bernie Bro. Podesta’s Gmail phishing “hack” was the sort of thing a high school kid could do. On the other hand, the Russians have been great at trolling the Atlanticists over the last few years. That said, I think the vast majority of online trolls are who they say they are, rather than being “paid Putinbots”. Paid Russian trolls are surplus to requirements now.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Assange has all but literally confirmed that it was Seth Rich.
  44. @Sam Haysom
    I'm not arguing with your point but the Dreyfus Affair isn't really an example of the phenomenon you are illustrating. If Col. Esterhazy had been for some inexplicable Reason spying for the Spanish Marraus and his gang would still have found a Jewish person to blame. It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    Dreyfus Affair

    It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

    Same thing with the Rosenbergs. It was common knowledge at the time that they were innocent and were railroaded by those anti-Semitic Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Let's face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service for giving the Soviets the A-bomb secrets.
    , @bored identity



    "...Rosenbergs ....were railroaded."

     

    As always.



    https://newrepublic.com/article/79648/rosenbergs-redux-julius-ethel-communist-spies:

    This mass of documentation shows that Julius Rosenberg began his espionage career before the German invasion of the Soviet Union (a time when Hitler and Stalin were allies) and that he continued for years after the end of World War II, when the Soviet Union's only potential opponent was the United States.

    This evidence also reveals that Julius was a more active atomic spy than the FBI, prosecutors, or his most ardent opponents ever suspected.

    The risks and sacrifices he took for the USSR surprised even hardened KGB officers. During a two-year period, from 1946 to 1948, when security concerns had caused the KGB to cut off communication, Rosenberg kept his ring together, stockpiled classified information in the hope that the KGB would get back in touch, and provided financial support to his agents.

     

    American Fifth Oppenheimering Column provided Stalin with Los Alamos' Fifth Element in exchange for USSR recognition of newly established colonial power in the tragic dessert.
  45. Lenin called Allen Dulles the evening before he left Switzerland on the sealed train and requested an in-person meeting. But Dulles was too busy managing his sexual liasons to make time for him.

    Read More
  46. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “So, No Lenin, No Hitler.”

    Doesn’t seem very insightful to me. Was Russia going to be stable after WWI? If not then would not some other revolutionary figure emerge?

    There were a lot of racist ideas during that time. If no Hitler there would have been some other European leader who would have launched another round of belligerent war that was much more violent because of racism.

    Read More
  47. @Cagey Beast
    I'm a big fan of Putin but I don't believe it. I don't think the DNC leak was an outside hack by the Russians but rather was an inside job by a Bernie Bro. Podesta's Gmail phishing "hack" was the sort of thing a high school kid could do. On the other hand, the Russians have been great at trolling the Atlanticists over the last few years. That said, I think the vast majority of online trolls are who they say they are, rather than being "paid Putinbots". Paid Russian trolls are surplus to requirements now.

    Assange has all but literally confirmed that it was Seth Rich.

    Read More
  48. @Anon
    I asked Richard Spencer and he said it was impossible for someone to gain the leadership of a political movement yet be a govt. agent. So, there.

    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it’s the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it’s the Russians then that’s probably good news too. That would suggest we’re not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Sorry, just spotted this in Richard Spencer's Twitter feed:

    https://twitter.com/RichardBSpencer/status/876953834379251712

    The Alt-Right and the Alt-Light are holding rival rallies in Washington on Sunday afternoon. Will a fight break out at the Cernovich's "Rally Against Political Violence" or will someone try to shut down Spencer's "Rally For Free Speech"?
    , @Opinionator
    Spencer is a liability both to American nationalism and to President Trump. Heck, he's even a liability to White nationalism.

    So which governments would pay?

    The political establishment in the United States. The Democrat Party. Israel. India. Occupied Germany.

    , @Thea
    Have you read the Russian embassy UK Twitter? They certainly want someone to think they are pro alt-right.

    If the Russians think we serve their geopolitical needs they'll help. But I suspect Putin benefits from standing up to Russia's age old enemy, the Anglo-Americans, and needs us as an adversary. How would a WN USA benefit Russia?
    , @Desiderius

    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it’s the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them.
     
    No, it's guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
    , @BB753
    The same American Government that's made sure over the years that no White Movement ever succeeds. They were looking for a replacement for Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer fits the bill. Articulate, cultivated, not too nazi, not too charismatic. With no political chops. Too bad Spencer is a pain to read, unlike Taylor.
  49. @Hippopotamusdrome


    Dreyfus Affair
    ...
    It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

     

    Same thing with the Rosenbergs. It was common knowledge at the time that they were innocent and were railroaded by those anti-Semitic Americans.

    Let’s face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service for giving the Soviets the A-bomb secrets.

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Trying to recall a Gentile counterexample where this was even thinkable. For some strange reason, from Fuchs to Hiss to Pollard to Abel to Ames ...
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    Let’s face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service

     

    Let’s face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would not have been sympathetic to the cause of Communism. They would think of America as being "their" country and would not want to help its enemies.
  50. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @J.Ross
    It's unfortunate that he veers into talking about France because everything else in that comment is good. We cannot today easily imagine France before WWII, which was one of the most openly anti-Semitic countries in Europe. A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he'd heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.

    French anti-semites at the time of the Dreyfus case used to taunt Jews with references to the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre

    Read More
  51. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Cagey Beast
    I wonder sometimes whether Perfidious Albion developed its skills during all the back and forth over religion and the throne from the time of Henry VIII until the sneaky little gradualists managed to get a statue of Oliver Cromwell* put up in front of Westminster in the 1890s? Sneaky little crypto-Dissenters, crypto-Catholics and crypto-others all having to get along with one another on that island. The fictional Vicar of Bray knew how the game was played:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray

    The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky and they too had the wars of religion steam roll over them for quite some time.

    * It's worth noting that Putin unflatteringly compared Oliver Cromwell to Stalin during one of his interviews with Oliver Stone. Putin pointed out there are statues of Cromwell despite his bad behaviour. More anti-WASPism from the Kremlin.

    “Perfidious Albion” is a constitutional rather than ethical issue. Britain had parliamentary government at a time when most European nations were led by absolutist monarchs. That meant that British foreign policy changed (sometimes radically) with every election when the ruling party changed. This was exasperating to foreign diplomats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivy
    Albion also wanted to keep their Continental foes off balance, including some creative diplomacy and fluctuating alliances.
  52. @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    Sorry, just spotted this in Richard Spencer’s Twitter feed:

    Read More
  53. @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    Spencer is a liability both to American nationalism and to President Trump. Heck, he’s even a liability to White nationalism.

    So which governments would pay?

    The political establishment in the United States. The Democrat Party. Israel. India. Occupied Germany.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Are you saying this as a concerned White nationalist and Trump supporter?
  54. @Pat Casey
    OT here ya go Steve lol

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z5lc8OUwNU

    "Is it barbaric to be the best?"

    Bret Stephens’ (and the other Wall Street Journal affiliated cucks) fantasy comes to the screen.

    Read More
  55. @Cagey Beast
    The CIA did seem to like the French New Left:

    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/876059738383036416

    Lenin had his "sealed train" but did Foucault and Derrida have their sealed planes to the University of California?

    Foucault etc should cause revulsion about all the sealed brains poisoned by their weaponized musings. Students need to be taught how to Notice, so that they may recognize the techniques.
    See the following from The Center for Media Literacy as one of many similar resources:

    http://MediaLit.org

    Read More
  56. @Anonymous
    "Perfidious Albion" is a constitutional rather than ethical issue. Britain had parliamentary government at a time when most European nations were led by absolutist monarchs. That meant that British foreign policy changed (sometimes radically) with every election when the ruling party changed. This was exasperating to foreign diplomats.

    Albion also wanted to keep their Continental foes off balance, including some creative diplomacy and fluctuating alliances.

