The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 The Saker ArchiveBlogview
The Ancient Spiritual Roots of Russophobia
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_296800937
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Introduction

The term “russophobia” (the hatred and/or fear of things Russian) has become rather popular in the recent years, courtesy of the anti-Russian hysteria of the AngloZionist Empire, but this is hardly a new concept. In his seminal book “Russie-Occident – une guerre de mille ans: La russophobie de Charlemagne à la Crise Ukrainienne” (“The West vs Russia – a thousand year long war: russophobia from Charlemange to the Ukrainian Crisis”) which I recently reviewed here, Guy Mettan places the roots of russophobia as early as the times of Charlemagne. How could that be? That would mean that russophobia predates the birth of Russia by a full two centuries? And yet, Mettan is correct, although even he does not paint the full picture.

What I propose to do today is not to discuss modern russophobia which has numerous causes and forms, but to look far back into history for the ancient spiritual roots of this relatively modern phenomenon.

My thesis will probably trigger even more condescending smirks, expression of outrage and accusations of bigotry and racism than usual. That is fine. In fact, I will welcome them as a visceral reaction to what I propose to uncover below. One glaring weakness of my argument will be that I won’t bother presenting numerous sources as evidence for my assertions. Not only am I not writing an academic paper here, I simply don’t have the time and space needed to substantiate all my claims. Still, all the facts and claims I make below are easily verifiable for anybody with an Internet connection. My goal today is not to convince the naysayers, but to offer a few hopefully useful pointers to those seeking to connect the dots and see the full picture. This being, said, let’s now go far back in time.

A 2000 year old dispute

Those who believe that the Romans crucified Christ better stop reading here and go back to the comfort of ignorance. Those who have actually read the New Testament or, for that matter, the basic Judaic texts on this topic, know that Christ was accused and executed for the crime of blasphemy: He claimed to be the Son of God, the Son of Man (a messianic title), the messiah announced by the prophets and that He was God: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58) (this “I AM” is a direct reference to Exodus 3:14). This claim is what split the Jewish people into those who accepted Christ’s claims and believed Him and those who did not. What is interesting here, is the view which the Jews who did accept Christ had of those Jews who did not. As we all know, Saint John the Theologian wrote the famous words “I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan” (Rev 2:9). And Christ Himself said “If ye were Abraham’s children, ye would do the works of Abraham” (John 8:39). What we see here is the basis for a claim which was first made in the Apostolic times and which was later fully endorsed and further developed by the Church Fathers: those Jews who rejected Christ thereby lost their “Jewishness” and the “new Jews” are the Christians, regardless of ethnicity, which now have become the new “chosen people”. In our modern times of hyper-political correctness and generalized “ecumenical dialogs of love”, Christians are mostly ignorant of theses facts and, when they are, they dare not mention them in public. At a time when Popes declare that Jews are their “older brothers”, that they need not accept Christ and that Christians and Jews are awaiting the same 2nd coming of Christ, saying that Christianity denies Jews their very Jewish identity is definitely “mauvais ton”. But before the 20th century, this Christian claim that modern “Jews” were not really Jews anymore was common knowledge, both amongst Christians and amongst Jews.

[Sidebar: as I explained it in some details here, modern “Judaism” is not the religion of “Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” but the religion of Maimonides, Karo and Luria and has its roots in the teachings of the sect of the Pharisees, the Talmud and the Kabbalah. The closest modern heir to Christ-rejecting Jews of the times of Christ would be the Karaite sect. Modern “Judaism” really ought to be called “Phariseic Talmudism”. For a traditional Patristic look at Phariseic Talmudism, please see here and here]

Conversely, Judaic teaching about Christ are not sympathetic either. A quick read of the Toldot Yeshu or, for that matter, the passages about Christ in the Talmud, will convince anyone in need of convincing that the Pharisees’ hatred for Christ was not satiated with His crucifixion. And lest anybody think that this is all racist drivel by blue-eyed Nazis, here is a good article on this topic from Ha’artez corroborating it all.

ORDER IT NOW

Nowadays an uninformed observer might erroneously conclude that there is a big love-fest between Judaics and Christians, but to the extend that this is true, this is solely due to the fact that most modern Christians and Judaics have long ceased to believe, think and act in accordance to their own traditions. The reality is that for traditional Christians, modern Judaics are fallen, lapsed, people who have failed to live up to their election by God and who now are determined to take by force what had been promised to them by God. For traditional Judaics, Christians are idolaters of the worst kind, as they worship a blaspheming magician, born of a promiscuous hairdresser and a Roman legionnaire, who was justly executed for his crimes and who now forever is confined to hell where he boils in excrement. And lest anybody believe that this hostility is only a matter of a long gone past, I would add that while the Judaics are still waiting for as their messiah, the Christian consensus patrum indicates that this Judaic messiah will be the very same person whom Christ and the Apostles called the Antichrist.

Why does all this matter? It matters because at the very core of it all is the claim that Gentiles have replaced Jews as the chosen people of God, that Christians are the “new Jews” and that modern day Jews are simply not Jews at all, not only because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish, but because their faith, traditions and beliefs are not the ones of the ancient Jewish people as described in the Old Testament. In other words, Christianity says that Jews are not Jews.

A 1000 year old dispute

Western history books usually say that Rome was sacked in 410 and fell in 476. The former is true, but the latter is completely false as it conflates the city of Rome and the Roman Empire. Only the city of Rome and the western Roman Empire came to an end in the 5th century, but that very same Roman Empire continued to exist in the East for a full 1000 years (!), until 1453 when the Ottomans finally captured the city of Constantinople. In fact, the imperial capital of the Roman Empire had been moved from Rome to the city of Constantinople, the “New Rome”, by the Emperor Constantine in 320. Thus, the Rome which, at various times, Visigoths, Vandals and Ostrogoths sacked was no longer the capital of the Roman Empire.

These two crucial dates, 476 and 1453, are often used to mark the beginning and the end of the Middle-Ages (along with other dates between the 5th and the 15th century). And since I am setting up the crucial dates for my argument, I will add another one here: 1054, the “official” date for the so-called “Great Schism” between, on one hand, Rome (the city) and, on the other, the other four Patriarchates founded by the Apostles: the Patriarchates of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople.

At this point, things get complicated and a halfway decent explanation of what really took place would require no less than 100 pages, including a discussion of dogmatic theology, culture, sociology and, of course, politics. The best I can provide at this point are a few bullet-point style sentences summarizing what happened:

The Franks, especially Charlemagne, decided that they would re-create the Roman Empire. To be truly Romans, the Franks also wanted to make their own, original, contribution to Christian theology. They did so by making an addition to the so-called “Symbol of Faith”, or “Credo” in Latin, a text which summarizes the key Christian beliefs. Furthermore, since they were now occupying Rome, the former imperial capital of the Empire, the Franks felt that they were in control of the spiritual capital of the Christian world and that, therefore, the rest of the Christian world ought to accept the primacy of the bishop of Rome – called the “Pope” – and his right to impose a new dogma on the entire Christian world. Following roughly 200 years of tensions between the (Frankish-occupied) Rome and the (still free) eastern Roman Empire the final separation took place in 1054 when the Pope excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople who then returned him the favor. What is important for our purposes is this: not only did the Frankish invasion of Rome mark the end of the Roman civilization in the West, it also cut-off the western world from the Roman Empire which continued to exist for another ten centuries. The process of severance between the two parts of the Empire began in the 5th century following the fall of the city of Rome and continued throughout the following centuries. During the 10th century, Rome suffered during the so-called dark ages (saeculum obscurum) and the so-called the “Rule of the Harlots” (pornokratia). At a time when the Roman Empire in the east was almost at the apex of its glory, the Franks were indulging in an orgy of destruction and corruption which completely changed the face of the western part of the European continent and completely severed the vital cultural and spiritual ties which had kept the Roman Empire together in the past centuries.

shutterstock_76564732 During the following 1000 years while the Roman Empire continued its existence in the East, the European Middle-Ages slowly and painfully gave birth to a new civilization, the West European civilization, which really took its first mature shape during the Renaissance with it’s re-discovery of the ancient Greek and Roman world. Whatever form this so-called “re-discovery” took, it is a fact that the 1000 years of the Middle-Ages separate modern western civilization from the Roman civilization and that modern Europe was born not of the Romans, but of the Franks. The (Orthodox) East, however, has never known any “Middle-Ages” and has maintained a cultural and religious continuity to the ancient Christian world and the Roman Empire.

In the West, the so-called “Roman Catholic Church” (another misnomer – there is nothing Roman or “catholic” – meaning “universal” – about the Papacy as it is Frankish and local) likes to present itself as the original Church whose roots and traditions go back to the Apostolic times. This is simply false. The reality is that the religion which calls itself “Roman Catholic” is a relatively new religion, younger than Islam by several centuries, which was born in the 11th century of a rejection of the key tenets of the 1000 year long Christian faith. Furthermore, from the moment of its birth, this religion has embarked on an endless cycle of innovations including the 19th century (!) dogmas of the Papal infallibility and the Immaculate Conception. Far from being conservative or traditionalists, the Latins have always been rabid innovators and modernists.

Nowadays there are many Christian denominations out there, but only the Orthodox Churches can testify to the fact that the Frankish local Church is neither Roman, nor Catholic, that it’s roots are not in the Apostolic times, but in the (dark) Middle-Ages and that far from being a heir to the 2000 year old faith “which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers” to use the words of Saint Athanasios, the Latin faith is nothing but a collection of deviations from the original Christian faith.

The feared and hated witness

Now we see a pattern here. Both for the Judaics and for the Latins, the Orthodox Christians are the only witnesses out there who can (and do!) openly challenge not only their legitimacy, but their very identity. From an Orthodox perspective (and here I am referring to the traditional, Patristic, point of view) modern Jews are not Jews and the Catholics are not catholic. In both cases, we are dealing with very successful frauds, but frauds nonetheless. Orthodox Christians believe that they, and they alone, are both the real Jews and the real Catholics. Modern Jews are nothing but Pharisees while Latins are simply heretics. Jews were called to be the Chosen People while Rome used to be recognized as the “first amongst equals” by the other Patriarchates. Alas, in both cases a tragic fall from grace occurred in a manner reminiscent of Lucifer’s fall from Heaven (“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” Isa 14:12). And to those who would say that such a claim is preposterous, Orthodox Christians would simply point at the immense corpus of Patristic writings which has always supported that claim. The only option for somebody rejecting this claim is to reject Christianity itself.

My argument here is not a historical or theological one. Regardless of whether one accepts or not the Orthodox view of modern “Judaism” and “Roman Catholicism” – it is certain that both Judaics and Latin were quite aware of this view (there were plenty of polemical texts written over the centuries by all sides to this dispute) and that this challenge to their very legitimacy and identity was perceived as a monumental affront and, when supported by an immense and powerful empire like the Russian one, a mortal enemy which had to be either conquered or eliminated.

[Sidebar: Islam. It is interesting to note here that Orthodox Christianity, which Muslims called “Rum” as in Rome, in no way challenges the legitimacy or identity of Islam. While Islam and Christianity have plenty of irreconcilable theological differences, Muslims do not claim to be Jews or Christians. As for Orthodox Christians, they obviously do not claim to be the true or original, Muslims. Thus the co-existence of these two religions is not logically mutually exclusive even if their theologies are fundamentally incompatible].

The modern dispute

It would be ridiculous to claim that the cause(s) of modern fear and/or hate of things Russian can all be explained by ancient theological arguments. In reality, neither Russia nor the West are all that religious nowadays. And while there is definitely a religious rebirth taking place in Russia, it remains also true that only a minority of Russians are truly religious or well-versed in Orthodox theology. Furthermore, there are plenty of reasons why some hate/fear Russia which have absolutely nothing to do with religion, including the fact that Russia is, and has always been, an unconquered military superpower, that the Soviet regime has oppressed millions of people in Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union and that any more or less sovereign and independent regime in Russia stands as the main obstacle for the West to take control of Russia’s immense resources and many other reasons. As for (truly religious) Judaics and Latins, they are a small minority compared to the vast majority of largely agnostic people around them. In reality, modern russophobia has numerous independent “vectors” all contributing to a grand “sum vector” expressed in the West’s current policies towards Russia. And yet.

Regardless of the actual level of religiosity in Russia, Russia remains the objective historical and cultural heir to the Roman Empire: the First Rome fell in 476, the Second Rome fell in 1453 while the Third Rome fell in 1917.

[Sidebar: A Fourth Rome cannot happen simply because, unlike what happened with the First and Second Rome, the Third one could not “pass on” its role to a hypothetical Fourth one. Seventy years of Communist rule will forever remain and unsurmountable barrier between Russia the Third Rome and modern Russia and not true succession is now possible]

To ignore the historical importance of a Christian Roman civilization which lasted from the 4th to the 20th century would be a major oversight. Those 16 centuries have had a huge impact on the Russian culture, even upon those Russians who are only superficially religious or outright agnostic, and they still can be felt today. The same is true for what is called the “West” nowadays: what is the AngloZionist Empire if not the cultural continuation of the British Empire with the Zionist (and, thus, Judaic) element recently added to it? And don’t let the fact that Protestants and Anglicans are not “Roman Catholics” distract you from the reality that Protestantism itself is just the offspring from the spiritual intercourse between its Latin and Judaic parents, just as Freemasonry – the dominant ideology and worldview today – is the offspring resulting from the spiritual intercourse between of Protestantism and Phariseic Judaism. Whether we are aware of it or not, we live in “civilizational realms” which have ancient roots and our worldview and outlook on life are often shaped by a past which we often know very little about.

Conclusion

ORDER IT NOW

There is a clash of civilizations taking place. It does not primarily oppose a putative “Christian West” to Islam. For one thing, the modern “West” has long ceased to be Christian and should now be categorized as post-Christian. Furthermore, the Muslim world is not united and does not have the resources to meaningfully oppose the AngloZionist Empire. Until China, Latin America or some other civilization truly rises up to be able to challenge the current world order, Russia is the only country which will dare to openly challenge the very legitimacy of the western political system and the ideology it has been built upon. Modern Russia is both capable and willing of challenging the dominant western ideology (from Capitalism to the belief that homosexuality is a normal and healthy variation of human sexuality) precisely because of her position as the heir to, and continuator of, the Christian Roman Empire. True, for the past 300 years or so, Russia has been ruled by a generally westernized ruling elite, but that elite itself has always remained a foreign superstructure imposed upon the Russian nation which never truly identified with it. With Putin Russia has finally found a leader who does not represent the interests of the elites, but rather the interests of the vast majority of the population – hence Putin’s stratospheric popularity ratings. And that too frightens the West, especially the western elites who now feel that their rule is threatened by a nuclear superpower which is determined not to let them take over our entire planet. It is impossible to predict what will happen next. But it does appear likely to me that this ancient conflict between two fundamentally opposed spiritualities and civilizations will come to some kind of a resolution, for better or for worse, in the near future.

 
• Category: History, Ideology • Tags: Christianity, Orthodoxy, Russia 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. Jews are under a Deicidal curse.Islam is a Christian heresy. The Roman Catholic Church is a homosexual, Freemasonic, multi-culti Grand Lodge.

    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
    /tsaker/the-ancient-spiritual-roots-of-russophobia/#comment-1637447
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. I keep thinking of crazy George C. Scott in “Dr. Strangelove:

    There are lots of American Generals like this, recently retired General Breedlove for example. Unfortunately, unlike the sane President in that movie, Ms Clinton lacks the backbone to stop these crazies.

    As our Western civilization deals with Third World chaos in the Middle East and Africa, plus the growth of Chinese power, we need Russia as an ally. All this senseless anti-Russian BS is pushed by power crazed neocons to exploit the historically impaired, and our nuclear weapons industry that wants $2 trillion to rebuild the entire Cold War nuclear arsenal. NATO should be spending billions of dollars to deploy forces to the Med, not to Russia’s borders.

    Our only hope is that Trump wins, or the Germans rebel against American puppeteers and restore sanity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    "...or the Germans rebel against American puppeteers and restore sanity.""
    See the pre-emptive move that has produced the ongoing waves of Middle East/African newcomers to Germany. The "deciders" are not able to make rational decisions because of the atrophied sense of responsibility. In effect, we are ruled by idiots.
  3. Jason Liu says:

    Our current clash of civilizations puts the western world, with its democracy, humanism, and egalitarianism against the rest of the world. This is a losing battle for the west, but ultimately a win for humanity.

    You are right that Russia is the most prominent opponent, but it’s not that bleak. The west is in decline while the rest has plenty of room to grow. Even western growth is predicated on immigrants from the non-west, who are not as likely to believe in western values as native whites. In time the western political ideologies that have reigned over the last two centuries will be reduced to nice-sounding platitudes, talked about but rarely practiced in earnest.

    In the long run, China is better positioned to challenge liberal democracy. It has a larger economic and population (opinion) base, and better diplomatic ties in Africa and South America. For now, Chinese leaders are pretty much absent from the global culture war (which I think is a big mistake). But if a future, charismatic Chinese leader wishes to use rhetoric/incentive to draw non-western nations away from the western political model, we could have a coalition on our hands.

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    China is collapsing. It has aborted itself. Asians can only copy, not create. Japan was set to takeover the world in the 1980s. How did that work out?
  4. 5371 says:

    To describe western Christianity as equally alien to eastern Christianity with talmudic Judaism is really crazy and irresponsible. As far as the specific theological innovation of the west, the dual procession of the Holy Ghost, is concerned, there is no evidence that it came from a deliberate Frankish quest for originality. It rather seems to have been introduced in Spain through ignorance. What divides the eastern and western churches is not theology but ecclesiastical discipline, folkways and political history. Much greater doctrinal differences than this were forgotten about when, for example, the Maronites reconciled to Rome without abandoning their monothelite past, or Nestorian Christians in Kerala accepted Jacobite monophysitism without missing a beat. I think the aim should be to soothe the strained relations between those attached to tradition on each side, not to further envenom them by importing the odium theologicum.

    Read More
  5. I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have “only” been allowed to stone a person to death, but then most of what I know about such matters I got from watching The Life of Brian, many times over.

    To be sure the Saker is a very naughty boy and he certainly is not the Messiah, perhaps it’s Trump after all. I do expect this article will give Phillip Giraldi’s typical high count of comments a run for the shekels.

    One thing I do know for sure is that the MSM seem to have forgotten the story of the boy who cried wolf and that all of this blaming of Putin and Russia for everything from DNC subterfuge to ingrowing toenails is/has become beyond a joke.

    Salaam

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment
     
    Josephus relates several episodes of the practice by Jews. One of the more hair raising was that of Alexander Janneus who had hundreds of his fellows crucified out of revenge for the way they had treated him.

    2. Now as Alexander [Janneus, the Maccabean king]... as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of [his enemies, the Pharasees] to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes. This was indeed by way of revenge for the injuries they had done him; which punishment yet was of an inhuman nature,

    - Josephus, Antiquities 13: Chapter 14
     
    Crucifixion was apparently practiced by other "civilizations" long before Rome existed.
  6. El Dato says:

    Very interesting. This is like reading Rothbard on Economics. How come the author knows so much about the ebb and flow of the religious belief packages (USB sticks for the mind, really) If the Romans had left the crazy Middle East alone and concentrated on their North and West, all of this could have been avoided.

    Wasn’t there at some point a problem with the center of the Orthodox Church moving from Constantinople to Moscow leading to a period of fingerpointing and conflicting claims of being the real deal?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel H
    >>If the Romans had left the crazy Middle East alone and concentrated on their North and West, all of this could have been avoided.

    Syria, Palestine and Egypt were the wealthiest and most advanced parts of the Roman realm. With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia). After one of the wars with Constantinople, the Persians managed to get a hold of Egypt for about 10-20 years. The Constantinople Romans took it back but soon lost the better part of their realm, permanently, to the Arabs.

  7. Miro23 says:

    This is an interesting article, but I would disagree with some of the principal points:

    “What is important for our purposes is this: not only did the Frankish invasion of Rome mark the end of the Roman civilization in the West, it also cut-off the western world from the Roman Empire which continued to exist for another ten centuries (Eastern Orthodox part based on Constantinople)”.

    The late Roman Empire was already Christian (conversion of Emperor Constantine) and when it fell, a critically important point was the adoption by the “barbarian” invaders of this Roman version of Christianity. The monasteries provided the only literate class (spoken and written Latin) with Charlemagne fully supporting them, and they fully supporting him, with the full integration of Church and State and the introduction for the first time of a Papal coronation of Holy Roman Emperors.

    Charlemagne built the concept of Christendom, which is meaningless in the modern context, but was highly influential in the European Middle Ages. The Franks halted the Islamic invasion of Europe (battle of Poitiers 732) and launched the re-conquest of Muslim Spain as a Europe wide Christian project (one of the few cases where a country conquered by Islam eventually returned to Christianity).

    And another important point is that when the Franks were subsequently defeated by Northern invaders, these “barbarians” also converted and became strong supporters of Christianity (e.g. Canute) so it’s not too much to say that the first European proto-states grew out of a shared identity in European Christendom.

    “the European Middle-Ages slowly and painfully gave birth to a new civilization, the West European civilization, which really took its first mature shape during the Renaissance with its re-discovery of the ancient Greek and Roman world.”

    The shape was there long before the Renaissance

    “…modern fear and/or hate of things Russian”

    Not really. It’s more a fear of recent Bolshevik and Communist expansionism which is quickly fading. The basic Russian identity has far more to do with Europe, with its historic threats coming from Asia. WW1 and WW2 involved many European countries apart from Russia and it was really only a story of Europe vs. Russia in Hitler’s hyper-ethnocentric mind, and then only to 1945. Current US Zionist targeting of Russia has more to do with their power games in the US and dissatisfaction with loss of influence in Russia – nothing to do with Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous coward

    It’s more a fear of recent Bolshevik and Communist expansionism which is quickly fading.
     
    No. Read Dostoevsky's diaries and editorials, written long before 'bolsheviks' and 'communists' even existed. They could have been published today and you wouldn't even notice the difference. Hardly anything has changed in centuries.
  8. Che Guava says:

    Hello, the Saker,

    I haven’t finished reading this, but on the early part on religion, I agree with much of what you say. Jotting down a few random thoughts.

    Hatred of many Jews for Christianity, well, it is obvious from the relevant parts of the Talmud, and late Roman pagan writers such as Porphyrius repeated the Jewish version. The US Jewish B-movie The Hebrew Hammer, just as one example, well expressed Jewish hatred for Christians.

    The only time when overseas having been invited to a Jewish meal, I didn’t understand (too young) why it was so strange. The food was nice, but in retrospect, I realized that the parents were annoyed that their daughter had invited a couple of other goys along with her fiance.

    I am sure that not all are like that, but most are, in my experience, including later and not overseas.

    modern Jews are not Jews and the Catholics are not catholic.

    I agree on both, my closest friend is a ‘Roman Catholic’, when we met on Friday, she said (as she often does when a little drunk) ‘Don’t you love Mary?’

    Replied ‘Certainly do, but I do not believe in the recent 1850s doctrine of the Immaculate Conception’.

    modern Jews are not Jews

    Sure, that is true to varying extents, on religious and ethnic grounds.

    However, you could better state your other poimt:

    the very core of it all is the claim that Gentiles have replaced Jews as the chosen people of God, that Christians are the “new Jews”

    as a new covenant, rather than new Jews.

    Will finish reading later, groceries to buy.

    Read More
  9. Sherman says:

    Hey Andrey

    I think it’s time for Jewish and Catholic pet owners in Florida to know what you are writing about their faith.

    Sherm

    Read More
    • Replies: @FW
    Always true to type- threatening a person's life, livelihood or reputation when no cogent counter-argument can be found.
  10. Having read so far to the sub-heading “A 2000 Year Old Dispute” and as one who has expressed critical scepticism about The Saker’s opinionating I want to also express my sympathy for his attempts to stir interest in his theses without citing convincing documented evidence. And as a memo to self I note that the plausibility of his case that anti-Russian sentiment can be sourced to ancient spiritual disputes should be tested by looking for comparable causal sequences which might lend support to the idea that it is an unsurprising example of human nature in action rather than some freakish outlier or just a picture confected by coincidences.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Wiz, you might try reading a little more. Perhaps start with the links in the article to the Church fathers, and the Haaretz article (a representative whine).

    It is easy to see what the Saker is saying if you have a little background in church and secular history.

    I do not have the time to fill in all of the gaps.

    For the Saker, the installation of Clovis not many years after the deposition of Romulus Augustulus could be viewed as a kind of western successor state to Rome. As you say, he was king of the Franks, but the eastern Romans had increasingly little use of Latin and increasingly fewer ethnic ties with the old empire from the times following Justinian. Not that I am saying that the eastern remnant wasn't the true continuation, clearly it was the Roman Empire.

    For the Wiz, after the fall of Constantinople, the Orthodox church in Greece was persecuted, the eastern Roman world lost most of its remaining heartlands, a few places in the peninsula and islands remained free for a short time (although eastern Romans retained a presence even in much of what is now Turkey until the Turks went on the rampage again following the fall of their empire).

    In the meantime, the Russian clergy, Christian intellectuals, and elements of the nobility and royalty came to see Russia, the only major inheritor of Orthodox Christianity not to have been enslaved, as having the role of the third Rome, although preferably based in Constantinople, and presumably on the Oecumenical Patriarch there.


    This may have been quite possible, but the Germans (probably not anticipating the scale of the results), sent Lenin and several of his colleagues to Russia in a secret train, the coup d'etat and civil war followed ...
    , @in the middle
    My opinion is that the name "Russia" sounds sort of dislike-able. Moskovia, or Slavia only, should replace "Russia". What is in a name? well, nice sounding helps.
  11. Bravo!

    can you answer — Did Virgil & later Dante reflect & continue authentic Roman (Orthodox) Christianity?

    & where does Augustine fit in? Zionist Jews constantly refer to Aug w/ bitterness.–

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Which Virgil are you referring to? It couldn't be my old school friend Publius Virgilius Maro who so famously wrote "timeo danaos et dona ferentes" arising out of enthusiastic interest in events on a piece of Asia Minor near what might, proleptically, be called Constantinople. His problem as a potential reflector is death in 21 BC.
  12. Darin says:

    Very good article as usual, but if you want to seek the true Church, the Old Believers would strongly disagree with you.

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

    They would say that Russian Tsarist church serves Satan since the Nikonian schism in 1650′s

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

    and they are the true believers, last Christians left on earth.

    Very similar to the modern sedevacantists

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

    who felt , that on Second Vatican Council, whole Catholic Church betrayed their ancient faith and sold itself to Satan lock, stock and barrel. As usual, the splitters continue splitting themselves and now there are numerous “true catholic” groups and many self made popes.

    Read More
  13. as a conclussion, what you say is that jews aren´t jews, chistian catholics aren´t christians, and russian slavic christians are both christians and jews.
    In the West (and also in Rossiania) there is a total subversion of values. You just join to the subverters. Some people attack the institution of the family and love, some others attack traditions and your attack is from a theological point of view, by the way, very appropiatred for times of “byzantine discussions” like now, where the muslims are close to the final conquering of the whatever upside-down Rome we have in Europe right now.
    A much finer mockery of christianity was made by a portuguese rabbi, who in the Middle Ages affirmed that heaven and hell were upside-down, in Heaven was Satan, who was the real victor of the battle, and in hell was God, who was the looser. So, according to this rabbi, the Christians were unaware followers of Satan. Since this rabbi had not been raised in a propaganda soviet school, he, at least, didn´t accused anyone of russophobia.

    Read More
  14. @NoseytheDuke
    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have "only" been allowed to stone a person to death, but then most of what I know about such matters I got from watching The Life of Brian, many times over.

    To be sure the Saker is a very naughty boy and he certainly is not the Messiah, perhaps it's Trump after all. I do expect this article will give Phillip Giraldi's typical high count of comments a run for the shekels.

    One thing I do know for sure is that the MSM seem to have forgotten the story of the boy who cried wolf and that all of this blaming of Putin and Russia for everything from DNC subterfuge to ingrowing toenails is/has become beyond a joke.

    Salaam

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment

    Josephus relates several episodes of the practice by Jews. One of the more hair raising was that of Alexander Janneus who had hundreds of his fellows crucified out of revenge for the way they had treated him.

    2. Now as Alexander [Janneus, the Maccabean king]… as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of [his enemies, the Pharasees] to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes. This was indeed by way of revenge for the injuries they had done him; which punishment yet was of an inhuman nature,

    - Josephus, Antiquities 13: Chapter 14

    Crucifixion was apparently practiced by other “civilizations” long before Rome existed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Che Guava
    Hello Jaques.

    I am sure that you are correct about the custom of crucifixion (and similar cruelties) pre-dating the Roman empire ... but citing the Maccabeans doesn't make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic, by which time Rome was (depending on the situations of China and perhaps Persia at times) already the biggest polity in the world.

    Still, thanks for the informative quote. Should read Josephus some time, have only ever read excerpts.

    Hell, the Romans may well have adopted it from the Maccabeans, they did beat the latter in a war.

    This makes me curious about the Bible canons, I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can't see why) and Maccabees (can see why, but interesting to read), one or two others.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same, but must check. I know that some eastetn churches still use (or recently used), for example, the Didache.

    ... and all via Greek scholars.

    I love it when Jewish people refer to their scripture as 'the Bible', sorry, the term is from Greek to start with, this is just a ploy to set up the fake concept of 'Judaeo-Christianity', a confection of the late 19th century. 'The Bible' exclusively refers to the Christian one.

    The only books the Jewish scriptures have in common with the OT in the Christian Bible are the first five or so, nice of the Greeks and Hellenistic Jews to have recorded the other texts at the time.

    In any case, I am at heart a Marcionite, I have read the Church Fathers, but I believe Marcion's original (as in the first) canon, one gospel, 12 or 13 letters of St. Paul (who may have been Marcion, or vice versa) to be the most real.

    Those having ears, hear.

    It does tie in to the words of the Saker.

    , @Alden
    The Greeks also practiced crufixion and tied the bodies on the crosses so they would not fall off till the birds ate the flesh and cartilage.
    It was especially horrible in Greek religion because if there was no proper burial service the deceased would be unhappy ghosts for eternity.
  15. @SolontoCroesus
    Bravo!

    can you answer -- Did Virgil & later Dante reflect & continue authentic Roman (Orthodox) Christianity?

    & where does Augustine fit in? Zionist Jews constantly refer to Aug w/ bitterness.--

    Which Virgil are you referring to? It couldn’t be my old school friend Publius Virgilius Maro who so famously wrote “timeo danaos et dona ferentes” arising out of enthusiastic interest in events on a piece of Asia Minor near what might, proleptically, be called Constantinople. His problem as a potential reflector is death in 21 BC.