    Read More
  57. @Cagey Beast
    Let's face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service for giving the Soviets the A-bomb secrets.

    Trying to recall a Gentile counterexample where this was even thinkable. For some strange reason, from Fuchs to Hiss to Pollard to Abel to Ames …

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matra
    Senator Joseph McCarthy was particularly interested in finding Waspy communists: WASPs", Jews, and McCarthy
  58. @Opinionator
    Spencer is a liability both to American nationalism and to President Trump. Heck, he's even a liability to White nationalism.

    So which governments would pay?

    The political establishment in the United States. The Democrat Party. Israel. India. Occupied Germany.

    Are you saying this as a concerned White nationalist and Trump supporter?

    Read More
  59. @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    Have you read the Russian embassy UK Twitter? They certainly want someone to think they are pro alt-right.

    If the Russians think we serve their geopolitical needs they’ll help. But I suspect Putin benefits from standing up to Russia’s age old enemy, the Anglo-Americans, and needs us as an adversary. How would a WN USA benefit Russia?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Cagey Beast
    Yes the Russian embassy to the UK does make clear its affinity with those of us sick of the "invade them all, invite them all" governing class now in charge of our West but I wouldn't say they're specifically pro-Alt-Right. The Alt-Right is too niche, too quirky and too entangled in Nazi nostalgia to be of interest to official Russia.
  60. …by giving Germans a temporary but massive territorial conquest in the East in the late winter of 1918, which made many Germans, such as Corporal Hitler, assume that the great sacrifices of the last four years had been justified by the fruits of victory, only to have Germany “stabbed in the back” by the defeat later that year, a hot potato the blame for which the (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.

    So, No Lenin, No Hitler.

    Oh, absolutely, 100%.

    When I was doing research for my dissertation 20+ years ago, I came across a speech by Hitler in which he was ripping on the Treaty of Locarno, and calling Wilson a liar, saying that Wilson wanted “self-determination” for everybody else, but not the Germans.

    For the first time in my life, I said “Wow… Hitler was right!” You’re not supposed to think that, are you? But he was right about far more than we are led to believe, because in the U.S. we really don’t grasp the significance of the Eastern Front from the German perspective in both World Wars.

    In short, the Eastern Front was everything for the Germans. The Western Front was merely a sideshow; the Schlieffen Plan assumed that France would be quickly knocked off to free up Germany to deal with its real enemy, Russia. (Ironically, the Schileffen Plan failed in World War I, but an updated version of it worked to perfection in World War II).

    The Germans won an enormous victory in the East after the Russian withdrawal in 1917, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk gave then significant territorial gains — which they lost two years later at Versailles, plus had the Polish Corridor and Czech control of the Sudetenland imposed upon them.

    The other significant feature of the Eastern Front that we are not familiar with in the U.S. is that the Bolshevik Revolution allowed the Jews to go “beyond the Pale” of Settlement that the Tsar had declared in what is now Belarus and Poland, territories won by Germany in 1917 and stripped from them at Versailles.

    Jews were not only now “off the reservation,” they were in control of the government and army of Germany’s greatest enemy, Russia. After Versailles, Germany was practically defenseless — it was forbidden to have a navy and an air force, and the German army was limited to 100,000 men while Bolshevik Jews like Trotsky were preaching global communist revolution (and actually fomenting it in Berlin, Bavaria, and Hungary).

    Puts things in a whole different perspective, doesn’t it?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
    German writer Martin Walser refers often times to aquote by acclaimed historian Golo Mann (son of Thomas Mann) which (in my translation) reads: "WW 1 is the source of all catastropies that formed the twentieth century."

    Viktor Suworow wrote a book while living in British exile, that supports lots of your views, too. The German title of this book is: "Stalins verhinderter Erstschlag" (Stalin's first strike - avoided).

    , @JackOH
    I've sometimes wondered mischievously to myself whether Germans might get the whole "war guilt" monkey off their backs by redubbing the 1914-1945 war as the War of Slavic Aggression. Having failed to effectively defend, the Germans could then adopt the coveted mantle of victimhood.
  61. @J.Ross
    Trying to recall a Gentile counterexample where this was even thinkable. For some strange reason, from Fuchs to Hiss to Pollard to Abel to Ames ...

    Senator Joseph McCarthy was particularly interested in finding Waspy communists: WASPs”, Jews, and McCarthy

    Read More
    • Replies: @J.Ross
    Well no kidding. That's just practicality. Jews circle wagons and WASPs leave you to hang.
  62. So, No Lenin, No Hitler.

    Or ‘No Hitler, so Hitler’.

    Read More
  63. The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization. Starting WW1, bringing in Lenin to Russia (and funding him) with no thought as to the consequences, invading Poland in 1939 and wrecking themselves and the Continent completely. Their latest attempt, bringing in millions of Middle Eastern and African Muslims right into the heart of Europe, might just work. Those Germans do not give up! Once they set their minds on something they keep trying.

    Read More
    • Troll: Hippopotamusdrome
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Something on Drudge today 6/19. Angela Merkel announced that 100 million Africans will arrive in Europe soon. I agree with you that Germany was a destructive force in the 2oth century and will be even worse in the 21st.

    As the economic power in the EU, Germany rules the EU. Look at what it has done already only 17 years into the 21st century. She was the STASI commissar at her company. Her father a Lutheran pastor defected to east Germany.
    She was golden girl type run through the best schools and sent to Russia for further studies.

    Then after reunification she was parachuted into political office and rose and rose.

    Her background is similar to Obama's. His mother was hard hard left. He was raised by communist grandparents and grandpas best friend Frank Davis, head of the communist party of Hawaii, such as it was.

    Merkel's sort of a Napoleon who will never be defeated. And the Germans elected her. Her party won big in the last election and polls predict she will be re elected in the next election.

    The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever.
    , @Matthew McConnagay

    The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization...
     
    Don't forget this little brouhaha.
    , @oddsbodkins
    You left Kraftwerk off your list.
  64. @B
    Lenin was ALSO a German agent (or taking money from the Germans in order to achieve mutual goals).

    Mainly, though, he was working for Wall Street: https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Sutton_Wall_Street_and_the_bolshevik_revolution-5.pdf

    Fun Fact:
    In Chapter IV, the “Schmedeman” who sent the cipher message of Feb. 21, 1918, from the U.S. Embassy at Christiana (Oslo), Norway, advising of the location of the Bolshevik funds in Sweden was Albert G. Schmedeman, a Democrat who supported Wilson, and future Mayor of Madison, Wis. and Governor of the state.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_G._Schmedeman

    Read More
  65. @Matra
    Senator Joseph McCarthy was particularly interested in finding Waspy communists: WASPs", Jews, and McCarthy

    Well no kidding. That’s just practicality. Jews circle wagons and WASPs leave you to hang.

    Read More
  66. Actually Hitler was a secret agent as well.

    “What do I do, see what these so called “National Socialists”are up to, or have another Lowenbrau and send that boring little Austrian Fuck to tell me what will happened ? Aw fuck it, send him, what’s the worst that can happen ? ”

    Ernst Rohm,
    Munich 1919.

    Read More
  67. No. Lenin was a “true believer,” a sort of first, SJW of the world. Stalin, and “strong” men months and years after him, thought Lenin was a weakling…a loser….not up for the job, so to speak.

    Read More
  68. @Hippopotamusdrome


    Dreyfus Affair
    ...
    It wasn’t blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

     

    Same thing with the Rosenbergs. It was common knowledge at the time that they were innocent and were railroaded by those anti-Semitic Americans.

    “…Rosenbergs ….were railroaded.”

    As always.

    https://newrepublic.com/article/79648/rosenbergs-redux-julius-ethel-communist-spies:

    This mass of documentation shows that Julius Rosenberg began his espionage career before the German invasion of the Soviet Union (a time when Hitler and Stalin were allies) and that he continued for years after the end of World War II, when the Soviet Union’s only potential opponent was the United States.