    Read More
  16. Rehmat says:

    Guy Mettan is right to some extent. The Russians were feared as horde of barbarian living in the city of Moscow in ancient times. There was no Russia at that time. The entity was created by the King Ivan the terrible. The picture of the Red Square is a testimony to Russian barbarism. Its minarets were designed to resemble the turbans of the rulers of Mongol and Turk Muslim Khanates such as Crimean, Kazan, Astrakhan and others.

    The so-called ‘Clash of Civilization’ between the Jewish-controlled Soviet Union (Putin admitted it) and the Muslims was decided in Afghanistan in the 1980s when the Red Army was defeated by a bunch of Afghan Mujahideen. The credit, of course, was given to American aid by the Jewish-controlled media. Funny though, 100-times more military aid to the Jewish army could not help it defeat a bunch of Hizbullah fighters in 2006.

    Today, most of the Muslim world don’t consider Russia as its major problem except in Chechnya. The Zionist Jews and Hindu fascists are the new Russian-enemies for the Muslim world.

    Putin has built friendly relations with Iran, and Syria – and now extending them to Pakistan and Turkey. India has long maintained its historical relations with Persia.
    No Muslim has equated Putin with Hitler, but many Jews and Christians have done it.

    On May 21, 2014, British Jewish Daily Mail reported a Canadian Jewish woman volunteer at the WW II Museum in Halifax, Marienne Ferguson saying that Prince Charles likened Russian president Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler in a private conversation.

    “And now Putin is doing just about same as Hitler,” she said.

    https://rehmat1.com/2014/05/22/canadian-jew-prince-charles-likened-putin-to-hitler/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    "Jewish Daily Mail"? Please elaborate and explain. The Harmsworths are about as clearly non-Jewish as it gets. Are you mad or just hopelessly ignorant of things that are common knowledge to people who have some reason to be read on line?
  17. Overall, an excellent article full of great points well stated.

    It would be ridiculous to claim that the cause(s) of modern fear and/or hate of things Russian can all be explained by ancient theological arguments. In reality, neither Russia nor the West are all that religious nowadays.

    True. And most of the remnants are twisted beyond redemption, I think.

    …any more or less sovereign and independent regime in Russia stands as the main obstacle for the West to take control of Russia’s immense resources and many other reasons.

    Today’s Islamophobia also has similar roots.

    Read More
    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    What are the roots of the antisemitism myth dude? after all over one million Jews left Soviet Russia for Palestine for that very reason.

    Over 125 years ago, Vienna-born Theodor Herrzl said that anti-Semites would provide fuel to Zionist cause. Since then the Organized Jewry have been faking Jew-hating events around the world. After the establishment of the Zionist entity, the B’nai B’rith and ADL took the task of keeping antisemism project alive by faking annual reports claiming that antisemitism is on the rise in whichever country Muslim communities live.

    This claim has become so ridiculous that according to ‘Zionism On The Web’ site even calling Jew criminal being ‘Jewish’, is antisemitism.....

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/09/01/antisemitism-greatest-myth-of-the-century/
    , @Gene Su
    I didn't care for some of the Saker's anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic remarks.

    Notwithstanding, this is a very good article. A lot of Westerners, and particularly Americans, think that the West's hostile rivalry towards Russia was caused by the latter's adherence to Soviet Communist Socialism. Maybe 1 in 10 Americans (and maybe far less) know that the Russian empire considered itself to be the successor imperial state to the Byzantine (East Roman) empire. Too few people know that in 1453 the Ottoman Turks finally captured Istanbul (called Constantinople then), enslaved the Christian populace, and turned the Hagia Sophia into a mosque. My eighth grade history teacher said that 18th's Century Russia's interest in capturing Istanbul was driven purely by a desired for warm water ports. Shows what he knew.
  18. Che Guava says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Having read so far to the sub-heading "A 2000 Year Old Dispute" and as one who has expressed critical scepticism about The Saker's opinionating I want to also express my sympathy for his attempts to stir interest in his theses without citing convincing documented evidence. And as a memo to self I note that the plausibility of his case that anti-Russian sentiment can be sourced to ancient spiritual disputes should be tested by looking for comparable causal sequences which might lend support to the idea that it is an unsurprising example of human nature in action rather than some freakish outlier or just a picture confected by coincidences.

    Wiz, you might try reading a little more. Perhaps start with the links in the article to the Church fathers, and the Haaretz article (a representative whine).

    It is easy to see what the Saker is saying if you have a little background in church and secular history.

    I do not have the time to fill in all of the gaps.

    For the Saker, the installation of Clovis not many years after the deposition of Romulus Augustulus could be viewed as a kind of western successor state to Rome. As you say, he was king of the Franks, but the eastern Romans had increasingly little use of Latin and increasingly fewer ethnic ties with the old empire from the times following Justinian. Not that I am saying that the eastern remnant wasn’t the true continuation, clearly it was the Roman Empire.

    For the Wiz, after the fall of Constantinople, the Orthodox church in Greece was persecuted, the eastern Roman world lost most of its remaining heartlands, a few places in the peninsula and islands remained free for a short time (although eastern Romans retained a presence even in much of what is now Turkey until the Turks went on the rampage again following the fall of their empire).

    In the meantime, the Russian clergy, Christian intellectuals, and elements of the nobility and royalty came to see Russia, the only major inheritor of Orthodox Christianity not to have been enslaved, as having the role of the third Rome, although preferably based in Constantinople, and presumably on the Oecumenical Patriarch there.

    This may have been quite possible, but the Germans (probably not anticipating the scale of the results), sent Lenin and several of his colleagues to Russia in a secret train, the coup d’etat and civil war followed …

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    All very interesting to be reminded of but it doesn't add up to The Saker's implied continuity as I was obviously writing in #21 while you were also writing.
  19. Now that I’ve finished reading your stimulating article I can proffer my view that you don’t make your case because “roots” implies causal continuity and I just don’t see it. There’s now no relevant spiritual connection positive or negative (cp. evangelical Christian Zionists and their support for Israel). True modern Western secularists might explain the primitive nature of Russian patriotism and support for authoritarians as having some Orthoodox as well as peasant roots but that’s but a faint echo of your thesis.

    In reality Russia didn’t mean anything to Western Europeans until Peter the Great started making it matter. Of course I am no scholarly authority so contradict me if you can.

    And where, BTW, was Western Russophobia when Britain was subsidising Russia to fight Napoleon?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    And where was western Russia phobia during the first half of the 20th century when America subdued Russia and France and Britian were begging Russia to join the fight against Germany?
  20. HBM says:

    The “Religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob” did not exist, because they did not exist. Jews did not exist. Judaism did not exist. Like much of the “Old Testament,” the Patriarchs and what they supposedly did is a retrohistorical fiction, an ethnic propaganda invention, almost certainly authored by Hellenized Jews in the Greek period.

    “Jews” were Canaanite pagans until the Persians arrived in the 5th century. Persians brought the Zoroastrianism that imparted Judaism with many of its most salient features, things we think of as being peculiarly Jewish: a focus on personal “holiness”; food and other taboos; angelology; putative monotheism; messianism and apocalyptic eshcatology. The Greeks later brought the intellectual culture that Jews would usurp for their own ends yet which informed it enough to begin to give Judaism its final shape: a disembodied, neck-up, purely religious yet intellectual affair for persecuted, harmless bookworms.

    Jesus– a composite figure, a Judean Jewish folk hero, or whatever he was, assuming he existed– was a Jewish Messiah, one of many aspirants to that title, who violently opposed the Romans and the occupation and was executed by the Roman state. That “Jews killed Jesus” is another retrohistorical fiction in the tradition of propagandistic Jewish revision, as expressed through the shabbos goyim given enough time for the mixed affair of the inevitable backlash against Jewish origins.

    Hellenized Jews, like the Jews who run Western media today, spun the tales of what their cousins were up to in the Holy Land (like Jewish terrorists stabbing Romans soldiers to death in the streets, fantasizing about an apocalypse to slaughter all the goyish invaders driven by a longing for a holy prophet to lead the charge of YHWH’s heavenly armies to liquidate what they called the Kittim, the men from across the sea)– these Hellenized Jewish “intellectuals” told us this Jesus was not a fanatic but rather a Socrates-like pacifist faith-healer and unjustly persecuted savior of the goyim, to make Jews appear less threatening to the Westerners they despised, in the exact same way the Jewish media lies endlessly about the nature of what their cousins do in Israel today to our detriment; or whatever else it is that they are up to that forwards a Jewish agenda while ruining the rest of us, such as telling us that “Islam is a Religion of Peace” or infecting the underclass with the notion that lumpenprole black criminals who try to murder White cops are utterly blameless civil rights martyrs.

    And like today, many of the goyim swallow this mendacious, kosher version of events, and then compulsively tell their own lies. After the turmoil of the first century, marked by endless Jewish rebellion and the subversive, exploitative, firestarting behavior of Jews in Rome itself, the new religion could not survive unless it took on features of the growing anti-Jewish opinions of remaining good Romans, which end-up piecemeal in the texts of the New Testament, and particularly in the ones authored late.

    Our Russophobia today is driven exclusively by our Jewish media, by the same tired, poisonous suite of Jewish ethnomytholocial fantasies and interests, which are projected out into the world from Jewish psyches and the psyches of the goyim they’ve captured.

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous “persecution” of Jews as well as to make sure that Russia becomes a puppet state of the “AngloZionists” in order to realize their Messianic vision of a globalist hellscape that will have healed they goyishe masses of “hate”– a thing which of course means the centralization of power into the hands of post-nationalist Jewish bankers, lawyers, intelligentsia, causuists, technocrats and oligarchs lording it over the coffee-colored neutered masses.

    Who knows how extensive is this vision for the future they have scripted out in their collective psyche, having plugged-in new realities into the old tales and inscriptions? Whatever the case, however far-into the future they see this old-new bit of theater playing out, they sure aren’t going to admit or tell us about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kurt van Ghoye
    I'd like to buy you a drink.
    , @mcohen.
    i might even buy you a second round.i always put humour before intellectual blather about relegion.
    1.
    survival comes first.all relegion does is provide the will and intent to survive.

    2.
    there is absolutely no connection between relegion and G-d.if there was we all would belong to one universal relegion.one truth.unquestioned

    3
    the laws of nature are the absolute truth.

    4.
    G-d exists i have no doubt at all.
    , @Anonymous
    I'll buy you a round too.

    Heck, I'll buy you twenty.

    What caliber do you shoot?
  21. Svigor says:

    Interesting piece. I would point out that all serious Christians know that God took the Covenant from the Hebrews and gave it to Christians. This is not yet relegated to fringe Christianity. I was raised Episcopalian, and it is what I was taught. I’d bet my bottom dollar the belief is even more widespread among Catholics. I can’t speak for charismatic faiths like Baptists – something tells me ignorance of this is more common among them, Evangelicals, etc. Especially the latter, who tend to have relatively shallow, rootless belief systems.

    Oh, and note that it’s not really something that is presented in a hostile way, at least, not in my experience. More like a quiet, matter-of-fact kind of way.

    not because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish

    FIFY. Khazarian kook fringe theories aren’t really on the map for Christians, in my experience. I never even heard of this stuff until I became an ethnopatriot.

    but because their faith, traditions and beliefs are not the ones of the ancient Jewish people as described in the Old Testament.

    Mmm, sorta. More like, “the true Hebrew faith has moved on…to Christianity.”

    This is a big source of anti-Christian animus among Jews, especially historically; Christians stole their mojo. They took the charismatic parts of Hebrew religion and gave them to the Gentiles, sans Jewish racialism. That’s a pretty big deal.

    Western history books usually say that Rome was sacked in 410 and fell in 476. The former is true, but the latter is completely false as it conflates the city of Rome and the Roman Empire. Only the city of Rome and the western Roman Empire came to an end in the 5th century, but that very same Roman Empire continued to exist in the East for a full 1000 years (!), until 1453 when the Ottomans finally captured the city of Constantinople. In fact, the imperial capital of the Roman Empire had been moved from Rome to the city of Constantinople, the “New Rome”, by the Emperor Constantine in 320. Thus, the Rome which, at various times, Visigoths, Vandals and Ostrogoths sacked was no longer the capital of the Roman Empire.

    I’ve said this many times myself, including here. And that’s true. On the other hand, in many ways, the Roman Empire did die with the Western Empire. Much of its mojo was lost, never to return. And I’m not talking territory or military power. Then there’s the semantic problem of calling an Empire Roman when it didn’t control Rome.

    That said, your conflation of Christianity and Church is absurd. Scripture stands above all of it. Protestantism is the breaking of the power of the Church. A good thing, because Christianity is not an institution, it is a religion.

    Read More
    • Replies: @animalogic
    I think there's some weight to your view that the "Roman Empire" did not carry on through Constantinople to the Byzantine Empire to its defeat by the Ottomans.
    One plain difference was language and culture: Byzantium was Greek, and for most of its existence most public (& private) affairs were conducted in Greek.
    Byzantium developed Justinian Law (naturally based on "Roman" Law.
    Also, I believe, Eastern Emperors were head of State AND Church.
    And, although Roman military structures etc were changing well prior to the fall of the West it's worth noting that the Byzantian military had little resemblance to the "traditional" Roman military.
  22. Svigor says:

    From the Haaretz link:

    Surely, some of the Jesus fad is due to the success of David Klinghoffer’s 2005 book, “Why the Jews Rejected Jesus.” (Answer: We’re the chosen people – a nation, not universalists.) But I think a lot of it is also due to our increased confidence as an assimilated minority in the United States. Where once we could have been tortured or burned for not accepting Christ, now we can publish books criticizing him.

    See what I mean? Stole their mojo. Stripped out the Jewish racism, and gave the rest to humanity. Oy, the humanity!

    To a Jew, there is no point at all to their religion, without the Jewish ethnic onanism.

    Christian authorities have been blaming the Jews for killing Jesus, even though the New Testament itself makes clear that it’s the Romans who actually did the deed.

    Actually, the Bible makes it pretty clear that the Romans excecuted Christ solely because the Jews wanted him dead. If the Jews choosing Barabus over Christ for clemency doesn’t make that clear, nothing will.

    One wonders when, if ever, we Jews will be able to heal from the trauma of Christian oppression and actually learn from, while still differentiating ourselves from, Christian teaching and tradition.

    When you ethnic onanists finally acknowledge the trauma of Jewish oppression and malfeasance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stan
    The Catholic church has subverted the traditional meaning of the crucifixion. Now on Palm Sunday the congregants take the part of the crowd to proclaim "“His blood be upon us and upon our children.”
  23. neutral says:

    I don’t know what the ancient jew thought of Russia, but the modern day jew (Soros, Max Boot, Julia Ioffe, Jenefir Rubin, etc) who agitate against Russia 24/7 are doing so because its a white nation. Their end goal is to turn every white nation non white, since Russia is a holdout by being nationalist and their politicians not having accepted the globalist ideology they will keep on attacking it.

    Read More
  24. For the first time in my life I am in total agreement with Saker.

    Absolutely spot on in every respect.

    Read More
  25. Rehmat says:
    @jacques sheete
    Overall, an excellent article full of great points well stated.

    It would be ridiculous to claim that the cause(s) of modern fear and/or hate of things Russian can all be explained by ancient theological arguments. In reality, neither Russia nor the West are all that religious nowadays.
     
    True. And most of the remnants are twisted beyond redemption, I think.

    ...any more or less sovereign and independent regime in Russia stands as the main obstacle for the West to take control of Russia’s immense resources and many other reasons.
     
    Today's Islamophobia also has similar roots.

    What are the roots of the antisemitism myth dude? after all over one million Jews left Soviet Russia for Palestine for that very reason.

    Over 125 years ago, Vienna-born Theodor Herrzl said that anti-Semites would provide fuel to Zionist cause. Since then the Organized Jewry have been faking Jew-hating events around the world. After the establishment of the Zionist entity, the B’nai B’rith and ADL took the task of keeping antisemism project alive by faking annual reports claiming that antisemitism is on the rise in whichever country Muslim communities live.

    This claim has become so ridiculous that according to ‘Zionism On The Web’ site even calling Jew criminal being ‘Jewish’, is antisemitism…..

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/09/01/antisemitism-greatest-myth-of-the-century/

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Why are you asking me?

    And why are you telling me stuff I already know?

    PS: If one would read Josephus' Antiquities it would quickly become apparent that Jews were pretty much anti-Jew, anti-Semitic, even anti-G-d at times and anti-pretty much everything (no, I am not kidding) as well. A lot of them couldn't stand even their parents, spouses, siblings, former allies, high priests and what not.
  26. Louis says:

    Viva Russia! The Saker is being too harsh on the Popes and is ignoring the Oriental churches. For shame. Pope Francis is working to restore the papacy to what it was before the churches split. While the structure of the MODERN PAPACY might be heretical so is DIVORCE which the Orthodox church accepts and MONOPHYSITISM which the Oriental Orthodox accept. Christendom will rise again when all 3 heresies are defeated and all three branches of Christianity with valid priesthoods are reunited. Those Oriental Orthodox are not being martyred for nothing. The Oriental Orthodox are Christians too. That’s why the Muslims kill them! The Saker is right about Jews, Muslims and especially about the Eastern Roman Emperors and the Third Rome. I voted for Trump and hope for a Romanov Emperor.

    Louis
    San Antonio, TX

    Read More
  27. Diogenes says:

    This has been all very interesting. I am quite impressed with the diversity of opinion and depth of history expressed by the readership but shouldn`t we all concede that Russo phobia is quite irrational and maladaptive regardless of it`s historical roots or provenance. One may try to rationally explain the origins of a common prejudice and thereby hope to prove it was a mistaken or false judgement but perhaps it might be more fruitful to examine the factual evidence at hand to maintain such a claim.
    Clearly if we were to do so we could find no rational basis for a Russo phobic or anti Russian belief or prejudice. It was an irrational deliberately propagandized meme propagated by western Jews ,American capitalists and the old European nations having a history of conflict with Russia. Our energies should be directed to smashing this folkloric anti Russian myth wherever it is found and discrediting it`s purveyors.

    Read More
  28. Che Guava says:
    @jacques sheete

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment
     
    Josephus relates several episodes of the practice by Jews. One of the more hair raising was that of Alexander Janneus who had hundreds of his fellows crucified out of revenge for the way they had treated him.

    2. Now as Alexander [Janneus, the Maccabean king]... as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of [his enemies, the Pharasees] to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes. This was indeed by way of revenge for the injuries they had done him; which punishment yet was of an inhuman nature,

    - Josephus, Antiquities 13: Chapter 14
     
    Crucifixion was apparently practiced by other "civilizations" long before Rome existed.

    Hello Jaques.

    I am sure that you are correct about the custom of crucifixion (and similar cruelties) pre-dating the Roman empire … but citing the Maccabeans doesn’t make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic, by which time Rome was (depending on the situations of China and perhaps Persia at times) already the biggest polity in the world.

    Still, thanks for the informative quote. Should read Josephus some time, have only ever read excerpts.

    Hell, the Romans may well have adopted it from the Maccabeans, they did beat the latter in a war.

    This makes me curious about the Bible canons, I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can’t see why) and Maccabees (can see why, but interesting to read), one or two others.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same, but must check. I know that some eastetn churches still use (or recently used), for example, the Didache.

    … and all via Greek scholars.

    I love it when Jewish people refer to their scripture as ‘the Bible’, sorry, the term is from Greek to start with, this is just a ploy to set up the fake concept of ‘Judaeo-Christianity’, a confection of the late 19th century. ‘The Bible’ exclusively refers to the Christian one.

    The only books the Jewish scriptures have in common with the OT in the Christian Bible are the first five or so, nice of the Greeks and Hellenistic Jews to have recorded the other texts at the time.

    In any case, I am at heart a Marcionite, I have read the Church Fathers, but I believe Marcion’s original (as in the first) canon, one gospel, 12 or 13 letters of St. Paul (who may have been Marcion, or vice versa) to be the most real.

    Those having ears, hear.

    It does tie in to the words of the Saker.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    but citing the Maccabeans doesn’t make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic,
     
    Ha! I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call me on that! Anyway, I put that quote in there because I was answering this.

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have “only” been allowed to stone a person to death...
     
    I was merely showing that crucifixion wasn't distinctly Roman. Oh, well, maybe I was trying to make another point or two. Anyway, I think the answer I provided is valid.

    I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can’t see why)
     
    I'm no religious or biblical scholar, but I love reading that and Ecclesiastes.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same,
     
    OMG! Please don't say that to a Greek orthodox priest! Seriously, those dudes, in my experience, are hard core. Again, I'm no scholar on the subject tho.
  29. @Jason Liu
    Our current clash of civilizations puts the western world, with its democracy, humanism, and egalitarianism against the rest of the world. This is a losing battle for the west, but ultimately a win for humanity.

    You are right that Russia is the most prominent opponent, but it's not that bleak. The west is in decline while the rest has plenty of room to grow. Even western growth is predicated on immigrants from the non-west, who are not as likely to believe in western values as native whites. In time the western political ideologies that have reigned over the last two centuries will be reduced to nice-sounding platitudes, talked about but rarely practiced in earnest.

    In the long run, China is better positioned to challenge liberal democracy. It has a larger economic and population (opinion) base, and better diplomatic ties in Africa and South America. For now, Chinese leaders are pretty much absent from the global culture war (which I think is a big mistake). But if a future, charismatic Chinese leader wishes to use rhetoric/incentive to draw non-western nations away from the western political model, we could have a coalition on our hands.

    China is collapsing. It has aborted itself. Asians can only copy, not create. Japan was set to takeover the world in the 1980s. How did that work out?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    I remember that very well. About 10 books a year were published to great acclaim that Japan would take over the world. Many friends read and believed those books.

    Cynic that I am I always pointed out that Japan's great rise was due to:

    1 Loot from WW2
    2 Massive amounts of aid from America.
    3 Unequal tariff arrangements; America had a tiny tariff on Japanese goods. Japan basically imported nothing including birth control pills until the patent ran out.
    4. As soon as the Korean war began our military gave the contracts for jeeps, ambulances, trucks and most vehicles to Japanese companies in Japan and not American companies in America.

    I was right and the best selling authors were wrong
    , @Che Guava
    This was not a matter of to 'taking over the world', this was a matter of the US making many unfair trade blockages, right down to the US making threats about Japan's programme to have schools use the TRON OS instead of Windows. TRON was far superior at the time. Still is, in many cases.

    The govt. of the time abandoned the idea thx to US bullying.

    It was a programme of one-way bullying.
  30. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    On May 21, 2014, British Jewish Daily Mail reported a Canadian Jewish woman volunteer at the WW II Museum in Halifax, Marienne Ferguson saying that Prince Charles likened Russian president Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler in a private conversation.

    “And now Putin is doing just about same as Hitler,” she said.

    Control is addictive.
    No way they can come to grips with the fact Russia isn’t under their control like the West.
    China is the same, but, unlike Russia, China has never been under their control, and this makes acceptance easier.

    Not being under their control means being Hitler. ‘Hitler’ has become a synonym for ‘refusing to obey’.

    What can confound so many minds so deeply? An excess of power.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    "Not being under their control means being Hitler. ‘Hitler’ has become a synonym for ‘refusing to obey’.

    What can confound so many minds so deeply?"

    I believe that if you think about what you said, then you would see that you have answered your own question. Hitler is not merely a synonym for refusing to obey, he literally didn't obey--and was duly punished for his dereliction. In this sense, they, meaning those many deeply confounded minds of whom you speak, tell the truth in spite of their not knowing that and why it is true.
  31. annamaria says:
    @Carlton Meyer
    I keep thinking of crazy George C. Scott in "Dr. Strangelove:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuP6KbIsNK4

    There are lots of American Generals like this, recently retired General Breedlove for example. Unfortunately, unlike the sane President in that movie, Ms Clinton lacks the backbone to stop these crazies.

    As our Western civilization deals with Third World chaos in the Middle East and Africa, plus the growth of Chinese power, we need Russia as an ally. All this senseless anti-Russian BS is pushed by power crazed neocons to exploit the historically impaired, and our nuclear weapons industry that wants $2 trillion to rebuild the entire Cold War nuclear arsenal. NATO should be spending billions of dollars to deploy forces to the Med, not to Russia's borders.

    Our only hope is that Trump wins, or the Germans rebel against American puppeteers and restore sanity.

    “…or the Germans rebel against American puppeteers and restore sanity.””
    See the pre-emptive move that has produced the ongoing waves of Middle East/African newcomers to Germany. The “deciders” are not able to make rational decisions because of the atrophied sense of responsibility. In effect, we are ruled by idiots.

    Read More
  32. Stan says:
    @Svigor
    From the Haaretz link:

    Surely, some of the Jesus fad is due to the success of David Klinghoffer's 2005 book, "Why the Jews Rejected Jesus." (Answer: We're the chosen people - a nation, not universalists.) But I think a lot of it is also due to our increased confidence as an assimilated minority in the United States. Where once we could have been tortured or burned for not accepting Christ, now we can publish books criticizing him.
     
    See what I mean? Stole their mojo. Stripped out the Jewish racism, and gave the rest to humanity. Oy, the humanity!

    To a Jew, there is no point at all to their religion, without the Jewish ethnic onanism.

    Christian authorities have been blaming the Jews for killing Jesus, even though the New Testament itself makes clear that it's the Romans who actually did the deed.
     
    Actually, the Bible makes it pretty clear that the Romans excecuted Christ solely because the Jews wanted him dead. If the Jews choosing Barabus over Christ for clemency doesn't make that clear, nothing will.

    One wonders when, if ever, we Jews will be able to heal from the trauma of Christian oppression and actually learn from, while still differentiating ourselves from, Christian teaching and tradition.
     
    When you ethnic onanists finally acknowledge the trauma of Jewish oppression and malfeasance.

    The Catholic church has subverted the traditional meaning of the crucifixion. Now on Palm Sunday the congregants take the part of the crowd to proclaim ““His blood be upon us and upon our children.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    "His blood be upon us and upon our children" Has nothing to do with Palm Sunday, 6 days before his trial for whatever. It would probably be included in the good Friday service.

    The gospel makes it very clear that his blood be upon us and upon our children was said by the Jews who attended the trial. But the trial was definitely not held on Palm Sunday.
  33. Daniel H says:
    @El Dato
    Very interesting. This is like reading Rothbard on Economics. How come the author knows so much about the ebb and flow of the religious belief packages (USB sticks for the mind, really) If the Romans had left the crazy Middle East alone and concentrated on their North and West, all of this could have been avoided.

    Wasn't there at some point a problem with the center of the Orthodox Church moving from Constantinople to Moscow leading to a period of fingerpointing and conflicting claims of being the real deal?

    >>If the Romans had left the crazy Middle East alone and concentrated on their North and West, all of this could have been avoided.

    Syria, Palestine and Egypt were the wealthiest and most advanced parts of the Roman realm. With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia). After one of the wars with Constantinople, the Persians managed to get a hold of Egypt for about 10-20 years. The Constantinople Romans took it back but soon lost the better part of their realm, permanently, to the Arabs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia).
     
    That's all right except that the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.
  34. Daniel H says:

    Russians have a bold, imaginative and beautiful grasp of color in their architecture. I have never been to Russia, but I have observed enough photographs to feel confident in this assessment. The church pictured above is typical of Russian art in this matter. Just beautiful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @mcohen
    exactly what i was thinking.the shapes are from seperate original thought.very little mixing.
    has russia supported syria solely to protect the syrian orthodox . could be or is it gazprom or both.
    i have a suggestion for you saker...i never insult another persons belief for one simply reason.i am not G-d.i am in no position to judge.
    let me tell you a true story that happened a few years ago
    3 homeless people were crossing a road while i waited at a traffic light.they were heading to a church that gave away free food.
    there was a big banner up on the church that said ....jesus saves....and one of them pointed out to the other and said....see what that says ...."jesus saves"and the other guy said ....."how would you know you are not G- d".
    never forgot that conversation.


    .
  35. nickels says:

    I’d have to agree with a lot of this.

    Not totally willing to condemn the Catholic lineage so fully but otherwise I would agree with all.

    Read More
  36. Ivy says:

    Scratch a Russian, find a Tartar.

    In that brief statement one may find various interpretations. One of those is that there is an untamed aspect of the Russian soul that remains unappreciated by, and somewhat beyond the ken of, the West. There is a Wild East component of Eurasian life that scares the more civilized West, passed down for example through stories of the Mongol Hordes or other invaders sweeping across the steppe. Parts of Europe have their own scare stories about The Turk, as a rough analog. The subconscious impact of anxiety remains a threat to the world view of those who would attempt to control the fate of the Occident, untamed by media propaganda. Putin is the latest bogeyman to represent that face to us.

    Read More
  37. @HBM
    The "Religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" did not exist, because they did not exist. Jews did not exist. Judaism did not exist. Like much of the "Old Testament," the Patriarchs and what they supposedly did is a retrohistorical fiction, an ethnic propaganda invention, almost certainly authored by Hellenized Jews in the Greek period.

    "Jews" were Canaanite pagans until the Persians arrived in the 5th century. Persians brought the Zoroastrianism that imparted Judaism with many of its most salient features, things we think of as being peculiarly Jewish: a focus on personal "holiness"; food and other taboos; angelology; putative monotheism; messianism and apocalyptic eshcatology. The Greeks later brought the intellectual culture that Jews would usurp for their own ends yet which informed it enough to begin to give Judaism its final shape: a disembodied, neck-up, purely religious yet intellectual affair for persecuted, harmless bookworms.

    Jesus-- a composite figure, a Judean Jewish folk hero, or whatever he was, assuming he existed-- was a Jewish Messiah, one of many aspirants to that title, who violently opposed the Romans and the occupation and was executed by the Roman state. That "Jews killed Jesus" is another retrohistorical fiction in the tradition of propagandistic Jewish revision, as expressed through the shabbos goyim given enough time for the mixed affair of the inevitable backlash against Jewish origins.

    Hellenized Jews, like the Jews who run Western media today, spun the tales of what their cousins were up to in the Holy Land (like Jewish terrorists stabbing Romans soldiers to death in the streets, fantasizing about an apocalypse to slaughter all the goyish invaders driven by a longing for a holy prophet to lead the charge of YHWH's heavenly armies to liquidate what they called the Kittim, the men from across the sea)-- these Hellenized Jewish "intellectuals" told us this Jesus was not a fanatic but rather a Socrates-like pacifist faith-healer and unjustly persecuted savior of the goyim, to make Jews appear less threatening to the Westerners they despised, in the exact same way the Jewish media lies endlessly about the nature of what their cousins do in Israel today to our detriment; or whatever else it is that they are up to that forwards a Jewish agenda while ruining the rest of us, such as telling us that "Islam is a Religion of Peace" or infecting the underclass with the notion that lumpenprole black criminals who try to murder White cops are utterly blameless civil rights martyrs.

    And like today, many of the goyim swallow this mendacious, kosher version of events, and then compulsively tell their own lies. After the turmoil of the first century, marked by endless Jewish rebellion and the subversive, exploitative, firestarting behavior of Jews in Rome itself, the new religion could not survive unless it took on features of the growing anti-Jewish opinions of remaining good Romans, which end-up piecemeal in the texts of the New Testament, and particularly in the ones authored late.

    Our Russophobia today is driven exclusively by our Jewish media, by the same tired, poisonous suite of Jewish ethnomytholocial fantasies and interests, which are projected out into the world from Jewish psyches and the psyches of the goyim they've captured.

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous "persecution" of Jews as well as to make sure that Russia becomes a puppet state of the "AngloZionists" in order to realize their Messianic vision of a globalist hellscape that will have healed they goyishe masses of "hate"-- a thing which of course means the centralization of power into the hands of post-nationalist Jewish bankers, lawyers, intelligentsia, causuists, technocrats and oligarchs lording it over the coffee-colored neutered masses.

    Who knows how extensive is this vision for the future they have scripted out in their collective psyche, having plugged-in new realities into the old tales and inscriptions? Whatever the case, however far-into the future they see this old-new bit of theater playing out, they sure aren't going to admit or tell us about it.

    I’d like to buy you a drink.

    Read More
  38. mcohen says:
    @Daniel H
    Russians have a bold, imaginative and beautiful grasp of color in their architecture. I have never been to Russia, but I have observed enough photographs to feel confident in this assessment. The church pictured above is typical of Russian art in this matter. Just beautiful.

    exactly what i was thinking.the shapes are from seperate original thought.very little mixing.
    has russia supported syria solely to protect the syrian orthodox . could be or is it gazprom or both.
    i have a suggestion for you saker…i never insult another persons belief for one simply reason.i am not G-d.i am in no position to judge.
    let me tell you a true story that happened a few years ago
    3 homeless people were crossing a road while i waited at a traffic light.they were heading to a church that gave away free food.
    there was a big banner up on the church that said ….jesus saves….and one of them pointed out to the other and said….see what that says ….”jesus saves”and the other guy said …..”how would you know you are not G- d”.
    never forgot that conversation.

    .

    Read More
  39. Lot says:

    not only because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish

    And here Saker exposes himself as a retard who cannot be bothered to read the many articles on Jewish genetic history showing no support whatsoever for a Jewish-Khazar connection. (Indeed, to the extent any modern Jews do have Khazar blood, it is probably from intermarriage with Russian/Ukrainian Slavs).

    Saker and his admirers here pretend to be WN, but really they are just obsessed with their hatred of the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi).

    As for Mother Russia being the savior of whites,

    What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin’s Russia now that he has been the dictator there for 16 years?

    How much of Russia’s economy is nothing but resource extraction?

    Can you name a single important scientific innovation to come out of Russia in the past 16 years?

    Saker shows one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as “Anglozionist,” and becoming partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites in the world while hating on the rest of us.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin’s Russia]

    Higher than the white birth rate in the USA.
    , @annamaria
    “…partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites…”
    Are you writing about Clintons and the pedophile Epstein, or about Cheney, Blair, Bush the lesser and others in “the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi)” ?
    The UK authorities had been very differential towards certain Sir Saville, while having no pity to hundreds of orphans that were raped by the “Sir.” The same “protectors of mortality” made Assange staying, for years, in two bedrooms of Ecuadorian embassy, guarded expensively by the UK police, on a cue from such paragon of virtue as Hillary Clinton, the beneficiary of the pedophile Epstein’ largesse.

    “…one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as “Anglozionist”…
    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims. These wars were pushed by Israel-firsters with a goal to “reformulate” the Middle East to satisfy Israel’s desires. See the bags with shredded children, the limbless youth, and the destroyed cities and even whole states. Well-done, AIPAC, PNAC, and the scores of war-mongering think tanks filled with ziocons.

    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department? Don't they, and their financial backer Kolomojsky (a citizen of Israel) deserve to be called “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites” or you believe that these Ukrainian "freedom fighters” are as good as the various “moderate” jihadists supported and armed by the US/NATO and their bosom-buddies Saudis?

    "..the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to..."
    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.” To get some ideas of why the modern-day Trotskies are despised in Russia, read “Two Hundred Years Together” by Solzhenitsyn.... If you will be able, of course, to find this documentary in a translated version, since this documentary has been sequestered by ALL main publishing houses in the US and UK.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal
    http://gawker.com/here-is-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epsteins-little-b-1681383992

  40. Lot says:
    @Daniel H
    >>If the Romans had left the crazy Middle East alone and concentrated on their North and West, all of this could have been avoided.

    Syria, Palestine and Egypt were the wealthiest and most advanced parts of the Roman realm. With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia). After one of the wars with Constantinople, the Persians managed to get a hold of Egypt for about 10-20 years. The Constantinople Romans took it back but soon lost the better part of their realm, permanently, to the Arabs.

    With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia).

    That’s all right except that the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.
  41. Lot says:

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous “persecution” of Jews

    That’s silly, for much of history Russia was the 3nd most hospitable place for Jews after Poland and Holland.

    Russia is deeply corrupt and dysfunctional. My wish for them is that they become more like successful white peoples like Norway, Denmark, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Switzerland, etc.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Taking a break from gaslighting Trump supporters? I'm sure all your readers will appreciate the equal honesty of your Jewish thoughts on the Russian question.
  42. Alden says:
    @jacques sheete

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment
     
    Josephus relates several episodes of the practice by Jews. One of the more hair raising was that of Alexander Janneus who had hundreds of his fellows crucified out of revenge for the way they had treated him.

    2. Now as Alexander [Janneus, the Maccabean king]... as he was feasting with his concubines, in the sight of all the city, he ordered about eight hundred of [his enemies, the Pharasees] to be crucified; and while they were living, he ordered the throats of their children and wives to be cut before their eyes. This was indeed by way of revenge for the injuries they had done him; which punishment yet was of an inhuman nature,

    - Josephus, Antiquities 13: Chapter 14
     
    Crucifixion was apparently practiced by other "civilizations" long before Rome existed.

    The Greeks also practiced crufixion and tied the bodies on the crosses so they would not fall off till the birds ate the flesh and cartilage.
    It was especially horrible in Greek religion because if there was no proper burial service the deceased would be unhappy ghosts for eternity.

    Read More
  43. 5371 says:
    @Lot

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous “persecution” of Jews
     
    That's silly, for much of history Russia was the 3nd most hospitable place for Jews after Poland and Holland.

    Russia is deeply corrupt and dysfunctional. My wish for them is that they become more like successful white peoples like Norway, Denmark, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Switzerland, etc.

    Taking a break from gaslighting Trump supporters? I’m sure all your readers will appreciate the equal honesty of your Jewish thoughts on the Russian question.

    Read More
  44. 5371 says:
    @Lot

    With the withering of the Greek successor states to Alexander there was a power vacuum, for which the Romans and Persians contested, for centuries. The Romans prevailed in the western portions of the Greek realm (Greece, Thrace, Illyria, Anatolia, Syria, Palestine, Egypt) and the Persians controlled the east (Persia, Babylon and going out into central Asia).
     
    That's all right except that the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.

    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.
     
    No retard, you are the ignorant one spouting off about subjects of which you have no knowledge.

    First of all, what I said was completely correct:


    the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.
     
    From this article:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_%28Roman_province%29


    Mesopotamia was the name of two distinct Roman provinces, the one a short-lived creation of the Roman Emperor Trajan in 116–117 and the other established by Emperor Septimius Severus in ca. 198, which ranged between the Roman and the Sassanid empires, until the Muslim conquests of the 7th Century.
     
  45. 5371 says:
    @Lot

    not only because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish
     
    And here Saker exposes himself as a retard who cannot be bothered to read the many articles on Jewish genetic history showing no support whatsoever for a Jewish-Khazar connection. (Indeed, to the extent any modern Jews do have Khazar blood, it is probably from intermarriage with Russian/Ukrainian Slavs).

    Saker and his admirers here pretend to be WN, but really they are just obsessed with their hatred of the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi).

    As for Mother Russia being the savior of whites,

    What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin's Russia now that he has been the dictator there for 16 years?

    How much of Russia's economy is nothing but resource extraction?

    Can you name a single important scientific innovation to come out of Russia in the past 16 years?

    Saker shows one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as "Anglozionist," and becoming partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites in the world while hating on the rest of us.

    [What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin’s Russia]

    Higher than the white birth rate in the USA.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    But do they become alcoholic before Americans become obese? (Mind you we're challenging).!
  46. Alden says:
    @attilathehen
    China is collapsing. It has aborted itself. Asians can only copy, not create. Japan was set to takeover the world in the 1980s. How did that work out?

    I remember that very well. About 10 books a year were published to great acclaim that Japan would take over the world. Many friends read and believed those books.

    Cynic that I am I always pointed out that Japan’s great rise was due to:

    1 Loot from WW2
    2 Massive amounts of aid from America.
    3 Unequal tariff arrangements; America had a tiny tariff on Japanese goods. Japan basically imported nothing including birth control pills until the patent ran out.
    4. As soon as the Korean war began our military gave the contracts for jeeps, ambulances, trucks and most vehicles to Japanese companies in Japan and not American companies in America.

    I was right and the best selling authors were wrong

    Read More
    • Replies: @attilathehen
    Excellent points! Caucasians are at the top, Asians in the middle, blacks at the bottom.
  47. mcohen. says:
    @HBM
    The "Religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" did not exist, because they did not exist. Jews did not exist. Judaism did not exist. Like much of the "Old Testament," the Patriarchs and what they supposedly did is a retrohistorical fiction, an ethnic propaganda invention, almost certainly authored by Hellenized Jews in the Greek period.

    "Jews" were Canaanite pagans until the Persians arrived in the 5th century. Persians brought the Zoroastrianism that imparted Judaism with many of its most salient features, things we think of as being peculiarly Jewish: a focus on personal "holiness"; food and other taboos; angelology; putative monotheism; messianism and apocalyptic eshcatology. The Greeks later brought the intellectual culture that Jews would usurp for their own ends yet which informed it enough to begin to give Judaism its final shape: a disembodied, neck-up, purely religious yet intellectual affair for persecuted, harmless bookworms.

    Jesus-- a composite figure, a Judean Jewish folk hero, or whatever he was, assuming he existed-- was a Jewish Messiah, one of many aspirants to that title, who violently opposed the Romans and the occupation and was executed by the Roman state. That "Jews killed Jesus" is another retrohistorical fiction in the tradition of propagandistic Jewish revision, as expressed through the shabbos goyim given enough time for the mixed affair of the inevitable backlash against Jewish origins.

    Hellenized Jews, like the Jews who run Western media today, spun the tales of what their cousins were up to in the Holy Land (like Jewish terrorists stabbing Romans soldiers to death in the streets, fantasizing about an apocalypse to slaughter all the goyish invaders driven by a longing for a holy prophet to lead the charge of YHWH's heavenly armies to liquidate what they called the Kittim, the men from across the sea)-- these Hellenized Jewish "intellectuals" told us this Jesus was not a fanatic but rather a Socrates-like pacifist faith-healer and unjustly persecuted savior of the goyim, to make Jews appear less threatening to the Westerners they despised, in the exact same way the Jewish media lies endlessly about the nature of what their cousins do in Israel today to our detriment; or whatever else it is that they are up to that forwards a Jewish agenda while ruining the rest of us, such as telling us that "Islam is a Religion of Peace" or infecting the underclass with the notion that lumpenprole black criminals who try to murder White cops are utterly blameless civil rights martyrs.

    And like today, many of the goyim swallow this mendacious, kosher version of events, and then compulsively tell their own lies. After the turmoil of the first century, marked by endless Jewish rebellion and the subversive, exploitative, firestarting behavior of Jews in Rome itself, the new religion could not survive unless it took on features of the growing anti-Jewish opinions of remaining good Romans, which end-up piecemeal in the texts of the New Testament, and particularly in the ones authored late.

    Our Russophobia today is driven exclusively by our Jewish media, by the same tired, poisonous suite of Jewish ethnomytholocial fantasies and interests, which are projected out into the world from Jewish psyches and the psyches of the goyim they've captured.

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous "persecution" of Jews as well as to make sure that Russia becomes a puppet state of the "AngloZionists" in order to realize their Messianic vision of a globalist hellscape that will have healed they goyishe masses of "hate"-- a thing which of course means the centralization of power into the hands of post-nationalist Jewish bankers, lawyers, intelligentsia, causuists, technocrats and oligarchs lording it over the coffee-colored neutered masses.

    Who knows how extensive is this vision for the future they have scripted out in their collective psyche, having plugged-in new realities into the old tales and inscriptions? Whatever the case, however far-into the future they see this old-new bit of theater playing out, they sure aren't going to admit or tell us about it.

    i might even buy you a second round.i always put humour before intellectual blather about relegion.
    1.
    survival comes first.all relegion does is provide the will and intent to survive.

    2.
    there is absolutely no connection between relegion and G-d.if there was we all would belong to one universal relegion.one truth.unquestioned

    3
    the laws of nature are the absolute truth.

    4.
    G-d exists i have no doubt at all.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Nicely summarised. But pls explain 4 which I presume to embody the humour of the more entertaining Crossword setters. I don't use my limited mental energy on Crosswords...
    , @The Scalpel
    "The laws of nature are the absolute truth"

    This point covers your first three points.

    As for your fourth point, given the third point, who cares?
  48. Alden says:

    This article should be titled” The Eastern Orthodox Church is the only true Christian Church and Catholics and Jews are wrong wrong wrong.”

    Wasn’t the Khazar hypothesis disproved by DNA? Didn’t DNA testing prove that Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Italian and middle eastern ancestry.?

    I really don’t see how the bible explains what Russia has been doing the last 500 years.

    Read More
    • Replies: @mcohen
    exactly right.it is all pipeline politics with a dash of relegion

    but did i get a whiff of something though.correct if i am wrong here.sakers take

    whitey has decided that the branch office is running amok and needs to be reined in
    the usa cannot do it.....ooooohh to painful to watch.pass me the bagels and lox
    the chinese cannot do it .....confucious say....what is this abraham wong thing

    the euros are all tied up in knots

    so

    igor says to boris,time to rollout the big kahuna.dust it off and sail it to the med....past all the other whities to fly the flag and give the message...i got this boys.

    who knows what the wind sows
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Long before the DNA testing it struck me that The Great Khazar Connection was nonsense in its 13th Tribe form because Ashkenazim spoke a German dialect....
    , @Philip Owen
    Scientific evidence doesn't deter serious haters. They filter it out.

    It is possible that the Khazar nobility in small numbers became Jews. They blocked the Don trade route (equal access to Byzantium and Persia). So they needed to sell slaves to both Christians and Muslims but Christians didn't buy Christians and Muslims didn't buy Muslims. They needed to buy from the one and sell to the other. The main body of the tribe wasn't Jewish. Any genetic contribution to any population of modern Jews is invisibly small. No one has found it.
  49. Lot says:
    @5371
    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.

    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.

    No retard, you are the ignorant one spouting off about subjects of which you have no knowledge.

    First of all, what I said was completely correct:

    the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.

    From this article:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_%28Roman_province%29

    Mesopotamia was the name of two distinct Roman provinces, the one a short-lived creation of the Roman Emperor Trajan in 116–117 and the other established by Emperor Septimius Severus in ca. 198, which ranged between the Roman and the Sassanid empires, until the Muslim conquests of the 7th Century.

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    How could a Wikipedia copy-paster know that only the first Roman province of Mesopotamia coincided with what later became Iraq?
  50. @Che Guava
    Hello Jaques.

    I am sure that you are correct about the custom of crucifixion (and similar cruelties) pre-dating the Roman empire ... but citing the Maccabeans doesn't make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic, by which time Rome was (depending on the situations of China and perhaps Persia at times) already the biggest polity in the world.

    Still, thanks for the informative quote. Should read Josephus some time, have only ever read excerpts.

    Hell, the Romans may well have adopted it from the Maccabeans, they did beat the latter in a war.

    This makes me curious about the Bible canons, I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can't see why) and Maccabees (can see why, but interesting to read), one or two others.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same, but must check. I know that some eastetn churches still use (or recently used), for example, the Didache.

    ... and all via Greek scholars.

    I love it when Jewish people refer to their scripture as 'the Bible', sorry, the term is from Greek to start with, this is just a ploy to set up the fake concept of 'Judaeo-Christianity', a confection of the late 19th century. 'The Bible' exclusively refers to the Christian one.

    The only books the Jewish scriptures have in common with the OT in the Christian Bible are the first five or so, nice of the Greeks and Hellenistic Jews to have recorded the other texts at the time.

    In any case, I am at heart a Marcionite, I have read the Church Fathers, but I believe Marcion's original (as in the first) canon, one gospel, 12 or 13 letters of St. Paul (who may have been Marcion, or vice versa) to be the most real.

    Those having ears, hear.

    It does tie in to the words of the Saker.

    but citing the Maccabeans doesn’t make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic,

    Ha! I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call me on that! Anyway, I put that quote in there because I was answering this.

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have “only” been allowed to stone a person to death…

    I was merely showing that crucifixion wasn’t distinctly Roman. Oh, well, maybe I was trying to make another point or two. Anyway, I think the answer I provided is valid.

    I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can’t see why)

    I’m no religious or biblical scholar, but I love reading that and Ecclesiastes.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same,

    OMG! Please don’t say that to a Greek orthodox priest! Seriously, those dudes, in my experience, are hard core. Again, I’m no scholar on the subject tho.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Ecclesiastes (from memories of occasions when I was the Reader long ago) "of making many books there is no end" (and lots and lots of good stuff "Vanity of vanities saith the preacher" usw).
    , @Che Guava
    Jaques,

    'Agree' button has a longer time limit now. Srsly, the quote from Josephus was thought-provoking.

    Appreciated.
  51. @Alden
    The Greeks also practiced crufixion and tied the bodies on the crosses so they would not fall off till the birds ate the flesh and cartilage.
    It was especially horrible in Greek religion because if there was no proper burial service the deceased would be unhappy ghosts for eternity.

    Any sources for that?

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for the reply earlier. The one common denominator is that the practice was intended to serve both as an extreme punishment and deterrent by providing a very slow death and keeping the evidence on display for enough time for people to get the message. That they were able to face such an awful trial whilst singing Always Look On The Bright Side is inspiration enough for me.
    , @Alden
    Ask Mr Google. I'm sure you can find something. Or the nearest university library. Alexander the Great did it a lot as punishment for recalcitrant troops and enemies including the Dr who attended his deceased lover.

    But it was a fairly common execution for rebellious slaves, exceptionally nasty criminal's etc in Greece.
  52. @Rehmat
    What are the roots of the antisemitism myth dude? after all over one million Jews left Soviet Russia for Palestine for that very reason.

    Over 125 years ago, Vienna-born Theodor Herrzl said that anti-Semites would provide fuel to Zionist cause. Since then the Organized Jewry have been faking Jew-hating events around the world. After the establishment of the Zionist entity, the B’nai B’rith and ADL took the task of keeping antisemism project alive by faking annual reports claiming that antisemitism is on the rise in whichever country Muslim communities live.

    This claim has become so ridiculous that according to ‘Zionism On The Web’ site even calling Jew criminal being ‘Jewish’, is antisemitism.....

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/09/01/antisemitism-greatest-myth-of-the-century/

    Why are you asking me?

    And why are you telling me stuff I already know?

    PS: If one would read Josephus’ Antiquities it would quickly become apparent that Jews were pretty much anti-Jew, anti-Semitic, even anti-G-d at times and anti-pretty much everything (no, I am not kidding) as well. A lot of them couldn’t stand even their parents, spouses, siblings, former allies, high priests and what not.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    Don't you wish Muslims should act like the Jews you know - and save people from Islamophobia?

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/28/islamophobia-tales-of-2-christian-universities/
  53. the Saker has written a real knee-slapper here, the evolution of his recently advanced theological Education. It has turned him into an anti-semeitic religious loon. but, what the hell, we all have our little ways. you know how people are.

    Read More
  54. 5371 says:
    @Lot

    Is there any subject on which you are not ignorant? The Roman province of Mesopotamia existed for less than two years.
     
    No retard, you are the ignorant one spouting off about subjects of which you have no knowledge.

    First of all, what I said was completely correct:


    the Romans controlled modern Iraq for quite a while, and much of the rest of the time it was split between them or a buffer/puppet kingdom.
     
    From this article:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesopotamia_%28Roman_province%29


    Mesopotamia was the name of two distinct Roman provinces, the one a short-lived creation of the Roman Emperor Trajan in 116–117 and the other established by Emperor Septimius Severus in ca. 198, which ranged between the Roman and the Sassanid empires, until the Muslim conquests of the 7th Century.
     

    How could a Wikipedia copy-paster know that only the first Roman province of Mesopotamia coincided with what later became Iraq?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    But any poĺity thereabouts which was described by a name meaning it was between the Tigris and Euphrates (not Ganges and Indus or Rio Negro and Solemoës or Miss and Miss one may fairly assume) had to be in modern Iraq did it not?

    (Down Rover! This is not your fight.)
  55. @Che Guava
    Wiz, you might try reading a little more. Perhaps start with the links in the article to the Church fathers, and the Haaretz article (a representative whine).

    It is easy to see what the Saker is saying if you have a little background in church and secular history.

    I do not have the time to fill in all of the gaps.

    For the Saker, the installation of Clovis not many years after the deposition of Romulus Augustulus could be viewed as a kind of western successor state to Rome. As you say, he was king of the Franks, but the eastern Romans had increasingly little use of Latin and increasingly fewer ethnic ties with the old empire from the times following Justinian. Not that I am saying that the eastern remnant wasn't the true continuation, clearly it was the Roman Empire.

    For the Wiz, after the fall of Constantinople, the Orthodox church in Greece was persecuted, the eastern Roman world lost most of its remaining heartlands, a few places in the peninsula and islands remained free for a short time (although eastern Romans retained a presence even in much of what is now Turkey until the Turks went on the rampage again following the fall of their empire).

    In the meantime, the Russian clergy, Christian intellectuals, and elements of the nobility and royalty came to see Russia, the only major inheritor of Orthodox Christianity not to have been enslaved, as having the role of the third Rome, although preferably based in Constantinople, and presumably on the Oecumenical Patriarch there.


    This may have been quite possible, but the Germans (probably not anticipating the scale of the results), sent Lenin and several of his colleagues to Russia in a secret train, the coup d'etat and civil war followed ...

    All very interesting to be reminded of but it doesn’t add up to The Saker’s implied continuity as I was obviously writing in #21 while you were also writing.

    Read More
  56. @5371
    [What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin’s Russia]

    Higher than the white birth rate in the USA.

    But do they become alcoholic before Americans become obese? (Mind you we’re challenging).!

    Read More
  57. Anon says: • Disclaimer

    If Russia were a small nation, would its spiritual roots matter?

    It’s the size and natural resources.

    I mean who ever cared about Greece being Orthodox? Greece didn’t amount to much as a power in modern times.

    There are factors that continue to make Russia a power to reckon with.

    Huge size and natural resources.

    Population. Even though not large by standards of a big nation, it is still bigger than that of any European nation. And the number of whites in Russia isn’t much below number of whites in the US.

    Paradoxically, failure as strength. Russian failure over and over pull it in the opposite direction of the West. Suppose privatization had succeeded in the 90s. Russians might just be happy to be ‘just another European nation’. But the 90s failed, and it led to a national reaction, therefore a renewed sense of independence that is a kind of strength. Similarly, the failure of Russians to hold back the Mongols led it become something of a ‘Eastern’ Civilization divorced from rest of Europe. Also, Russia’s failure in WWI led to communism that also set Russia apart from Rest of the West. So, Russian autonomy owes to its series of failures. So, failure has led to a kind of strength that makes Russians look more inward and seek its own path independent of globalist powers.

    Due to its size and accident of history, Russia is one of the few genuinely autonomous powers(vis-a-vis) in the world, along with China and Iran.

    Germany and Japan may be rich, but they were crushed in WWII and lost sovereignty. They are essentially vassal states of the US.
    Also, as WWII was the ‘good war’ for the ‘good guys’, Japan and Germany lost not only political pride but moral pride. They were defeated in soul as well in body.
    In contrast, Russia, due to its vast and resources, was able to push back and win the war. So, it won in body and soul. Indeed, though the West is reluctant to admit it, Russia did more than any nation to defeat Germany. (Granted, Russia isn’t entirely innocent or noble since Stalin had made some wicked deals with Hitler.)

    One might say Russia lost the Cold War, and it is true enough that Russia almost fell into the hands of globalists. But the Soviet intelligence organizations were involved in the changes that led to the fall of communism, and as such, were poised to take the power when things got out of hand, and things did get out of hand. So, even though Putin was none too happy about the dissolution of the USSR(which went way beyond letting go of Warsaw Pact nations), the New Order was bound to favor insider agents lik him who had the connections. When Germany and Japan lost the war, they had to be purged and do as the US said. In contrast, many of those in power centers during communism remained at the center, especially in intelligence and military circles.

    Also, this thing called ‘Russophobia’ has different shapes and patterns depending on which power we are talking about. China’s fear of Russia goes back to Russian imperialism in 19th century and the Sino-Soviet rift. Things have improved in recent times, and it goes to show that China and Russia, like China and India, are both natural partners and natural rivals. They have much to gain through increased business and understanding, but they are too close for comfort.

    Caucasus and Central Asian Muslims have their own reasons for ‘Russophobia’ as many of their historical legends have to do with resistance against Russian-Christian Imperialism.

    And Finn and Eastern Europeans still have Russian belligerence fresh on their minds, even though, to be sure, Soviet aggression wasn’t always Russian in character.

    But ‘Russophobia’ cannot be understood apart from Russian ‘phobias’ of other peoples. Russians have had this tendency to conflate all Asians with Mongols who invaded Russia and ruled for few centuries. This fear abated in the 19th century when Russia was heading ever more eastward and feeding off the carcass of decaying China. But it came back to life with rise of Japan and the 1905 war that gave Japan the decisive advantage in Manchuria and Northeast Asia.
    And Russians have their own legends and narratives of how Russia had been invaded by Teutons-on-ice, like in the film Alexander Nevsky where Germanic barbarians come charging over the ice.

    [MORE]

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybuKQf9p5jg

    Russians also had/have phobias about Tatars of various stripes, the Polish-Lithuanian empire, Napoleon and the French army, Nazis, Chechen cutthroats, and etc. And following the Sino-Soviet rift, there was much Russian anxiety about the Chinese-gone-nuts. And even with the fall of USSR, Russians look back on the Cold War and see the West as the primary aggressor that was overly paranoid and unwilling to come to terms with Russia. So, even though some Russians regret Soviet rule over non-Russian folks, they feel it was necessary to maintain a bulwark against the aggressive West.

    But recently, it is all about angry Jews who feel that the big fish slipped out of their fingers in the 90s. Jews in the 90s saw Russia as a big sturgeon. They had it in their net, and they were gonna gut it for all the caviar in the world, but the damn fish got away because Putin and the new nationalists cut the net, and Jewish globalists just cannot let this pass, especially as they fear that Russian-ism might spread to EU nations(and may be even to some white Americans, which is Jewish Globalists love to draw comparisons between ‘deplorable’ white Americans and Trump as puppet of Putin the ‘new hitler’. ) Also, it hurt Jewish pride that they got outwitted by dumb Russians.
    I really don’t think any ethnic group in America give a damn about Russia except the Jews. To be sure, given that homomania is the new religion of the West, some insipid fools in US, Canada, UK, and etc may see Russia as particularly evil because it doesn’t bow down to the holey anus.
    Indeed, in our post-Christian and post-moral age — the age of ‘pornokratia’ when the two things the West worships most if the homo anus and the negro dong, and especially the negro dong inside the holy homo anus — , the main ‘spiritual’ struggle is about Russians not bowing down, pulling their pants down, and sticking their ass toward heaven in prayer that they will be humped by ‘gay angels’. The West is all about worshiping homo paraders and priders, rappers, and black thug athletes. White boys kiss the homo ass while white girls dream of using wombs to create black babies.
    So, Russia seems like an alien and even evil nation to decadent Westerners who worship homomania in the age of ‘pornokratia’.

    As for Roman Catholicism being ‘modern’ and ‘progressive’, it’s all relative. Compared to Orthodox Faith, that certainly was the case. But compared to certain Protestant denominations and secular culture, much of Catholicism has been a conservative force throughout the ages.

    Also, even though Saker says the True Church remained powerful in the Byzantine part of ‘Roman Empire’, the Western Church better captured the spirit of Jesus. Why this paradox? Because of the relative stability and continuity in the East, its version of Christianity became stuffy, moribund, stagnant, cob-webby, dank, lethargic, beardish, and bellowish.

    In contrast, the fall of Rome led to a ‘crucifixion’ of an entire civilization. Remember Jesus’s apotheosis wasn’t possible without the whupping, the execution, and death. Jesus had to undergo this trial by fire. Byzantium avoided this, whereas Rome soon suffered on a grand scale what had happened to Jesus, like St. Augustine said in Bob Dylan’s dream. The Passion of Rome led to pillaging, raping, looting, arson, murdering, bashing, torturing, and other crazy stuff. Romans got whupped real bad like Jesus, and many of them got killed. But just like Jesus rose from death and triumphed — notice that the image of Jesus on Crucifix is both tragic and triumphant, a tormented figure but also arms spread out like a bird defying gravity — , Rome that had been sacked by Germanic boors recovered and, if anything, won over the barbarian louts who realized the wrongfulness of their ways and decided to defend Rome. So, the Roman Church’s trial-by-fire made it a more vital religion representing the spirit of Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Church could just carry on with Christian rituals in relative safety and stability. In contrast, Roman Christians had to ask really tough questions after all the horrifying spectacle by Animal-House-like pagan louts. And it was that tragic element that made the Western Church more interesting and dynamic than the Eastern ones in the years to come. (Consider how the Russian Orthodox Christians didn’t try to convert outsiders and heathens though it might accept some non-Russians into the fold if they made a trek to Russia and decided to grow beards.) To be sure, the Catholics lost it for me once they decided to let Negroes into the inner sanctum in the Vatican.