    This evidence also reveals that Julius was a more active atomic spy than the FBI, prosecutors, or his most ardent opponents ever suspected.

    The risks and sacrifices he took for the USSR surprised even hardened KGB officers. During a two-year period, from 1946 to 1948, when security concerns had caused the KGB to cut off communication, Rosenberg kept his ring together, stockpiled classified information in the hope that the KGB would get back in touch, and provided financial support to his agents.

    American Fifth Oppenheimering Column provided Stalin with Los Alamos’ Fifth Element in exchange for USSR recognition of newly established colonial power in the tragic dessert.

    Read More
  69. Of course Lenin was a German agent, but that’s hardly all he was, nor was it anywhere close to being the most important thing he was. The deep state history of spies, terrorists, and assassins is full of double and triple agents and conspirators too clever by half. One of these was Ludendorf, who played a key roll both in the rise of Lenin and the Bolsheviks and the rise of Hitler and the Nazis. In both cases, things did not quite work out as he wanted and success was worse than failure, although he did not live to see the ultimate outcome with Hitler.

    BTW, McMeekin’s book is excellent, but to be fair, he had the advantage of access to archives not available to earlier historians.

    Read More
  70. @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it’s the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them.

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
     
    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there's a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )
  71. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @J.Ross
    Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the "one weird trick" explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don't think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can't do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    Many historians believe the Zimmerman telegram was one of the many false flag tricks done by the British to sucker us into WW1.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matthew McConnagay
    Zimmerman admitted the telegram was genuine, so these historians are either liars or idiots.

    "The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever."

    1. They didn't defeat Britain;
    2. While the current generation of civil servants seem to have lost their appetite for fomenting disunity on the continent, I doubt - or at least I hope not - this will continue. It's simply far too much in Britain's interest to prevent the nations of Europe from agglomerating (at least if that episode of Yes, Minister is to be believed).

    I really don't understand this disdain some Americans have for the British. It's been two hundred years, already - let it go!
  72. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Cwhatfuture
    The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization. Starting WW1, bringing in Lenin to Russia (and funding him) with no thought as to the consequences, invading Poland in 1939 and wrecking themselves and the Continent completely. Their latest attempt, bringing in millions of Middle Eastern and African Muslims right into the heart of Europe, might just work. Those Germans do not give up! Once they set their minds on something they keep trying.

    Something on Drudge today 6/19. Angela Merkel announced that 100 million Africans will arrive in Europe soon. I agree with you that Germany was a destructive force in the 2oth century and will be even worse in the 21st.

    As the economic power in the EU, Germany rules the EU. Look at what it has done already only 17 years into the 21st century. She was the STASI commissar at her company. Her father a Lutheran pastor defected to east Germany.
    She was golden girl type run through the best schools and sent to Russia for further studies.

    Then after reunification she was parachuted into political office and rose and rose.

    Her background is similar to Obama’s. His mother was hard hard left. He was raised by communist grandparents and grandpas best friend Frank Davis, head of the communist party of Hawaii, such as it was.

    Merkel’s sort of a Napoleon who will never be defeated. And the Germans elected her. Her party won big in the last election and polls predict she will be re elected in the next election.

    The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever.

    Read More
  73. @Anon
    The answer has been quite obvious, for many years: Yes he was a paid German agent. If I remember correctly (I'm not quite sure) he was also an Austrian agent at some point.

    Do we know at what point German support for Lenin was cut off? Was it when he achieved power? It must certainly have been before the Finnish civil war.

    However, Lenin was clearly acting, in the main, not in the interests of either the German or the Russian nation, but of the International Revolution, and of course, of V. I. Lenin himself.

    Do we know at what point German support for Lenin was cut off? Was it when he achieved power? It must certainly have been before the Finnish civil war.

    No. The German intervention in Finland was primarily about which faction of Whites ends up in power – going against Reds was an excuse to get involved in a war where the Whites already had the upper hand. The very pro-German Senate of Finland betrayed the White Army leaders and invited the German military to take over Helsinki to prevent the very pro-Entente imperial aristocrats leading the White Army from taking it.

    White leader Mannerheim wanted to take Finland into the Russian Civil War, to negotiate for British intervention to attack Petrograd through Finland and to have Russia ruled by generals to the conclusion of the World War. Supporting the pro-German puppet leader Svinhufvud in Finland and exiling imperial aristocrats like Mannerheim are perfectly consistent with Germany still wanting Lenin to remain in power.

    Things are also consistent to the other direction. The Finnish Civil War started very much as a result of Lenin personally pressuring the Finnish Left towards revolution but once Germany got involved, it sent a note to Lenin demanding an end to Russian support for Finnish Reds and Lenin simply acceded. Russians that were already fighting on the side of Finnish Reds remained but Lenin forbade sending any further support.

    On the other hand, Russian Reds may have simply been calculating that Finland is a lost cause for them and that a Finland as a German puppet state would be preferable to a Finland ruled by a White general. Whatever the truth is, Lenin gave personal attention to Finland far beyond what you’d expect for a place with such a tiny population but then during the Civil War when the Reds were supposed to reap the fruits of his years of activism in Finland he still took care to avoid stepping on German interests.

    Read More
  74. @Desiderius

    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it’s the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them.
     
    No, it's guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites

    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there’s a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    Correction: Stephen King. Don’t wanna look like some Koontz!
    , @Thea
    I like them. Likely you know nothing about them but lies.
    , @Cagey Beast
    All correct.

    Maybe there’s a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    As for that, as Putin said about Oliver Stone's idea that Edward Snowden was sent by the CIA: "I don't think think they're that subtle!" and then laughed.
    , @Desiderius
    Who knows what the government is up to.

    The megaphone/eye of sauron does like to highlight fringe righties to keep normies from prying too deeply into what they're up to/to make themselves look like the normals.

    The alt- side is alt- because they've figured out that shooting right is usually a waste of time, so no one is much interested in taking down Spencer but I haven't seen much actual enthusiasm for him among anyone who much matters.

    Megaphonies usually have to lie about us to keep normals on the plantation. That's not the case with Spencer.
  75. @El Dato

    Then many of us reading this wouldn’t be alive.
     
    Once you change history by the batting of the wings of a butterfly, all of us reading this wouldn't be alive. And it wouldn't even matter.

    “…all of us reading this wouldn’t be alive. And it wouldn’t even matter.”

    Not to us, then, ok. But, who kwows, to this butterfly – or to the wings of this very butterfly? Allmighty butterfly-wings: Could become the origin of a new cult. – Or couldn’t, because it exists already?

    Read More
  76. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
     
    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there's a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )

    Correction: Stephen King. Don’t wanna look like some Koontz!

    Read More
  77. @inertial
    Lenin made quite a show of not accepting money from suspicious sources. There is no evidence that he ever did. If he did accept money from the Germans there'd be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services; an a subsequent German government - e.g. Hitler - would've published these records for propaganda effect. "Haha, look at you your Lenin." But no.

    From the beginning of the WWI, Lenin took the position that all true Marxists must work to defeat their own governments in order to achieve the just peace. This made his an extremist, as virtually no other Marxists agreed with him. They all turned from internationalists to patriots overnight in 1914. So the German command had a bright idea to send Lenin to Russia and see what damage he could do. The problem was that the idea that was marginal and unpopular in 1914 had become super popular in 1917, including in Germany itself. In 1917, Lenin gained a lot of credibility, both in Russia just by saying I told you so. Add to this the land reform program, and the Bolsheviks had become unstoppable.

    I guess you don’t count bank robberies as “suspicious” sources.

    Read More
  78. @J.Ross
    It's unfortunate that he veers into talking about France because everything else in that comment is good. We cannot today easily imagine France before WWII, which was one of the most openly anti-Semitic countries in Europe. A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he'd heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.