    Also, because of the sense of continuity, the Byzantine just got tired and bored with its classical culture instead of seeing it as the stuff for fresh inspiration. Worse, heavy and stuffy form of Christianity(too cozy with the official powers-that-be) came to gradually smother whatever was vital in the Classical pagan tradition. Because the fading of Classical influences were more gradual than dramatic — as in Rome with the wild ransacking and stuff — , the Eastern ‘Roman’ empire didn’t even know what they were losing. In contrast, the fall of Rome was so violent that everyone knew that something sacred and glorious had been destroyed and lost.

    The Dark Ages prepared the path for the New Age. Not only did Roman Christianity reignite from near-total-extinction(thereby becoming analogous to what Jesus went through) but the near-total loss of classical culture and its recovery led to excitement and creativity. Also, because the Germanic shook things up, there was less official stuffiness to govern and restrict everything. Sometimes, wars and collapse are horrible, but they can clear and lay the ground the new possibilities. It’s like after a forest burns down, a new fresh forest can grow. The Eastern Empire was like a forest of trees that just grew older and older and gradually barren of leaves. And the shadow they cast prevented new plants from sprouting from the ground.

    Indeed, it is amazing that the Western Europeans regained much of classical knowledge not through Byzantines but from the Muslims. Even though much of classical knowledge was preserved in Byzantine, the Greeks(who ruled as the ‘new’ or ‘other’ Romans) had no will or desire to share this knowledge with the fallen West. The East just turned it back on the West. In a way, the very idea of Eastern Roman Empire was strange enough. The Romans had conquered the Greeks and Greek empire. But over time, Romans had moved the center of power to the East, but over there, the Greeks came to dominate the Eastern Empire. Greeks surely felt a certain glory in this, but they also never felt all that close to Roman stuff since the Romans had conquered them and stolen much of Greek culture. So, the Greeks-as-New-Romans must have felt ambivalent about the real Romans.

    There was the meaning of ‘Roman’ in the ethnic sense and in the civilizational sense, and Greeks were not ethnic Romans. It’s like non-Romans among other folks tried to identify as ‘Roman’ cuz of the glory attached to it. There’s even a nation called Romania. The Eastern Romans, mainly the Greeks were never truly Roman. It was Greeks in the Roman shell but just conniving like pesky no-good Greeks.

    Anyway, the disinterest that the Eastern Roman Empire felt toward the fallen West — and its lack of effort to regain that the territory for the sake of Roman glory — goes to show how static and mummified the empire had become.

    Western Europeans regained classical knowledge through the Muslims who were, at the time, far more dynamic, adventurous, and ever-on-the-move. Byzantine became, along with the Persians(against whom they struggled), more defensive and turtle-ish. Over time, it was just a weakened creature hiding inside a tough shell until the shell too was broken totally by the Turks though even the lowly Venetians kicked its butt so many times.

    The question that Russia faces is the conflict between production and preservation. Parts of the West grew far richer and more powerful by monetizing innovation, adventurousness, and production. Those who could innovate more, explore more, and produce more could become rich. And over time, such folks could take the main power and change society in drastic ways. Overall, society might become richer and more powerful, but those who had had the power and maintained certain civilizational principles would be swept aside.
    Consider Spain and Britain. The Spanish elites did a better job of keeping their power and privileges. They understood the threat posed by the business class. If those good at business were to take power, they might change too much of everything. So, such people had to be suppressed by kings and clergy. So, Spain did more to preserve its core elite power and principle. But in suppressing innovation and production, it lagged behind Great Britain. In Britain, there were more incentives for the explorers and producers], and the changes they wrought meant a richer and more powerful nation. But it could also mean that the ruling elites and the principles they stood for would undergo profound changes, maybe for better, maybe for the worse.

    We see the problem in the US. Because of its rule of law and meritocracy, US has made tremendous gains by rewarding the talented of any kind. So, Jews gained power over Wasps, and Jews contributed a great deal to economics, technology, medicine, and etc. And that made US richer and more powerful. But what Jews prefer in terms of narrative, culture, demographics, and politics is often at odds what many white gentiles prefer(especially if nostalgic for how things used to be). So, even though Jewish factor in the 20th century made the US a much richer and more powerful nation, it also meant the decline and loss of the governing power and narrative.

    To keep the power as it is, innovation and production are things to be feared as welcomed. Those most adept at innovation and production(and information) may take the power and then use the power to undermine the traditional identities and values of the society. (To be sure, people have been seeking for the secret to maintain the power and bring about greater progress in the modern era. Japan in Meiji Restoration sought to both modernize Japan yet maintain national independence. Russian Tsars tried to modernize and keep the system. Kemalists in Turkey tried to create a system that would remain nationalistic yet allow modernization that were key to power in the new age. China since the 80s is trying to keep the power in the communist party but also bring forth changes that will make China a great power).

    Much of the power used to be dynastic. Power was seen as belonging to certain families than to the nation as a whole. The kings might be concerned of the people, and they may claim to represent the truths and values of the larger society, but the power was all about maintaining power within the royal family.
    A revolution in politics happened when this sense of power went from royalty to race/ethnos/nation. And for a time, the kings tried to fuse dynasticism with nationalism, as with the German Kaiser and Russian Tsar. They played roles as fathers of the nation. And in Japan, the Emperor was promoted as father of the whole nation.
    But the old way was pretty much doomed. Dynasticism was almost completely destroyed in Europe in WWI. Several yrs earlier, it had ended in China as well in 1911.
    The new power was constituted around nations. It didn’t matter who or which family held the power AS LONG AS the dominant race/culture of the nation was powerful.
    As long as ‘we the people’ were powerful, it didn’t matter much what social or economic transformations took place. Unlike kings were ruled until death, modern societies could be democratic with rulers who ruled only for several yrs. But the true power wasn’t invested with them but with the nation as a whole. The System was geared toward serving the nation.
    As Jews gained in power and wealth, they began to target nationalism, at least the gentile kind, as it was an obstacle to Jewish domination. And no nation better illustrated this than Russia after the 90s. Russian nationalism has been the obstacle for Jewish communists(who eventually lost out) and Jewish capitalists(whose plan was checked though far from finished in Russia).

    Globalism seeks to serve the power that goes beyond the nation. Globalism isn’t about the elites of a nation leading the masses of their own kind to make the nation stronger and richer as a WHOLE. It is about the elites of all groups working for Jewish Globalists who have created a global network of super-privileged for those who are allowed entry. So, the elites of all nations have a hard time resisting this temptation. Why work nationally when there is a much bigger pie by working globally? Why try to lead the moron masses when it’s more profitable to serve the globalist super-elites?

    This is the core of Russian nationalists vs Atlanticists. The latter are like Sonny in THE GODFATHER when Sollozzo proposes that the Corleone’s join in the dope business. A lot of money to be made in that stuff. But is it good for the Family? What does it matter as long as there is more money for those who are offered special deals for taking part in the business.

    At any rate, the thing that is most important for any nation is HOW TO MAINTAIN NATIONAL POWER WHILE ALLOWING THE KIND OF NECESSARY PROGRESS AND PRODUCTION THAT WILL KEEP THE NATION AT THE EDGE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL POWER.

    North Korea is an extreme case of keeping the power by suppressing change and innovation. And many civilizations had been like this. Many powers-that-be in a domain sought to keep the power by preventing too much change. But while this may be effective domestically, it makes the domain vulnerable to outside power that did allow great progress and innovation.

    Yet, if progress and innovation are allowed to run free, it could mean that society will be just taken control of by guys like Zuckerberg, Soros, Buffet, Gates, and other clowns who, for all their intelligence and talent, are either fools, cretins, snakes, or boogers about human nature and history.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Holy goodness! I do believe you summarized, in only 3,100 words, several volumes of Will and Ariel Durant's The Story of Civilization!
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Indeed a neat summary (with extras) of much of what I have suggested should qualify The Saker's oversimplified view of continuity and relevance. So... glad to see you back.

    Let me now quibble. Japan and Germany had much more of the old power structure and old elites left in place after WW2 than you imply. And Putin has co-opted plenty of the oligarchs who had nothing to do with the KGB.

    And I think you are confusing "autonomy" with "autarky" but I question the latter as a description of Russia. The US had a much more sophisticated AND self-sufficient economy in the 1950s than Russia ever did except by treating all societies with very few imports and exports as autarkic.

    As to Jews I suspect that you have very little real knowledge or evidence behind your theorising concerning their globalism and the inter alia anti-Western white motivation behind it.

    My guess - probably as good as yours - would be that Russian Jews were typically amongst the Russians who were most knowledgeable about Western ways and ideas and, as well as, or apart from, Marxists were keen on Western models for bringing their homeland into the modern world. And that would have included the rich Anglophone countries as well as the Continentals who theorised about them favourably (and Alexander Herzen come to think of it). So, at best, you oversimplify.
  58. @jacques sheete

    but citing the Maccabeans doesn’t make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic,
     
    Ha! I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call me on that! Anyway, I put that quote in there because I was answering this.

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have “only” been allowed to stone a person to death...
     
    I was merely showing that crucifixion wasn't distinctly Roman. Oh, well, maybe I was trying to make another point or two. Anyway, I think the answer I provided is valid.

    I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can’t see why)
     
    I'm no religious or biblical scholar, but I love reading that and Ecclesiastes.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same,
     
    OMG! Please don't say that to a Greek orthodox priest! Seriously, those dudes, in my experience, are hard core. Again, I'm no scholar on the subject tho.

    Ecclesiastes (from memories of occasions when I was the Reader long ago) “of making many books there is no end” (and lots and lots of good stuff “Vanity of vanities saith the preacher” usw).

    Read More
  59. polistra says:

    This is overly complex. It’s just a basic personality difference. Russians are personally and nationally INDEPENDENT. Contrary. Ornery.

    They don’t take well to precision organization based on theories.

    Germans love precision organization based on theories. German Jews are the most precise and theoretical of all. Americans are mainly German, so we share the love to some extent.

    Over the centuries, Germans and Americans and especially German Jews have tried to impose theory-based precision on Russia, either via conquest or via industrial colonization. It never works well.

    Lenin tried to impose Marx. Didn’t work, had to fall back to normal feudalism. Henry Ford, certainly no Jew, tried to impose industrial precision. Didn’t work. Jeffrey Sachs tried to impose a newer German Jew theory of financialism. Didn’t work.

    Russians are incurably realistic and practical. Thank God for one sane nation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Interesting, and to me novel, idea. But perhaps your view of Russian individuality fits in with my observation long ago when staying at a place where lots of country people who lived far from the metropolis used to stay for a night or two. I could imagine them sitting for hours on a tractor thinking things through for themselves instead of picking up conventional views from the media.
  60. mcohen says:
    @Alden
    This article should be titled" The Eastern Orthodox Church is the only true Christian Church and Catholics and Jews are wrong wrong wrong."

    Wasn't the Khazar hypothesis disproved by DNA? Didn't DNA testing prove that Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Italian and middle eastern ancestry.?

    I really don't see how the bible explains what Russia has been doing the last 500 years.

    exactly right.it is all pipeline politics with a dash of relegion

    but did i get a whiff of something though.correct if i am wrong here.sakers take

    whitey has decided that the branch office is running amok and needs to be reined in
    the usa cannot do it…..ooooohh to painful to watch.pass me the bagels and lox
    the chinese cannot do it …..confucious say….what is this abraham wong thing

    the euros are all tied up in knots

    so

    igor says to boris,time to rollout the big kahuna.dust it off and sail it to the med….past all the other whities to fly the flag and give the message…i got this boys.

    who knows what the wind sows

    Read More
  61. @jacques sheete
    Any sources for that?

    Thanks for the reply earlier. The one common denominator is that the practice was intended to serve both as an extreme punishment and deterrent by providing a very slow death and keeping the evidence on display for enough time for people to get the message. That they were able to face such an awful trial whilst singing Always Look On The Bright Side is inspiration enough for me.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Thanks for taking the time to respond and thanks for taking it correctly! Can you imagine the horror?

    Then there was Vlad the ["Christian"] Impaler!!

    What next???
    , @Wizard of Oz
    There is a use for you in your semi retirement. Your views should be welcomed as an addition of unfashionable common sense to the Sentencing Advisory Board.
  62. Rehmat says:
    @jacques sheete
    Why are you asking me?

    And why are you telling me stuff I already know?

    PS: If one would read Josephus' Antiquities it would quickly become apparent that Jews were pretty much anti-Jew, anti-Semitic, even anti-G-d at times and anti-pretty much everything (no, I am not kidding) as well. A lot of them couldn't stand even their parents, spouses, siblings, former allies, high priests and what not.

    Don’t you wish Muslims should act like the Jews you know – and save people from Islamophobia?

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/28/islamophobia-tales-of-2-christian-universities/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Islamophobia}

    What is that, Mohammad?

    Is that like IslamoFascists who have been generously allowed to immigrate and settle in prosperous, peaceful Christian countries of the West - and then spreading Christianophobia as a way of saying "Thanks"?

    As in like these ingrate IslamoFascist anti-Christian savages?
    [Muslims in East London]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMZe5hXodQg


    btw, Mohammad: anytime you have any issues with so-called 'Islamophobia', Leave. Go back to your native Islamistan Pakistan, and live a peaceful, prosperous life surrounded by blessed Islamophilia.

    Nobody invited you: you begged to come and live in Christian North America.

  63. This Anabaptist American Christian concurs with quite a bit of what you’ve written above. I’m interested in what Rod Dreher, the journalist/author who’s converted to Russian Orthodoxy, and is having a new book, The Benedict Option published, would think.

    Read More
  64. @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for the reply earlier. The one common denominator is that the practice was intended to serve both as an extreme punishment and deterrent by providing a very slow death and keeping the evidence on display for enough time for people to get the message. That they were able to face such an awful trial whilst singing Always Look On The Bright Side is inspiration enough for me.

    Thanks for taking the time to respond and thanks for taking it correctly! Can you imagine the horror?

    Then there was Vlad the ["Christian"] Impaler!!

    What next???

    Read More
  65. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @HBM
    The "Religion of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" did not exist, because they did not exist. Jews did not exist. Judaism did not exist. Like much of the "Old Testament," the Patriarchs and what they supposedly did is a retrohistorical fiction, an ethnic propaganda invention, almost certainly authored by Hellenized Jews in the Greek period.

    "Jews" were Canaanite pagans until the Persians arrived in the 5th century. Persians brought the Zoroastrianism that imparted Judaism with many of its most salient features, things we think of as being peculiarly Jewish: a focus on personal "holiness"; food and other taboos; angelology; putative monotheism; messianism and apocalyptic eshcatology. The Greeks later brought the intellectual culture that Jews would usurp for their own ends yet which informed it enough to begin to give Judaism its final shape: a disembodied, neck-up, purely religious yet intellectual affair for persecuted, harmless bookworms.

    Jesus-- a composite figure, a Judean Jewish folk hero, or whatever he was, assuming he existed-- was a Jewish Messiah, one of many aspirants to that title, who violently opposed the Romans and the occupation and was executed by the Roman state. That "Jews killed Jesus" is another retrohistorical fiction in the tradition of propagandistic Jewish revision, as expressed through the shabbos goyim given enough time for the mixed affair of the inevitable backlash against Jewish origins.

    Hellenized Jews, like the Jews who run Western media today, spun the tales of what their cousins were up to in the Holy Land (like Jewish terrorists stabbing Romans soldiers to death in the streets, fantasizing about an apocalypse to slaughter all the goyish invaders driven by a longing for a holy prophet to lead the charge of YHWH's heavenly armies to liquidate what they called the Kittim, the men from across the sea)-- these Hellenized Jewish "intellectuals" told us this Jesus was not a fanatic but rather a Socrates-like pacifist faith-healer and unjustly persecuted savior of the goyim, to make Jews appear less threatening to the Westerners they despised, in the exact same way the Jewish media lies endlessly about the nature of what their cousins do in Israel today to our detriment; or whatever else it is that they are up to that forwards a Jewish agenda while ruining the rest of us, such as telling us that "Islam is a Religion of Peace" or infecting the underclass with the notion that lumpenprole black criminals who try to murder White cops are utterly blameless civil rights martyrs.

    And like today, many of the goyim swallow this mendacious, kosher version of events, and then compulsively tell their own lies. After the turmoil of the first century, marked by endless Jewish rebellion and the subversive, exploitative, firestarting behavior of Jews in Rome itself, the new religion could not survive unless it took on features of the growing anti-Jewish opinions of remaining good Romans, which end-up piecemeal in the texts of the New Testament, and particularly in the ones authored late.

    Our Russophobia today is driven exclusively by our Jewish media, by the same tired, poisonous suite of Jewish ethnomytholocial fantasies and interests, which are projected out into the world from Jewish psyches and the psyches of the goyim they've captured.

    Our Jews have a dual desire to exact holy vengeance (once again) on Russia for its previous "persecution" of Jews as well as to make sure that Russia becomes a puppet state of the "AngloZionists" in order to realize their Messianic vision of a globalist hellscape that will have healed they goyishe masses of "hate"-- a thing which of course means the centralization of power into the hands of post-nationalist Jewish bankers, lawyers, intelligentsia, causuists, technocrats and oligarchs lording it over the coffee-colored neutered masses.

    Who knows how extensive is this vision for the future they have scripted out in their collective psyche, having plugged-in new realities into the old tales and inscriptions? Whatever the case, however far-into the future they see this old-new bit of theater playing out, they sure aren't going to admit or tell us about it.

    I’ll buy you a round too.

    Heck, I’ll buy you twenty.

    What caliber do you shoot?

    Read More
  66. Avery says:
    @Rehmat
    Don't you wish Muslims should act like the Jews you know - and save people from Islamophobia?

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/12/28/islamophobia-tales-of-2-christian-universities/

    {Islamophobia}

    What is that, Mohammad?

    Is that like IslamoFascists who have been generously allowed to immigrate and settle in prosperous, peaceful Christian countries of the West – and then spreading Christianophobia as a way of saying “Thanks”?

    As in like these ingrate IslamoFascist anti-Christian savages?
    [Muslims in East London]

    btw, Mohammad: anytime you have any issues with so-called ‘Islamophobia’, Leave. Go back to your native Islamistan Pakistan, and live a peaceful, prosperous life surrounded by blessed Islamophilia.

    Nobody invited you: you begged to come and live in Christian North America.

    Read More
    • Agree: Marcus
    • Replies: @Rehmat
    A Zionazi always think his entire tribe is being hunted by neo-Nazis.

    The best part is, late chief rabbi of Toronto, Wolf Gunther Plaut, in his 1990 book, ‘The Man Who Would Be Messiah' claims that it were the B****d Frankist Zionist Jews who carried Jewish Holocaust during WWII.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/03/24/rabbi-frankist-jews-committed-holocaust/
  67. @Anon
    If Russia were a small nation, would its spiritual roots matter?

    It's the size and natural resources.

    I mean who ever cared about Greece being Orthodox? Greece didn't amount to much as a power in modern times.

    There are factors that continue to make Russia a power to reckon with.

    Huge size and natural resources.

    Population. Even though not large by standards of a big nation, it is still bigger than that of any European nation. And the number of whites in Russia isn't much below number of whites in the US.

    Paradoxically, failure as strength. Russian failure over and over pull it in the opposite direction of the West. Suppose privatization had succeeded in the 90s. Russians might just be happy to be 'just another European nation'. But the 90s failed, and it led to a national reaction, therefore a renewed sense of independence that is a kind of strength. Similarly, the failure of Russians to hold back the Mongols led it become something of a 'Eastern' Civilization divorced from rest of Europe. Also, Russia's failure in WWI led to communism that also set Russia apart from Rest of the West. So, Russian autonomy owes to its series of failures. So, failure has led to a kind of strength that makes Russians look more inward and seek its own path independent of globalist powers.

    Due to its size and accident of history, Russia is one of the few genuinely autonomous powers(vis-a-vis) in the world, along with China and Iran.

    Germany and Japan may be rich, but they were crushed in WWII and lost sovereignty. They are essentially vassal states of the US.
    Also, as WWII was the 'good war' for the 'good guys', Japan and Germany lost not only political pride but moral pride. They were defeated in soul as well in body.
    In contrast, Russia, due to its vast and resources, was able to push back and win the war. So, it won in body and soul. Indeed, though the West is reluctant to admit it, Russia did more than any nation to defeat Germany. (Granted, Russia isn't entirely innocent or noble since Stalin had made some wicked deals with Hitler.)

    One might say Russia lost the Cold War, and it is true enough that Russia almost fell into the hands of globalists. But the Soviet intelligence organizations were involved in the changes that led to the fall of communism, and as such, were poised to take the power when things got out of hand, and things did get out of hand. So, even though Putin was none too happy about the dissolution of the USSR(which went way beyond letting go of Warsaw Pact nations), the New Order was bound to favor insider agents lik him who had the connections. When Germany and Japan lost the war, they had to be purged and do as the US said. In contrast, many of those in power centers during communism remained at the center, especially in intelligence and military circles.

    Also, this thing called 'Russophobia' has different shapes and patterns depending on which power we are talking about. China's fear of Russia goes back to Russian imperialism in 19th century and the Sino-Soviet rift. Things have improved in recent times, and it goes to show that China and Russia, like China and India, are both natural partners and natural rivals. They have much to gain through increased business and understanding, but they are too close for comfort.

    Caucasus and Central Asian Muslims have their own reasons for 'Russophobia' as many of their historical legends have to do with resistance against Russian-Christian Imperialism.

    And Finn and Eastern Europeans still have Russian belligerence fresh on their minds, even though, to be sure, Soviet aggression wasn't always Russian in character.

    But 'Russophobia' cannot be understood apart from Russian 'phobias' of other peoples. Russians have had this tendency to conflate all Asians with Mongols who invaded Russia and ruled for few centuries. This fear abated in the 19th century when Russia was heading ever more eastward and feeding off the carcass of decaying China. But it came back to life with rise of Japan and the 1905 war that gave Japan the decisive advantage in Manchuria and Northeast Asia.
    And Russians have their own legends and narratives of how Russia had been invaded by Teutons-on-ice, like in the film Alexander Nevsky where Germanic barbarians come charging over the ice.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybuKQf9p5jg

    Russians also had/have phobias about Tatars of various stripes, the Polish-Lithuanian empire, Napoleon and the French army, Nazis, Chechen cutthroats, and etc. And following the Sino-Soviet rift, there was much Russian anxiety about the Chinese-gone-nuts. And even with the fall of USSR, Russians look back on the Cold War and see the West as the primary aggressor that was overly paranoid and unwilling to come to terms with Russia. So, even though some Russians regret Soviet rule over non-Russian folks, they feel it was necessary to maintain a bulwark against the aggressive West.

    But recently, it is all about angry Jews who feel that the big fish slipped out of their fingers in the 90s. Jews in the 90s saw Russia as a big sturgeon. They had it in their net, and they were gonna gut it for all the caviar in the world, but the damn fish got away because Putin and the new nationalists cut the net, and Jewish globalists just cannot let this pass, especially as they fear that Russian-ism might spread to EU nations(and may be even to some white Americans, which is Jewish Globalists love to draw comparisons between 'deplorable' white Americans and Trump as puppet of Putin the 'new hitler'. ) Also, it hurt Jewish pride that they got outwitted by dumb Russians.
    I really don't think any ethnic group in America give a damn about Russia except the Jews. To be sure, given that homomania is the new religion of the West, some insipid fools in US, Canada, UK, and etc may see Russia as particularly evil because it doesn't bow down to the holey anus.
    Indeed, in our post-Christian and post-moral age --- the age of 'pornokratia' when the two things the West worships most if the homo anus and the negro dong, and especially the negro dong inside the holy homo anus --- , the main 'spiritual' struggle is about Russians not bowing down, pulling their pants down, and sticking their ass toward heaven in prayer that they will be humped by 'gay angels'. The West is all about worshiping homo paraders and priders, rappers, and black thug athletes. White boys kiss the homo ass while white girls dream of using wombs to create black babies.
    So, Russia seems like an alien and even evil nation to decadent Westerners who worship homomania in the age of 'pornokratia'.

    As for Roman Catholicism being 'modern' and 'progressive', it's all relative. Compared to Orthodox Faith, that certainly was the case. But compared to certain Protestant denominations and secular culture, much of Catholicism has been a conservative force throughout the ages.

    Also, even though Saker says the True Church remained powerful in the Byzantine part of 'Roman Empire', the Western Church better captured the spirit of Jesus. Why this paradox? Because of the relative stability and continuity in the East, its version of Christianity became stuffy, moribund, stagnant, cob-webby, dank, lethargic, beardish, and bellowish.

    In contrast, the fall of Rome led to a 'crucifixion' of an entire civilization. Remember Jesus's apotheosis wasn't possible without the whupping, the execution, and death. Jesus had to undergo this trial by fire. Byzantium avoided this, whereas Rome soon suffered on a grand scale what had happened to Jesus, like St. Augustine said in Bob Dylan's dream. The Passion of Rome led to pillaging, raping, looting, arson, murdering, bashing, torturing, and other crazy stuff. Romans got whupped real bad like Jesus, and many of them got killed. But just like Jesus rose from death and triumphed --- notice that the image of Jesus on Crucifix is both tragic and triumphant, a tormented figure but also arms spread out like a bird defying gravity --- , Rome that had been sacked by Germanic boors recovered and, if anything, won over the barbarian louts who realized the wrongfulness of their ways and decided to defend Rome. So, the Roman Church's trial-by-fire made it a more vital religion representing the spirit of Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Church could just carry on with Christian rituals in relative safety and stability. In contrast, Roman Christians had to ask really tough questions after all the horrifying spectacle by Animal-House-like pagan louts. And it was that tragic element that made the Western Church more interesting and dynamic than the Eastern ones in the years to come. (Consider how the Russian Orthodox Christians didn't try to convert outsiders and heathens though it might accept some non-Russians into the fold if they made a trek to Russia and decided to grow beards.) To be sure, the Catholics lost it for me once they decided to let Negroes into the inner sanctum in the Vatican.

    Also, because of the sense of continuity, the Byzantine just got tired and bored with its classical culture instead of seeing it as the stuff for fresh inspiration. Worse, heavy and stuffy form of Christianity(too cozy with the official powers-that-be) came to gradually smother whatever was vital in the Classical pagan tradition. Because the fading of Classical influences were more gradual than dramatic -- as in Rome with the wild ransacking and stuff -- , the Eastern 'Roman' empire didn't even know what they were losing. In contrast, the fall of Rome was so violent that everyone knew that something sacred and glorious had been destroyed and lost.

    The Dark Ages prepared the path for the New Age. Not only did Roman Christianity reignite from near-total-extinction(thereby becoming analogous to what Jesus went through) but the near-total loss of classical culture and its recovery led to excitement and creativity. Also, because the Germanic shook things up, there was less official stuffiness to govern and restrict everything. Sometimes, wars and collapse are horrible, but they can clear and lay the ground the new possibilities. It's like after a forest burns down, a new fresh forest can grow. The Eastern Empire was like a forest of trees that just grew older and older and gradually barren of leaves. And the shadow they cast prevented new plants from sprouting from the ground.

    Indeed, it is amazing that the Western Europeans regained much of classical knowledge not through Byzantines but from the Muslims. Even though much of classical knowledge was preserved in Byzantine, the Greeks(who ruled as the 'new' or 'other' Romans) had no will or desire to share this knowledge with the fallen West. The East just turned it back on the West. In a way, the very idea of Eastern Roman Empire was strange enough. The Romans had conquered the Greeks and Greek empire. But over time, Romans had moved the center of power to the East, but over there, the Greeks came to dominate the Eastern Empire. Greeks surely felt a certain glory in this, but they also never felt all that close to Roman stuff since the Romans had conquered them and stolen much of Greek culture. So, the Greeks-as-New-Romans must have felt ambivalent about the real Romans.

    There was the meaning of 'Roman' in the ethnic sense and in the civilizational sense, and Greeks were not ethnic Romans. It's like non-Romans among other folks tried to identify as 'Roman' cuz of the glory attached to it. There's even a nation called Romania. The Eastern Romans, mainly the Greeks were never truly Roman. It was Greeks in the Roman shell but just conniving like pesky no-good Greeks.

    Anyway, the disinterest that the Eastern Roman Empire felt toward the fallen West --- and its lack of effort to regain that the territory for the sake of Roman glory --- goes to show how static and mummified the empire had become.

    Western Europeans regained classical knowledge through the Muslims who were, at the time, far more dynamic, adventurous, and ever-on-the-move. Byzantine became, along with the Persians(against whom they struggled), more defensive and turtle-ish. Over time, it was just a weakened creature hiding inside a tough shell until the shell too was broken totally by the Turks though even the lowly Venetians kicked its butt so many times.

    The question that Russia faces is the conflict between production and preservation. Parts of the West grew far richer and more powerful by monetizing innovation, adventurousness, and production. Those who could innovate more, explore more, and produce more could become rich. And over time, such folks could take the main power and change society in drastic ways. Overall, society might become richer and more powerful, but those who had had the power and maintained certain civilizational principles would be swept aside.
    Consider Spain and Britain. The Spanish elites did a better job of keeping their power and privileges. They understood the threat posed by the business class. If those good at business were to take power, they might change too much of everything. So, such people had to be suppressed by kings and clergy. So, Spain did more to preserve its core elite power and principle. But in suppressing innovation and production, it lagged behind Great Britain. In Britain, there were more incentives for the explorers and producers], and the changes they wrought meant a richer and more powerful nation. But it could also mean that the ruling elites and the principles they stood for would undergo profound changes, maybe for better, maybe for the worse.

    We see the problem in the US. Because of its rule of law and meritocracy, US has made tremendous gains by rewarding the talented of any kind. So, Jews gained power over Wasps, and Jews contributed a great deal to economics, technology, medicine, and etc. And that made US richer and more powerful. But what Jews prefer in terms of narrative, culture, demographics, and politics is often at odds what many white gentiles prefer(especially if nostalgic for how things used to be). So, even though Jewish factor in the 20th century made the US a much richer and more powerful nation, it also meant the decline and loss of the governing power and narrative.