    A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he’d heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.

    This aspect of the European history is hardly understood at all. In the holocaust-history up to today, you’ll find this obvious difference between Germany and France hardly explained (=made sense of).

    German scocietal reaction to the fast and strong economic rise of jews – roughly from 1870 on – reaching quite some hights in the Weimar period, resulting in lots of envy and hatred, might well have been inadequate.

    I think, that this is no cynical argument.

    There’s some intellectuals in Germany, who did notice this omission in the usual explanations of the holocaust. Acclaimed literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki, who survived the holocaust, because (Christian) polish regular folks hid him in their home), did mention the rise of envy, caused by the jewish economic progress made in the Weimar period. A few years back, Siegfried Kohlhammer wrote an interesting essay about this subject, but got very few reactions.

    Eminent Weimar journalist and writer Kurt Tucholsky – an early public loather of Hitler and erverything Nazi as well as Bolschewik – accused the German Jews to be blind to the Nazi-threat, because they had lost their critical distance to their hosts by ages of symbiotic relationships – and therefor did not understand the danger, that lied ahead of them and did not act according to this danger – while there was still time to do so.
    Erich Fromm later on – in his great tome Anatomy of Human Destructiveness – emphasised the destructive nature of symbiotic relationships.

    PS – If the name of the Holocaust historian you mentioned comes to your mind – please let me know.

    I’ve come across the very same thought in a biography of the German lawyer, chameleon-journalist and writer Kurt Hiller – an incredible figure, often times accused of anti-semitism, who embodied left positions, right-wing positions (pro Mussolini…), socialist, capitalist, anarchist positions and therefor made lots of interesting observations and experiences (met literally all kinds of people). He just never managed to focus his wide-angle views. An outsider, if ever there was one. An army of Angels helped him to survive the “Third Reich”.
    At the end of his (long) life, he supported Social Democrat Willy Brandt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johann Ricke

    Eminent Weimar journalist and writer Kurt Tucholsky – an early public loather of Hitler and erverything Nazi as well as Bolschewik – accused the German Jews to be blind to the Nazi-threat, because they had lost their critical distance to their hosts by ages of symbiotic relationships – and therefor did not understand the danger, that lied ahead of them and did not act according to this danger – while there was still time to do so.
     
    What Hitler did was historically unprecedented. Here's a list of what isn't:

    1) The massacre of city inhabitants after a long and high-casualty siege.
    2) The confiscation of the assets of a troublesome minority.
    3) The expulsion of a troublesome minority.
    4) The exemplary, but limited massacre of a troublesome minority.
    5) The proscription/slaughter of a minority involved in armed insurrection.
    6) The slaughter of a territory's population after a surrender ultimatum is ignored and the invader's envoys killed, used as a ruthless but practical measure, owing to the invader's limited troop numbers, pour encourager les autres.

    The reason no one saw Hitler's depredations coming, vis-a-vis his disfavored groups (i.e. the extermination of Jews, Slavs, gypsies, et al), was because his actions were not simply wicked and impractical for an empire builder, they were sui generis, one of a kind.

  79. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
     
    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there's a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )

    I like them. Likely you know nothing about them but lies.

    Read More
  80. Dr. X,

    Or maybe he was just using ‘ideas’ that ‘sounded right’ to rise up politically. How can he be right, when he wanted to take half of russia for himself and killed thousands (or probably more) of sl*v soldiers) as a result? How can he be right, when he killed millions of j*ws in the holocaust? You cannot be ‘right’ when you want to kill somebody.

    Read More
  81. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
     
    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there's a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )

    All correct.

    Maybe there’s a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    As for that, as Putin said about Oliver Stone’s idea that Edward Snowden was sent by the CIA: “I don’t think think they’re that subtle!” and then laughed.

    Read More
  82. @Thea
    Have you read the Russian embassy UK Twitter? They certainly want someone to think they are pro alt-right.

    If the Russians think we serve their geopolitical needs they'll help. But I suspect Putin benefits from standing up to Russia's age old enemy, the Anglo-Americans, and needs us as an adversary. How would a WN USA benefit Russia?

    Yes the Russian embassy to the UK does make clear its affinity with those of us sick of the “invade them all, invite them all” governing class now in charge of our West but I wouldn’t say they’re specifically pro-Alt-Right. The Alt-Right is too niche, too quirky and too entangled in Nazi nostalgia to be of interest to official Russia.

    Read More
  83. @Cwhatfuture
    The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization. Starting WW1, bringing in Lenin to Russia (and funding him) with no thought as to the consequences, invading Poland in 1939 and wrecking themselves and the Continent completely. Their latest attempt, bringing in millions of Middle Eastern and African Muslims right into the heart of Europe, might just work. Those Germans do not give up! Once they set their minds on something they keep trying.

    The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization…

    Don’t forget this little brouhaha.

    Read More
  84. @guest
    "I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin"

    It is.

    "Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?"

    I don't think so. It's hard to tell just what the purpose of this article is. To raise the question of the propriety of Bolshevik tactics? To explore philosophically what constitutes being an agent? Just to flap gums about an interesting piece of history? I dunno.

    My instinct was to guess somehow it would tie into Trump being a Russian agent. Maybe that'll be in future installments.

    Just to flap gums about an interesting piece of history?

    Most likely. This is the 100th anniversary of the period between Lenin’s arrival at the Finland Station in April 1917 and the October Revolution. As Lenin famously said of this period, “There are decades when nothing happens, and then there are weeks when decades happen.”

    Read More
  85. @Anonymous
    Many historians believe the Zimmerman telegram was one of the many false flag tricks done by the British to sucker us into WW1.

    Zimmerman admitted the telegram was genuine, so these historians are either liars or idiots.

    “The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever.”

    1. They didn’t defeat Britain;
    2. While the current generation of civil servants seem to have lost their appetite for fomenting disunity on the continent, I doubt – or at least I hope not – this will continue. It’s simply far too much in Britain’s interest to prevent the nations of Europe from agglomerating (at least if that episode of Yes, Minister is to be believed).

    I really don’t understand this disdain some Americans have for the British. It’s been two hundred years, already – let it go!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    In 1999, I sat about three feet away while Mrs. Thatcher and General Odom argued over German reunification in a most animated fashion for 10 minutes.
    , @Hippopotamusdrome


    1. They didn’t defeat Britain;

     

    What happened to the British Empire? Remember India, Egypt etc?

    British and Sikh Soldiers in front of the Sphinx
  86. @Matthew McConnagay
    Zimmerman admitted the telegram was genuine, so these historians are either liars or idiots.

    "The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever."

    1. They didn't defeat Britain;
    2. While the current generation of civil servants seem to have lost their appetite for fomenting disunity on the continent, I doubt - or at least I hope not - this will continue. It's simply far too much in Britain's interest to prevent the nations of Europe from agglomerating (at least if that episode of Yes, Minister is to be believed).

    I really don't understand this disdain some Americans have for the British. It's been two hundred years, already - let it go!

    In 1999, I sat about three feet away while Mrs. Thatcher and General Odom argued over German reunification in a most animated fashion for 10 minutes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Matthew McConnagay
    I take it they were rehashing an argument that Mrs. Thatcher had lost some ten years previously?
  87. @Dr. X

    ...by giving Germans a temporary but massive territorial conquest in the East in the late winter of 1918, which made many Germans, such as Corporal Hitler, assume that the great sacrifices of the last four years had been justified by the fruits of victory, only to have Germany “stabbed in the back” by the defeat later that year, a hot potato the blame for which the (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.

    So, No Lenin, No Hitler.
     

    Oh, absolutely, 100%.

    When I was doing research for my dissertation 20+ years ago, I came across a speech by Hitler in which he was ripping on the Treaty of Locarno, and calling Wilson a liar, saying that Wilson wanted "self-determination" for everybody else, but not the Germans.

    For the first time in my life, I said "Wow... Hitler was right!" You're not supposed to think that, are you? But he was right about far more than we are led to believe, because in the U.S. we really don't grasp the significance of the Eastern Front from the German perspective in both World Wars.

    In short, the Eastern Front was everything for the Germans. The Western Front was merely a sideshow; the Schlieffen Plan assumed that France would be quickly knocked off to free up Germany to deal with its real enemy, Russia. (Ironically, the Schileffen Plan failed in World War I, but an updated version of it worked to perfection in World War II).

    The Germans won an enormous victory in the East after the Russian withdrawal in 1917, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk gave then significant territorial gains -- which they lost two years later at Versailles, plus had the Polish Corridor and Czech control of the Sudetenland imposed upon them.

    The other significant feature of the Eastern Front that we are not familiar with in the U.S. is that the Bolshevik Revolution allowed the Jews to go "beyond the Pale" of Settlement that the Tsar had declared in what is now Belarus and Poland, territories won by Germany in 1917 and stripped from them at Versailles.

    Jews were not only now "off the reservation," they were in control of the government and army of Germany's greatest enemy, Russia. After Versailles, Germany was practically defenseless -- it was forbidden to have a navy and an air force, and the German army was limited to 100,000 men while Bolshevik Jews like Trotsky were preaching global communist revolution (and actually fomenting it in Berlin, Bavaria, and Hungary).

    Puts things in a whole different perspective, doesn't it?

    German writer Martin Walser refers often times to aquote by acclaimed historian Golo Mann (son of Thomas Mann) which (in my translation) reads: “WW 1 is the source of all catastropies that formed the twentieth century.”

    Viktor Suworow wrote a book while living in British exile, that supports lots of your views, too. The German title of this book is: “Stalins verhinderter Erstschlag” (Stalin’s first strike – avoided).

    Read More
  88. @Jenner Ickham Errican

    No, it’s guilt by association.

    Westboro Baptist : Christians :: Spencer : Whites
     
    Seems like a bad analogy. Are you saying that…

    A) The U.S. government likely sponsors Westboro Baptist and/or Spencer (presumably to act as straw man bigots/racists), and

    B) That general public’s perception of Westboro and Spencer are the same? (I assume you mean strongly negative towards both.)

    From what I can tell, no one likes Westboro Baptist, which appears to be a wack ‘religious’ family cult straight out of a Steven King novel. Spencer, though, seems to have significant popularity among growing numbers of racially “woke” American nationalists, particularly Millennials. Any presumed Establishment social taboo “guilt by association” counter-signaling (Spencer bad!) isn’t working.

    Maybe there's a COINTELPRO PSYOPs double secret plan to reveal a dark, devastating secret about Spencer at a crucial moment, thereby demoralizing legions of Pepe memers.

    ( Dun-dun-dunnnn! )

    Who knows what the government is up to.

    The megaphone/eye of sauron does like to highlight fringe righties to keep normies from prying too deeply into what they’re up to/to make themselves look like the normals.

    The alt- side is alt- because they’ve figured out that shooting right is usually a waste of time, so no one is much interested in taking down Spencer but I haven’t seen much actual enthusiasm for him among anyone who much matters.

    Megaphonies usually have to lie about us to keep normals on the plantation. That’s not the case with Spencer.

    Read More
  89. “But Germany’s Lenin Gambit actually worked, which proved disastrous for the world by inflicting Communism on Russia and temporarily on Central Europe in 1918-1919, and by giving Germans a temporary but massive territorial conquest in the East in the late winter of 1918, which made many Germans, such as Corporal Hitler, assume that the great sacrifices of the last four years had been justified by the fruits of victory, only to have Germany “stabbed in the back” by the defeat later that year, a hot potato the blame for which the (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.”

    Your remark about the “highly culpable” German Gerneral Staff and their scapegoat, “the poor Social Democrats” is the foundation of the German Communist’s and Leftist’s most effective attack on the Social Democrats, because it makes use of the image of the Social Democrats as part of those who stabbed the German people in the back: “Wer hat uns verraten – Sozialdemokraten!” – ( – rougly: Who were the betraying rats/Social Democrats).

    As an aside: Hitler wasn’t German until 1932 – the Hitler of the aboeve quoted – impressive – sentence, therefor was Austrian.

    Read More
  90. @Bill P
    I thought it was common knowledge that the Germans used Lenin to break the Russian Empire. Is this being treated as some sort of revelation today?

    Personally, I think it's similar to today in that Barack Obama - a Leninische figure in his own right - was and remains immensely popular with Germans, who really are not so much American allies as commonly assumed.

    Personally, I think it’s similar to today in that [Barry] Obama – a Lenin[] figure in his own right – was and remains immensely popular with Germans,

    Like the measles, Barry was in reality an Old World virus to which the American body politic had not developed any resistance: the prototype (indeed cartoon) of the smirking, snarky, homosexual, Third-Worldy, “progressive,” atheist, 1970s Euro-socialist backed by shady but invariably wealthy interests: George Soros, Nadhmi Auchi (shady Iraqi billionaire), Exelon (nuclear energy company, sponsored Barry in Illinois, was finally RICHLY rewarded in December 2016, a mere 4 weeks after the election), etc.

    http://www.utilitydive.com/news/illinois-passes-sweeping-energy-bill-with-support-for-exelon-nuclear-plants/431521/

    As regards Germany itself (and indeed all of Western Europe), there certainly seems to have been an element of thumb-in-the-eye in Europe’s early (and ongoing) enthusiastic support for “OBAMA.” (Like Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov himself, Barry Dunham prefers to be known by a romantic nom de guerre.) In “Barack Obama,” the Euros had finally found the man to reshape their own caricature of uncouth, gun-toting, redneck America in the image of soi-disant European elites.

    During the later years of the Obama reign, Germany seems to have become something of a support base for broader Barry-affiliated Deep State “stay-behind” operations in the U.S. itself aimed at finally putting the kibosh on silly democratic aspirations by an unruly American populace. It is less clear to what extent Barry is still a serious force within this organization – some of his more recent pronouncements suggest he is little more than of a sock puppet.

    What seems clear is that the broader “Barry Organization” was instrumental – with massive support from intelligence services including the Comey-FBI’s intelligence arm – in depriving Hillary Rodham Clinton of the presidency, the better to resume control in a post-Hillary landscape while undermining and co-opting the upstart Trump team.

    Read More
  91. @Dr. X

    ...by giving Germans a temporary but massive territorial conquest in the East in the late winter of 1918, which made many Germans, such as Corporal Hitler, assume that the great sacrifices of the last four years had been justified by the fruits of victory, only to have Germany “stabbed in the back” by the defeat later that year, a hot potato the blame for which the (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.

    So, No Lenin, No Hitler.
     

    Oh, absolutely, 100%.

    When I was doing research for my dissertation 20+ years ago, I came across a speech by Hitler in which he was ripping on the Treaty of Locarno, and calling Wilson a liar, saying that Wilson wanted "self-determination" for everybody else, but not the Germans.

    For the first time in my life, I said "Wow... Hitler was right!" You're not supposed to think that, are you? But he was right about far more than we are led to believe, because in the U.S. we really don't grasp the significance of the Eastern Front from the German perspective in both World Wars.

    In short, the Eastern Front was everything for the Germans. The Western Front was merely a sideshow; the Schlieffen Plan assumed that France would be quickly knocked off to free up Germany to deal with its real enemy, Russia. (Ironically, the Schileffen Plan failed in World War I, but an updated version of it worked to perfection in World War II).

    The Germans won an enormous victory in the East after the Russian withdrawal in 1917, and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk gave then significant territorial gains -- which they lost two years later at Versailles, plus had the Polish Corridor and Czech control of the Sudetenland imposed upon them.