    To keep the power as it is, innovation and production are things to be feared as welcomed. Those most adept at innovation and production(and information) may take the power and then use the power to undermine the traditional identities and values of the society. (To be sure, people have been seeking for the secret to maintain the power and bring about greater progress in the modern era. Japan in Meiji Restoration sought to both modernize Japan yet maintain national independence. Russian Tsars tried to modernize and keep the system. Kemalists in Turkey tried to create a system that would remain nationalistic yet allow modernization that were key to power in the new age. China since the 80s is trying to keep the power in the communist party but also bring forth changes that will make China a great power).

    Much of the power used to be dynastic. Power was seen as belonging to certain families than to the nation as a whole. The kings might be concerned of the people, and they may claim to represent the truths and values of the larger society, but the power was all about maintaining power within the royal family.
    A revolution in politics happened when this sense of power went from royalty to race/ethnos/nation. And for a time, the kings tried to fuse dynasticism with nationalism, as with the German Kaiser and Russian Tsar. They played roles as fathers of the nation. And in Japan, the Emperor was promoted as father of the whole nation.
    But the old way was pretty much doomed. Dynasticism was almost completely destroyed in Europe in WWI. Several yrs earlier, it had ended in China as well in 1911.
    The new power was constituted around nations. It didn't matter who or which family held the power AS LONG AS the dominant race/culture of the nation was powerful.
    As long as 'we the people' were powerful, it didn't matter much what social or economic transformations took place. Unlike kings were ruled until death, modern societies could be democratic with rulers who ruled only for several yrs. But the true power wasn't invested with them but with the nation as a whole. The System was geared toward serving the nation.
    As Jews gained in power and wealth, they began to target nationalism, at least the gentile kind, as it was an obstacle to Jewish domination. And no nation better illustrated this than Russia after the 90s. Russian nationalism has been the obstacle for Jewish communists(who eventually lost out) and Jewish capitalists(whose plan was checked though far from finished in Russia).

    Globalism seeks to serve the power that goes beyond the nation. Globalism isn't about the elites of a nation leading the masses of their own kind to make the nation stronger and richer as a WHOLE. It is about the elites of all groups working for Jewish Globalists who have created a global network of super-privileged for those who are allowed entry. So, the elites of all nations have a hard time resisting this temptation. Why work nationally when there is a much bigger pie by working globally? Why try to lead the moron masses when it's more profitable to serve the globalist super-elites?

    This is the core of Russian nationalists vs Atlanticists. The latter are like Sonny in THE GODFATHER when Sollozzo proposes that the Corleone's join in the dope business. A lot of money to be made in that stuff. But is it good for the Family? What does it matter as long as there is more money for those who are offered special deals for taking part in the business.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yut9qPyT9jE

    At any rate, the thing that is most important for any nation is HOW TO MAINTAIN NATIONAL POWER WHILE ALLOWING THE KIND OF NECESSARY PROGRESS AND PRODUCTION THAT WILL KEEP THE NATION AT THE EDGE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL POWER.

    North Korea is an extreme case of keeping the power by suppressing change and innovation. And many civilizations had been like this. Many powers-that-be in a domain sought to keep the power by preventing too much change. But while this may be effective domestically, it makes the domain vulnerable to outside power that did allow great progress and innovation.

    Yet, if progress and innovation are allowed to run free, it could mean that society will be just taken control of by guys like Zuckerberg, Soros, Buffet, Gates, and other clowns who, for all their intelligence and talent, are either fools, cretins, snakes, or boogers about human nature and history.

    Holy goodness! I do believe you summarized, in only 3,100 words, several volumes of Will and Ariel Durant’s The Story of Civilization!

    Read More
  68. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Anonymous

    On May 21, 2014, British Jewish Daily Mail reported a Canadian Jewish woman volunteer at the WW II Museum in Halifax, Marienne Ferguson saying that Prince Charles likened Russian president Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler in a private conversation.

    “And now Putin is doing just about same as Hitler,” she said.
     
    Control is addictive.
    No way they can come to grips with the fact Russia isn't under their control like the West.
    China is the same, but, unlike Russia, China has never been under their control, and this makes acceptance easier.

    Not being under their control means being Hitler. 'Hitler' has become a synonym for 'refusing to obey'.

    What can confound so many minds so deeply? An excess of power.

    “Not being under their control means being Hitler. ‘Hitler’ has become a synonym for ‘refusing to obey’.

    What can confound so many minds so deeply?”

    I believe that if you think about what you said, then you would see that you have answered your own question. Hitler is not merely a synonym for refusing to obey, he literally didn’t obey–and was duly punished for his dereliction. In this sense, they, meaning those many deeply confounded minds of whom you speak, tell the truth in spite of their not knowing that and why it is true.

    Read More
  69. annamaria says:
    @Lot

    not only because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish
     
    And here Saker exposes himself as a retard who cannot be bothered to read the many articles on Jewish genetic history showing no support whatsoever for a Jewish-Khazar connection. (Indeed, to the extent any modern Jews do have Khazar blood, it is probably from intermarriage with Russian/Ukrainian Slavs).

    Saker and his admirers here pretend to be WN, but really they are just obsessed with their hatred of the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi).

    As for Mother Russia being the savior of whites,

    What is the non-Muslim birth rate in Putin's Russia now that he has been the dictator there for 16 years?

    How much of Russia's economy is nothing but resource extraction?

    Can you name a single important scientific innovation to come out of Russia in the past 16 years?

    Saker shows one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as "Anglozionist," and becoming partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites in the world while hating on the rest of us.

    “…partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites…”
    Are you writing about Clintons and the pedophile Epstein, or about Cheney, Blair, Bush the lesser and others in “the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi)” ?
    The UK authorities had been very differential towards certain Sir Saville, while having no pity to hundreds of orphans that were raped by the “Sir.” The same “protectors of mortality” made Assange staying, for years, in two bedrooms of Ecuadorian embassy, guarded expensively by the UK police, on a cue from such paragon of virtue as Hillary Clinton, the beneficiary of the pedophile Epstein’ largesse.

    “…one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as “Anglozionist”…
    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims. These wars were pushed by Israel-firsters with a goal to “reformulate” the Middle East to satisfy Israel’s desires. See the bags with shredded children, the limbless youth, and the destroyed cities and even whole states. Well-done, AIPAC, PNAC, and the scores of war-mongering think tanks filled with ziocons.

    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department? Don’t they, and their financial backer Kolomojsky (a citizen of Israel) deserve to be called “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites” or you believe that these Ukrainian “freedom fighters” are as good as the various “moderate” jihadists supported and armed by the US/NATO and their bosom-buddies Saudis?

    “..the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to…”
    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.” To get some ideas of why the modern-day Trotskies are despised in Russia, read “Two Hundred Years Together” by Solzhenitsyn…. If you will be able, of course, to find this documentary in a translated version, since this documentary has been sequestered by ALL main publishing houses in the US and UK.

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

    http://gawker.com/here-is-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epsteins-little-b-1681383992

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims.
     
    Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.

    I am with Derbyshire on Muslims: Don't let them into the West and don't try to interfere with their internal politics. Take steps to wean ourselves off their hydrocarbon exports. I feel the same way about Russia, however unlike Muslims, I have some hope for the future of Russia after Putin based on the positive experience of post-communist Poland and other similar countries.


    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department?
     
    We should stay out of that mess too. As far as I am concerned, except for the baltic states all of the ex USSR is fair game for Russia to do whatever it wants.

    “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites”
     
    You are right, the Ukraine and various other ex-Soviet states are about as backward and corrupt as Russia. Ukraine is Russia without all the oil and gold to export to the West.

    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.”
     
    Sure, nothing antisemitic about babbling on and on about "AngloZionist Empire."

    Anyway, I don't care if random Putinists on the Internet hate Jews or not. I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people. These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.

  70. @5371
    How could a Wikipedia copy-paster know that only the first Roman province of Mesopotamia coincided with what later became Iraq?

    But any poĺity thereabouts which was described by a name meaning it was between the Tigris and Euphrates (not Ganges and Indus or Rio Negro and Solemoës or Miss and Miss one may fairly assume) had to be in modern Iraq did it not?

    (Down Rover! This is not your fight.)

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    It was called Mesopotamia for the same reason that Pakistan calls one of its provinces Kashmir although it does not actually contain any of the Vale of Kashmir after which the province is named.
  71. Alden says:
    @jacques sheete
    Any sources for that?

    Ask Mr Google. I’m sure you can find something. Or the nearest university library. Alexander the Great did it a lot as punishment for recalcitrant troops and enemies including the Dr who attended his deceased lover.

    But it was a fairly common execution for rebellious slaves, exceptionally nasty criminal’s etc in Greece.

    Read More
  72. @Alden
    I remember that very well. About 10 books a year were published to great acclaim that Japan would take over the world. Many friends read and believed those books.

    Cynic that I am I always pointed out that Japan's great rise was due to:

    1 Loot from WW2
    2 Massive amounts of aid from America.
    3 Unequal tariff arrangements; America had a tiny tariff on Japanese goods. Japan basically imported nothing including birth control pills until the patent ran out.
    4. As soon as the Korean war began our military gave the contracts for jeeps, ambulances, trucks and most vehicles to Japanese companies in Japan and not American companies in America.

    I was right and the best selling authors were wrong

    Excellent points! Caucasians are at the top, Asians in the middle, blacks at the bottom.

    Read More
  73. Alden says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Now that I've finished reading your stimulating article I can proffer my view that you don't make your case because "roots" implies causal continuity and I just don't see it. There's now no relevant spiritual connection positive or negative (cp. evangelical Christian Zionists and their support for Israel). True modern Western secularists might explain the primitive nature of Russian patriotism and support for authoritarians as having some Orthoodox as well as peasant roots but that's but a faint echo of your thesis.

    In reality Russia didn't mean anything to Western Europeans until Peter the Great started making it matter. Of course I am no scholarly authority so contradict me if you can.

    And where, BTW, was Western Russophobia when Britain was subsidising Russia to fight Napoleon?

    And where was western Russia phobia during the first half of the 20th century when America subdued Russia and France and Britian were begging Russia to join the fight against Germany?

    Read More
  74. @Anon
    If Russia were a small nation, would its spiritual roots matter?

    It's the size and natural resources.

    I mean who ever cared about Greece being Orthodox? Greece didn't amount to much as a power in modern times.

    There are factors that continue to make Russia a power to reckon with.

    Huge size and natural resources.

    Population. Even though not large by standards of a big nation, it is still bigger than that of any European nation. And the number of whites in Russia isn't much below number of whites in the US.

    Paradoxically, failure as strength. Russian failure over and over pull it in the opposite direction of the West. Suppose privatization had succeeded in the 90s. Russians might just be happy to be 'just another European nation'. But the 90s failed, and it led to a national reaction, therefore a renewed sense of independence that is a kind of strength. Similarly, the failure of Russians to hold back the Mongols led it become something of a 'Eastern' Civilization divorced from rest of Europe. Also, Russia's failure in WWI led to communism that also set Russia apart from Rest of the West. So, Russian autonomy owes to its series of failures. So, failure has led to a kind of strength that makes Russians look more inward and seek its own path independent of globalist powers.

    Due to its size and accident of history, Russia is one of the few genuinely autonomous powers(vis-a-vis) in the world, along with China and Iran.

    Germany and Japan may be rich, but they were crushed in WWII and lost sovereignty. They are essentially vassal states of the US.
    Also, as WWII was the 'good war' for the 'good guys', Japan and Germany lost not only political pride but moral pride. They were defeated in soul as well in body.
    In contrast, Russia, due to its vast and resources, was able to push back and win the war. So, it won in body and soul. Indeed, though the West is reluctant to admit it, Russia did more than any nation to defeat Germany. (Granted, Russia isn't entirely innocent or noble since Stalin had made some wicked deals with Hitler.)

    One might say Russia lost the Cold War, and it is true enough that Russia almost fell into the hands of globalists. But the Soviet intelligence organizations were involved in the changes that led to the fall of communism, and as such, were poised to take the power when things got out of hand, and things did get out of hand. So, even though Putin was none too happy about the dissolution of the USSR(which went way beyond letting go of Warsaw Pact nations), the New Order was bound to favor insider agents lik him who had the connections. When Germany and Japan lost the war, they had to be purged and do as the US said. In contrast, many of those in power centers during communism remained at the center, especially in intelligence and military circles.

    Also, this thing called 'Russophobia' has different shapes and patterns depending on which power we are talking about. China's fear of Russia goes back to Russian imperialism in 19th century and the Sino-Soviet rift. Things have improved in recent times, and it goes to show that China and Russia, like China and India, are both natural partners and natural rivals. They have much to gain through increased business and understanding, but they are too close for comfort.

    Caucasus and Central Asian Muslims have their own reasons for 'Russophobia' as many of their historical legends have to do with resistance against Russian-Christian Imperialism.

    And Finn and Eastern Europeans still have Russian belligerence fresh on their minds, even though, to be sure, Soviet aggression wasn't always Russian in character.

    But 'Russophobia' cannot be understood apart from Russian 'phobias' of other peoples. Russians have had this tendency to conflate all Asians with Mongols who invaded Russia and ruled for few centuries. This fear abated in the 19th century when Russia was heading ever more eastward and feeding off the carcass of decaying China. But it came back to life with rise of Japan and the 1905 war that gave Japan the decisive advantage in Manchuria and Northeast Asia.
    And Russians have their own legends and narratives of how Russia had been invaded by Teutons-on-ice, like in the film Alexander Nevsky where Germanic barbarians come charging over the ice.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybuKQf9p5jg

    Russians also had/have phobias about Tatars of various stripes, the Polish-Lithuanian empire, Napoleon and the French army, Nazis, Chechen cutthroats, and etc. And following the Sino-Soviet rift, there was much Russian anxiety about the Chinese-gone-nuts. And even with the fall of USSR, Russians look back on the Cold War and see the West as the primary aggressor that was overly paranoid and unwilling to come to terms with Russia. So, even though some Russians regret Soviet rule over non-Russian folks, they feel it was necessary to maintain a bulwark against the aggressive West.

    But recently, it is all about angry Jews who feel that the big fish slipped out of their fingers in the 90s. Jews in the 90s saw Russia as a big sturgeon. They had it in their net, and they were gonna gut it for all the caviar in the world, but the damn fish got away because Putin and the new nationalists cut the net, and Jewish globalists just cannot let this pass, especially as they fear that Russian-ism might spread to EU nations(and may be even to some white Americans, which is Jewish Globalists love to draw comparisons between 'deplorable' white Americans and Trump as puppet of Putin the 'new hitler'. ) Also, it hurt Jewish pride that they got outwitted by dumb Russians.
    I really don't think any ethnic group in America give a damn about Russia except the Jews. To be sure, given that homomania is the new religion of the West, some insipid fools in US, Canada, UK, and etc may see Russia as particularly evil because it doesn't bow down to the holey anus.
    Indeed, in our post-Christian and post-moral age --- the age of 'pornokratia' when the two things the West worships most if the homo anus and the negro dong, and especially the negro dong inside the holy homo anus --- , the main 'spiritual' struggle is about Russians not bowing down, pulling their pants down, and sticking their ass toward heaven in prayer that they will be humped by 'gay angels'. The West is all about worshiping homo paraders and priders, rappers, and black thug athletes. White boys kiss the homo ass while white girls dream of using wombs to create black babies.
    So, Russia seems like an alien and even evil nation to decadent Westerners who worship homomania in the age of 'pornokratia'.

    As for Roman Catholicism being 'modern' and 'progressive', it's all relative. Compared to Orthodox Faith, that certainly was the case. But compared to certain Protestant denominations and secular culture, much of Catholicism has been a conservative force throughout the ages.

    Also, even though Saker says the True Church remained powerful in the Byzantine part of 'Roman Empire', the Western Church better captured the spirit of Jesus. Why this paradox? Because of the relative stability and continuity in the East, its version of Christianity became stuffy, moribund, stagnant, cob-webby, dank, lethargic, beardish, and bellowish.

    In contrast, the fall of Rome led to a 'crucifixion' of an entire civilization. Remember Jesus's apotheosis wasn't possible without the whupping, the execution, and death. Jesus had to undergo this trial by fire. Byzantium avoided this, whereas Rome soon suffered on a grand scale what had happened to Jesus, like St. Augustine said in Bob Dylan's dream. The Passion of Rome led to pillaging, raping, looting, arson, murdering, bashing, torturing, and other crazy stuff. Romans got whupped real bad like Jesus, and many of them got killed. But just like Jesus rose from death and triumphed --- notice that the image of Jesus on Crucifix is both tragic and triumphant, a tormented figure but also arms spread out like a bird defying gravity --- , Rome that had been sacked by Germanic boors recovered and, if anything, won over the barbarian louts who realized the wrongfulness of their ways and decided to defend Rome. So, the Roman Church's trial-by-fire made it a more vital religion representing the spirit of Christianity. The Eastern Orthodox Church could just carry on with Christian rituals in relative safety and stability. In contrast, Roman Christians had to ask really tough questions after all the horrifying spectacle by Animal-House-like pagan louts. And it was that tragic element that made the Western Church more interesting and dynamic than the Eastern ones in the years to come. (Consider how the Russian Orthodox Christians didn't try to convert outsiders and heathens though it might accept some non-Russians into the fold if they made a trek to Russia and decided to grow beards.) To be sure, the Catholics lost it for me once they decided to let Negroes into the inner sanctum in the Vatican.

    Also, because of the sense of continuity, the Byzantine just got tired and bored with its classical culture instead of seeing it as the stuff for fresh inspiration. Worse, heavy and stuffy form of Christianity(too cozy with the official powers-that-be) came to gradually smother whatever was vital in the Classical pagan tradition. Because the fading of Classical influences were more gradual than dramatic -- as in Rome with the wild ransacking and stuff -- , the Eastern 'Roman' empire didn't even know what they were losing. In contrast, the fall of Rome was so violent that everyone knew that something sacred and glorious had been destroyed and lost.

    The Dark Ages prepared the path for the New Age. Not only did Roman Christianity reignite from near-total-extinction(thereby becoming analogous to what Jesus went through) but the near-total loss of classical culture and its recovery led to excitement and creativity. Also, because the Germanic shook things up, there was less official stuffiness to govern and restrict everything. Sometimes, wars and collapse are horrible, but they can clear and lay the ground the new possibilities. It's like after a forest burns down, a new fresh forest can grow. The Eastern Empire was like a forest of trees that just grew older and older and gradually barren of leaves. And the shadow they cast prevented new plants from sprouting from the ground.

    Indeed, it is amazing that the Western Europeans regained much of classical knowledge not through Byzantines but from the Muslims. Even though much of classical knowledge was preserved in Byzantine, the Greeks(who ruled as the 'new' or 'other' Romans) had no will or desire to share this knowledge with the fallen West. The East just turned it back on the West. In a way, the very idea of Eastern Roman Empire was strange enough. The Romans had conquered the Greeks and Greek empire. But over time, Romans had moved the center of power to the East, but over there, the Greeks came to dominate the Eastern Empire. Greeks surely felt a certain glory in this, but they also never felt all that close to Roman stuff since the Romans had conquered them and stolen much of Greek culture. So, the Greeks-as-New-Romans must have felt ambivalent about the real Romans.

    There was the meaning of 'Roman' in the ethnic sense and in the civilizational sense, and Greeks were not ethnic Romans. It's like non-Romans among other folks tried to identify as 'Roman' cuz of the glory attached to it. There's even a nation called Romania. The Eastern Romans, mainly the Greeks were never truly Roman. It was Greeks in the Roman shell but just conniving like pesky no-good Greeks.

    Anyway, the disinterest that the Eastern Roman Empire felt toward the fallen West --- and its lack of effort to regain that the territory for the sake of Roman glory --- goes to show how static and mummified the empire had become.

    Western Europeans regained classical knowledge through the Muslims who were, at the time, far more dynamic, adventurous, and ever-on-the-move. Byzantine became, along with the Persians(against whom they struggled), more defensive and turtle-ish. Over time, it was just a weakened creature hiding inside a tough shell until the shell too was broken totally by the Turks though even the lowly Venetians kicked its butt so many times.

    The question that Russia faces is the conflict between production and preservation. Parts of the West grew far richer and more powerful by monetizing innovation, adventurousness, and production. Those who could innovate more, explore more, and produce more could become rich. And over time, such folks could take the main power and change society in drastic ways. Overall, society might become richer and more powerful, but those who had had the power and maintained certain civilizational principles would be swept aside.
    Consider Spain and Britain. The Spanish elites did a better job of keeping their power and privileges. They understood the threat posed by the business class. If those good at business were to take power, they might change too much of everything. So, such people had to be suppressed by kings and clergy. So, Spain did more to preserve its core elite power and principle. But in suppressing innovation and production, it lagged behind Great Britain. In Britain, there were more incentives for the explorers and producers], and the changes they wrought meant a richer and more powerful nation. But it could also mean that the ruling elites and the principles they stood for would undergo profound changes, maybe for better, maybe for the worse.

    We see the problem in the US. Because of its rule of law and meritocracy, US has made tremendous gains by rewarding the talented of any kind. So, Jews gained power over Wasps, and Jews contributed a great deal to economics, technology, medicine, and etc. And that made US richer and more powerful. But what Jews prefer in terms of narrative, culture, demographics, and politics is often at odds what many white gentiles prefer(especially if nostalgic for how things used to be). So, even though Jewish factor in the 20th century made the US a much richer and more powerful nation, it also meant the decline and loss of the governing power and narrative.

    To keep the power as it is, innovation and production are things to be feared as welcomed. Those most adept at innovation and production(and information) may take the power and then use the power to undermine the traditional identities and values of the society. (To be sure, people have been seeking for the secret to maintain the power and bring about greater progress in the modern era. Japan in Meiji Restoration sought to both modernize Japan yet maintain national independence. Russian Tsars tried to modernize and keep the system. Kemalists in Turkey tried to create a system that would remain nationalistic yet allow modernization that were key to power in the new age. China since the 80s is trying to keep the power in the communist party but also bring forth changes that will make China a great power).

    Much of the power used to be dynastic. Power was seen as belonging to certain families than to the nation as a whole. The kings might be concerned of the people, and they may claim to represent the truths and values of the larger society, but the power was all about maintaining power within the royal family.
    A revolution in politics happened when this sense of power went from royalty to race/ethnos/nation. And for a time, the kings tried to fuse dynasticism with nationalism, as with the German Kaiser and Russian Tsar. They played roles as fathers of the nation. And in Japan, the Emperor was promoted as father of the whole nation.
    But the old way was pretty much doomed. Dynasticism was almost completely destroyed in Europe in WWI. Several yrs earlier, it had ended in China as well in 1911.
    The new power was constituted around nations. It didn't matter who or which family held the power AS LONG AS the dominant race/culture of the nation was powerful.
    As long as 'we the people' were powerful, it didn't matter much what social or economic transformations took place. Unlike kings were ruled until death, modern societies could be democratic with rulers who ruled only for several yrs. But the true power wasn't invested with them but with the nation as a whole. The System was geared toward serving the nation.
    As Jews gained in power and wealth, they began to target nationalism, at least the gentile kind, as it was an obstacle to Jewish domination. And no nation better illustrated this than Russia after the 90s. Russian nationalism has been the obstacle for Jewish communists(who eventually lost out) and Jewish capitalists(whose plan was checked though far from finished in Russia).

    Globalism seeks to serve the power that goes beyond the nation. Globalism isn't about the elites of a nation leading the masses of their own kind to make the nation stronger and richer as a WHOLE. It is about the elites of all groups working for Jewish Globalists who have created a global network of super-privileged for those who are allowed entry. So, the elites of all nations have a hard time resisting this temptation. Why work nationally when there is a much bigger pie by working globally? Why try to lead the moron masses when it's more profitable to serve the globalist super-elites?

    This is the core of Russian nationalists vs Atlanticists. The latter are like Sonny in THE GODFATHER when Sollozzo proposes that the Corleone's join in the dope business. A lot of money to be made in that stuff. But is it good for the Family? What does it matter as long as there is more money for those who are offered special deals for taking part in the business.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yut9qPyT9jE

    At any rate, the thing that is most important for any nation is HOW TO MAINTAIN NATIONAL POWER WHILE ALLOWING THE KIND OF NECESSARY PROGRESS AND PRODUCTION THAT WILL KEEP THE NATION AT THE EDGE OF SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL POWER.

    North Korea is an extreme case of keeping the power by suppressing change and innovation. And many civilizations had been like this. Many powers-that-be in a domain sought to keep the power by preventing too much change. But while this may be effective domestically, it makes the domain vulnerable to outside power that did allow great progress and innovation.

    Yet, if progress and innovation are allowed to run free, it could mean that society will be just taken control of by guys like Zuckerberg, Soros, Buffet, Gates, and other clowns who, for all their intelligence and talent, are either fools, cretins, snakes, or boogers about human nature and history.

    Indeed a neat summary (with extras) of much of what I have suggested should qualify The Saker’s oversimplified view of continuity and relevance. So… glad to see you back.

    Let me now quibble. Japan and Germany had much more of the old power structure and old elites left in place after WW2 than you imply. And Putin has co-opted plenty of the oligarchs who had nothing to do with the KGB.

    And I think you are confusing “autonomy” with “autarky” but I question the latter as a description of Russia. The US had a much more sophisticated AND self-sufficient economy in the 1950s than Russia ever did except by treating all societies with very few imports and exports as autarkic.

    As to Jews I suspect that you have very little real knowledge or evidence behind your theorising concerning their globalism and the inter alia anti-Western white motivation behind it.

    My guess – probably as good as yours – would be that Russian Jews were typically amongst the Russians who were most knowledgeable about Western ways and ideas and, as well as, or apart from, Marxists were keen on Western models for bringing their homeland into the modern world. And that would have included the rich Anglophone countries as well as the Continentals who theorised about them favourably (and Alexander Herzen come to think of it). So, at best, you oversimplify.

    Read More
  75. @Wizard of Oz
    Having read so far to the sub-heading "A 2000 Year Old Dispute" and as one who has expressed critical scepticism about The Saker's opinionating I want to also express my sympathy for his attempts to stir interest in his theses without citing convincing documented evidence. And as a memo to self I note that the plausibility of his case that anti-Russian sentiment can be sourced to ancient spiritual disputes should be tested by looking for comparable causal sequences which might lend support to the idea that it is an unsurprising example of human nature in action rather than some freakish outlier or just a picture confected by coincidences.

    My opinion is that the name “Russia” sounds sort of dislike-able. Moskovia, or Slavia only, should replace “Russia”. What is in a name? well, nice sounding helps.

    Read More
  76. Alden says:
    @Stan
    The Catholic church has subverted the traditional meaning of the crucifixion. Now on Palm Sunday the congregants take the part of the crowd to proclaim "“His blood be upon us and upon our children.”

    “His blood be upon us and upon our children” Has nothing to do with Palm Sunday, 6 days before his trial for whatever. It would probably be included in the good Friday service.

    The gospel makes it very clear that his blood be upon us and upon our children was said by the Jews who attended the trial. But the trial was definitely not held on Palm Sunday.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Are you really that ignorant of the Western Church? Have you really never been to a Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran church in your life?

    Palm Sunday begins with the blessing and distribution of palms and a procession marking the entry into Jerusalem, but it quickly moves on to the Passion narrative. Traditionally all four Passions are chanted or read during Holy Week: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John on, respectively, Palm Sunday, Holy Tuesday, Holy Wednesday, and Good Friday. (In the post-Vatican II Catholic Church, Mathew Mark and Luke are read in three-yearly rotation on Palm Sunday and John is still always the Gospel for Good Friday.) Since “His blood be on our heads” etc. is in St. Matthew’s Gospel, it is indeed on Palm Sunday that that would be said or sung—by the choir traditionally, or, as often today, by the congregation.
  77. Rehmat says:
    @Avery
    {Islamophobia}

    What is that, Mohammad?

    Is that like IslamoFascists who have been generously allowed to immigrate and settle in prosperous, peaceful Christian countries of the West - and then spreading Christianophobia as a way of saying "Thanks"?

    As in like these ingrate IslamoFascist anti-Christian savages?
    [Muslims in East London]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMZe5hXodQg


    btw, Mohammad: anytime you have any issues with so-called 'Islamophobia', Leave. Go back to your native Islamistan Pakistan, and live a peaceful, prosperous life surrounded by blessed Islamophilia.

    Nobody invited you: you begged to come and live in Christian North America.

    A Zionazi always think his entire tribe is being hunted by neo-Nazis.

    The best part is, late chief rabbi of Toronto, Wolf Gunther Plaut, in his 1990 book, ‘The Man Who Would Be Messiah’ claims that it were the B****d Frankist Zionist Jews who carried Jewish Holocaust during WWII.

    https://rehmat1.com/2012/03/24/rabbi-frankist-jews-committed-holocaust/

    Read More
  78. @mcohen.
    i might even buy you a second round.i always put humour before intellectual blather about relegion.
    1.
    survival comes first.all relegion does is provide the will and intent to survive.

    2.
    there is absolutely no connection between relegion and G-d.if there was we all would belong to one universal relegion.one truth.unquestioned

    3
    the laws of nature are the absolute truth.

    4.
    G-d exists i have no doubt at all.

    Nicely summarised. But pls explain 4 which I presume to embody the humour of the more entertaining Crossword setters. I don’t use my limited mental energy on Crosswords…

    Read More
    • Replies: @mcohen.
    w o oz

    4. is tricky to explain.i base my statement purely on lifelong personal experiences i have had.G-d in this case is a higher power that exists around us.i truly believe that.i once explained it like this
    there are 3 sides to a coin heads, tails ,and the edge,which is the hand of G-d both seen and unseen.
  79. @Alden
    This article should be titled" The Eastern Orthodox Church is the only true Christian Church and Catholics and Jews are wrong wrong wrong."

    Wasn't the Khazar hypothesis disproved by DNA? Didn't DNA testing prove that Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Italian and middle eastern ancestry.?

    I really don't see how the bible explains what Russia has been doing the last 500 years.

    Long before the DNA testing it struck me that The Great Khazar Connection was nonsense in its 13th Tribe form because Ashkenazim spoke a German dialect….

    Read More
  80. @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for the reply earlier. The one common denominator is that the practice was intended to serve both as an extreme punishment and deterrent by providing a very slow death and keeping the evidence on display for enough time for people to get the message. That they were able to face such an awful trial whilst singing Always Look On The Bright Side is inspiration enough for me.

    There is a use for you in your semi retirement. Your views should be welcomed as an addition of unfashionable common sense to the Sentencing Advisory Board.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    It has always been a standing joke in the family that I have been semi-retired my entire working life. My dad used to ask if I would consider coming out of retirement to make a pot of tea, and that was in my teens.
  81. Rehmat says:

    Romans occupiers of Palestine did try to crucify Jesus – not because they hated him being an non-pagan Israelite – but because the Jew York Times, WSJ, and CNN told the Roman governor that Jesus posed an existential threat to the Roman occupation.

    However, by a Divine act Jesus was able to fool both the Romans and the Jewish Lobby. That’s the very reason the rabbis who penned Talmud a century after Jesus’ disappearance cursed him and his mother.

    To think of several Christian, Jewish and Hindu authors have claimed that Jesus not only got married but even produced a son while living in the Kashmir valley.

    In June 2015, a Jerusalem court judge Jacob Sheiman ruled out that Jesus did marry Mary Magdalene and both had a son by the name Judah from the marriage – as a 2007 documentary “The Lost Tomb of Jesus” claims. The movie was produced by James Cameron and was based on a script written by Israeli-born Canadian Jewish film-maker Simcha Jocobovici…….

    https://rehmat1.com/2015/06/19/israeli-court-jesus-was-married-and-had-a-son/

    Read More
  82. @Alden
    And where was western Russia phobia during the first half of the 20th century when America subdued Russia and France and Britian were begging Russia to join the fight against Germany?

    “subdued Russia”?

    Read More
  83. Lot says:
    @annamaria
    “…partisans of the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites…”
    Are you writing about Clintons and the pedophile Epstein, or about Cheney, Blair, Bush the lesser and others in “the most successful groups of whites (English and Ashkenazi)” ?
    The UK authorities had been very differential towards certain Sir Saville, while having no pity to hundreds of orphans that were raped by the “Sir.” The same “protectors of mortality” made Assange staying, for years, in two bedrooms of Ecuadorian embassy, guarded expensively by the UK police, on a cue from such paragon of virtue as Hillary Clinton, the beneficiary of the pedophile Epstein’ largesse.

    “…one of the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to: warmth toward Islam, attacking the United States and the United Kingdom as “Anglozionist”…
    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims. These wars were pushed by Israel-firsters with a goal to “reformulate” the Middle East to satisfy Israel’s desires. See the bags with shredded children, the limbless youth, and the destroyed cities and even whole states. Well-done, AIPAC, PNAC, and the scores of war-mongering think tanks filled with ziocons.

    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department? Don't they, and their financial backer Kolomojsky (a citizen of Israel) deserve to be called “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites” or you believe that these Ukrainian "freedom fighters” are as good as the various “moderate” jihadists supported and armed by the US/NATO and their bosom-buddies Saudis?

    "..the major dead-ends that antisemitism leads to..."
    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.” To get some ideas of why the modern-day Trotskies are despised in Russia, read “Two Hundred Years Together” by Solzhenitsyn.... If you will be able, of course, to find this documentary in a translated version, since this documentary has been sequestered by ALL main publishing houses in the US and UK.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Savile_sexual_abuse_scandal
    http://gawker.com/here-is-pedophile-billionaire-jeffrey-epsteins-little-b-1681383992

    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims.

    Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.

    I am with Derbyshire on Muslims: Don’t let them into the West and don’t try to interfere with their internal politics. Take steps to wean ourselves off their hydrocarbon exports. I feel the same way about Russia, however unlike Muslims, I have some hope for the future of Russia after Putin based on the positive experience of post-communist Poland and other similar countries.

    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department?

    We should stay out of that mess too. As far as I am concerned, except for the baltic states all of the ex USSR is fair game for Russia to do whatever it wants.

    “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites”

    You are right, the Ukraine and various other ex-Soviet states are about as backward and corrupt as Russia. Ukraine is Russia without all the oil and gold to export to the West.

    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.”

    Sure, nothing antisemitic about babbling on and on about “AngloZionist Empire.”

    Anyway, I don’t care if random Putinists on the Internet hate Jews or not. I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people. These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    “Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.”
    How old are you – middle school or high school? A civil war is part of the history of the US as well as all European countries. The difference is, the ongoing civil wars in the Middle East have been provoked and carefully cultivated by the invading US/NATO forces. Why? – Yes, hydrocarbon and the striving for the ideal Eretz Israel (see Yinon Plan, http://www.voltairenet.org/article186019.html).

    “…I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.”
    Really? And what segment of your “fellow white Americans” you care of in particular? For example, Mr. Douglas Feith in his capacity of undersec. of def. had been weeding out the truly patriotic and competent Americans (like the honorable Colonel Patrick Lang, a former Green Beret and specialist in Arab culture) to prevent their expert influence on the US “deciders” re the US interventions in the Middle East. See the $5 trillions lost for the American citizenry, thousands American lives lost to the wars, and more than 1.000.000 lives lost in the Middle East. Add to that the radicalization of the region, the waves of desperate refugees to Europe, and the uncontrolled migration of Africans that used to be kept at bay by Qaddafi. Ever heard about Wolfowitz that had lied the US into the illegal war in Iraq? Or Michael Ledeen (of the Gladio fame) that had arranged the famous aluminum tubes? What about Bill Kristol, a “discoverer” and promoter of the useful idiot Sarah Palin? There is also the Kagans' clan of warmongers (http://hpub.org/the-kagans-a-jewish-family-business-of-perpetual-war-at-taxpayer-expense/). Do they constitute your kind of "fellow white Americans?" Perhaps this roster could help you realize why many people (including white Americans) are upset with Anglozionism.

    “These Putinists … are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.”
    And what is Netanyahu popularity… among the US Congress people? By the way, his constituency in Israel is basically a mini-USSR in exile. The alia from the Soviet Union represents the progeny of the former communists and the creators of secret police (see Kaganovich, the right hand of Stalin, who lived to a ripe age of 92), as well as the flower of Russian civilization in the fine arts and sciences.
    And of course, the US democracy is the bestest democracy whatever these Princeton researchers say about the US being a plutocracy. Never mind the despicable war criminal Clinton and the ridiculous Trump fighting for the presidency of the USA... The country is fragmented beyond repair, tragically.

    , @5371
    [ I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.]

    You don't care at all about white Americans when their interests conflict with those of world Jewry.

    [These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.]

    The only Russian you would not call a Putinist would be one who worked for those same Jewish interests. As for Russian interests, they are much more compatible with the interests of actual white Americans than those Jewish interests are. Furthermore, your claim to support Trump is no more honest than your claim to believe that Russia was hospitable to Jews.
  84. As for Catholic Russophobia, Saker is right.

    With respect to Anglicans he is not. The Russian Orthodox Church was a nationalist breakaway from the Constaninople Patriarchy for very similar reasons to the Anglican one (Religious centre in control of hostile power, seizure of Church wealth). There were close associations between the two until the 1920′s. When the Anglican Church came into existence under Elizabeth, to whom Ivan proposed, it was short of Bishops to continue the Apostolic Succession. The Russian Orthodox Church conveniently ordained three in Sweden (I have never found this on the internet, only in books). Anglican Bishops who stayed loyal to James II after the Dutch conquest of England were offered membership of the Russian Orthodox Church. Russophobia in English speaking countries is not so religiously based. Early contact between G Britain and Russia was almost entirely friendly and stayed so for centuries.

    Read More
  85. @Alden
    This article should be titled" The Eastern Orthodox Church is the only true Christian Church and Catholics and Jews are wrong wrong wrong."

    Wasn't the Khazar hypothesis disproved by DNA? Didn't DNA testing prove that Ashkenazi Jews are a mix of Italian and middle eastern ancestry.?

    I really don't see how the bible explains what Russia has been doing the last 500 years.

    Scientific evidence doesn’t deter serious haters. They filter it out.

    It is possible that the Khazar nobility in small numbers became Jews. They blocked the Don trade route (equal access to Byzantium and Persia). So they needed to sell slaves to both Christians and Muslims but Christians didn’t buy Christians and Muslims didn’t buy Muslims. They needed to buy from the one and sell to the other. The main body of the tribe wasn’t Jewish. Any genetic contribution to any population of modern Jews is invisibly small. No one has found it.

    Read More
  86. @5371
    To describe western Christianity as equally alien to eastern Christianity with talmudic Judaism is really crazy and irresponsible. As far as the specific theological innovation of the west, the dual procession of the Holy Ghost, is concerned, there is no evidence that it came from a deliberate Frankish quest for originality. It rather seems to have been introduced in Spain through ignorance. What divides the eastern and western churches is not theology but ecclesiastical discipline, folkways and political history. Much greater doctrinal differences than this were forgotten about when, for example, the Maronites reconciled to Rome without abandoning their monothelite past, or Nestorian Christians in Kerala accepted Jacobite monophysitism without missing a beat. I think the aim should be to soothe the strained relations between those attached to tradition on each side, not to further envenom them by importing the odium theologicum.

    5371 this is a first. Not entirely rubbish.

    Read More
  87. Wow, so much overthinking, so much wasted intellectualism. Let me set you straight, my man:

    The modern roots of Russophobia lie in President Putin’s refusal to celebrate sodomy. Period. Even worse, President Putin actively suppresses all pro-sodomite propaganda, including public acts of sodomy and heterophobia: there are YouTube videos of men literally whipping sodomites back into their closets. It is a beautiful thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Qoheleth
    Actually besides that issue we have a country who kicked out the international Banksters/ Anglo-Zios, who are mad as hell and won't take it any more! How can they be expected to run a one world government when Russia won't play.
  88. It’s discouraging, especially for an American Orthodox convert like myself. I wish the Russians, real stewards of the ancient faith the best, and will try to help in my own way.

    Read More
  89. @Wizard of Oz
    There is a use for you in your semi retirement. Your views should be welcomed as an addition of unfashionable common sense to the Sentencing Advisory Board.

    It has always been a standing joke in the family that I have been semi-retired my entire working life. My dad used to ask if I would consider coming out of retirement to make a pot of tea, and that was in my teens.

    Read More
  90. annamaria says:
    @Lot

    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims.
     
    Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.

    I am with Derbyshire on Muslims: Don't let them into the West and don't try to interfere with their internal politics. Take steps to wean ourselves off their hydrocarbon exports. I feel the same way about Russia, however unlike Muslims, I have some hope for the future of Russia after Putin based on the positive experience of post-communist Poland and other similar countries.


    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department?
     
    We should stay out of that mess too. As far as I am concerned, except for the baltic states all of the ex USSR is fair game for Russia to do whatever it wants.

    “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites”
     
    You are right, the Ukraine and various other ex-Soviet states are about as backward and corrupt as Russia. Ukraine is Russia without all the oil and gold to export to the West.

    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.”
     
    Sure, nothing antisemitic about babbling on and on about "AngloZionist Empire."

    Anyway, I don't care if random Putinists on the Internet hate Jews or not. I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people. These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.

    “Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.”
    How old are you – middle school or high school? A civil war is part of the history of the US as well as all European countries. The difference is, the ongoing civil wars in the Middle East have been provoked and carefully cultivated by the invading US/NATO forces. Why? – Yes, hydrocarbon and the striving for the ideal Eretz Israel (see Yinon Plan, http://www.voltairenet.org/article186019.html).

    “…I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.”
    Really? And what segment of your “fellow white Americans” you care of in particular? For example, Mr. Douglas Feith in his capacity of undersec. of def. had been weeding out the truly patriotic and competent Americans (like the honorable Colonel Patrick Lang, a former Green Beret and specialist in Arab culture) to prevent their expert influence on the US “deciders” re the US interventions in the Middle East. See the $5 trillions lost for the American citizenry, thousands American lives lost to the wars, and more than 1.000.000 lives lost in the Middle East. Add to that the radicalization of the region, the waves of desperate refugees to Europe, and the uncontrolled migration of Africans that used to be kept at bay by Qaddafi. Ever heard about Wolfowitz that had lied the US into the illegal war in Iraq? Or Michael Ledeen (of the Gladio fame) that had arranged the famous aluminum tubes? What about Bill Kristol, a “discoverer” and promoter of the useful idiot Sarah Palin? There is also the Kagans’ clan of warmongers (http://hpub.org/the-kagans-a-jewish-family-business-of-perpetual-war-at-taxpayer-expense/). Do they constitute your kind of “fellow white Americans?” Perhaps this roster could help you realize why many people (including white Americans) are upset with Anglozionism.

    “These Putinists … are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.”
    And what is Netanyahu popularity… among the US Congress people? By the way, his constituency in Israel is basically a mini-USSR in exile. The alia from the Soviet Union represents the progeny of the former communists and the creators of secret police (see Kaganovich, the right hand of Stalin, who lived to a ripe age of 92), as well as the flower of Russian civilization in the fine arts and sciences.
    And of course, the US democracy is the bestest democracy whatever these Princeton researchers say about the US being a plutocracy. Never mind the despicable war criminal Clinton and the ridiculous Trump fighting for the presidency of the USA… The country is fragmented beyond repair, tragically.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot
    You don't need to tell me Iraq was a disaster for the USA. However, Muslims have their own agency and are quite capable of killing each other by the millions without outside influences "provoking" them.
    , @animalogic
    Anna-Maria, you nail it time after time. This "Lot" character (incidentally, isn't calling yourself "Lot" open to the suspicion of Pretentiousness ?) is (as you suggest) morally infantile ?
    The supposed fact that Muslim's are quite adept at killing each other absolves us from OUR responsibility for killing millions more ? It's ... almost embarrassing ....
  91. mcohen. says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    Nicely summarised. But pls explain 4 which I presume to embody the humour of the more entertaining Crossword setters. I don't use my limited mental energy on Crosswords...

    w o oz

    4. is tricky to explain.i base my statement purely on lifelong personal experiences i have had.G-d in this case is a higher power that exists around us.i truly believe that.i once explained it like this
    there are 3 sides to a coin heads, tails ,and the edge,which is the hand of G-d both seen and unseen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    I think it's the same as I've heard from a professor friend who has been worldly enough to write books that sell. I'm OK with it as long as it doesn't translate into religious instructions to politicians on how to legislate. E.g. a human blastocyst is a human being so must be protected from destruction by the criminal law which is plainly illogical until it has been registered and received a Tax File Number and begun looking for a job.
  92. @Rehmat
    Guy Mettan is right to some extent. The Russians were feared as horde of barbarian living in the city of Moscow in ancient times. There was no Russia at that time. The entity was created by the King Ivan the terrible. The picture of the Red Square is a testimony to Russian barbarism. Its minarets were designed to resemble the turbans of the rulers of Mongol and Turk Muslim Khanates such as Crimean, Kazan, Astrakhan and others.

    The so-called 'Clash of Civilization' between the Jewish-controlled Soviet Union (Putin admitted it) and the Muslims was decided in Afghanistan in the 1980s when the Red Army was defeated by a bunch of Afghan Mujahideen. The credit, of course, was given to American aid by the Jewish-controlled media. Funny though, 100-times more military aid to the Jewish army could not help it defeat a bunch of Hizbullah fighters in 2006.

    Today, most of the Muslim world don't consider Russia as its major problem except in Chechnya. The Zionist Jews and Hindu fascists are the new Russian-enemies for the Muslim world.

    Putin has built friendly relations with Iran, and Syria - and now extending them to Pakistan and Turkey. India has long maintained its historical relations with Persia.
    No Muslim has equated Putin with Hitler, but many Jews and Christians have done it.

    On May 21, 2014, British Jewish Daily Mail reported a Canadian Jewish woman volunteer at the WW II Museum in Halifax, Marienne Ferguson saying that Prince Charles likened Russian president Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler in a private conversation.

    “And now Putin is doing just about same as Hitler,” she said.

    https://rehmat1.com/2014/05/22/canadian-jew-prince-charles-likened-putin-to-hitler/

    “Jewish Daily Mail”? Please elaborate and explain. The Harmsworths are about as clearly non-Jewish as it gets. Are you mad or just hopelessly ignorant of things that are common knowledge to people who have some reason to be read on line?

    Read More
  93. @mcohen.
    w o oz

    4. is tricky to explain.i base my statement purely on lifelong personal experiences i have had.G-d in this case is a higher power that exists around us.i truly believe that.i once explained it like this
    there are 3 sides to a coin heads, tails ,and the edge,which is the hand of G-d both seen and unseen.

    I think it’s the same as I’ve heard from a professor friend who has been worldly enough to write books that sell. I’m OK with it as long as it doesn’t translate into religious instructions to politicians on how to legislate. E.g. a human blastocyst is a human being so must be protected from destruction by the criminal law which is plainly illogical until it has been registered and received a Tax File Number and begun looking for a job.

    Read More
  94. @polistra
    This is overly complex. It's just a basic personality difference. Russians are personally and nationally INDEPENDENT. Contrary. Ornery.

    They don't take well to precision organization based on theories.

    Germans love precision organization based on theories. German Jews are the most precise and theoretical of all. Americans are mainly German, so we share the love to some extent.

    Over the centuries, Germans and Americans and especially German Jews have tried to impose theory-based precision on Russia, either via conquest or via industrial colonization. It never works well.

    Lenin tried to impose Marx. Didn't work, had to fall back to normal feudalism. Henry Ford, certainly no Jew, tried to impose industrial precision. Didn't work. Jeffrey Sachs tried to impose a newer German Jew theory of financialism. Didn't work.

    Russians are incurably realistic and practical. Thank God for one sane nation.

    Interesting, and to me novel, idea. But perhaps your view of Russian individuality fits in with my observation long ago when staying at a place where lots of country people who lived far from the metropolis used to stay for a night or two. I could imagine them sitting for hours on a tractor thinking things through for themselves instead of picking up conventional views from the media.

    Read More
  95. Qoheleth says:

    And yet. 1.2 billion Roman Catholics. 300 million or so Eastern Orthodox. 10 centuries of the true church under ONE pope then suddenly, like a Darwinian theory, numerous leaders emerge under the ‘first among equals’ program. How does that work?

    Read More
  96. Qoheleth says:
    @Je Suis Omar Mateen
    Wow, so much overthinking, so much wasted intellectualism. Let me set you straight, my man:

    The modern roots of Russophobia lie in President Putin's refusal to celebrate sodomy. Period. Even worse, President Putin actively suppresses all pro-sodomite propaganda, including public acts of sodomy and heterophobia: there are YouTube videos of men literally whipping sodomites back into their closets. It is a beautiful thing.

    Actually besides that issue we have a country who kicked out the international Banksters/ Anglo-Zios, who are mad as hell and won’t take it any more! How can they be expected to run a one world government when Russia won’t play.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Not really. Yeltsin never let foreign direct investors in anyway. The investors that did come had to buy at one remove.
  97. Re the Khazars: it’s one of those theories that looks really appealing at first blush but just doesn’t fit the evidence. We know from genetic studies that Eastern Ashkenazic Jews are extremely closely related to German/Austrian/Czech Jews. How would that be if Eastern AJ were descended from the Khazars?

    It’s not a big deal to me either way and I am willing to be convinced otherwise.

    My thesis will probably trigger even more condescending smirks, expression of outrage and accusations of bigotry and racism than usual

    Well thank you for saving me the time.

    Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    [Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?]

    Remember when your shitty countries got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Russkies to save your garbage people from total extermination?
    Projection is a Jewish vice.

    , @Wizard of Oz
    KYou don't need DNA. Just ask how the eastern Ashkenazim came to speak a German dialect viz. Yiddish.

    OK I know the legend that an Irish evangelist got up enough cod German to pick up the supplies with which he was going to buy the souls of starving Jews during a famine (cf. Rice Christians in China) and/but that they reneged on the deal after they had picked up the working language for trade.....

  98. 5371 says:
    @Lot

    The illegal wars of aggression in the Middle East have resulted in at least a million of civilian victims.
     
    Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.

    I am with Derbyshire on Muslims: Don't let them into the West and don't try to interfere with their internal politics. Take steps to wean ourselves off their hydrocarbon exports. I feel the same way about Russia, however unlike Muslims, I have some hope for the future of Russia after Putin based on the positive experience of post-communist Poland and other similar countries.


    By the way, what would be your opinion of Ukrainian neo-Nazis that have been profitably used by the Kaganate of State Department?
     
    We should stay out of that mess too. As far as I am concerned, except for the baltic states all of the ex USSR is fair game for Russia to do whatever it wants.

    “the most corrupt, dysfunctional and backward whites”
     
    You are right, the Ukraine and various other ex-Soviet states are about as backward and corrupt as Russia. Ukraine is Russia without all the oil and gold to export to the West.

    Enough already of crying “anti-Semitism.”
     
    Sure, nothing antisemitic about babbling on and on about "AngloZionist Empire."

    Anyway, I don't care if random Putinists on the Internet hate Jews or not. I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people. These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.

    [ I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.]

    You don’t care at all about white Americans when their interests conflict with those of world Jewry.

    [These Putinists are not their friends, however much they claim to support the right side in this election, and are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.]

    The only Russian you would not call a Putinist would be one who worked for those same Jewish interests. As for Russian interests, they are much more compatible with the interests of actual white Americans than those Jewish interests are. Furthermore, your claim to support Trump is no more honest than your claim to believe that Russia was hospitable to Jews.

    Read More
  99. 5371 says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    But any poĺity thereabouts which was described by a name meaning it was between the Tigris and Euphrates (not Ganges and Indus or Rio Negro and Solemoës or Miss and Miss one may fairly assume) had to be in modern Iraq did it not?

    (Down Rover! This is not your fight.)

    It was called Mesopotamia for the same reason that Pakistan calls one of its provinces Kashmir although it does not actually contain any of the Vale of Kashmir after which the province is named.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    OK where was it in modern terms?

    You're not going to tell me to rely on Wikipedia are you even if it was only the FO editing it, not Mossad?

  100. Lot says:
    @annamaria
    “Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.”
    How old are you – middle school or high school? A civil war is part of the history of the US as well as all European countries. The difference is, the ongoing civil wars in the Middle East have been provoked and carefully cultivated by the invading US/NATO forces. Why? – Yes, hydrocarbon and the striving for the ideal Eretz Israel (see Yinon Plan, http://www.voltairenet.org/article186019.html).

    “…I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.”
    Really? And what segment of your “fellow white Americans” you care of in particular? For example, Mr. Douglas Feith in his capacity of undersec. of def. had been weeding out the truly patriotic and competent Americans (like the honorable Colonel Patrick Lang, a former Green Beret and specialist in Arab culture) to prevent their expert influence on the US “deciders” re the US interventions in the Middle East. See the $5 trillions lost for the American citizenry, thousands American lives lost to the wars, and more than 1.000.000 lives lost in the Middle East. Add to that the radicalization of the region, the waves of desperate refugees to Europe, and the uncontrolled migration of Africans that used to be kept at bay by Qaddafi. Ever heard about Wolfowitz that had lied the US into the illegal war in Iraq? Or Michael Ledeen (of the Gladio fame) that had arranged the famous aluminum tubes? What about Bill Kristol, a “discoverer” and promoter of the useful idiot Sarah Palin? There is also the Kagans' clan of warmongers (http://hpub.org/the-kagans-a-jewish-family-business-of-perpetual-war-at-taxpayer-expense/). Do they constitute your kind of "fellow white Americans?" Perhaps this roster could help you realize why many people (including white Americans) are upset with Anglozionism.

    “These Putinists … are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.”
    And what is Netanyahu popularity… among the US Congress people? By the way, his constituency in Israel is basically a mini-USSR in exile. The alia from the Soviet Union represents the progeny of the former communists and the creators of secret police (see Kaganovich, the right hand of Stalin, who lived to a ripe age of 92), as well as the flower of Russian civilization in the fine arts and sciences.
    And of course, the US democracy is the bestest democracy whatever these Princeton researchers say about the US being a plutocracy. Never mind the despicable war criminal Clinton and the ridiculous Trump fighting for the presidency of the USA... The country is fragmented beyond repair, tragically.

    You don’t need to tell me Iraq was a disaster for the USA. However, Muslims have their own agency and are quite capable of killing each other by the millions without outside influences “provoking” them.

    Read More
  101. empty says:

    reading history, it occurred to me that the slogan “Putin is Hitler”, that is getting stale, could be upgraded and sexied up a bit:

    Putin combines the worst features of Hitler with the most evil traits of his namesake, Vlad Dracula — when Dracula ate, he cheered himself up by having opposition politicians and undocument Muslim immigrants impaled aroud his table, exactly like Putin has his opponents shot dead in front of his sinister Kremlin palace while he is enjoying supper … the intelligence community is confident that Putin is a spiritual, cultural and political sucessor of Dracula …

    Read More
  102. 5371 says:
    @Greasy William
    Re the Khazars: it's one of those theories that looks really appealing at first blush but just doesn't fit the evidence. We know from genetic studies that Eastern Ashkenazic Jews are extremely closely related to German/Austrian/Czech Jews. How would that be if Eastern AJ were descended from the Khazars?

    It's not a big deal to me either way and I am willing to be convinced otherwise.

    My thesis will probably trigger even more condescending smirks, expression of outrage and accusations of bigotry and racism than usual
     
    Well thank you for saving me the time.

    Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?

    [Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?]

    Remember when your shitty countries got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Russkies to save your garbage people from total extermination?
    Projection is a Jewish vice.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.
    , @Greasy William
    For today, at least, we are allies. Let's smash Globalism once and for all.

    Am America Chai.
  103. Svigor says:

    The Red Army whupped the piss out of the Afghans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Correct...and then left...or advanced, in a brilliantly executed militarily tactic, back to Russia - either way is fine.

    Peace.

  104. Che Guava says:
    @jacques sheete

    but citing the Maccabeans doesn’t make much of a case on the point, they were contempories of the late Roman Republic,
     
    Ha! I was wondering how long it would take for someone to call me on that! Anyway, I put that quote in there because I was answering this.

    I was always told that crucifixion was a distinctly Roman punishment and that the Jews would have “only” been allowed to stone a person to death...
     
    I was merely showing that crucifixion wasn't distinctly Roman. Oh, well, maybe I was trying to make another point or two. Anyway, I think the answer I provided is valid.

    I know most Prots. reject Ecclasisticus (can’t see why)
     
    I'm no religious or biblical scholar, but I love reading that and Ecclesiastes.

    I would guess that the Orthodox and Roman canons are the same,
     
    OMG! Please don't say that to a Greek orthodox priest! Seriously, those dudes, in my experience, are hard core. Again, I'm no scholar on the subject tho.

    Jaques,

    ‘Agree’ button has a longer time limit now. Srsly, the quote from Josephus was thought-provoking.

    Appreciated.

    Read More
  105. Che Guava says:
    @attilathehen
    China is collapsing. It has aborted itself. Asians can only copy, not create. Japan was set to takeover the world in the 1980s. How did that work out?

    This was not a matter of to ‘taking over the world’, this was a matter of the US making many unfair trade blockages, right down to the US making threats about Japan’s programme to have schools use the TRON OS instead of Windows. TRON was far superior at the time. Still is, in many cases.

    The govt. of the time abandoned the idea thx to US bullying.

    It was a programme of one-way bullying.

    Read More
  106. FW says:
    @Sherman
    Hey Andrey

    I think it's time for Jewish and Catholic pet owners in Florida to know what you are writing about their faith.

    Sherm

    Always true to type- threatening a person’s life, livelihood or reputation when no cogent counter-argument can be found.

    Read More
  107. Kilo 4/11 says:

    This is a good way to end the controversy over Judaism’s succession/absorption by the Roman Catholic Church:

    “My thoughts have led me closer and closer to Catholicism in which I see the full achievement of Judaism.” – Henri Bergson

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    Bergson also stated, in the last months of his life, that he attributed the rise of anti-semitism to the appearance of a generation of Jews wholly devoid of any sense of morality.
  108. 5371 says:
    @Kilo 4/11
    This is a good way to end the controversy over Judaism’s succession/absorption by the Roman Catholic Church:

    “My thoughts have led me closer and closer to Catholicism in which I see the full achievement of Judaism.” - Henri Bergson

    Bergson also stated, in the last months of his life, that he attributed the rise of anti-semitism to the appearance of a generation of Jews wholly devoid of any sense of morality.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kilo 4/11
    Yes, and he said that in the same excerpt footnoted in Lukacs' book "The Last European War", which I'm reading now. I left it out because I only wanted to answer the doctrinal/theological question. The immorality of the Jews is of course a vast subject of its own.
  109. Kilo 4/11 says:

    Here are other reasons some of us oppose Russia, reasons the russophiles here never admit:

    “Somehow when reflecting upon Russians, White Nationalists, who in all other instances are manifestly sober and realistic with regard to race and ethnicity, suddenly lose their common sense. When one speaks of German or French identity, it is understood that the Germans and the French are white, European peoples, regardless of recent non-white immigration. Thus German and French nationalism are not necessarily opposed to wider white racial interests, although they often have been. Let’s call German, French, and similar identities ethnic, because they denote a core ethnic group.

    Brazilian identity, however, does not have such unambiguous racial connotations. Brazil has many Europeans, but it also has blacks, Amerindians, and many individuals of two or more races. Thus Brazilian nationalism is, by its nature, inconsistent with white racial interests. American identity used to connote whiteness, even though America had non-white minorities. But the American identity has been transformed into a commitment to the idea of freedom and equality for all. Thus American nationalism is, by its nature, opposed to white racial interests. Let’s call American, Brazilian, and analogous identities trans-racial, since they both transcend and transform races.

    Russian identity is more analogous to American and Brazilian trans-racial identity than German or French ethnic identity. There are many Russians who are entirely European. But there are also many Russians of Near Eastern and Mongoloid ancestry, and many of mixed race. But even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three. A Russian is not, therefore, just another kind of European. Thus it is with good reason that Russians have always felt that their identity, interests, and destiny are distinct from those of Europe. European White Nationalists need to recognize this as well.

    White Nationalists are also well aware that a country’s developmental index, its per-capita GDP, the average income of its citizens, the level of corruption, etc. are directly correlated with average levels of many heritable traits within its population. In terms of corruption and many other parameters Russia is far closer to a country like Brazil than to any European country. In some areas, Russia is not even within Asian or Latin American ranges but rather competes with sub-Saharan Africa.

    Moreover, blaming the backwardness of Russia on Communism would be like blaming slavery for the backwardness of Africa. Firstly, Russia has always been backward in comparison to the West, and secondly most of the former Eastern bloc and USSR countries in Europe managed to create functional and prosperous societies shortly after freeing themselves from the Russian yoke. Belarus and Ukraine have been exceptions, mainly due to the fact that even after gaining independence they could never properly throw off Russian influence.

    If the identity, interests, and destiny of Russia are not European, the fact that Putin has passed some traditionalist laws and that Russian society is allegedly moving in a more traditionalist direction does not help European White Nationalists in any way. If we are to rejoice at Russian traditionalism and see them as allies simply because of that, then why don’t we see Muslims as allies and see hope for the West in their traditionalism as well? After all, they are even more hardcore than Russians.