    The other significant feature of the Eastern Front that we are not familiar with in the U.S. is that the Bolshevik Revolution allowed the Jews to go "beyond the Pale" of Settlement that the Tsar had declared in what is now Belarus and Poland, territories won by Germany in 1917 and stripped from them at Versailles.

    Jews were not only now "off the reservation," they were in control of the government and army of Germany's greatest enemy, Russia. After Versailles, Germany was practically defenseless -- it was forbidden to have a navy and an air force, and the German army was limited to 100,000 men while Bolshevik Jews like Trotsky were preaching global communist revolution (and actually fomenting it in Berlin, Bavaria, and Hungary).

    Puts things in a whole different perspective, doesn't it?

    I’ve sometimes wondered mischievously to myself whether Germans might get the whole “war guilt” monkey off their backs by redubbing the 1914-1945 war as the War of Slavic Aggression. Having failed to effectively defend, the Germans could then adopt the coveted mantle of victimhood.

    Read More
  92. @Abe

    This doesn’t seem very plausible to me. Say what you want about current US intel organizations but the CIA fought the KGB to at least a draw during the Cold War
     
    Well, CIA did have technological advantages (queue Steve's rhapsody over U2 and Blackbird spy planes). Plus the US was still run by actual grown-ups at the time. And then when you think about all the operations that went BLEEWEY!- Bay of Pigs- plus then all the operations that were hailed as smashing successes but later went on to haunt the US for decades afterward as grist for negative foreign and internal propaganda- coup in Iran, coups in Latin America- I'm not so sure...

    Consider Russian hacking activities during the election last year which- no matter which side you are on politically- have to be recognized as so elegant they qualify as works of art. Vidy, oh my brothers:

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails
    * they release said emails through a hip, admired intermediary (WIKILEAKS)
    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide
    * college students, Bernie bros, repulsed by usual Clinton dirty tricks, stay home and probably hand the election to Trump

    But here is the really elegant part (turning the Russian trick from a pedestrian double-axle to a magnificent triple lutz)-

    * Russians make kissy-eyes at Trump after the election
    * Democrats and their scum media allies, enrage and humiliated by losing to a man whose own party chief was telling him to drop out, run with this "evidence" of Trump-Russia collusion, thus while dialing up the anti-Russia hysteria to 11, actually doing Putin's bidding by paralyzing the US Executive with endless investigations, talk of impeachment, etc. while Russia gets a free hand abroad

    Brilliant! I'd even say that it would not surprise me at all that Putin baited Flynn (who I'll accept is not a Russian agent, but simply thought better Russia relations were in the US's overall interest) into the premature sanctions talk, then planted that evidence for the US Creep State to find, thus launching the investigations that'd paralyze the President.

    * Russian hackers phish the heck out of top Clinton campaign staffers (I am willing to believe this is more likely true than not) and steal their internal emails

    * emails are all true, so the worst that can be said of Putin is he gave the American voter information the scum mainstream media was actively trying to hide

    NICE TROLLING, but facts don’t fit despite the nicely crafted narrative. Guess they don’t teach much computer science at Georgetown.

    Government-level hackers do NOT rely on “phishing” but penetrate entire computer networks, email servers, intermediary routers etc.

    Remember that thanks to decades of diligent efforts by the NSA and its blackmailees on the Hill, almost all email (even at Hillary’s level) was sent and stored unencrypted. This means it can easily be intercepted in transit at any of several computer systems between sender and recipient.

    Read More
  93. @J.Ross
    The British always find these pat, perfect things. There is no other government that is constantly happening upon Guy Fawkes just in time. Not except for dictatorships setting up political rivals. I can't argue it better, but I read all these novelesque coincidences involving the united confession and comeuppance of an enemy of Albion, like Haman weeping on Esther's bed, and got to a point where I just cannot accept that sort of thing as believable.

    Guy Fawkes was discovered because one of the conspirators realised that if you blow up King, Lords and Commons, you’ll kill Roman Catholic Lords too. So he tipped off one of them who, very sensibly, blabbed.

    Read More
  94. @inertial
    Lenin made quite a show of not accepting money from suspicious sources. There is no evidence that he ever did. If he did accept money from the Germans there'd be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services; an a subsequent German government - e.g. Hitler - would've published these records for propaganda effect. "Haha, look at you your Lenin." But no.

    From the beginning of the WWI, Lenin took the position that all true Marxists must work to defeat their own governments in order to achieve the just peace. This made his an extremist, as virtually no other Marxists agreed with him. They all turned from internationalists to patriots overnight in 1914. So the German command had a bright idea to send Lenin to Russia and see what damage he could do. The problem was that the idea that was marginal and unpopular in 1914 had become super popular in 1917, including in Germany itself. In 1917, Lenin gained a lot of credibility, both in Russia just by saying I told you so. Add to this the land reform program, and the Bolsheviks had become unstoppable.

    “If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services”: not necessarily. A sensible spy service will “sweep” its archives regularly and destroy anything that’s likelier to do harm than good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PV van der Byl
    And if the German intelligence services had failed to sweep the relevant files, we can be quite confident that the Soviet KGB would have done so. They did, after all, cart off an astonishing proportion of the German archives after May, 1945.

    German funding for Lenin was something the Soviets really, really, didn't want discussed.

    While acknowledging that documentary evidence for that German funding is thin by most historical standards, Richard Pipes (The Russian Revolution, 1991) shows that what evidence does exist is still quite significant.

    Read from the bottom of page 410 to the middle of page 412:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=XtE54LuhFzEC&pg=PA411&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

    , @inertial
    Why would anyone destroy this potentially valuable evidence? The Occam's razor says that it never existed in the first place.
    , @The True and Original David
    So we have to take on faith that the proof existed and was destroyed. "The dog ate my homework."

    Lenin was a Jew (recently admitted in Time magazine and elsewhere). But there is great effort to frame him, not as the ethno-nationalist he was, but as a German spy - to smear Germany and preempt any Slezkind/Solzhenitsyn pattern-noticing.

    I once got a check from the US government for intelligence work, and I once took a train. So I can blame Washington D.C. if I ever rob a bank, right? This analogy works because there is no copy of the check.

  95. “No Lenin, no Hitler” is true.

    But the problems with non-Russians fomenting revolution within Russia did not begin in 1917 and were perpetrated by more than Germans. The British secret service was all over Petersburg, acting to get the Russians to trust Britain while also acting to destabilize the traditional Russian monarchy.

    The nasty spy game made certain we would have WW1, and it managed to act in ways that made certain that out of that unnecessary war the Left and revolution would sweep wildly.

    The world has never recovered its balance.

    Read More
  96. @Cwhatfuture
    The Germans have proven very persistent in their attempts to destroy Western civilization. Starting WW1, bringing in Lenin to Russia (and funding him) with no thought as to the consequences, invading Poland in 1939 and wrecking themselves and the Continent completely. Their latest attempt, bringing in millions of Middle Eastern and African Muslims right into the heart of Europe, might just work. Those Germans do not give up! Once they set their minds on something they keep trying.

    You left Kraftwerk off your list.

    Read More
  97. Germany also sought to use the Ottoman caliphate to stir up a worldwide jihad amongst the British Empire’s Muslim subjects against their overlords.

    No shortage of harebrained schemes in the German foreign ministry.

    Read More
  98. @J.Ross
    Lenin was inarguably acting as an agent of Germany in entering Russia in the sealed train. Beyond that, the label is just misapplied. I am also not a fan, and am less of a fan the older I get and the more history I read, of the "one weird trick" explanatory panacea.
    Was Trotsky an agent of Germany in Brest-Litovsk? Only in effect. It is the same with Lenin.
    The impression I get of German espionage is they had no idea what they were doing. (I don't think the Zimmerman telegram was real either.)
    I wonder what the nature-over-nurture crowd thinks about how performance in espionage reflects genes. Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can't do spying because of their nature. The Russians are the best spies in the world, and the Russians themselves will tell you that is a result of being naturally sneaky. The main competition for that title comes from the Israelis and the Chinese.

    “Those autistic, honest, stamm German people just can’t do spying because of their nature.”

    Yes, there is something to it. They can’t do a good provocation or a false flag either. Gleiwitz incident (assuming that it really took place) is a perfect example. Or look at the trial after the Reichstag fire. Some accused were acquitted. Can you imagine in post 9/11 America somebody get acquitted when put on trial on terrorism. Or look at the case of Herschel Grynszpan. They had him in prison and were unable to make a show trial.

    Read More
  99. @Matthew McConnagay
    Zimmerman admitted the telegram was genuine, so these historians are either liars or idiots.

    "The only good thing the Germans did for Europe in the 20th century was to totally defeat perfidious Albion whose 900 year of constantly fomenting wars on the continent has ended forever."

    1. They didn't defeat Britain;
    2. While the current generation of civil servants seem to have lost their appetite for fomenting disunity on the continent, I doubt - or at least I hope not - this will continue. It's simply far too much in Britain's interest to prevent the nations of Europe from agglomerating (at least if that episode of Yes, Minister is to be believed).

    I really don't understand this disdain some Americans have for the British. It's been two hundred years, already - let it go!

    1. They didn’t defeat Britain;

    What happened to the British Empire? Remember India, Egypt etc?

    British and Sikh Soldiers in front of the Sphinx

    Read More
  100. @El Dato
    Lenin was basically the Bin Laden of the times.

    Blowback was enormous and actually started in 1920 with an attack of the Red Army with direction Berlin (stopped by the Poles before Warshaw) and Rome (ineffectual, gave up)

    The (highly culpable) German General Staff adroitly managed to hand off to the poor Social Democrats.
     
    This is rather well explained in Hindenburg: Icon of German Militarism. The sly fox managed to blame everyone including the Jews for his suicidal decision to go for "total war" and abrade the german nation and industrial base in the search for victory. He even managed to not show up during signature of the Versailles Treaty.

    Lenin was basically the Bin Laden of the times.

    If Bin Laden had gotten the slave-master’s whip over hundreds of millions of souls and a land area twice the size of the USA…

    Read More
  101. @Cagey Beast
    I wonder sometimes whether Perfidious Albion developed its skills during all the back and forth over religion and the throne from the time of Henry VIII until the sneaky little gradualists managed to get a statue of Oliver Cromwell* put up in front of Westminster in the 1890s? Sneaky little crypto-Dissenters, crypto-Catholics and crypto-others all having to get along with one another on that island. The fictional Vicar of Bray knew how the game was played:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray

    The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky and they too had the wars of religion steam roll over them for quite some time.

    * It's worth noting that Putin unflatteringly compared Oliver Cromwell to Stalin during one of his interviews with Oliver Stone. Putin pointed out there are statues of Cromwell despite his bad behaviour. More anti-WASPism from the Kremlin.

    “The Czechs are also notoriously sneaky

    Oh yes. But when they know they can get away with murder they do it in open.

    Read More
  102. @dearieme
    "If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services": not necessarily. A sensible spy service will "sweep" its archives regularly and destroy anything that's likelier to do harm than good.

    And if the German intelligence services had failed to sweep the relevant files, we can be quite confident that the Soviet KGB would have done so. They did, after all, cart off an astonishing proportion of the German archives after May, 1945.

    German funding for Lenin was something the Soviets really, really, didn’t want discussed.

    While acknowledging that documentary evidence for that German funding is thin by most historical standards, Richard Pipes (The Russian Revolution, 1991) shows that what evidence does exist is still quite significant.

    Read from the bottom of page 410 to the middle of page 412:

    https://books.google.com/books?id=XtE54LuhFzEC&pg=PA411&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Read More
  103. @Steve Sailer
    In 1999, I sat about three feet away while Mrs. Thatcher and General Odom argued over German reunification in a most animated fashion for 10 minutes.

    I take it they were rehashing an argument that Mrs. Thatcher had lost some ten years previously?

    Read More
  104. @Cagey Beast
    Which government would pay Richard Spencer to do what he does? If it's the American Deep State that might actually be good news. That would suggest they want to win over White guys rather than replace them. If it's the Russians then that's probably good news too. That would suggest we're not out here on our own at the mercy of the malicious freaks and incompetents currently running things. I doubt it though.

    The same American Government that’s made sure over the years that no White Movement ever succeeds. They were looking for a replacement for Jared Taylor and Richard Spencer fits the bill. Articulate, cultivated, not too nazi, not too charismatic. With no political chops. Too bad Spencer is a pain to read, unlike Taylor.

    Read More
  105. @Cagey Beast
    Let's face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service for giving the Soviets the A-bomb secrets.

    Let’s face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would have gotten off with a few hundred hours of community service

    Let’s face it, if the Rosenbergs were the Robinsons they would not have been sympathetic to the cause of Communism. They would think of America as being “their” country and would not want to help its enemies.

    Read More
  106. Was Gorbachev a CIA plant?
    Old Russian Proverb: He who has a Hungarian for a friend has no need of enemies.
    Sometimes you use the good linen and sometimes the Lenin uses you.

    Read More
  107. @dearieme
    "If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services": not necessarily. A sensible spy service will "sweep" its archives regularly and destroy anything that's likelier to do harm than good.

    Why would anyone destroy this potentially valuable evidence? The Occam’s razor says that it never existed in the first place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    Because a spy service gets lots of information that has value only briefly (regiment X has moved to port Y) so the only result of keeping it is that you are also keeping a record of who your spies were, which might some day be penetrated.
  108. The greedy (they had financial interest in eastward expasion in many cases) idiot Tsarist regieme that underestimated Japan’s ability to defeat Russia was the origin of the 1905 Russian revolution Germany caused the 1918 revolution by thrashing Russia and discrediting the whole system.That defeat not Lenin was the key.

    Read More
  109. @mukat

    It wasn't blame the Jewish guy because Germany it was blame the Jewish guy cause Jewish guy.

     

    Who let the non-revisionist commenter into Unz.com?

    The Affair was a "we're the #1 victims ever" manuever by Jews. His guilt or innocence is debatable but the Affair was a Lugenpresse power move, the first of many, many more to come.

    I never understood the Affair, until I started to think of it like all the other leftist cause celebres I’ve experienced. In that case they were right, but so what? It was just one guy; why was his injustice so meaningful? Couldn’t we do the same with, I don’t know, George Zimmerman, honorary white?

    If we had their megaphone, yes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @BB753
    I hear Robert Zimmerman aka Bob Dylan is busy writing a song to clear his distant Jewish cousin George's name. Same as he did with Reuben Carter, the Hurricane, who wasn't guilty as sin, as bigots like to say. Real soon.
  110. @inertial
    Why would anyone destroy this potentially valuable evidence? The Occam's razor says that it never existed in the first place.

    Because a spy service gets lots of information that has value only briefly (regiment X has moved to port Y) so the only result of keeping it is that you are also keeping a record of who your spies were, which might some day be penetrated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    This is true. Historians don't know exactly what the British S.O.E. did in occupied Europe between 1940 and 1944 because the organization routinely destroyed its records during that period. Files were kept only for as long as they were needed.
  111. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @dearieme
    Because a spy service gets lots of information that has value only briefly (regiment X has moved to port Y) so the only result of keeping it is that you are also keeping a record of who your spies were, which might some day be penetrated.

    This is true. Historians don’t know exactly what the British S.O.E. did in occupied Europe between 1940 and 1944 because the organization routinely destroyed its records during that period. Files were kept only for as long as they were needed.

    Read More
  112. @dearieme
    "If he did accept money from the Germans there’d be records to that effect in the archives of the German intelligence services": not necessarily. A sensible spy service will "sweep" its archives regularly and destroy anything that's likelier to do harm than good.

    So we have to take on faith that the proof existed and was destroyed. “The dog ate my homework.”

    Lenin was a Jew (recently admitted in Time magazine and elsewhere). But there is great effort to frame him, not as the ethno-nationalist he was, but as a German spy – to smear Germany and preempt any Slezkind/Solzhenitsyn pattern-noticing.

    I once got a check from the US government for intelligence work, and I once took a train. So I can blame Washington D.C. if I ever rob a bank, right? This analogy works because there is no copy of the check.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The True and Original David
    Standard history is that Lenin was trying to foment revolution in Germany because Marxists up until then believed that The Revolution, though inevitable, would begin more easily in modern, industrialized countries. Upon discovering the rabble-rousing of this shady figure, the German government deported him back to Russia, after which he reconciled himself to doing what he could where he was.
    , @Jimi Shmendrix
    Sorry, a maternal grandfather does not a Juden make. Even old Adolph made that exception for the Mischlinge. Try again.
  113. @The True and Original David
    So we have to take on faith that the proof existed and was destroyed. "The dog ate my homework."

    Lenin was a Jew (recently admitted in Time magazine and elsewhere). But there is great effort to frame him, not as the ethno-nationalist he was, but as a German spy - to smear Germany and preempt any Slezkind/Solzhenitsyn pattern-noticing.

    I once got a check from the US government for intelligence work, and I once took a train. So I can blame Washington D.C. if I ever rob a bank, right? This analogy works because there is no copy of the check.

    Standard history is that Lenin was trying to foment revolution in Germany because Marxists up until then believed that The Revolution, though inevitable, would begin more easily in modern, industrialized countries. Upon discovering the rabble-rousing of this shady figure, the German government deported him back to Russia, after which he reconciled himself to doing what he could where he was.

    Read More
  114. @guest
    I never understood the Affair, until I started to think of it like all the other leftist cause celebres I've experienced. In that case they were right, but so what? It was just one guy; why was his injustice so meaningful? Couldn't we do the same with, I don't know, George Zimmerman, honorary white?

    If we had their megaphone, yes.

    I hear Robert Zimmerman aka Bob Dylan is busy writing a song to clear his distant Jewish cousin George’s name. Same as he did with Reuben Carter, the Hurricane, who wasn’t guilty as sin, as bigots like to say. Real soon.

    Read More
  115. Lenin’s inspiration for the New Economic Policy, like a lot of things, was Germany’s equivalent of War Socialism in WW1. Among the Bolsheviks, Lenin was always considered more to the right and extremely practical, even if his rhetoric was always all over the map. It was not until Stalin seized control and instituted the 1st 5 year plan that the NEP disappeared along with a lot of other things (and people).

    Read More
    • Replies: @guest
    You curiously leave out the era before the NEP, when Lenin put his policies where his mouth was and actually carried out communist fantasy to disastrous ends.
  116. @The True and Original David
    So we have to take on faith that the proof existed and was destroyed. "The dog ate my homework."

    Lenin was a Jew (recently admitted in Time magazine and elsewhere). But there is great effort to frame him, not as the ethno-nationalist he was, but as a German spy - to smear Germany and preempt any Slezkind/Solzhenitsyn pattern-noticing.

    I once got a check from the US government for intelligence work, and I once took a train. So I can blame Washington D.C. if I ever rob a bank, right? This analogy works because there is no copy of the check.

    Sorry, a maternal grandfather does not a Juden make. Even old Adolph made that exception for the Mischlinge. Try again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The True and Original David
    The issue is what his sister and Uncle Joe thought. Uncle Adolf has nothing to do with it.

    http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2077413,00.html

    Keep trying, though.
  117. @Prof. Woland
    Lenin's inspiration for the New Economic Policy, like a lot of things, was Germany's equivalent of War Socialism in WW1. Among the Bolsheviks, Lenin was always considered more to the right and extremely practical, even if his rhetoric was always all over the map. It was not until Stalin seized control and instituted the 1st 5 year plan that the NEP disappeared along with a lot of other things (and people).

    You curiously leave out the era before the NEP, when Lenin put his policies where his mouth was and actually carried out communist fantasy to disastrous ends.

    Read More
  118. @Jimi Shmendrix
    Sorry, a maternal grandfather does not a Juden make. Even old Adolph made that exception for the Mischlinge. Try again.

    The issue is what his sister and Uncle Joe thought. Uncle Adolf has nothing to do with it.

    http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2077413,00.html

    Keep trying, though.

    Read More
  119. @Dieter Kief

    A Holocaust historian (I know but bear with me) said that if you talked to a Jewish ghost from before WWII and was telling him about the Holocaust, the first time he’d heard about it, and had not yet mentioned who did it, he would instantly assume it had been France.
     
    This aspect of the European history is hardly understood at all. In the holocaust-history up to today, you'll find this obvious difference between Germany and France hardly explained (=made sense of).

    German scocietal reaction to the fast and strong economic rise of jews - roughly from 1870 on - reaching quite some hights in the Weimar period, resulting in lots of envy and hatred, might well have been inadequate.

    I think, that this is no cynical argument.

    There's some intellectuals in Germany, who did notice this omission in the usual explanations of the holocaust. Acclaimed literary critic Marcel Reich-Ranicki, who survived the holocaust, because (Christian) polish regular folks hid him in their home), did mention the rise of envy, caused by the jewish economic progress made in the Weimar period. A few years back, Siegfried Kohlhammer wrote an interesting essay about this subject, but got very few reactions.

    Eminent Weimar journalist and writer Kurt Tucholsky - an early public loather of Hitler and erverything Nazi as well as Bolschewik - accused the German Jews to be blind to the Nazi-threat, because they had lost their critical distance to their hosts by ages of symbiotic relationships - and therefor did not understand the danger, that lied ahead of them and did not act according to this danger - while there was still time to do so.
    Erich Fromm later on - in his great tome Anatomy of Human Destructiveness - emphasised the destructive nature of symbiotic relationships.


    PS - If the name of the Holocaust historian you mentioned comes to your mind - please let me know.

    I've come across the very same thought in a biography of the German lawyer, chameleon-journalist and writer Kurt Hiller - an incredible figure, often times accused of anti-semitism, who embodied left positions, right-wing positions (pro Mussolini...), socialist, capitalist, anarchist positions and therefor made lots of interesting observations and experiences (met literally all kinds of people). He just never managed to focus his wide-angle views. An outsider, if ever there was one. An army of Angels helped him to survive the "Third Reich".
    At the end of his (long) life, he supported Social Democrat Willy Brandt.

    Eminent Weimar journalist and writer Kurt Tucholsky – an early public loather of Hitler and erverything Nazi as well as Bolschewik – accused the German Jews to be blind to the Nazi-threat, because they had lost their critical distance to their hosts by ages of symbiotic relationships – and therefor did not understand the danger, that lied ahead of them and did not act according to this danger – while there was still time to do so.

    What Hitler did was historically unprecedented. Here’s a list of what isn’t:

    1) The massacre of city inhabitants after a long and high-casualty siege.
    2) The confiscation of the assets of a troublesome minority.
    3) The expulsion of a troublesome minority.
    4) The exemplary, but limited massacre of a troublesome minority.
    5) The proscription/slaughter of a minority involved in armed insurrection.
    6) The slaughter of a territory’s population after a surrender ultimatum is ignored and the invader’s envoys killed, used as a ruthless but practical measure, owing to the invader’s limited troop numbers, pour encourager les autres.

    The reason no one saw Hitler’s depredations coming, vis-a-vis his disfavored groups (i.e. the extermination of Jews, Slavs, gypsies, et al), was because his actions were not simply wicked and impractical for an empire builder, they were sui generis, one of a kind.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments are moderated by iSteve, at whim.


 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
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
While other top brass played press agents for the administration’s war, William Odom told the truth about Iraq—though few listened.
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?