    Traditionalism serves the well-being and promotes the survival of every different ethnic group, but just because different ethnic groups choose similar methods and values to promote their own survival does not automatically make them allies. Therefore the stronger traditionalism of Russians, their patriotism and pride in their heritage, do not advance White Nationalist interests any more than the racial pride and patriotism of Indians, Chinese, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans, or Africans. Indeed, it might make them more formidable enemies of our interests.”

    Emile Durand’s article in Counter-Currents, from which this excerpt is taken, very well sums up one strand of my opposition to Putin and current Russian actions. Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”. Conversations with people who escaped the NKVD murderers, in many cases after barely surviving slave labor for the Germans, will not leave anyone so gullible to today’s Russian propaganda: the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    Basically a load of shit by someone who is completely detached from Russian realities. But then again, doctrine-mongering is usually a first symptom of lack of knowledge.
    , @5371
    The author you quote, and possibly you yourself, has a strange muddle in his head. A Russian can have an ethnic identity and a state patriotism at the same time, just as an Englishman, Scotsman or Frenchman could be proud both of his nation and of his country's worldwide empire.
    , @Philip Owen
    Putin defends the constitution and uses the term Rossiani - citizens of Russia. He makes the stretch you describe.

    Most ethnic Russians use the term Russki and do not include Caucasians or Tatars as Russki. Russki usually include Belarussians and Ukrainians as Russki whether the latter like it or not. Nationalist journals like Sputnik i Pogrom (A Satellite and a Mess - ironic contrast) or most publications from Duginists use the term West Russia for Belarus and Ukraine but do not include Muslims or Buddhists as Russki. Their stretch to include them in the greater Russian state is often abandoned or turned into Eurasianism, also adopted by Putin as a grander setting for Russia.
    , @annamaria
    "Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”.

    Are you aware that the Ukrainian diaspora (that has been quite instrumental in its supports of the recent coup d'etat in Kiev and of the Ukrainian neo-Nazis) made to a large extend of a progeny of the former Nazi collaborators?
    Ukrainian collaborators with Nazis and treatment of Poles:
    "In late 1942, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was involved in a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Volhynia during the Ukrainian-Polish civil war, and in early 1944, these campaigns began to include Eastern Galicia. It is estimated that more than 35,000 and up to 60,000[38] Poles, mostly women and children along with unarmed men, were killed during the spring and summer campaign of 1943 in Volhynia."
    Ukrainian collaborators with Nazis and treatment of Jews:
    "Jews must be isolated, removed from governmental positions in order to prevent sabotage, those who are deemed necessary may only work with an overseer... Jewish assimilation is not possible." Later in June Yaroslav Stetsko sent to Bandera a report in which he indicated – "We are creating a militia which would help to remove the Jews and protect the population." In 1941–1942 while Bandera was cooperating with the Germans, OUN members did take part in anti-Jewish actions. German police at 1941 reported that "fanatic" Bandera followers, organised in small groups were "extraordinarily active" against Jews and communists."
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepan_Bandera

    MI5, the CIA and Ukrainian Nazi Collaborator Stepan Bandera: http://www.constantinereport.com/mi5-the-cia-and-ukranian-nazi-collaborator-stepan-bandera/

    "...the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations."
    The greatest relative concentration of the former Soviets is in Israel. Would you agree that Israel represents "the continuity of the USSR?"

  110. Sam Shama says:

    For a click bait this piece is good enough I suppose; still, Saker, are you looking to ignite new fires? Probably. So here you shall have it.

    You’ve succumbed to much nonsense when you blithely equate “true” Christianity to Judaism. If you are going to argue from a place of knowledge, you should do so: compare the Masoretic Torah [which includes the Yemenite version] or even the Samaritan Torah to the NT and you couldn’t miss the stark contrasts evident in the innumerable variations which have sprouted in the Christian texts as opposed to none in the Torah. So, the NT of any version does not compute.

    The Masoretic Torah contains 340,805 letters with variations between the Leningrad Codex and the Yemenite text to only 9 – spelling differences. The Leningrad Codex is wholly correct and checks with the original copy kept in the Ark of the Covenant))

    Every letter of the Torah is precisely placed – it is code for the name of Hashem, and variations render the text entirely useless. Its meaning would not compile let alone run; Saker you wouldn’t understand it, despite the benefit of centuries of lessons learnt.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Sam,

    I thought the Ark of the Covenant was lost - no?

    Peace.
    , @mcohen
    sam

    yes all well and good but what about the 27 variations contained in the 9 spelling differences.
    that alone morphs into a whole new set of opinions as listed by the great rav kook who said that even one stroke to many can change an aleph into a nun
  111. Kilo 4/11 says:
    @5371
    Bergson also stated, in the last months of his life, that he attributed the rise of anti-semitism to the appearance of a generation of Jews wholly devoid of any sense of morality.

    Yes, and he said that in the same excerpt footnoted in Lukacs’ book “The Last European War”, which I’m reading now. I left it out because I only wanted to answer the doctrinal/theological question. The immorality of the Jews is of course a vast subject of its own.

    Read More
  112. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @Kilo 4/11
    Here are other reasons some of us oppose Russia, reasons the russophiles here never admit:

    “Somehow when reflecting upon Russians, White Nationalists, who in all other instances are manifestly sober and realistic with regard to race and ethnicity, suddenly lose their common sense. When one speaks of German or French identity, it is understood that the Germans and the French are white, European peoples, regardless of recent non-white immigration. Thus German and French nationalism are not necessarily opposed to wider white racial interests, although they often have been. Let’s call German, French, and similar identities ethnic, because they denote a core ethnic group.

    Brazilian identity, however, does not have such unambiguous racial connotations. Brazil has many Europeans, but it also has blacks, Amerindians, and many individuals of two or more races. Thus Brazilian nationalism is, by its nature, inconsistent with white racial interests. American identity used to connote whiteness, even though America had non-white minorities. But the American identity has been transformed into a commitment to the idea of freedom and equality for all. Thus American nationalism is, by its nature, opposed to white racial interests. Let’s call American, Brazilian, and analogous identities trans-racial, since they both transcend and transform races.

    Russian identity is more analogous to American and Brazilian trans-racial identity than German or French ethnic identity. There are many Russians who are entirely European. But there are also many Russians of Near Eastern and Mongoloid ancestry, and many of mixed race. But even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three. A Russian is not, therefore, just another kind of European. Thus it is with good reason that Russians have always felt that their identity, interests, and destiny are distinct from those of Europe. European White Nationalists need to recognize this as well.

    White Nationalists are also well aware that a country’s developmental index, its per-capita GDP, the average income of its citizens, the level of corruption, etc. are directly correlated with average levels of many heritable traits within its population. In terms of corruption and many other parameters Russia is far closer to a country like Brazil than to any European country. In some areas, Russia is not even within Asian or Latin American ranges but rather competes with sub-Saharan Africa.

    Moreover, blaming the backwardness of Russia on Communism would be like blaming slavery for the backwardness of Africa. Firstly, Russia has always been backward in comparison to the West, and secondly most of the former Eastern bloc and USSR countries in Europe managed to create functional and prosperous societies shortly after freeing themselves from the Russian yoke. Belarus and Ukraine have been exceptions, mainly due to the fact that even after gaining independence they could never properly throw off Russian influence.

    If the identity, interests, and destiny of Russia are not European, the fact that Putin has passed some traditionalist laws and that Russian society is allegedly moving in a more traditionalist direction does not help European White Nationalists in any way. If we are to rejoice at Russian traditionalism and see them as allies simply because of that, then why don’t we see Muslims as allies and see hope for the West in their traditionalism as well? After all, they are even more hardcore than Russians.

    Traditionalism serves the well-being and promotes the survival of every different ethnic group, but just because different ethnic groups choose similar methods and values to promote their own survival does not automatically make them allies. Therefore the stronger traditionalism of Russians, their patriotism and pride in their heritage, do not advance White Nationalist interests any more than the racial pride and patriotism of Indians, Chinese, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans, or Africans. Indeed, it might make them more formidable enemies of our interests.”


    Emile Durand’s article in Counter-Currents, from which this excerpt is taken, very well sums up one strand of my opposition to Putin and current Russian actions. Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”. Conversations with people who escaped the NKVD murderers, in many cases after barely surviving slave labor for the Germans, will not leave anyone so gullible to today’s Russian propaganda: the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.

    Basically a load of shit by someone who is completely detached from Russian realities. But then again, doctrine-mongering is usually a first symptom of lack of knowledge.

    Read More
  113. OutWest says:

    Russia is feared –a fact- primarily since it was late to the table in recognizing and enabling the bourgeoisie. In the nineteenth century the serfs were still chattel property –as were the nobility in theory but not practice. Abortive attempts to liberalize the society failed. Thus the country was remade into Stalin’s image. That’s pretty scary.

    While I agree that the fall of Constantinople was the seed that caused Muscovy to develop visions of greatness, similar religious ambitions have come and gone throughout Europe.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is feared –a fact- primarily since it was late to the table in recognizing and enabling the bourgeoisie.
     
    Russia is feared because she can generate alternative civilizational concepts, plus it is the only unconquered by the "West" nation. She actually has military power which does challenge "West's" military might.
  114. 5371 says:
    @Kilo 4/11
    Here are other reasons some of us oppose Russia, reasons the russophiles here never admit:

    “Somehow when reflecting upon Russians, White Nationalists, who in all other instances are manifestly sober and realistic with regard to race and ethnicity, suddenly lose their common sense. When one speaks of German or French identity, it is understood that the Germans and the French are white, European peoples, regardless of recent non-white immigration. Thus German and French nationalism are not necessarily opposed to wider white racial interests, although they often have been. Let’s call German, French, and similar identities ethnic, because they denote a core ethnic group.

    Brazilian identity, however, does not have such unambiguous racial connotations. Brazil has many Europeans, but it also has blacks, Amerindians, and many individuals of two or more races. Thus Brazilian nationalism is, by its nature, inconsistent with white racial interests. American identity used to connote whiteness, even though America had non-white minorities. But the American identity has been transformed into a commitment to the idea of freedom and equality for all. Thus American nationalism is, by its nature, opposed to white racial interests. Let’s call American, Brazilian, and analogous identities trans-racial, since they both transcend and transform races.

    Russian identity is more analogous to American and Brazilian trans-racial identity than German or French ethnic identity. There are many Russians who are entirely European. But there are also many Russians of Near Eastern and Mongoloid ancestry, and many of mixed race. But even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three. A Russian is not, therefore, just another kind of European. Thus it is with good reason that Russians have always felt that their identity, interests, and destiny are distinct from those of Europe. European White Nationalists need to recognize this as well.

    White Nationalists are also well aware that a country’s developmental index, its per-capita GDP, the average income of its citizens, the level of corruption, etc. are directly correlated with average levels of many heritable traits within its population. In terms of corruption and many other parameters Russia is far closer to a country like Brazil than to any European country. In some areas, Russia is not even within Asian or Latin American ranges but rather competes with sub-Saharan Africa.

    Moreover, blaming the backwardness of Russia on Communism would be like blaming slavery for the backwardness of Africa. Firstly, Russia has always been backward in comparison to the West, and secondly most of the former Eastern bloc and USSR countries in Europe managed to create functional and prosperous societies shortly after freeing themselves from the Russian yoke. Belarus and Ukraine have been exceptions, mainly due to the fact that even after gaining independence they could never properly throw off Russian influence.

    If the identity, interests, and destiny of Russia are not European, the fact that Putin has passed some traditionalist laws and that Russian society is allegedly moving in a more traditionalist direction does not help European White Nationalists in any way. If we are to rejoice at Russian traditionalism and see them as allies simply because of that, then why don’t we see Muslims as allies and see hope for the West in their traditionalism as well? After all, they are even more hardcore than Russians.

    Traditionalism serves the well-being and promotes the survival of every different ethnic group, but just because different ethnic groups choose similar methods and values to promote their own survival does not automatically make them allies. Therefore the stronger traditionalism of Russians, their patriotism and pride in their heritage, do not advance White Nationalist interests any more than the racial pride and patriotism of Indians, Chinese, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans, or Africans. Indeed, it might make them more formidable enemies of our interests.”


    Emile Durand’s article in Counter-Currents, from which this excerpt is taken, very well sums up one strand of my opposition to Putin and current Russian actions. Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”. Conversations with people who escaped the NKVD murderers, in many cases after barely surviving slave labor for the Germans, will not leave anyone so gullible to today’s Russian propaganda: the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.

    The author you quote, and possibly you yourself, has a strange muddle in his head. A Russian can have an ethnic identity and a state patriotism at the same time, just as an Englishman, Scotsman or Frenchman could be proud both of his nation and of his country’s worldwide empire.

    Read More
    • Agree: Sam Shama
    • Replies: @Kilo 4/11
    A Russian can be “patriotic” i.e., proud of Russia, and still support a trans-racial, or if you prefer, multi-ethnic, basis for Russianness. The place has at least 185 officially recognized - key point - nationalities - not the kind of model I want for my country, nor is it what Ukrainians want for theirs. Just as some people with American citizenship consider themselves good patriotic Americans while adhering to the idea that anyone can be an American just by coming here and taking the oath of citizenship, what’s important in the Russian case is not whether a citizen of the RF considers himself a Russian or a Tatar or a Chechen ethnically speaking, but that very loyalty to the Russian Empire you seem unconcerned about.

    What Russo-skeptics like me see in Russian patriotism is support - now near fanatic support - for another globalist universalist hegemon. You assert that your favorite empire is benign. I assert that it is consuming nations just as it always has, and that Russia’s gamble in Ukraine is nothing less than a last ditch effort to hold on to its status as an empire. There’s no muddle here, except for the permanent condition of human life of not being able to foresee the future.
  115. Talha says:
    @Svigor
    The Red Army whupped the piss out of the Afghans.

    Correct…and then left…or advanced, in a brilliantly executed militarily tactic, back to Russia – either way is fine.

    Peace.

    Read More
  116. Andrei Martyanov [AKA "SmoothieX12"] says: • Website
    @OutWest
    Russia is feared –a fact- primarily since it was late to the table in recognizing and enabling the bourgeoisie. In the nineteenth century the serfs were still chattel property –as were the nobility in theory but not practice. Abortive attempts to liberalize the society failed. Thus the country was remade into Stalin’s image. That’s pretty scary.

    While I agree that the fall of Constantinople was the seed that caused Muscovy to develop visions of greatness, similar religious ambitions have come and gone throughout Europe.

    Russia is feared –a fact- primarily since it was late to the table in recognizing and enabling the bourgeoisie.

    Russia is feared because she can generate alternative civilizational concepts, plus it is the only unconquered by the “West” nation. She actually has military power which does challenge “West’s” military might.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    Military might is a condition precedent to the fear being discussed. Russia’s military might is predicated upon the populace being satisfied with a rather severely reduced standard of living. Actually the same –but to a lesser degree- is happening in the U.S. with only a belated reaction to the costs of belligerence.

    The E.U. has, among its ill-advised homogenizing tactics, managed to move old enemies from the archaic waste of war. But the western powers do not have a populace that suffers deprivation as well as the Russians do. Thus, in my opinion, the fact that most of the Russian citizenry has skipped the step to the middle class accounts in large part for their military might.
    Again, the Russians went from serfdom to Stalinism to the present foot on the dock and foot on the deck regarding personal freedom and the needs of the state. The U.S. has its own problems, but is descending from a different direction having somewhat attained and now is losing its independence.

    By the way, U.S.’s problems are the result of not standing down from a European war (II) that it should have avoided.
  117. Talha says:
    @Sam Shama
    For a click bait this piece is good enough I suppose; still, Saker, are you looking to ignite new fires? Probably. So here you shall have it.

    You've succumbed to much nonsense when you blithely equate "true" Christianity to Judaism. If you are going to argue from a place of knowledge, you should do so: compare the Masoretic Torah [which includes the Yemenite version] or even the Samaritan Torah to the NT and you couldn't miss the stark contrasts evident in the innumerable variations which have sprouted in the Christian texts as opposed to none in the Torah. So, the NT of any version does not compute.

    The Masoretic Torah contains 340,805 letters with variations between the Leningrad Codex and the Yemenite text to only 9 - spelling differences. The Leningrad Codex is wholly correct and checks with the original copy kept in the Ark of the Covenant))

    Every letter of the Torah is precisely placed - it is code for the name of Hashem, and variations render the text entirely useless. Its meaning would not compile let alone run; Saker you wouldn't understand it, despite the benefit of centuries of lessons learnt.

    Hey Sam,

    I thought the Ark of the Covenant was lost – no?

    Peace.

    Read More
  118. Thirdeye says:

    This seems like a wordy, arcane, and generally superfluous explanation that seems centered on some of the author’s pet peeves. The Russian Orthodox Church has enough events in its history to compromise the claim that it represents the “True Christianity” as does the Roman Church. We can grant that the Roman Church adopted a stance of aggression against the Holy Lands and Russia in a quest to win by force what it could not win by moral authority. But the promotion of the Moscow Patriarchate as the true seat of the Orthodox faith and its use by Russian despots seems like a move towards a similar political exploitation of spirituality that the Roman Church is criticized for. Understandably, those who accepted the authority of other Patriarchates might have had a disagreement with calling the Moscow Patriarchate, used for local political objectives, the true heir to the early Christian faith.

    Russophobia is IMO of a piece with the ideology the Yellow Peril. An established civilization doing its own thing, not accepting subjugation by western Europe or the Anglosphere, is simply unacceptable. Russia survived the Thirteenth Century onslaught from the West by allying with the East. All indications are that they will do a similar move, with China in the place of the Golden Horde, to survive the current one.

    Read More
  119. mcohen says:
    @Sam Shama
    For a click bait this piece is good enough I suppose; still, Saker, are you looking to ignite new fires? Probably. So here you shall have it.

    You've succumbed to much nonsense when you blithely equate "true" Christianity to Judaism. If you are going to argue from a place of knowledge, you should do so: compare the Masoretic Torah [which includes the Yemenite version] or even the Samaritan Torah to the NT and you couldn't miss the stark contrasts evident in the innumerable variations which have sprouted in the Christian texts as opposed to none in the Torah. So, the NT of any version does not compute.

    The Masoretic Torah contains 340,805 letters with variations between the Leningrad Codex and the Yemenite text to only 9 - spelling differences. The Leningrad Codex is wholly correct and checks with the original copy kept in the Ark of the Covenant))

    Every letter of the Torah is precisely placed - it is code for the name of Hashem, and variations render the text entirely useless. Its meaning would not compile let alone run; Saker you wouldn't understand it, despite the benefit of centuries of lessons learnt.

    sam

    yes all well and good but what about the 27 variations contained in the 9 spelling differences.
    that alone morphs into a whole new set of opinions as listed by the great rav kook who said that even one stroke to many can change an aleph into a nun

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    I am sure you are aware as a cohen gadol, that only one of the variants "work". What does "work" mean? Rav Nachman Breslov provided the most cogent - and I consider the most miraculous answer - to the problem. To obtain it one needs to go to Ukraine during Rosh Hashanah. Might be worth a trip?
    , @Wizard of Oz
    It's all very well playing these funny ecologically friendly games during the long cold nights but it keeps you away from your chess practice and you know the Armenians and even the Svilis are challenging.
  120. Sam Shama says:
    @Talha
    Hey Sam,

    I thought the Ark of the Covenant was lost - no?

    Peace.

    was it? :)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Dude - you hiding it in your basement??? What's up with that!!! Indiana Jones gonna need some 'splainin'!

    Peace.

    Also - how did you get it down the stairs???

  121. This analysis is very Eurocentric. And fanciful. There’s a whole lot of religions, cultures, spiritualties. Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism. Why would the evil westerners have so much hatred for the Russians, but next to nothing for the Indians? Gay sex is punishable by a life sentence in the “world’s largest democracy” – and yet, tsk,no problem, western liberals are not concerned. What gives?

    I say: forget these fancy ideas, everything can be explained by economics and geopolitical interests…

    Read More
    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
    Everything? No place for genes + epigenetics? No place for culture/upbringing?
    , @iffen
    forget these fancy ideas, everything can be explained by economics and geopolitical interests…

    This illustrates the difference between West and East; the West enjoys having many more options for choosing up sides for fighting than the East.
  122. Talha says:
    @Sam Shama
    was it? :)

    Dude – you hiding it in your basement??? What’s up with that!!! Indiana Jones gonna need some ‘splainin’!

    Peace.

    Also – how did you get it down the stairs???

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sam Shama
    Hey. A chap like you would surely find it more than a little fascinating. There is some dispute between academic scholars of the textual Masoretic Book and the pure faith-based rabbinical authorities, yet these disputes are within a very narrow set of issues. I believe a resolution is close. Check out my answer to 'mcohen'. Also, "Aleppo Codex", is a great read if you find the time.
  123. […] The Ancient Spiritual Roots of Russophobia The Unz Review – The Saker – 6 Nov 2016 http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-ancient-spiritual-roots-of-russophobia/ […]

    Read More
  124. Sam Shama says:
    @mcohen
    sam

    yes all well and good but what about the 27 variations contained in the 9 spelling differences.
    that alone morphs into a whole new set of opinions as listed by the great rav kook who said that even one stroke to many can change an aleph into a nun

    I am sure you are aware as a cohen gadol, that only one of the variants “work“. What does “work” mean? Rav Nachman Breslov provided the most cogent – and I consider the most miraculous answer – to the problem. To obtain it one needs to go to Ukraine during Rosh Hashanah. Might be worth a trip?

    Read More
  125. Sam Shama says:
    @Talha
    Dude - you hiding it in your basement??? What's up with that!!! Indiana Jones gonna need some 'splainin'!

    Peace.

    Also - how did you get it down the stairs???

    Hey. A chap like you would surely find it more than a little fascinating. There is some dispute between academic scholars of the textual Masoretic Book and the pure faith-based rabbinical authorities, yet these disputes are within a very narrow set of issues. I believe a resolution is close. Check out my answer to ‘mcohen’. Also, “Aleppo Codex”, is a great read if you find the time.

    Read More
  126. OutWest says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Russia is feared –a fact- primarily since it was late to the table in recognizing and enabling the bourgeoisie.
     
    Russia is feared because she can generate alternative civilizational concepts, plus it is the only unconquered by the "West" nation. She actually has military power which does challenge "West's" military might.

    Military might is a condition precedent to the fear being discussed. Russia’s military might is predicated upon the populace being satisfied with a rather severely reduced standard of living. Actually the same –but to a lesser degree- is happening in the U.S. with only a belated reaction to the costs of belligerence.

    The E.U. has, among its ill-advised homogenizing tactics, managed to move old enemies from the archaic waste of war. But the western powers do not have a populace that suffers deprivation as well as the Russians do. Thus, in my opinion, the fact that most of the Russian citizenry has skipped the step to the middle class accounts in large part for their military might.
    Again, the Russians went from serfdom to Stalinism to the present foot on the dock and foot on the deck regarding personal freedom and the needs of the state. The U.S. has its own problems, but is descending from a different direction having somewhat attained and now is losing its independence.

    By the way, U.S.’s problems are the result of not standing down from a European war (II) that it should have avoided.

    Read More
  127. @5371
    [Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?]

    Remember when your shitty countries got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Russkies to save your garbage people from total extermination?
    Projection is a Jewish vice.

    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    True, the Soviets allowed German tank and Luftwaffe units to train in Russia. But this stopped before the war. Stalin had two purposes; to ingratiate himself with Hitler and to enable Germany to attack the capitalistic nations, i.e. France and Britain. While this worked out after a fashion, it blew back with Barbarossa.
    , @Thirdeye
    And Sweden spent most of the war shipping iron ore to the Nazis. Those bad, bad Swedes!
    , @5371
    You have no idea what the word "ally" means.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Was it an alliance or a non-aggression pact? Do you know the difference?
  128. @Qoheleth
    Actually besides that issue we have a country who kicked out the international Banksters/ Anglo-Zios, who are mad as hell and won't take it any more! How can they be expected to run a one world government when Russia won't play.

    Not really. Yeltsin never let foreign direct investors in anyway. The investors that did come had to buy at one remove.

    Read More
  129. @Greasy William
    Re the Khazars: it's one of those theories that looks really appealing at first blush but just doesn't fit the evidence. We know from genetic studies that Eastern Ashkenazic Jews are extremely closely related to German/Austrian/Czech Jews. How would that be if Eastern AJ were descended from the Khazars?

    It's not a big deal to me either way and I am willing to be convinced otherwise.

    My thesis will probably trigger even more condescending smirks, expression of outrage and accusations of bigotry and racism than usual
     
    Well thank you for saving me the time.

    Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?

    KYou don’t need DNA. Just ask how the eastern Ashkenazim came to speak a German dialect viz. Yiddish.

    OK I know the legend that an Irish evangelist got up enough cod German to pick up the supplies with which he was going to buy the souls of starving Jews during a famine (cf. Rice Christians in China) and/but that they reneged on the deal after they had picked up the working language for trade…..

    Read More
  130. OutWest says:
    @Philip Owen
    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.

    True, the Soviets allowed German tank and Luftwaffe units to train in Russia. But this stopped before the war. Stalin had two purposes; to ingratiate himself with Hitler and to enable Germany to attack the capitalistic nations, i.e. France and Britain. While this worked out after a fashion, it blew back with Barbarossa.

    Read More
  131. @5371
    It was called Mesopotamia for the same reason that Pakistan calls one of its provinces Kashmir although it does not actually contain any of the Vale of Kashmir after which the province is named.

    OK where was it in modern terms?

    You’re not going to tell me to rely on Wikipedia are you even if it was only the FO editing it, not Mossad?

    Read More
    • Replies: @5371
    The rivers Tigris and Euphrates, which flow rather close together in their lower course, flow very far apart in their upper. The second Roman province of Mesopotamia, unlike the first, didn't include the core area of Iraq, around their lower course, and formerly including Akkad and Sumer, then Babylonia and the Sealands, etc. It only included some territory east of the upper Euphrates.
  132. GogMagog says:

    “You don’t need to tell me Iraq was a disaster for the USA. However, Muslims have their own agency and are quite capable of killing each other by the millions without outside influences “provoking” them.”

    For all your spouting this was a pathetically weak reply. You are so transparent! A real doughnut!

    Read More
  133. @mcohen
    sam

    yes all well and good but what about the 27 variations contained in the 9 spelling differences.
    that alone morphs into a whole new set of opinions as listed by the great rav kook who said that even one stroke to many can change an aleph into a nun

    It’s all very well playing these funny ecologically friendly games during the long cold nights but it keeps you away from your chess practice and you know the Armenians and even the Svilis are challenging.

    Read More
  134. @Sam Shama
    I am sure you are aware as a cohen gadol, that only one of the variants "work". What does "work" mean? Rav Nachman Breslov provided the most cogent - and I consider the most miraculous answer - to the problem. To obtain it one needs to go to Ukraine during Rosh Hashanah. Might be worth a trip?

    See #135 and get serious.

    Hashem

    Read More
  135. @Mao Cheng Ji
    This analysis is very Eurocentric. And fanciful. There's a whole lot of religions, cultures, spiritualties. Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism. Why would the evil westerners have so much hatred for the Russians, but next to nothing for the Indians? Gay sex is punishable by a life sentence in the "world's largest democracy" - and yet, tsk,no problem, western liberals are not concerned. What gives?

    I say: forget these fancy ideas, everything can be explained by economics and geopolitical interests...

    Everything? No place for genes + epigenetics? No place for culture/upbringing?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji
    No place for genes, definitely. Culture, sure, it plays a role; but culture is, for the most part, secondary, it reflects the socioeconomic conditions. For example, I'm sure Russian 'mazhor' (rich kid, offspring of a Russian oligarch) got more in common with his western counterpart than with the average Russian working class kid. And so on.
  136. @Kilo 4/11
    Here are other reasons some of us oppose Russia, reasons the russophiles here never admit:

    “Somehow when reflecting upon Russians, White Nationalists, who in all other instances are manifestly sober and realistic with regard to race and ethnicity, suddenly lose their common sense. When one speaks of German or French identity, it is understood that the Germans and the French are white, European peoples, regardless of recent non-white immigration. Thus German and French nationalism are not necessarily opposed to wider white racial interests, although they often have been. Let’s call German, French, and similar identities ethnic, because they denote a core ethnic group.

    Brazilian identity, however, does not have such unambiguous racial connotations. Brazil has many Europeans, but it also has blacks, Amerindians, and many individuals of two or more races. Thus Brazilian nationalism is, by its nature, inconsistent with white racial interests. American identity used to connote whiteness, even though America had non-white minorities. But the American identity has been transformed into a commitment to the idea of freedom and equality for all. Thus American nationalism is, by its nature, opposed to white racial interests. Let’s call American, Brazilian, and analogous identities trans-racial, since they both transcend and transform races.

    Russian identity is more analogous to American and Brazilian trans-racial identity than German or French ethnic identity. There are many Russians who are entirely European. But there are also many Russians of Near Eastern and Mongoloid ancestry, and many of mixed race. But even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three. A Russian is not, therefore, just another kind of European. Thus it is with good reason that Russians have always felt that their identity, interests, and destiny are distinct from those of Europe. European White Nationalists need to recognize this as well.

    White Nationalists are also well aware that a country’s developmental index, its per-capita GDP, the average income of its citizens, the level of corruption, etc. are directly correlated with average levels of many heritable traits within its population. In terms of corruption and many other parameters Russia is far closer to a country like Brazil than to any European country. In some areas, Russia is not even within Asian or Latin American ranges but rather competes with sub-Saharan Africa.

    Moreover, blaming the backwardness of Russia on Communism would be like blaming slavery for the backwardness of Africa. Firstly, Russia has always been backward in comparison to the West, and secondly most of the former Eastern bloc and USSR countries in Europe managed to create functional and prosperous societies shortly after freeing themselves from the Russian yoke. Belarus and Ukraine have been exceptions, mainly due to the fact that even after gaining independence they could never properly throw off Russian influence.

    If the identity, interests, and destiny of Russia are not European, the fact that Putin has passed some traditionalist laws and that Russian society is allegedly moving in a more traditionalist direction does not help European White Nationalists in any way. If we are to rejoice at Russian traditionalism and see them as allies simply because of that, then why don’t we see Muslims as allies and see hope for the West in their traditionalism as well? After all, they are even more hardcore than Russians.

    Traditionalism serves the well-being and promotes the survival of every different ethnic group, but just because different ethnic groups choose similar methods and values to promote their own survival does not automatically make them allies. Therefore the stronger traditionalism of Russians, their patriotism and pride in their heritage, do not advance White Nationalist interests any more than the racial pride and patriotism of Indians, Chinese, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans, or Africans. Indeed, it might make them more formidable enemies of our interests.”


    Emile Durand’s article in Counter-Currents, from which this excerpt is taken, very well sums up one strand of my opposition to Putin and current Russian actions. Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”. Conversations with people who escaped the NKVD murderers, in many cases after barely surviving slave labor for the Germans, will not leave anyone so gullible to today’s Russian propaganda: the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.

    Putin defends the constitution and uses the term Rossiani – citizens of Russia. He makes the stretch you describe.

    Most ethnic Russians use the term Russki and do not include Caucasians or Tatars as Russki. Russki usually include Belarussians and Ukrainians as Russki whether the latter like it or not. Nationalist journals like Sputnik i Pogrom (A Satellite and a Mess – ironic contrast) or most publications from Duginists use the term West Russia for Belarus and Ukraine but do not include Muslims or Buddhists as Russki. Their stretch to include them in the greater Russian state is often abandoned or turned into Eurasianism, also adopted by Putin as a grander setting for Russia.

    Read More
  137. annamaria says:
    @Kilo 4/11
    Here are other reasons some of us oppose Russia, reasons the russophiles here never admit:

    “Somehow when reflecting upon Russians, White Nationalists, who in all other instances are manifestly sober and realistic with regard to race and ethnicity, suddenly lose their common sense. When one speaks of German or French identity, it is understood that the Germans and the French are white, European peoples, regardless of recent non-white immigration. Thus German and French nationalism are not necessarily opposed to wider white racial interests, although they often have been. Let’s call German, French, and similar identities ethnic, because they denote a core ethnic group.

    Brazilian identity, however, does not have such unambiguous racial connotations. Brazil has many Europeans, but it also has blacks, Amerindians, and many individuals of two or more races. Thus Brazilian nationalism is, by its nature, inconsistent with white racial interests. American identity used to connote whiteness, even though America had non-white minorities. But the American identity has been transformed into a commitment to the idea of freedom and equality for all. Thus American nationalism is, by its nature, opposed to white racial interests. Let’s call American, Brazilian, and analogous identities trans-racial, since they both transcend and transform races.

    Russian identity is more analogous to American and Brazilian trans-racial identity than German or French ethnic identity. There are many Russians who are entirely European. But there are also many Russians of Near Eastern and Mongoloid ancestry, and many of mixed race. But even the whitest of Russians, to the extent that he thinks of himself as a Russian, is committed to a trans-racial identity, an identity whose racial “substratum” includes not just European, but also Mongoloid and Near Eastern (e.g., Caucasian) elements, as well as mixtures of all three. A Russian is not, therefore, just another kind of European. Thus it is with good reason that Russians have always felt that their identity, interests, and destiny are distinct from those of Europe. European White Nationalists need to recognize this as well.

    White Nationalists are also well aware that a country’s developmental index, its per-capita GDP, the average income of its citizens, the level of corruption, etc. are directly correlated with average levels of many heritable traits within its population. In terms of corruption and many other parameters Russia is far closer to a country like Brazil than to any European country. In some areas, Russia is not even within Asian or Latin American ranges but rather competes with sub-Saharan Africa.

    Moreover, blaming the backwardness of Russia on Communism would be like blaming slavery for the backwardness of Africa. Firstly, Russia has always been backward in comparison to the West, and secondly most of the former Eastern bloc and USSR countries in Europe managed to create functional and prosperous societies shortly after freeing themselves from the Russian yoke. Belarus and Ukraine have been exceptions, mainly due to the fact that even after gaining independence they could never properly throw off Russian influence.

    If the identity, interests, and destiny of Russia are not European, the fact that Putin has passed some traditionalist laws and that Russian society is allegedly moving in a more traditionalist direction does not help European White Nationalists in any way. If we are to rejoice at Russian traditionalism and see them as allies simply because of that, then why don’t we see Muslims as allies and see hope for the West in their traditionalism as well? After all, they are even more hardcore than Russians.

    Traditionalism serves the well-being and promotes the survival of every different ethnic group, but just because different ethnic groups choose similar methods and values to promote their own survival does not automatically make them allies. Therefore the stronger traditionalism of Russians, their patriotism and pride in their heritage, do not advance White Nationalist interests any more than the racial pride and patriotism of Indians, Chinese, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans, or Africans. Indeed, it might make them more formidable enemies of our interests.”


    Emile Durand’s article in Counter-Currents, from which this excerpt is taken, very well sums up one strand of my opposition to Putin and current Russian actions. Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”. Conversations with people who escaped the NKVD murderers, in many cases after barely surviving slave labor for the Germans, will not leave anyone so gullible to today’s Russian propaganda: the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.

    “Another comes from my friendship with many Ukrainian Americans, who are viciously and constantly attacked in the pro Russian media and internet as “diaspora nazis”.

    Are you aware that the Ukrainian diaspora (that has been quite instrumental in its supports of the recent coup d’etat in Kiev and of the Ukrainian neo-Nazis) made to a large extend of a progeny of the former Nazi collaborators?
    Ukrainian collaborators with Nazis and treatment of Poles:
    “In late 1942, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists was involved in a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Volhynia during the Ukrainian-Polish civil war, and in early 1944, these campaigns began to include Eastern Galicia. It is estimated that more than 35,000 and up to 60,000[38] Poles, mostly women and children along with unarmed men, were killed during the spring and summer campaign of 1943 in Volhynia.”
    Ukrainian collaborators with Nazis and treatment of Jews:
    “Jews must be isolated, removed from governmental positions in order to prevent sabotage, those who are deemed necessary may only work with an overseer… Jewish assimilation is not possible.” Later in June Yaroslav Stetsko sent to Bandera a report in which he indicated – “We are creating a militia which would help to remove the Jews and protect the population.” In 1941–1942 while Bandera was cooperating with the Germans, OUN members did take part in anti-Jewish actions. German police at 1941 reported that “fanatic” Bandera followers, organised in small groups were “extraordinarily active” against Jews and communists.”

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

    MI5, the CIA and Ukrainian Nazi Collaborator Stepan Bandera: http://www.constantinereport.com/mi5-the-cia-and-ukranian-nazi-collaborator-stepan-bandera/

    “…the continuity of today’s Russia with the USSR is real and not a figment of ex-cold warriors’ imaginations.”
    The greatest relative concentration of the former Soviets is in Israel. Would you agree that Israel represents “the continuity of the USSR?”

    Read More
  138. Thirdeye says:
    @Philip Owen
    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.

    And Sweden spent most of the war shipping iron ore to the Nazis. Those bad, bad Swedes!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Not only iron ore. Ballbearings and anti aircraft guns too. They've been expiating their guilt ever since.
  139. 5371 says:
    @Philip Owen
    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.

    You have no idea what the word “ally” means.

    Read More
  140. 5371 says:
    @Wizard of Oz
    OK where was it in modern terms?

    You're not going to tell me to rely on Wikipedia are you even if it was only the FO editing it, not Mossad?

    The rivers Tigris and Euphrates, which flow rather close together in their lower course, flow very far apart in their upper. The second Roman province of Mesopotamia, unlike the first, didn’t include the core area of Iraq, around their lower course, and formerly including Akkad and Sumer, then Babylonia and the Sealands, etc. It only included some territory east of the upper Euphrates.

    Read More
  141. The Scalpel says: • Website
    @mcohen.
    i might even buy you a second round.i always put humour before intellectual blather about relegion.
    1.
    survival comes first.all relegion does is provide the will and intent to survive.

    2.
    there is absolutely no connection between relegion and G-d.if there was we all would belong to one universal relegion.one truth.unquestioned

    3
    the laws of nature are the absolute truth.

    4.
    G-d exists i have no doubt at all.

    “The laws of nature are the absolute truth”

    This point covers your first three points.

    As for your fourth point, given the third point, who cares?

    Read More
    • Replies: @mcohen
    true but the these points are made to bolster point 3 and to expand upon what i am trying to say

    take point 1.... survival.
    only judaism and some eastetn beliefs try to go one step beyond carrying the lucky crystal or rosary in your pocket.it actually sets out a life scheme for healthy living through keeping kosher and keeping the sabbath.but you do not have to be a jew to do this.the laws of nature apply and these 2 practices also provide a path to connecting with a higher "power" using empathy and emotional thought . basically relegion in this case educates you in survival.


    point 2 ...

    is straight forward.connecting to G-d is a personal journey involving a control of one's emotional state both physically and mentally.knowledge on how to do this might come from relegion or other sources but they are only instructions
    the real "relegion connection" takes place in your body.in your soul.
    there is no connection between relegion and G-d

    point 3 does cover it all ...the laws of nature are the absolute truth.gravity shapes our whole world.it is the force that binds.it is the hand of G-d.both the seen and unseen as in the edge of a coin

    point 4 is more a personal statement.this is what happened to me therefore i believe.no doubt.part of the laws of nature

    i always like to think of the mule as a good example of the laws of nature.another one is our poisoning of the atmosphere with car exhaust fumes.people commit suicide by inhaling the gases in a confined space but pumping it into a larger confined space is ok.the laws of nature say otherwise but yet we ignore them.

    i had a vision that our sky was no longer blue buy a yellow rust colour.
  142. @Wizard of Oz
    Everything? No place for genes + epigenetics? No place for culture/upbringing?

    No place for genes, definitely. Culture, sure, it plays a role; but culture is, for the most part, secondary, it reflects the socioeconomic conditions. For example, I’m sure Russian ‘mazhor‘ (rich kid, offspring of a Russian oligarch) got more in common with his western counterpart than with the average Russian working class kid. And so on.

    Read More
  143. @Svigor
    Interesting piece. I would point out that all serious Christians know that God took the Covenant from the Hebrews and gave it to Christians. This is not yet relegated to fringe Christianity. I was raised Episcopalian, and it is what I was taught. I'd bet my bottom dollar the belief is even more widespread among Catholics. I can't speak for charismatic faiths like Baptists - something tells me ignorance of this is more common among them, Evangelicals, etc. Especially the latter, who tend to have relatively shallow, rootless belief systems.

    Oh, and note that it's not really something that is presented in a hostile way, at least, not in my experience. More like a quiet, matter-of-fact kind of way.

    not because most of them are more Khazarian than Jewish
     
    FIFY. Khazarian kook fringe theories aren't really on the map for Christians, in my experience. I never even heard of this stuff until I became an ethnopatriot.

    but because their faith, traditions and beliefs are not the ones of the ancient Jewish people as described in the Old Testament.
     
    Mmm, sorta. More like, "the true Hebrew faith has moved on...to Christianity."

    This is a big source of anti-Christian animus among Jews, especially historically; Christians stole their mojo. They took the charismatic parts of Hebrew religion and gave them to the Gentiles, sans Jewish racialism. That's a pretty big deal.

    Western history books usually say that Rome was sacked in 410 and fell in 476. The former is true, but the latter is completely false as it conflates the city of Rome and the Roman Empire. Only the city of Rome and the western Roman Empire came to an end in the 5th century, but that very same Roman Empire continued to exist in the East for a full 1000 years (!), until 1453 when the Ottomans finally captured the city of Constantinople. In fact, the imperial capital of the Roman Empire had been moved from Rome to the city of Constantinople, the “New Rome”, by the Emperor Constantine in 320. Thus, the Rome which, at various times, Visigoths, Vandals and Ostrogoths sacked was no longer the capital of the Roman Empire.
     
    I've said this many times myself, including here. And that's true. On the other hand, in many ways, the Roman Empire did die with the Western Empire. Much of its mojo was lost, never to return. And I'm not talking territory or military power. Then there's the semantic problem of calling an Empire Roman when it didn't control Rome.

    That said, your conflation of Christianity and Church is absurd. Scripture stands above all of it. Protestantism is the breaking of the power of the Church. A good thing, because Christianity is not an institution, it is a religion.

    I think there’s some weight to your view that the “Roman Empire” did not carry on through Constantinople to the Byzantine Empire to its defeat by the Ottomans.
    One plain difference was language and culture: Byzantium was Greek, and for most of its existence most public (& private) affairs were conducted in Greek.
    Byzantium developed Justinian Law (naturally based on “Roman” Law.
    Also, I believe, Eastern Emperors were head of State AND Church.
    And, although Roman military structures etc were changing well prior to the fall of the West it’s worth noting that the Byzantian military had little resemblance to the “traditional” Roman military.

    Read More
  144. @annamaria
    “Muslims kill each other in high numbers regardless if Western powers intervene or not. Blaming the issues in that part of the world on the West is anti-white propaganda.”
    How old are you – middle school or high school? A civil war is part of the history of the US as well as all European countries. The difference is, the ongoing civil wars in the Middle East have been provoked and carefully cultivated by the invading US/NATO forces. Why? – Yes, hydrocarbon and the striving for the ideal Eretz Israel (see Yinon Plan, http://www.voltairenet.org/article186019.html).

    “…I posted this as a warning to my fellow white Americans who care about their own people.”
    Really? And what segment of your “fellow white Americans” you care of in particular? For example, Mr. Douglas Feith in his capacity of undersec. of def. had been weeding out the truly patriotic and competent Americans (like the honorable Colonel Patrick Lang, a former Green Beret and specialist in Arab culture) to prevent their expert influence on the US “deciders” re the US interventions in the Middle East. See the $5 trillions lost for the American citizenry, thousands American lives lost to the wars, and more than 1.000.000 lives lost in the Middle East. Add to that the radicalization of the region, the waves of desperate refugees to Europe, and the uncontrolled migration of Africans that used to be kept at bay by Qaddafi. Ever heard about Wolfowitz that had lied the US into the illegal war in Iraq? Or Michael Ledeen (of the Gladio fame) that had arranged the famous aluminum tubes? What about Bill Kristol, a “discoverer” and promoter of the useful idiot Sarah Palin? There is also the Kagans' clan of warmongers (http://hpub.org/the-kagans-a-jewish-family-business-of-perpetual-war-at-taxpayer-expense/). Do they constitute your kind of "fellow white Americans?" Perhaps this roster could help you realize why many people (including white Americans) are upset with Anglozionism.

    “These Putinists … are generally ignorant shills for a tin-pot dictator.”
    And what is Netanyahu popularity… among the US Congress people? By the way, his constituency in Israel is basically a mini-USSR in exile. The alia from the Soviet Union represents the progeny of the former communists and the creators of secret police (see Kaganovich, the right hand of Stalin, who lived to a ripe age of 92), as well as the flower of Russian civilization in the fine arts and sciences.
    And of course, the US democracy is the bestest democracy whatever these Princeton researchers say about the US being a plutocracy. Never mind the despicable war criminal Clinton and the ridiculous Trump fighting for the presidency of the USA... The country is fragmented beyond repair, tragically.

    Anna-Maria, you nail it time after time. This “Lot” character (incidentally, isn’t calling yourself “Lot” open to the suspicion of Pretentiousness ?) is (as you suggest) morally infantile ?
    The supposed fact that Muslim’s are quite adept at killing each other absolves us from OUR responsibility for killing millions more ? It’s … almost embarrassing ….

    Read More
  145. Urim says:

    I keep thinking about the thing that we’re learning from our media. Everyone knows that we’re being fooled by this enormous power. But then you come across such crazy things … The saddest thing ever is that’s not only us, but our children are learning from these sources…

    Read More
  146. Gene Su says:
    @jacques sheete
    Overall, an excellent article full of great points well stated.

    It would be ridiculous to claim that the cause(s) of modern fear and/or hate of things Russian can all be explained by ancient theological arguments. In reality, neither Russia nor the West are all that religious nowadays.
     
    True. And most of the remnants are twisted beyond redemption, I think.

    ...any more or less sovereign and independent regime in Russia stands as the main obstacle for the West to take control of Russia’s immense resources and many other reasons.
     
    Today's Islamophobia also has similar roots.

    I didn’t care for some of the Saker’s anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic remarks.

    Notwithstanding, this is a very good article. A lot of Westerners, and particularly Americans, think that the West’s hostile rivalry towards Russia was caused by the latter’s adherence to Soviet Communist Socialism. Maybe 1 in 10 Americans (and maybe far less) know that the Russian empire considered itself to be the successor imperial state to the Byzantine (East Roman) empire. Too few people know that in 1453 the Ottoman Turks finally captured Istanbul (called Constantinople then), enslaved the Christian populace, and turned the Hagia Sophia into a mosque. My eighth grade history teacher said that 18th’s Century Russia’s interest in capturing Istanbul was driven purely by a desired for warm water ports. Shows what he knew.

    Read More
  147. […] ignore the historical importance of a Christian Roman civilization which lasted from the 4th to the 20th century would be a major […]

    Read More
  148. This piece just goes to show that interpreting millennia of history through the lens of confessional chauvinism is liable to leave a writer looking tendentious and silly.

    To take just one point: Western European history only took its “first mature shape” with the Renaissance? Saker seriously thinks the culture that produced Gothic cathedrals and the Divine Comedy was “immature?” The idea of a “dark” Middle Ages is an artifact of the Western European modernity that Saker so disdains, and no conservative or rightist should take that tired notion seriously.

    The less said about the strained self-congratulatory thesis of cultural continuity between Rome and Moscow, the better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I am of the understanding that it was the Templars who brought to Europe the science and technology necessary to the building of those cathedrals after they had spent time in the Levant.
  149. @5371
    [Remember when your shitty country got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Brits and Yanks to save your garbage people from total extermination?]

    Remember when your shitty countries got run over by the outnumbered 3 to 1 Nazis and you needed the Russkies to save your garbage people from total extermination?
    Projection is a Jewish vice.

    For today, at least, we are allies. Let’s smash Globalism once and for all.

    Am America Chai.

    Read More
  150. Stan says:

    Russian Orthodox Christianity is younger than Roman Catholicism. Christianity is transformed by the culture of the people that embrace Christianity. Oswald Spengler had a good analysis of the differences between Faustian (German Catholic) Christianity and Magian( Arabian) Christianity in “The Decline of the West”.

    Read More
  151. mcohen says:
    @The Scalpel
    "The laws of nature are the absolute truth"

    This point covers your first three points.

    As for your fourth point, given the third point, who cares?

    true but the these points are made to bolster point 3 and to expand upon what i am trying to say

    take point 1…. survival.
    only judaism and some eastetn beliefs try to go one step beyond carrying the lucky crystal or rosary in your pocket.it actually sets out a life scheme for healthy living through keeping kosher and keeping the sabbath.but you do not have to be a jew to do this.the laws of nature apply and these 2 practices also provide a path to connecting with a higher “power” using empathy and emotional thought . basically relegion in this case educates you in survival.

    point 2 …

    is straight forward.connecting to G-d is a personal journey involving a control of one’s emotional state both physically and mentally.knowledge on how to do this might come from relegion or other sources but they are only instructions
    the real “relegion connection” takes place in your body.in your soul.
    there is no connection between relegion and G-d

    point 3 does cover it all …the laws of nature are the absolute truth.gravity shapes our whole world.it is the force that binds.it is the hand of G-d.both the seen and unseen as in the edge of a coin

    point 4 is more a personal statement.this is what happened to me therefore i believe.no doubt.part of the laws of nature

    i always like to think of the mule as a good example of the laws of nature.another one is our poisoning of the atmosphere with car exhaust fumes.people commit suicide by inhaling the gases in a confined space but pumping it into a larger confined space is ok.the laws of nature say otherwise but yet we ignore them.

    i had a vision that our sky was no longer blue buy a yellow rust colour.

    Read More
  152. Kilo 4/11 says:
    @5371
    The author you quote, and possibly you yourself, has a strange muddle in his head. A Russian can have an ethnic identity and a state patriotism at the same time, just as an Englishman, Scotsman or Frenchman could be proud both of his nation and of his country's worldwide empire.

    A Russian can be “patriotic” i.e., proud of Russia, and still support a trans-racial, or if you prefer, multi-ethnic, basis for Russianness. The place has at least 185 officially recognized – key point – nationalities – not the kind of model I want for my country, nor is it what Ukrainians want for theirs. Just as some people with American citizenship consider themselves good patriotic Americans while adhering to the idea that anyone can be an American just by coming here and taking the oath of citizenship, what’s important in the Russian case is not whether a citizen of the RF considers himself a Russian or a Tatar or a Chechen ethnically speaking, but that very loyalty to the Russian Empire you seem unconcerned about.

    What Russo-skeptics like me see in Russian patriotism is support – now near fanatic support – for another globalist universalist hegemon. You assert that your favorite empire is benign. I assert that it is consuming nations just as it always has, and that Russia’s gamble in Ukraine is nothing less than a last ditch effort to hold on to its status as an empire. There’s no muddle here, except for the permanent condition of human life of not being able to foresee the future.

    Read More
  153. @Thirdeye
    And Sweden spent most of the war shipping iron ore to the Nazis. Those bad, bad Swedes!

    Not only iron ore. Ballbearings and anti aircraft guns too. They’ve been expiating their guilt ever since.

    Read More
  154. @Philip Owen
    5371, the Russians spent the first part of the war supplying rubber and oil to their Nazi allies.

    Was it an alliance or a non-aggression pact? Do you know the difference?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Yes. Non Agression Pact is a politically correct variant of alliance. Alliance was a dirty word after WW1, which many thought had been caused by excessive commitment to alliances. Germany and the USSR coordinated the carve up of Poland with boundaries agreed in advance. It was about the same level of coordination as the USSR and the British Empire+USA when attacking Germany. That is described as an Alliance. To say otherwise is to align with socialist professors who have been busy rewriting the history of fascism since Mussolini was elected. Most alliances have not involved the tight coordination of Anglo-American operations in WW2. Look at Russia's side switching in the Napoleonic wars for example or the various Triple Alliances and so forth before WW1 or say the Anglo French efforts in Crimea. If the Anglosphere in WW2 is your yardstick there have been very few alliances in history. The present NATO and US-Japan being a continuation of WW2.

    And since it is today; Trump is no Mussolini. He's the peace candidate. He is further from fascism than a corporatist like Clinton (in the original socialist/fascist sense that corporatism means dealing with people as groups - not just business corporations - an American term anyway but trade unions, professional associations, guilds, town councils, religious groups).
  155. @Patrick Harris
    This piece just goes to show that interpreting millennia of history through the lens of confessional chauvinism is liable to leave a writer looking tendentious and silly.

    To take just one point: Western European history only took its "first mature shape" with the Renaissance? Saker seriously thinks the culture that produced Gothic cathedrals and the Divine Comedy was "immature?" The idea of a "dark" Middle Ages is an artifact of the Western European modernity that Saker so disdains, and no conservative or rightist should take that tired notion seriously.

    The less said about the strained self-congratulatory thesis of cultural continuity between Rome and Moscow, the better.

    I am of the understanding that it was the Templars who brought to Europe the science and technology necessary to the building of those cathedrals after they had spent time in the Levant.

    Read More
  156. @NoseytheDuke
    Was it an alliance or a non-aggression pact? Do you know the difference?

    Yes. Non Agression Pact is a politically correct variant of alliance. Alliance was a dirty word after WW1, which many thought had been caused by excessive commitment to alliances. Germany and the USSR coordinated the carve up of Poland with boundaries agreed in advance. It was about the same level of coordination as the USSR and the British Empire+USA when attacking Germany. That is described as an Alliance. To say otherwise is to align with socialist professors who have been busy rewriting the history of fascism since Mussolini was elected. Most alliances have not involved the tight coordination of Anglo-American operations in WW2. Look at Russia’s side switching in the Napoleonic wars for example or the various Triple Alliances and so forth before WW1 or say the Anglo French efforts in Crimea. If the Anglosphere in WW2 is your yardstick there have been very few alliances in history. The present NATO and US-Japan being a continuation of WW2.

    And since it is today; Trump is no Mussolini. He’s the peace candidate. He is further from fascism than a corporatist like Clinton (in the original socialist/fascist sense that corporatism means dealing with people as groups – not just business corporations – an American term anyway but trade unions, professional associations, guilds, town councils, religious groups).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mao Cheng Ji

    Non Agression Pact is a politically correct variant of alliance.
     
    In that case, most of everyone had an alliance with Germany. From wikipedia:

    German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact (January 26, 1934)
    German–British Non-Aggression Pact (September 30, 1938)
    German–Danish Non-Aggression Pact (May 31, 1939)
    German–Estonian Non-Aggression Pact (June 7, 1939)
    German–Latvian Non-Aggression Pact (June 7, 1939)

    Also, Germany and Poland "coordinated the carve up of" Czechoslovakia in 1938...
  157. Helen says: • Website

    Russia and its “tsar” are now everywhere. As I read recently, “‘Find Putin’ game begins!” https://brutalist.press/posts/731/putin-cult-how-usa-turns-into-big-ukraine?cab741=efe2a47d-4956-4b9d-ae19-8e70c50ce830
    Don’t you have anything else to worry about? Look for the evil in your own ranks!

    Read More
  158. iffen says:
    @Mao Cheng Ji
    This analysis is very Eurocentric. And fanciful. There's a whole lot of religions, cultures, spiritualties. Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism. Why would the evil westerners have so much hatred for the Russians, but next to nothing for the Indians? Gay sex is punishable by a life sentence in the "world's largest democracy" - and yet, tsk,no problem, western liberals are not concerned. What gives?

    I say: forget these fancy ideas, everything can be explained by economics and geopolitical interests...

    forget these fancy ideas, everything can be explained by economics and geopolitical interests…

    This illustrates the difference between West and East; the West enjoys having many more options for choosing up sides for fighting than the East.

    Read More
  159. anon says: • Disclaimer
    @Alden
    "His blood be upon us and upon our children" Has nothing to do with Palm Sunday, 6 days before his trial for whatever. It would probably be included in the good Friday service.

    The gospel makes it very clear that his blood be upon us and upon our children was said by the Jews who attended the trial. But the trial was definitely not held on Palm Sunday.

    Are you really that ignorant of the Western Church? Have you really never been to a Catholic, Anglican, or Lutheran church in your life?

    Palm Sunday begins with the blessing and distribution of palms and a procession marking the entry into Jerusalem, but it quickly moves on to the Passion narrative. Traditionally all four Passions are chanted or read during Holy Week: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John on, respectively, Palm Sunday, Holy Tuesday, Holy Wednesday, and Good Friday. (In the post-Vatican II Catholic Church, Mathew Mark and Luke are read in three-yearly rotation on Palm Sunday and John is still always the Gospel for Good Friday.) Since “His blood be on our heads” etc. is in St. Matthew’s Gospel, it is indeed on Palm Sunday that that would be said or sung—by the choir traditionally, or, as often today, by the congregation.

    Read More
  160. @Philip Owen
    Yes. Non Agression Pact is a politically correct variant of alliance. Alliance was a dirty word after WW1, which many thought had been caused by excessive commitment to alliances. Germany and the USSR coordinated the carve up of Poland with boundaries agreed in advance. It was about the same level of coordination as the USSR and the British Empire+USA when attacking Germany. That is described as an Alliance. To say otherwise is to align with socialist professors who have been busy rewriting the history of fascism since Mussolini was elected. Most alliances have not involved the tight coordination of Anglo-American operations in WW2. Look at Russia's side switching in the Napoleonic wars for example or the various Triple Alliances and so forth before WW1 or say the Anglo French efforts in Crimea. If the Anglosphere in WW2 is your yardstick there have been very few alliances in history. The present NATO and US-Japan being a continuation of WW2.

    And since it is today; Trump is no Mussolini. He's the peace candidate. He is further from fascism than a corporatist like Clinton (in the original socialist/fascist sense that corporatism means dealing with people as groups - not just business corporations - an American term anyway but trade unions, professional associations, guilds, town councils, religious groups).

    Non Agression Pact is a politically correct variant of alliance.

    In that case, most of everyone had an alliance with Germany. From wikipedia:

    German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact (January 26, 1934)
    German–British Non-Aggression Pact (September 30, 1938)
    German–Danish Non-Aggression Pact (May 31, 1939)
    German–Estonian Non-Aggression Pact (June 7, 1939)
    German–Latvian Non-Aggression Pact (June 7, 1939)

    Also, Germany and Poland “coordinated the carve up of” Czechoslovakia in 1938…

    Read More
  161. @Miro23
    This is an interesting article, but I would disagree with some of the principal points:

    "What is important for our purposes is this: not only did the Frankish invasion of Rome mark the end of the Roman civilization in the West, it also cut-off the western world from the Roman Empire which continued to exist for another ten centuries (Eastern Orthodox part based on Constantinople)".
     
    The late Roman Empire was already Christian (conversion of Emperor Constantine) and when it fell, a critically important point was the adoption by the "barbarian" invaders of this Roman version of Christianity. The monasteries provided the only literate class (spoken and written Latin) with Charlemagne fully supporting them, and they fully supporting him, with the full integration of Church and State and the introduction for the first time of a Papal coronation of Holy Roman Emperors.

    Charlemagne built the concept of Christendom, which is meaningless in the modern context, but was highly influential in the European Middle Ages. The Franks halted the Islamic invasion of Europe (battle of Poitiers 732) and launched the re-conquest of Muslim Spain as a Europe wide Christian project (one of the few cases where a country conquered by Islam eventually returned to Christianity).

    And another important point is that when the Franks were subsequently defeated by Northern invaders, these "barbarians" also converted and became strong supporters of Christianity (e.g. Canute) so it's not too much to say that the first European proto-states grew out of a shared identity in European Christendom.


    "the European Middle-Ages slowly and painfully gave birth to a new civilization, the West European civilization, which really took its first mature shape during the Renaissance with its re-discovery of the ancient Greek and Roman world."
     
    The shape was there long before the Renaissance

    "...modern fear and/or hate of things Russian"
     
    Not really. It's more a fear of recent Bolshevik and Communist expansionism which is quickly fading. The basic Russian identity has far more to do with Europe, with its historic threats coming from Asia. WW1 and WW2 involved many European countries apart from Russia and it was really only a story of Europe vs. Russia in Hitler's hyper-ethnocentric mind, and then only to 1945. Current US Zionist targeting of Russia has more to do with their power games in the US and dissatisfaction with loss of influence in Russia - nothing to do with Europe.

    It’s more a fear of recent Bolshevik and Communist expansionism which is quickly fading.

    No. Read Dostoevsky’s diaries and editorials, written long before ‘bolsheviks’ and ‘communists’ even existed. They could have been published today and you wouldn’t even notice the difference. Hardly anything has changed in centuries.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 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 The Saker Comments via RSS
PastClassics
A simple remedy for income stagnation
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored