The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersRussian Reaction Blog
US State Department vs. Imperial Russian Terrorists
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

When I was in Saint-Petersburg in 2017, I spent a couple of hours at the underground base/gym/Ukrainian war trophy room of the Russian Imperial Movement (RIM) when I visited SPB in 2017 – the “white supremacist” group that has just been designated as a White Supremacist terrorist organization by the US State Department. Three individuals were also separately designated as “Specially Designated Global Terrorists”: Stanislav Vorobyev, Denis Gariev, and Nikolayevich Trushchalov. I would advise them to keep well away from the US and its colonies for the foreseeable future.

Americans’ idea of a typical Russian ultranationalist.

Although I am honored to have directly consorted with America’s first “white supremacist” global terrorists, the banal reality is that they were and are nothing of the sort. As I wrote back then:

Its nationalism is explicitly based on religion, not ethnicity – you don’t have to be an ethnic Russian to join, but you do have to be an Orthodox Christian. However, they are also considerably more hardcore than the others, having been directly involved in the events in Donbass through their Imperial Legion battalion.

Even so, to add to the irony, their website rusimperia.info is nonetheless blocked by Russian censorship body Roskomnadzor on the territory of the Russian Federation – while remaining accessible in the US, which has just branded them terrorists. If you’re not afraid of getting on the FBI watchlists, you can confirm what I said above by reading their Manifesto, which centers around “God, Tsar, Nation” (in that order). Or check them out celebrating being so “honored” on their Vkontakte page.

Nor are they a particularly large or influential organization. They have perhaps a few hundred “regulars” – enough to outfit a small battalion in the Donbass in 2014-15, but nothing on the scale of, say, Azov in the Ukraine, which functions as an official paramilitary force, hews to an explicitly white nationalist ideology, and does far more extensive outreach and training with European and American white nationalists.

Their lack of clout is not surprising, as the fact that their website is blocked within Russia rather suggests that the Kremlin isn’t all that enamored of them. And it’s not difficult to see why. Their Manifesto claims that Russians do not have a “national state”, and have been divided by “thieving regimes” that are “living out their last days” on the body of the true, historical Russia as it was before February 1917. Since RIM are barely any bigger fans of the Russian Federation than of the UkSSR, it is not surprising that relations between the Kremlin and RIM cannot be anything more than an alliance of convenience.

However, the American terrorist designation isn’t on account of RIM’s adventures in the Ukraine, but on its supposed involvement with “radicalizing” a couple of Swedish far rightists:

RIM is a terrorist group that provides paramilitary-style training to neo-Nazis and white supremacists, and it plays a prominent role in trying to rally like-minded Europeans and Americans into a common front against their perceived enemies. RIM has two training facilities in St. Petersburg, which likely are being used for woodland and urban assault, tactical weapons, and hand-to-hand combat training.

This group has innocent blood on its hands. In August 2016, two Swedish men traveled to St. Petersburg and underwent 11 days of paramilitary-style training provided by RIM.

A few months later, these men and another person conducted a series of terrorist attacks in the Swedish city of Gothenburg. In November 2016, they detonated a bomb outside a café. Two months later, they bombed a migrant center, gravely injuring one person. And three weeks after that, they placed another bomb at a campsite used to house refugees. Thankfully, that device failed to detonate.

RIM does indeed run “Partisan” courses on firearms training, woodsmanship, “military topography”, and similar topics (to the right is an advert for it; note that the gmail is Gariev’s). Bomb construction isn’t mentioned – if the Russian authorities don’t allow them to host their own website, they sure as hell would not look aside on something that wildly illegal. These courses are overseen by a separate organization called “Reserve-Druzhina”, which operates on a commercial basis. They are also open to anyone. If you’re interested, you can sign up and check them out for yourself here.

Swedish authorities were able to arrest the attackers, and they’ve now been tried and convicted for their crimes. The prosecutor who handled their case blamed RIM for radicalizing them and providing the training that enabled the attacks.

I am also not exactly sure how the ideology of Tsar, God, outdoor survival, and reclaiming the Russian lands intersects with removing kebab from Sweden – but OK.

And why now? After all, those events took place more than three years ago.

Here are my, possibly entirely groundless, speculations. Judging from this ThinkProgress report, it appears that some members of RIM were unfortunate enough to establish relationships with Matthew Heimbach – an obese, waddling caricature of a wignat who led something called the “Traditional” “Worker” “Party” while cheating with the wife of his spokesman Matthew Parrott and collecting unemployment benefits from his trailer park compound. This carnival of larping Orthodox freaks disintegrated in 2018, when Heimbach was arrested for assaulting Parrot and his own wife (who was also Parrot’s step-daughter) when they caught him cheating with Parrot’s wife.

However, literally within the past week, Heimbach has “reinvented” himself as a born again anti-racist, recanting his views in a video and article with some ur-Soros vibed NGO called “Light Upon Light: Creating Space Free of Hate.” Now I generally don’t imagine their social rehabilitation services come free. Can one demonstrate true contrition without disavowing and doxing one’s former “comrades” in the movement? At the very least, it is rather strange that a Russian nationalist organization, at least some of whose members had substantial contacts with Heimbach and the Traditional Workers Party, were designated as a terrorist organization by the US State Department within a week of Heimbach following in Katie McHugh’s footsteps and pleading with ZOG for forgiveness.

Speculating even further, it would certainly be very convenient for American security agencies with a new, big, juicy list of “white supremacist” targets to reel in. After all, collaborating with foreign terrorists is a serious crime.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Alt Right, United States, White Nationalists 
Hide 138 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

  2. Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA…

    • Agree: Tusk, John Regan
    • Replies: @Divine Right
    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    Navy secretary rips Capt. Brett Crozier for his warning about coronavirus aboard ship

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/navy-secretary-rips-brett-crozier-for-warning-about-coronavirus-on-ship/
     

    ‘He was trying to help us!’: Listen to sailors yell profanities at Trump’s acting Navy secretary while he trashes fired captain

    https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/he-was-trying-to-help-us-listen-to-sailors-yell-profanities-at-trumps-acting-navy-secretary-while-he-trashes-fired-captain/
     

    Trump on Navy Secretary's harsh comments: I might have to get involved

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0PhL8pa_Tg
     
    , @utu
    "early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks" - I would not be surprised if some of people who work for various US agencies that chase 98 year old Nazis and fight anti-semitism among teenagers in some country thousands of miles away actually had ancestors in Checka, NKVD or KGB. Though much more terrifying is finding such people in editorial boards and influential think tanks.

    The untold story who comprised waves of immigration from the Soviet Block needs to be told. You can have some glimpses at it in John Sack "An Eye for an Eye" and Robert I. Friedman "Red Mafiya".
    , @Dan Hayes
    Regarding your last paragraph: From your lips to God's ears!
    , @Belarusian Dude
    As much as I don't like what our friends in MENA call the great satan this seems really "optimistic". Yeah everything is bad but the population is growing and until the US is no linger capable of fielding an intercontinental Empire untouched I would be skeptical of predictions of some American collapse
    , @The Alarmist
    I was thinking something along the lines of the Reign of Terror ... sans Guillotine ... so far.
  3. This is probably just the first step in another retarded propaganda war that is completely disconnected from reality
    Russians should stay the fuck away from American wignat retardation, in fact all American politics are completely toxic and incredibly destructive to Europe, there is no one there that is to be trusted

    • Replies: @Seraphim
    It might be the first step in declaring the Orthodox Church a terrorist organization, as it is understood that condition to join the group is to be an Orthodox Christian. American Orthodox (especially of Russian extraction) should be worried.
  4. The salient point is that a lot of these fringe political figures are either FBI informants or CIA spooks.

    Will the State Department declare, “Male State” a terrorist group next?

    Is RU Roosh better off than the real McCoy?

  5. @Ron Unz
    Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA...

    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    Navy secretary rips Capt. Brett Crozier for his warning about coronavirus aboard ship

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/navy-secretary-rips-brett-crozier-for-warning-about-coronavirus-on-ship/

    ‘He was trying to help us!’: Listen to sailors yell profanities at Trump’s acting Navy secretary while he trashes fired captain

    https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/he-was-trying-to-help-us-listen-to-sailors-yell-profanities-at-trumps-acting-navy-secretary-while-he-trashes-fired-captain/

    Trump on Navy Secretary’s harsh comments: I might have to get involved

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0PhL8pa_Tg

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:
     
    I noticed that also. Widespread impoverishment and death brought about by total government incompetence and corruption are the sort of things that sometimes provokes a military mutiny and uprising...
    , @Realist
    I was kind of partial to the Navy Secretary...until I read this.

    Modly added on Monday: “One of the things about his email that bothered me the most was saying that we are not at war. Well, we aren’t technically at war. But let me tell ya something, the only reason we are dealing with this right now is a big authoritarian regime called China was not forthcoming about what was happening with this virus and they put the world at risk to protect themselves and to protect their reputations.”
     
    This dumb son of a bitch was using the incident to promote US propaganda against China.
    , @Max Payne
    That captain deserves to be reprimanded. Respect the chain of command. Don't go around it. First rule in any military.

    Jeez... As if they aren't training military personnel how to operate in dirty environments (CBRN).

    That guy won't be given a command again that's for sure.
  6. utu says:
    @Ron Unz
    Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA...

    “early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks” – I would not be surprised if some of people who work for various US agencies that chase 98 year old Nazis and fight anti-semitism among teenagers in some country thousands of miles away actually had ancestors in Checka, NKVD or KGB. Though much more terrifying is finding such people in editorial boards and influential think tanks.

    The untold story who comprised waves of immigration from the Soviet Block needs to be told. You can have some glimpses at it in John Sack “An Eye for an Eye” and Robert I. Friedman “Red Mafiya”.

    • Agree: Ron Unz, Exile
    • Replies: @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    Don't be rude- the NKVD did many great, selfless and heroic missions and acts during the Great Patriotic War.

    It's unfair to tarnish the good name of an organisation as a whole just because of some "bad" behaviour for a short time.

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries--without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn't act as noble.

    Also- in style and demeanor--the modern day Western equivalent of Stalin is probably Michael Buble- both calm, easy-going gentlemen
  7. By being the initiator of an anti-white crusade targeting Russia, the US is giving the Kremlin a chance to respond, not by saying that the US is the real racist, but by highlighting the targeted democide of white Americans, citing hostile government policies, institutional biases, and a host of groups that exist by the hundreds in the US, and also highlight NGOs supported by the State Dept that are engaged in anti-white activities in Europe.

    There is a powerful precedent that could be used to offer the white victims refuge status in Russia. The Jewish “refugees” of the 70s and 80s claimed that stealth, unannouced quotas aimed at lessening their overrepresentation in Soviet institutions were anti-Semitic. In the US, hostility and demands to kick whites out of their jobs and positions are open, legalized and growing. Based on bogus Jewish claims to refuge, white Americans have a more honest claim, and deserve a far more robust response by Russia.

    I sensed this was coming after the Silicon Valley mass purged nationalists in a coordinated fashion. Will Russia take this opportunity to turn the tide against its (and ours) enemies? The US is being proacrive, the problem here is that Russia has many options to hit back and attract white support, making it a viable alternative to the decaying, hostile US. Officializing it and showcasing Trotskyite misdeeds should be seriously considered.

    Russia has rich pickings should it choose to go after Zogistan. By the way, months ago when the IRCC was declared a terrorist organization, I googled the counter-terror department officials and it read like a Tel Aviv phonebook. Jews are wild and the anti-white crusade is going official, as opposed to from behind the curtains (funding all types of hostily orgs and outlets). It will get much worse.

    • Replies: @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    I'd move to a poorer European country if it meant I could get away from the anti-white affirmative action and genocidal replacement immigration levels. I would make every effort to assimilate to Russian cultural norms and would force my kids to speak only Russian at home. It seems like Russia is the only majority-white, not anti-white country right now. (Okay, maybe Hungary and Poland but how will these countries hold out long term - they are still EU members).

    I would be one of the "good ones". If Russia offered a refugee or immigration program for white Canadians I would certainly take it. That said, it's totally understandable that they wouldn't want *any* of us - after all, import the 3rd world, become the 3rd world - import the Anglos, become the Anglos?

    So: you can accept me as a refugee and I will gladly accept and make every effort to improve Russia. Most likely all us westerners will be stuck here and we can either fight for our lands or perish.
    , @Hyperborean
    If we accept the argument that the Empire is a pressure-cooker, why should Russian Federation authorities lift the lid and let steam escape?
  8. @Divine Right
    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    Navy secretary rips Capt. Brett Crozier for his warning about coronavirus aboard ship

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/navy-secretary-rips-brett-crozier-for-warning-about-coronavirus-on-ship/
     

    ‘He was trying to help us!’: Listen to sailors yell profanities at Trump’s acting Navy secretary while he trashes fired captain

    https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/he-was-trying-to-help-us-listen-to-sailors-yell-profanities-at-trumps-acting-navy-secretary-while-he-trashes-fired-captain/
     

    Trump on Navy Secretary's harsh comments: I might have to get involved

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0PhL8pa_Tg
     

    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    I noticed that also. Widespread impoverishment and death brought about by total government incompetence and corruption are the sort of things that sometimes provokes a military mutiny and uprising…

    • Replies: @216
    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.
  9. @Ron Unz

    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:
     
    I noticed that also. Widespread impoverishment and death brought about by total government incompetence and corruption are the sort of things that sometimes provokes a military mutiny and uprising...

    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    • Replies: @Ron Unz

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.
     
    Yes, I've been saying something similar in comments there for at least three or four years, e.g.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/wagner-debacle/#comment-2221533

    https://www.unz.com/runz/averting-world-conflict-with-china/?showcomments#comment-2698769

    But I'll admit I never imagined our ruling elites were so lazy and incompetent that they didn't bother properly preparing for a deadly contagious disease that was ravaging China as reported on the front pages of all our newspapers...
    , @Realist

    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.
     
    Agreed...the only purpose of aircraft carriers, as well as most of the Navy, is to wield power over foreign countries for hegemonic c0ntrol. Navies have been used for this purpose for centuries.
    , @Peripatetic Commenter
    If!

    Don't be too optimistic. There has not been an actual real test of those things.

    When the Chinese test it against a ship that large that has some ability to fight back (or a carrier group :-), then we will know.
    , @Hibernian
    I think they'll continue to have some utility in some form. There are places where islands are few and far between. Land bases are often hard to obtain for political reasons depending on the target and the nature of the mission. Very few weapons or weapons systems have totally disappeared. Swords survive as bayonets, which admittedly are very little used anymore. Battleships are gone, but frigates are small battle ships, now with missiles instead of guns. Field artillery has been greatly de-emphasized but is still around. Floating artillery to support the Marines on the beach is now on the amphibious assault ships.
  10. We all know that the US State Department are the real terrorists.
    As a group that openly pushes sodomy around the world, it should be no surprise that they view a group of capable and virile Christians as their enemy.

  11. @Nolin
    By being the initiator of an anti-white crusade targeting Russia, the US is giving the Kremlin a chance to respond, not by saying that the US is the real racist, but by highlighting the targeted democide of white Americans, citing hostile government policies, institutional biases, and a host of groups that exist by the hundreds in the US, and also highlight NGOs supported by the State Dept that are engaged in anti-white activities in Europe.

    There is a powerful precedent that could be used to offer the white victims refuge status in Russia. The Jewish "refugees" of the 70s and 80s claimed that stealth, unannouced quotas aimed at lessening their overrepresentation in Soviet institutions were anti-Semitic. In the US, hostility and demands to kick whites out of their jobs and positions are open, legalized and growing. Based on bogus Jewish claims to refuge, white Americans have a more honest claim, and deserve a far more robust response by Russia.

    I sensed this was coming after the Silicon Valley mass purged nationalists in a coordinated fashion. Will Russia take this opportunity to turn the tide against its (and ours) enemies? The US is being proacrive, the problem here is that Russia has many options to hit back and attract white support, making it a viable alternative to the decaying, hostile US. Officializing it and showcasing Trotskyite misdeeds should be seriously considered.

    Russia has rich pickings should it choose to go after Zogistan. By the way, months ago when the IRCC was declared a terrorist organization, I googled the counter-terror department officials and it read like a Tel Aviv phonebook. Jews are wild and the anti-white crusade is going official, as opposed to from behind the curtains (funding all types of hostily orgs and outlets). It will get much worse.

    I’d move to a poorer European country if it meant I could get away from the anti-white affirmative action and genocidal replacement immigration levels. I would make every effort to assimilate to Russian cultural norms and would force my kids to speak only Russian at home. It seems like Russia is the only majority-white, not anti-white country right now. (Okay, maybe Hungary and Poland but how will these countries hold out long term – they are still EU members).

    I would be one of the “good ones”. If Russia offered a refugee or immigration program for white Canadians I would certainly take it. That said, it’s totally understandable that they wouldn’t want *any* of us – after all, import the 3rd world, become the 3rd world – import the Anglos, become the Anglos?

    So: you can accept me as a refugee and I will gladly accept and make every effort to improve Russia. Most likely all us westerners will be stuck here and we can either fight for our lands or perish.

    • Replies: @utu
    Did you improve Quebec? Do your kids speak French only? Can you spell Quebec?
  12. Max Blumenthal does some solid reporting, but like many leftists he grossly exaggerates the influence & menace of the far right. The linked article on Azov’s foreign outreach and training is a good example of this. America’s Rise Above Movement did not receive military training from Azov Battalion in Ukraine, as the article claims. This is just one of numerous inaccuracies, omissions, and exaggerations in the article.

    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
  13. @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    I'd move to a poorer European country if it meant I could get away from the anti-white affirmative action and genocidal replacement immigration levels. I would make every effort to assimilate to Russian cultural norms and would force my kids to speak only Russian at home. It seems like Russia is the only majority-white, not anti-white country right now. (Okay, maybe Hungary and Poland but how will these countries hold out long term - they are still EU members).

    I would be one of the "good ones". If Russia offered a refugee or immigration program for white Canadians I would certainly take it. That said, it's totally understandable that they wouldn't want *any* of us - after all, import the 3rd world, become the 3rd world - import the Anglos, become the Anglos?

    So: you can accept me as a refugee and I will gladly accept and make every effort to improve Russia. Most likely all us westerners will be stuck here and we can either fight for our lands or perish.

    Did you improve Quebec? Do your kids speak French only? Can you spell Quebec?

    • Agree: Blinky Bill
    • LOL: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @Cyrano
    How about me: I am fluent in asshole language, that’s why I can effectively communicate with the likes of you, but it also makes me a true cosmopolitan since the asshole language is pretty much the Esperanto of today.
    , @LoutishAngloQuebecker
    You're displaying your ignorance of Quebec.

    I'm not an immigrant to Quebec. There are Anglo peoples native to Quebec, from whom I come from. BTW not (((Anglo))) as in the elite business community in Montreal. But real Anglo.
    , @Peter Frost
    "Did you improve Quebec?"

    Most Anglo-Quebeckers have deep roots in the province. They're not immigrants.

    "Do your kids speak French only?"

    Why should they speak only French? The English minority has an officially enshrined status in Quebec. This being said, I've met a lot of "Anglo" children who speak more freely in French than in English, even though they attend an English-language school. If you live outside Montreal, it's difficult to live your life solely in English.

    "Can you spell Quebec?"

    As a noun, it's officially Québec. As an adjective, it's either québécois or québécoise (depending on the gender of the noun).

    I wouldn't recommend emigrating to Russia for several reasons:

    - You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

    - Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs. It's less frequent and less "in your face" than in Canada, but that's how it started out in Canada, not so long ago.

    - The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it's not your grass. It's somebody else's. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly "conservative" ones. And they didn't speak to my identity and my traditions.
  14. @216
    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    Yes, I’ve been saying something similar in comments there for at least three or four years, e.g.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/wagner-debacle/#comment-2221533

    https://www.unz.com/runz/averting-world-conflict-with-china/?showcomments#comment-2698769

    But I’ll admit I never imagined our ruling elites were so lazy and incompetent that they didn’t bother properly preparing for a deadly contagious disease that was ravaging China as reported on the front pages of all our newspapers…

  15. mal says:

    And why now? After all, those events took place more than three years ago.

    Because Mueller indictments of St Petersburg troll farm went bust recently, and State Department can’t use “evil sneaky SPb trolls corrupting innocent foreigners” meme without embarrassing themselves. So the State Dept had to invent “evil sneaky SPb Imperial Terrorists corrupting innocent foreigners” meme.

    There is this organization in UK called Integrity Initiative. The basic goal is to kill tourism to Russia as part of the plan to isolate the country and make it easier to demonize. State Department is part of the same game – it is much easier to brainwash the peons about how evil and sneaky Russia is if they have never actually been there. Gods forbid regular people go to Russia and see it as a normal country with normal people and have a great time (like during World Cup) – this can’t be allowed.

    This is relatively successful too – when I went to St Petersburg three months ago to renew my Russian passport, everybody pretty much staged my funeral in the US – i was to be kidnapped by KGB agents and fed to bears. Even my grandmother in Kirov region was against me going. You know it’s bad when they get grandma in the provinces. The only person who was like “you mad? Hardly ever see a bear in St Pete these days” was my dad. And it ended up as a pretty awesome trip. Almost no bears.

    Anyway, expect more hysterical stories about evil SPb terrorists in Western media. They booted Russia from Tokyo Olympics, but Corona Chan blessed that event so nobody cares. By the time Olympics happen, Russia may win arbitration, and that makes our Integrity Initiative friends sad. So they need another tourist horror story to hound Russia with.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    Because Mueller indictments of St Petersburg troll farm went bust recently
     
    Few people seem to know, but what Mueller engaged in is called prosecutorial misconduct in American law. It is a crime. Do you think the criminal will be punished? That’s right, no way. You do not get punished for crimes committed in service of Deep State. You get punished for perfectly legal actions against Deep State (remember Assange?). This is called the rule of law, in case you are wondering.
  16. @Ron Unz
    Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA...

    Regarding your last paragraph: From your lips to God’s ears!

  17. @Korenchkin
    This is probably just the first step in another retarded propaganda war that is completely disconnected from reality
    Russians should stay the fuck away from American wignat retardation, in fact all American politics are completely toxic and incredibly destructive to Europe, there is no one there that is to be trusted

    It might be the first step in declaring the Orthodox Church a terrorist organization, as it is understood that condition to join the group is to be an Orthodox Christian. American Orthodox (especially of Russian extraction) should be worried.

    • Agree: TheTotallyAnonymous
    • Replies: @Mikhail

    It might be the first step in declaring the Orthodox Church a terrorist organization, as it is understood that condition to join the group is to be an Orthodox Christian. American Orthodox (especially of Russian extraction) should be worried.

     

    A decades long issue, going back to the Cold War and even before the USSR. After the American Civil War, the US and Britain improved their relationship, which included some American elites taking to the Brit caricatures of Russia. Related:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/03/30/continued-western-mass-media-creativity-misinformation-on-russia-knows-no-bounds/

  18. @Ron Unz
    Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA...

    As much as I don’t like what our friends in MENA call the great satan this seems really “optimistic”. Yeah everything is bad but the population is growing and until the US is no linger capable of fielding an intercontinental Empire untouched I would be skeptical of predictions of some American collapse

    • Replies: @Kovar
    I don't believe that the US is collapsing either, but then again my idea of collapse is grim.

    However, the US is in decline and the growth of non-whites, especially of the non-east Asian variety - and they are the overwhelming majority - will make the country less pleasant and more chaotic. Miscegenation is taking its toll on the margins, and the coming generation will be of lesser quality. This affects everything: government policy, the quality of public services, American science, and something difficult to name, let's call it the American soul: the expression of Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and Celtic spirit that made the country so quaint and wholesome.

    The most horrying aspect of miscegenation of whites with Mestizos, blacks, and the already substantial amount of mixed individuals, is that there will be a monumental jump in the number of mystery meat children due to the general decline of white Americans in comparison to other races, whites who would otherwise be the normal romantic match of one another if their population was >85%. This replacement along with the decline of white racial conscious spell doom for the shrinking white majority. Each mixed child adds to a corresponding decline in white children.

    The US will reach a turning point where whites will be bred out to insignificance, I'm talking about being reduced to 1/4 of the <40yo demographic by ~2050. If the population in a given place is half white, half non-white, and you factor out preservationist instincts, you have a 50% chance that the white person here won't be the parent of a white child. In this scenario you can wipe out 50% of the white American posterity in a single generation. In 2011, according to government statistics, white newborns were a minority (<50%)... for the first time since the US declared independence.

    Americans are clueless to the gigantic demographic shift that will take place in the next three decades. It isn't Brazil that will become more like the US, as Brazilians like to hope, but the US that will come to resemble Brazil. Demography is destiny.

  19. @Belarusian Dude
    As much as I don't like what our friends in MENA call the great satan this seems really "optimistic". Yeah everything is bad but the population is growing and until the US is no linger capable of fielding an intercontinental Empire untouched I would be skeptical of predictions of some American collapse

    I don’t believe that the US is collapsing either, but then again my idea of collapse is grim.

    However, the US is in decline and the growth of non-whites, especially of the non-east Asian variety – and they are the overwhelming majority – will make the country less pleasant and more chaotic. Miscegenation is taking its toll on the margins, and the coming generation will be of lesser quality. This affects everything: government policy, the quality of public services, American science, and something difficult to name, let’s call it the American soul: the expression of Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and Celtic spirit that made the country so quaint and wholesome.

    The most horrying aspect of miscegenation of whites with Mestizos, blacks, and the already substantial amount of mixed individuals, is that there will be a monumental jump in the number of mystery meat children due to the general decline of white Americans in comparison to other races, whites who would otherwise be the normal romantic match of one another if their population was >85%. This replacement along with the decline of white racial conscious spell doom for the shrinking white majority. Each mixed child adds to a corresponding decline in white children.

    The US will reach a turning point where whites will be bred out to insignificance, I’m talking about being reduced to 1/4 of the <40yo demographic by ~2050. If the population in a given place is half white, half non-white, and you factor out preservationist instincts, you have a 50% chance that the white person here won't be the parent of a white child. In this scenario you can wipe out 50% of the white American posterity in a single generation. In 2011, according to government statistics, white newborns were a minority (<50%)… for the first time since the US declared independence.

    Americans are clueless to the gigantic demographic shift that will take place in the next three decades. It isn't Brazil that will become more like the US, as Brazilians like to hope, but the US that will come to resemble Brazil. Demography is destiny.

    • Replies: @lloyd
    Do most white Americans care these days? Is it possible the white race is evolving out of existence? There is silicon valley and "dark web". But apart from that where else does the white race shine these days? The present Prime Minister of UK holed up in an oxygen mask is Turkish descent. I hold the eccentric opinion if left to their own devices most so called mixed race people would look up to their white side. Privately in their social life, most actually do. But of course the indoctrination in school and public funding push their non white sides. But people if expected to officially think one way have a historic habit of being contrary wise. Deeudoone may be a portend of the future despite desperate attempts to silence him. I was just listening to Melanie Philips on youtube declaring the Holocaust destroyed the ideal of Western civilisation. I closed it after a few minutes. Who wants to listen to that scarecrow these days except for deluded hasbara?
  20. This carnival of larping Orthodox freaks

    Second-hand story from a Greek church in the US.

    Priest, chanting: For our Archbishop X, for the honorable presbyterate, for the diaconate in Christ, and for all the clergy and the people, let us pray to the Lord!

    Choir: Lord have mercy!

    Priest: For our country, for the president,…

    Man in trench coat, stepping in front of ambon, pulling out a gun: And for the king!

    Priest: … and for the king, let us pray to the Lord!

    Choir: Lord have mercy!!!

  21. God I wish Russia was as cool as US propaganda makes it out to be

    • Agree: Dreadilk
    • LOL: Anatoly Karlin
  22. @Ron Unz
    Every day, our government reminds me more and more of the early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks strangely combined with a good deal of the decaying Politburo-types of the last years of the Soviet Union.

    This whole Coronavirus disaster may well be our Chernobyl, and mark the death-spiral of the corrupt and totally incompetent USSA...

    I was thinking something along the lines of the Reign of Terror … sans Guillotine … so far.

  23. Americans’ idea of a typical Russian ultranationalist.

    You forgot the the sword Anatoly.

    [MORE]

  24. @utu
    "early-stage fanatic Bolsheviks" - I would not be surprised if some of people who work for various US agencies that chase 98 year old Nazis and fight anti-semitism among teenagers in some country thousands of miles away actually had ancestors in Checka, NKVD or KGB. Though much more terrifying is finding such people in editorial boards and influential think tanks.

    The untold story who comprised waves of immigration from the Soviet Block needs to be told. You can have some glimpses at it in John Sack "An Eye for an Eye" and Robert I. Friedman "Red Mafiya".

    Don’t be rude- the NKVD did many great, selfless and heroic missions and acts during the Great Patriotic War.

    It’s unfair to tarnish the good name of an organisation as a whole just because of some “bad” behaviour for a short time.

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries–without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn’t act as noble.

    Also- in style and demeanor–the modern day Western equivalent of Stalin is probably Michael Buble- both calm, easy-going gentlemen

    • Replies: @Korenchkin

    some “bad”
     
    "some" is an understatement, and there is no need for quotes around the word "bad"

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries
     
    Lmao
    , @Hyperborean

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries–without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn’t act as noble.
     
    As we all know, the noble hand displayed a graceful and magnanimous attitude in 1953, 1956 and 1968, far beyond what its duties and responsibilities bound it to.

    Truly, children shall hear epics and ballads of the noble hand's obliging and lenient nature for eons and generations.

  25. @Seraphim
    It might be the first step in declaring the Orthodox Church a terrorist organization, as it is understood that condition to join the group is to be an Orthodox Christian. American Orthodox (especially of Russian extraction) should be worried.

    It might be the first step in declaring the Orthodox Church a terrorist organization, as it is understood that condition to join the group is to be an Orthodox Christian. American Orthodox (especially of Russian extraction) should be worried.

    A decades long issue, going back to the Cold War and even before the USSR. After the American Civil War, the US and Britain improved their relationship, which included some American elites taking to the Brit caricatures of Russia. Related:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/03/30/continued-western-mass-media-creativity-misinformation-on-russia-knows-no-bounds/

  26. @Divine Right
    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    Navy secretary rips Capt. Brett Crozier for his warning about coronavirus aboard ship

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/navy-secretary-rips-brett-crozier-for-warning-about-coronavirus-on-ship/
     

    ‘He was trying to help us!’: Listen to sailors yell profanities at Trump’s acting Navy secretary while he trashes fired captain

    https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/he-was-trying-to-help-us-listen-to-sailors-yell-profanities-at-trumps-acting-navy-secretary-while-he-trashes-fired-captain/
     

    Trump on Navy Secretary's harsh comments: I might have to get involved

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0PhL8pa_Tg
     

    I was kind of partial to the Navy Secretary…until I read this.

    Modly added on Monday: “One of the things about his email that bothered me the most was saying that we are not at war. Well, we aren’t technically at war. But let me tell ya something, the only reason we are dealing with this right now is a big authoritarian regime called China was not forthcoming about what was happening with this virus and they put the world at risk to protect themselves and to protect their reputations.”

    This dumb son of a bitch was using the incident to promote US propaganda against China.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    I believe that the relief of the Captain was necessary for all of the obvious reasons; however, the Secretary made a big mistake flying to Guam to personally give a speech to the crew. It should have been taken care of by the replacement Captain with maybe some backup from the Admiral one step above. In addition, the speech he gave tore down a still serving senior officer in front of a large contingent of enlisted sailors including a fair number of very junior ones. This Secretary, who has now resigned, was a ring knocker and had served for 7 years after graduating from Annapolis, then gone into the financial services industry. (Likely part of his problem.) He had been a helicopter pilot and maybe didn't lead that many enlisted sailors during his short military career, likely another part of his problem. With 4 years at Annapolis and 7 as an officer he should have realized that what he was about to do was little or no better an example of military protocol than what the Captain had done.
  27. @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    Don't be rude- the NKVD did many great, selfless and heroic missions and acts during the Great Patriotic War.

    It's unfair to tarnish the good name of an organisation as a whole just because of some "bad" behaviour for a short time.

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries--without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn't act as noble.

    Also- in style and demeanor--the modern day Western equivalent of Stalin is probably Michael Buble- both calm, easy-going gentlemen

    some “bad”

    “some” is an understatement, and there is no need for quotes around the word “bad”

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries

    Lmao

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    I am happy that you agree with the Stalin/Buble comparisons.

    Obviously the excesses of his policies are most important, but there is no doubt that as a statesman, quality of his speeches and how he conducted himself in public..... that Stalin was a million times better than the clumsy JFK
  28. @216
    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Agreed…the only purpose of aircraft carriers, as well as most of the Navy, is to wield power over foreign countries for hegemonic c0ntrol. Navies have been used for this purpose for centuries.

  29. @Nolin
    By being the initiator of an anti-white crusade targeting Russia, the US is giving the Kremlin a chance to respond, not by saying that the US is the real racist, but by highlighting the targeted democide of white Americans, citing hostile government policies, institutional biases, and a host of groups that exist by the hundreds in the US, and also highlight NGOs supported by the State Dept that are engaged in anti-white activities in Europe.

    There is a powerful precedent that could be used to offer the white victims refuge status in Russia. The Jewish "refugees" of the 70s and 80s claimed that stealth, unannouced quotas aimed at lessening their overrepresentation in Soviet institutions were anti-Semitic. In the US, hostility and demands to kick whites out of their jobs and positions are open, legalized and growing. Based on bogus Jewish claims to refuge, white Americans have a more honest claim, and deserve a far more robust response by Russia.

    I sensed this was coming after the Silicon Valley mass purged nationalists in a coordinated fashion. Will Russia take this opportunity to turn the tide against its (and ours) enemies? The US is being proacrive, the problem here is that Russia has many options to hit back and attract white support, making it a viable alternative to the decaying, hostile US. Officializing it and showcasing Trotskyite misdeeds should be seriously considered.

    Russia has rich pickings should it choose to go after Zogistan. By the way, months ago when the IRCC was declared a terrorist organization, I googled the counter-terror department officials and it read like a Tel Aviv phonebook. Jews are wild and the anti-white crusade is going official, as opposed to from behind the curtains (funding all types of hostily orgs and outlets). It will get much worse.

    If we accept the argument that the Empire is a pressure-cooker, why should Russian Federation authorities lift the lid and let steam escape?

  30. @Korenchkin

    some “bad”
     
    "some" is an understatement, and there is no need for quotes around the word "bad"

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries
     
    Lmao

    I am happy that you agree with the Stalin/Buble comparisons.

    Obviously the excesses of his policies are most important, but there is no doubt that as a statesman, quality of his speeches and how he conducted himself in public….. that Stalin was a million times better than the clumsy JFK

    • Disagree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    One reason I do wish the USSR was still around is so you could take your (free) meds
  31. @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    I am happy that you agree with the Stalin/Buble comparisons.

    Obviously the excesses of his policies are most important, but there is no doubt that as a statesman, quality of his speeches and how he conducted himself in public..... that Stalin was a million times better than the clumsy JFK

    One reason I do wish the USSR was still around is so you could take your (free) meds

    • LOL: Jaakko Raipala
  32. @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    Don't be rude- the NKVD did many great, selfless and heroic missions and acts during the Great Patriotic War.

    It's unfair to tarnish the good name of an organisation as a whole just because of some "bad" behaviour for a short time.

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries--without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn't act as noble.

    Also- in style and demeanor--the modern day Western equivalent of Stalin is probably Michael Buble- both calm, easy-going gentlemen

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries–without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn’t act as noble.

    As we all know, the noble hand displayed a graceful and magnanimous attitude in 1953, 1956 and 1968, far beyond what its duties and responsibilities bound it to.

    Truly, children shall hear epics and ballads of the noble hand’s obliging and lenient nature for eons and generations.

    • Replies: @Ms Karlin-Gerard
    Unfortunately you sabotaged your own point by not referencing anything bad from the last quarter of a century of the Warsaw Pact.
    True ,the US put great pressure for the USSR not to do much in the polish Solidarity protests in the early 1980s- but they certainly weren't enabling any widespread violence if they didn't put any pressure.
    Anyway, cretinous US funded student protests get the wholly proportionate responses they deserved in each of those "revolutions". De Gaulle realised this too late.
  33. @216
    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    If!

    Don’t be too optimistic. There has not been an actual real test of those things.

    When the Chinese test it against a ship that large that has some ability to fight back (or a carrier group :-), then we will know.

    • Replies: @Kent Nationalist
    So how is the carrier group going to fight back against large numbers of ASBMs?
  34. White Supermacy Bad.

    Orange Man is White.

    Therefore, Orange man bad!

  35. @utu
    Did you improve Quebec? Do your kids speak French only? Can you spell Quebec?

    How about me: I am fluent in asshole language, that’s why I can effectively communicate with the likes of you, but it also makes me a true cosmopolitan since the asshole language is pretty much the Esperanto of today.

  36. @Divine Right
    The signs of strain are all there, even in the military. Consider what just happened with the navy:

    Navy secretary rips Capt. Brett Crozier for his warning about coronavirus aboard ship

    https://nypost.com/2020/04/06/navy-secretary-rips-brett-crozier-for-warning-about-coronavirus-on-ship/
     

    ‘He was trying to help us!’: Listen to sailors yell profanities at Trump’s acting Navy secretary while he trashes fired captain

    https://www.alternet.org/2020/04/he-was-trying-to-help-us-listen-to-sailors-yell-profanities-at-trumps-acting-navy-secretary-while-he-trashes-fired-captain/
     

    Trump on Navy Secretary's harsh comments: I might have to get involved

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0PhL8pa_Tg
     

    That captain deserves to be reprimanded. Respect the chain of command. Don’t go around it. First rule in any military.

    Jeez… As if they aren’t training military personnel how to operate in dirty environments (CBRN).

    That guy won’t be given a command again that’s for sure.

  37. @Peripatetic Commenter
    If!

    Don't be too optimistic. There has not been an actual real test of those things.

    When the Chinese test it against a ship that large that has some ability to fight back (or a carrier group :-), then we will know.

    So how is the carrier group going to fight back against large numbers of ASBMs?

    • Replies: @Peripatetic Commenter

    So how is the carrier group going to fight back against large numbers of ASBMs?
     
    I don't know but the question is more likely will they have to fight back against a large number of ASBMs.

    Carrier groups do have DDGs in the mix and it is highly likely that thought has been given to dealing with ASBMs.

    I am not saying that the Chinese ASBMs are useless.

    I am just saying: "Don't count their chickens until they hatch!"
  38. More Jewish Spin.

    Meanwhile, US government fully promotes Wars for Israel and supports Zionist tyranny and ‘genocide’ over Palestinians.

  39. @utu
    Did you improve Quebec? Do your kids speak French only? Can you spell Quebec?

    You’re displaying your ignorance of Quebec.

    I’m not an immigrant to Quebec. There are Anglo peoples native to Quebec, from whom I come from. BTW not (((Anglo))) as in the elite business community in Montreal. But real Anglo.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  40. @utu
    Did you improve Quebec? Do your kids speak French only? Can you spell Quebec?

    “Did you improve Quebec?”

    Most Anglo-Quebeckers have deep roots in the province. They’re not immigrants.

    “Do your kids speak French only?”

    Why should they speak only French? The English minority has an officially enshrined status in Quebec. This being said, I’ve met a lot of “Anglo” children who speak more freely in French than in English, even though they attend an English-language school. If you live outside Montreal, it’s difficult to live your life solely in English.

    “Can you spell Quebec?”

    As a noun, it’s officially Québec. As an adjective, it’s either québécois or québécoise (depending on the gender of the noun).

    I wouldn’t recommend emigrating to Russia for several reasons:

    – You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

    – Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs. It’s less frequent and less “in your face” than in Canada, but that’s how it started out in Canada, not so long ago.

    – The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it’s not your grass. It’s somebody else’s. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly “conservative” ones. And they didn’t speak to my identity and my traditions.

    • Agree: Dreadilk
    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Kovar

    Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically.
     
    I didn't know Russia was being inundated with Arabs and Africans. Or is it?

    According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, as of July 2019, only two Syrian citizens have refugee status in Russia, while 694 people have temporary asylum. Year after year, the number of refugees has been steadily decreasing, but this is not because Syria has become safer, but rather because Russian officials are putting more and more obstacles in refugees’ paths.
     
    2 Syrians with refugee status. Two. And 694 granted temporary asylum, who must renew every year, and the government statistics say these are decreasing in the past few years, which suggests they were denied or just left Russia.

    LOL

    Unlike what happens in the US and Europe, most Central Asians in Russia are temporary workers and go back to their countries seasonally. It's a completely different story in the US, where the Hispanic population grew from a few hundreds of thousands, many of whom were actually of Spanish descent, to almost 60 million in 5 decades! Clearly, Central American Mestizos never go back and their US-born children are citizens by default.

    More from the link:


    Although it cannot be said that Russia refuses to take in refugees outright, incoming refugees are divided into two camps: “ours” and “others”. The former category includes residents of self-proclaimed republics in eastern Ukraine, who receive not only temporary asylum, but also Russian citizenship by the thousands. In 2018, 5822 citizens of Ukraine applied for temporary asylum status and almost all (5383) received it. As of July 2019, of the 61,948 people who had temporary asylum status in the Russian Federation, 60,093 were citizens of Ukraine. In mid-August, the Ministry of Internal Affairs reported that it had received more than 60’000 applications for citizenship from residents of Donbass, of which 25’000 were accepted.
     
    No bugmen in my bureaucracy, please:

    While people with refugee status are legally guaranteed housing, food, and all kinds of state assistance (at least on paper), temporary asylum does not amount to any assistance other than allowing the person to legally live and work in Russia. Here lies the fundamental difference between the Russian asylum institution and the European one. For example, Germany, a country that is also reluctant to recognize Syrians as refugees, nevertheless provides them with accommodation in dormitories, food, medical care and an allowance of 350 euros per month, even while their application is still under consideration. And most importantly: even foreigners with temporary asylum can partake in free integration courses, including intensive German language classes. In Russia, however, state institutions for the integration of refugees are essentially nonexistent.
     
    "Directed from above", or why the siloviki vertical is better than 'democracy' (i.e. Jewish/lobbyist rented politicos):

    Generous gestures that are widely publicized by the Russian authorities, like offering Russian passports to residents of the Donbass, are happening in tandem with the silent expulsion of other, less desirable refugees from the country. Human rights activists speculate that Russian migration services act as directed from above, and at the moment they are seemingly being directed not to give Syrians asylum. Most likely, Moscow fears that a large number of refugees from the Middle East in major cities could provoke popular unrest. And unlike the USSR, Russia places more importance on the “Russian world”, while leaving the notion of “friendship of peoples” in the dust.
     
    tell me this isn't based af
    , @anonymous coward

    Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically.
     
    False. The sentiments and values of the Russian people are way less pozzed and liberal today in 2020, on every issue you could care to name, than they were in 1990.

    This doesn't mean that the Russian government and (((media))) won't try to push towards 'global consensus', but in the face of mounting popular resistance they won't ever succeed.
  41. @Kovar
    I don't believe that the US is collapsing either, but then again my idea of collapse is grim.

    However, the US is in decline and the growth of non-whites, especially of the non-east Asian variety - and they are the overwhelming majority - will make the country less pleasant and more chaotic. Miscegenation is taking its toll on the margins, and the coming generation will be of lesser quality. This affects everything: government policy, the quality of public services, American science, and something difficult to name, let's call it the American soul: the expression of Anglo-Saxon, Germanic, and Celtic spirit that made the country so quaint and wholesome.

    The most horrying aspect of miscegenation of whites with Mestizos, blacks, and the already substantial amount of mixed individuals, is that there will be a monumental jump in the number of mystery meat children due to the general decline of white Americans in comparison to other races, whites who would otherwise be the normal romantic match of one another if their population was >85%. This replacement along with the decline of white racial conscious spell doom for the shrinking white majority. Each mixed child adds to a corresponding decline in white children.

    The US will reach a turning point where whites will be bred out to insignificance, I'm talking about being reduced to 1/4 of the <40yo demographic by ~2050. If the population in a given place is half white, half non-white, and you factor out preservationist instincts, you have a 50% chance that the white person here won't be the parent of a white child. In this scenario you can wipe out 50% of the white American posterity in a single generation. In 2011, according to government statistics, white newborns were a minority (<50%)... for the first time since the US declared independence.

    Americans are clueless to the gigantic demographic shift that will take place in the next three decades. It isn't Brazil that will become more like the US, as Brazilians like to hope, but the US that will come to resemble Brazil. Demography is destiny.

    Do most white Americans care these days? Is it possible the white race is evolving out of existence? There is silicon valley and “dark web”. But apart from that where else does the white race shine these days? The present Prime Minister of UK holed up in an oxygen mask is Turkish descent. I hold the eccentric opinion if left to their own devices most so called mixed race people would look up to their white side. Privately in their social life, most actually do. But of course the indoctrination in school and public funding push their non white sides. But people if expected to officially think one way have a historic habit of being contrary wise. Deeudoone may be a portend of the future despite desperate attempts to silence him. I was just listening to Melanie Philips on youtube declaring the Holocaust destroyed the ideal of Western civilisation. I closed it after a few minutes. Who wants to listen to that scarecrow these days except for deluded hasbara?

    • Replies: @Alden
    Silicon Valley pretty much purged the White men who built it starting 1980. The engineering management coding designing are definitely No Whites Need Apply. The only thing White men are doing there these days is building data centers.

    I suppose if a White man had 20 million and a great patent he could get something started. He’d need an army of highly skilled attorneys to protect him from the hostiles though. Definitely never sell shares to anyone.
  42. @Kent Nationalist
    So how is the carrier group going to fight back against large numbers of ASBMs?

    So how is the carrier group going to fight back against large numbers of ASBMs?

    I don’t know but the question is more likely will they have to fight back against a large number of ASBMs.

    Carrier groups do have DDGs in the mix and it is highly likely that thought has been given to dealing with ASBMs.

    I am not saying that the Chinese ASBMs are useless.

    I am just saying: “Don’t count their chickens until they hatch!”

  43. Related to the issue of defining terrorists in the former USSR:

    https://gordonhahn.com/2020/04/07/report-the-new-terrorist-threat-ukrainian-ultra-nationalist-and-neo-fascist-terrorism-at-home-and-abroad

    Includes a pointed shot at Alexander Motyl.

  44. @mal

    And why now? After all, those events took place more than three years ago.
     
    Because Mueller indictments of St Petersburg troll farm went bust recently, and State Department can't use "evil sneaky SPb trolls corrupting innocent foreigners" meme without embarrassing themselves. So the State Dept had to invent "evil sneaky SPb Imperial Terrorists corrupting innocent foreigners" meme.

    There is this organization in UK called Integrity Initiative. The basic goal is to kill tourism to Russia as part of the plan to isolate the country and make it easier to demonize. State Department is part of the same game - it is much easier to brainwash the peons about how evil and sneaky Russia is if they have never actually been there. Gods forbid regular people go to Russia and see it as a normal country with normal people and have a great time (like during World Cup) - this can't be allowed.

    This is relatively successful too - when I went to St Petersburg three months ago to renew my Russian passport, everybody pretty much staged my funeral in the US - i was to be kidnapped by KGB agents and fed to bears. Even my grandmother in Kirov region was against me going. You know it's bad when they get grandma in the provinces. The only person who was like "you mad? Hardly ever see a bear in St Pete these days" was my dad. And it ended up as a pretty awesome trip. Almost no bears.

    Anyway, expect more hysterical stories about evil SPb terrorists in Western media. They booted Russia from Tokyo Olympics, but Corona Chan blessed that event so nobody cares. By the time Olympics happen, Russia may win arbitration, and that makes our Integrity Initiative friends sad. So they need another tourist horror story to hound Russia with.

    Because Mueller indictments of St Petersburg troll farm went bust recently

    Few people seem to know, but what Mueller engaged in is called prosecutorial misconduct in American law. It is a crime. Do you think the criminal will be punished? That’s right, no way. You do not get punished for crimes committed in service of Deep State. You get punished for perfectly legal actions against Deep State (remember Assange?). This is called the rule of law, in case you are wondering.

    • Agree: mal, RadicalCenter
  45. @Peter Frost
    "Did you improve Quebec?"

    Most Anglo-Quebeckers have deep roots in the province. They're not immigrants.

    "Do your kids speak French only?"

    Why should they speak only French? The English minority has an officially enshrined status in Quebec. This being said, I've met a lot of "Anglo" children who speak more freely in French than in English, even though they attend an English-language school. If you live outside Montreal, it's difficult to live your life solely in English.

    "Can you spell Quebec?"

    As a noun, it's officially Québec. As an adjective, it's either québécois or québécoise (depending on the gender of the noun).

    I wouldn't recommend emigrating to Russia for several reasons:

    - You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

    - Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs. It's less frequent and less "in your face" than in Canada, but that's how it started out in Canada, not so long ago.

    - The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it's not your grass. It's somebody else's. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly "conservative" ones. And they didn't speak to my identity and my traditions.

    Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically.

    I didn’t know Russia was being inundated with Arabs and Africans. Or is it?

    According to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, as of July 2019, only two Syrian citizens have refugee status in Russia, while 694 people have temporary asylum. Year after year, the number of refugees has been steadily decreasing, but this is not because Syria has become safer, but rather because Russian officials are putting more and more obstacles in refugees’ paths.

    2 Syrians with refugee status. Two. And 694 granted temporary asylum, who must renew every year, and the government statistics say these are decreasing in the past few years, which suggests they were denied or just left Russia.

    LOL

    Unlike what happens in the US and Europe, most Central Asians in Russia are temporary workers and go back to their countries seasonally. It’s a completely different story in the US, where the Hispanic population grew from a few hundreds of thousands, many of whom were actually of Spanish descent, to almost 60 million in 5 decades! Clearly, Central American Mestizos never go back and their US-born children are citizens by default.

    More from the link:

    Although it cannot be said that Russia refuses to take in refugees outright, incoming refugees are divided into two camps: “ours” and “others”. The former category includes residents of self-proclaimed republics in eastern Ukraine, who receive not only temporary asylum, but also Russian citizenship by the thousands. In 2018, 5822 citizens of Ukraine applied for temporary asylum status and almost all (5383) received it. As of July 2019, of the 61,948 people who had temporary asylum status in the Russian Federation, 60,093 were citizens of Ukraine. In mid-August, the Ministry of Internal Affairs reported that it had received more than 60’000 applications for citizenship from residents of Donbass, of which 25’000 were accepted.

    No bugmen in my bureaucracy, please:

    While people with refugee status are legally guaranteed housing, food, and all kinds of state assistance (at least on paper), temporary asylum does not amount to any assistance other than allowing the person to legally live and work in Russia. Here lies the fundamental difference between the Russian asylum institution and the European one. For example, Germany, a country that is also reluctant to recognize Syrians as refugees, nevertheless provides them with accommodation in dormitories, food, medical care and an allowance of 350 euros per month, even while their application is still under consideration. And most importantly: even foreigners with temporary asylum can partake in free integration courses, including intensive German language classes. In Russia, however, state institutions for the integration of refugees are essentially nonexistent.

    “Directed from above”, or why the siloviki vertical is better than ‘democracy’ (i.e. Jewish/lobbyist rented politicos):

    Generous gestures that are widely publicized by the Russian authorities, like offering Russian passports to residents of the Donbass, are happening in tandem with the silent expulsion of other, less desirable refugees from the country. Human rights activists speculate that Russian migration services act as directed from above, and at the moment they are seemingly being directed not to give Syrians asylum. Most likely, Moscow fears that a large number of refugees from the Middle East in major cities could provoke popular unrest. And unlike the USSR, Russia places more importance on the “Russian world”, while leaving the notion of “friendship of peoples” in the dust.

    tell me this isn’t based af

  46. @Peter Frost
    "Did you improve Quebec?"

    Most Anglo-Quebeckers have deep roots in the province. They're not immigrants.

    "Do your kids speak French only?"

    Why should they speak only French? The English minority has an officially enshrined status in Quebec. This being said, I've met a lot of "Anglo" children who speak more freely in French than in English, even though they attend an English-language school. If you live outside Montreal, it's difficult to live your life solely in English.

    "Can you spell Quebec?"

    As a noun, it's officially Québec. As an adjective, it's either québécois or québécoise (depending on the gender of the noun).

    I wouldn't recommend emigrating to Russia for several reasons:

    - You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

    - Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs. It's less frequent and less "in your face" than in Canada, but that's how it started out in Canada, not so long ago.

    - The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it's not your grass. It's somebody else's. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly "conservative" ones. And they didn't speak to my identity and my traditions.

    Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically.

    False. The sentiments and values of the Russian people are way less pozzed and liberal today in 2020, on every issue you could care to name, than they were in 1990.

    This doesn’t mean that the Russian government and (((media))) won’t try to push towards ‘global consensus’, but in the face of mounting popular resistance they won’t ever succeed.

  47. The banal truth about those Swedish right wing terrorists is that they (now they call themselves NMR) have been engaged in various militant actions for decades and many of them have tons of prior convictions for violent attacks on leftists, immigrants etc.

    The three guys who were convicted of these bombings were led by neo-Nazi veteran Jonasson (50 years at the time) and were all *well* radicalized before they went to Partizan for some gun cosplaying in 2016. No way the Russians have anything to do with their militant sentiments or the later homebrew bombery. If anything, they just went wherever they could play around with guns.

    One of the comvicted guys were later caught in Poland, also at one of those “camps” where you get to fiddle with guns:
    https://expo.se/2019/11/bombnazist-utvisas-fr%C3%A5n-polen

    So, this classification sounds like it was just grabbed from a hat.

    BTW, one of the more well-known Swedish Azov volunteers has a past in NMR as well, and was a devout neo-Nazi (and had prior convictions), before he supposedly had a change of heart and became something of a media darling.

    Reality beats fiction sometimes.

    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @Anonymous lurker
    Jesus, those spelling and grammatical errors, pardon me. Hope it's decipherable.
  48. Your comments are reasonable and welcome, but I look at some of these issues from a different angle, as an American convert to Orthodox Christianity who lives in Russia.

    – You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

    While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country, so this is neither here nor there. What you can do, both as a native and as foreigner, is influence your social circle.

    – Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs.

    It is sadly quite true that many Russian people continue to idolize the West as it becomes more and more degenerate, and I am quite uncertain what to expect from the next generation of Russian “leaders”. As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples? I don’t watch television, but blacks, east Asian, and Hispanic people in advertisements for western companies are conspicuously out of place in Moscow, while Russian companies mostly put Russian people in their advertisements, so one solution to this problem would be a law, sold as economic protectionism, requiring all advertisements in Russia to be designed by Russian marketing firms.

    However, even the most “trad” clothing companies sometimes want to be hip:

    http://gazeta-dm.com/articles/media/2014/12/19/pavlovoposadskie-nabivnyie-platki/

    That said, during my half decade in Russia I have seen some positive developments, with slowly increasing self-confidence and awareness of the Russian people, and a small but noticeable return to tradition. So I am optimistic.

    – The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it’s not your grass. It’s somebody else’s. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly “conservative” ones. And they didn’t speak to my identity and my traditions.

    Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function, as the Soviets understood. But just as man does not live by bread alone, so a religion will not persist by being merely useful. For a traditional, Nicene Christian, the only way forward is, I believe, to make Orthodox Christianity your own, slowly synthesizing what is wholesome from your own culture with the Christian tradition that has been better preserved in the East– a work for many generations.

    One attempt to form an East-West Orthodox synthesis is the Antiochian Western Vicariate:

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

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Peter Frost
    "While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country"

    I believe I can.

    "As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples?"

    When I went to local shopping malls I saw a surprising number of black faces on advertising posters. Yet none of the posters showed Central Asian faces, even though there were many Central Asians among the shoppers.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    I had the same impression while watching a TV series on the life of Stalin's daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva. It dwelt at some length on her relationship with Brajesh Singh, an Indian living in Moscow. There was a scene in which she got angry and said something like: "This is a man who has come from another country to work here and make a contribution to our society, and he should be treated just like the rest of us!" In reality, he was too ill to do any work, and one might wonder whether her relationship with him was simply a stratagem. After receiving permission to take his ashes to India, she used that opportunity to defect to the West.

    "Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function"

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place. There was also the veneration of icons and other objects of gold and silver. I understand that this sort of thing is important to Orthodox Christians, but for me it would be impossible. Something inside me would say: No!!!

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don't have to kiss the icons. They're also "pozzed."

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It's socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West. As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

  49. @Anonymous lurker
    The banal truth about those Swedish right wing terrorists is that they (now they call themselves NMR) have been engaged in various militant actions for decades and many of them have tons of prior convictions for violent attacks on leftists, immigrants etc.

    The three guys who were convicted of these bombings were led by neo-Nazi veteran Jonasson (50 years at the time) and were all *well* radicalized before they went to Partizan for some gun cosplaying in 2016. No way the Russians have anything to do with their militant sentiments or the later homebrew bombery. If anything, they just went wherever they could play around with guns.

    One of the comvicted guys were later caught in Poland, also at one of those "camps" where you get to fiddle with guns:
    https://expo.se/2019/11/bombnazist-utvisas-fr%C3%A5n-polen

    So, this classification sounds like it was just grabbed from a hat.

    BTW, one of the more well-known Swedish Azov volunteers has a past in NMR as well, and was a devout neo-Nazi (and had prior convictions), before he supposedly had a change of heart and became something of a media darling.

    Reality beats fiction sometimes.

    Jesus, those spelling and grammatical errors, pardon me. Hope it’s decipherable.

  50. @216
    If the ASBM works as promised, the era of the carrier is over. Drone swarms could also do the job.

    Imagine a carrier group surrendering like the defeated Russians at Tsushima. The USN ships towed into Shanghai.

    I think they’ll continue to have some utility in some form. There are places where islands are few and far between. Land bases are often hard to obtain for political reasons depending on the target and the nature of the mission. Very few weapons or weapons systems have totally disappeared. Swords survive as bayonets, which admittedly are very little used anymore. Battleships are gone, but frigates are small battle ships, now with missiles instead of guns. Field artillery has been greatly de-emphasized but is still around. Floating artillery to support the Marines on the beach is now on the amphibious assault ships.

  51. @Realist
    I was kind of partial to the Navy Secretary...until I read this.

    Modly added on Monday: “One of the things about his email that bothered me the most was saying that we are not at war. Well, we aren’t technically at war. But let me tell ya something, the only reason we are dealing with this right now is a big authoritarian regime called China was not forthcoming about what was happening with this virus and they put the world at risk to protect themselves and to protect their reputations.”
     
    This dumb son of a bitch was using the incident to promote US propaganda against China.

    I believe that the relief of the Captain was necessary for all of the obvious reasons; however, the Secretary made a big mistake flying to Guam to personally give a speech to the crew. It should have been taken care of by the replacement Captain with maybe some backup from the Admiral one step above. In addition, the speech he gave tore down a still serving senior officer in front of a large contingent of enlisted sailors including a fair number of very junior ones. This Secretary, who has now resigned, was a ring knocker and had served for 7 years after graduating from Annapolis, then gone into the financial services industry. (Likely part of his problem.) He had been a helicopter pilot and maybe didn’t lead that many enlisted sailors during his short military career, likely another part of his problem. With 4 years at Annapolis and 7 as an officer he should have realized that what he was about to do was little or no better an example of military protocol than what the Captain had done.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    That secretary sent a clear message to sailors: the government does not give a hoot about their health. If their captain does, the government punishes him, as it’s a crime to care about health of enlisted men and women. Even though that scum resigned, he remains scum. But he is not the only one. End of story.
  52. @Hibernian
    I believe that the relief of the Captain was necessary for all of the obvious reasons; however, the Secretary made a big mistake flying to Guam to personally give a speech to the crew. It should have been taken care of by the replacement Captain with maybe some backup from the Admiral one step above. In addition, the speech he gave tore down a still serving senior officer in front of a large contingent of enlisted sailors including a fair number of very junior ones. This Secretary, who has now resigned, was a ring knocker and had served for 7 years after graduating from Annapolis, then gone into the financial services industry. (Likely part of his problem.) He had been a helicopter pilot and maybe didn't lead that many enlisted sailors during his short military career, likely another part of his problem. With 4 years at Annapolis and 7 as an officer he should have realized that what he was about to do was little or no better an example of military protocol than what the Captain had done.

    That secretary sent a clear message to sailors: the government does not give a hoot about their health. If their captain does, the government punishes him, as it’s a crime to care about health of enlisted men and women. Even though that scum resigned, he remains scum. But he is not the only one. End of story.

  53. @The Big Red Scary
    Your comments are reasonable and welcome, but I look at some of these issues from a different angle, as an American convert to Orthodox Christianity who lives in Russia.

    – You will be a foreigner in another country. You will no longer be able to influence the situation in your home country, while being unable to influence the situation in Russia. If you try, you will be told to mind your own business.

     

    While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country, so this is neither here nor there. What you can do, both as a native and as foreigner, is influence your social circle.

    – Russia is moving in the same direction as the West, demographically, culturally, and ideologically. The population is much more Westernized today than it was back in 2003 (when I was studying there). On a recent visit I noticed several cases of what looked to me like pro-immigration messaging in advertising and TV programs.
     
    It is sadly quite true that many Russian people continue to idolize the West as it becomes more and more degenerate, and I am quite uncertain what to expect from the next generation of Russian "leaders". As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples? I don't watch television, but blacks, east Asian, and Hispanic people in advertisements for western companies are conspicuously out of place in Moscow, while Russian companies mostly put Russian people in their advertisements, so one solution to this problem would be a law, sold as economic protectionism, requiring all advertisements in Russia to be designed by Russian marketing firms.

    However, even the most "trad" clothing companies sometimes want to be hip:

    http://gazeta-dm.com/articles/media/2014/12/19/pavlovoposadskie-nabivnyie-platki/

    That said, during my half decade in Russia I have seen some positive developments, with slowly increasing self-confidence and awareness of the Russian people, and a small but noticeable return to tradition. So I am optimistic.

    – The grass may seem greener on the other side, but it’s not your grass. It’s somebody else’s. When I left the United Church of Canada I considered joining another church, but then changed my mind. The other churches were moving in the same direction anyway, even the supposedly “conservative” ones. And they didn’t speak to my identity and my traditions.
     
    Religion serves many utilitarian purposes-- providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals-- without which a society cannot function, as the Soviets understood. But just as man does not live by bread alone, so a religion will not persist by being merely useful. For a traditional, Nicene Christian, the only way forward is, I believe, to make Orthodox Christianity your own, slowly synthesizing what is wholesome from your own culture with the Christian tradition that has been better preserved in the East-- a work for many generations.

    One attempt to form an East-West Orthodox synthesis is the Antiochian Western Vicariate:

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

    “While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country”

    I believe I can.

    “As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples?”

    When I went to local shopping malls I saw a surprising number of black faces on advertising posters. Yet none of the posters showed Central Asian faces, even though there were many Central Asians among the shoppers.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    I had the same impression while watching a TV series on the life of Stalin’s daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva. It dwelt at some length on her relationship with Brajesh Singh, an Indian living in Moscow. There was a scene in which she got angry and said something like: “This is a man who has come from another country to work here and make a contribution to our society, and he should be treated just like the rest of us!” In reality, he was too ill to do any work, and one might wonder whether her relationship with him was simply a stratagem. After receiving permission to take his ashes to India, she used that opportunity to defect to the West.

    “Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function”

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place. There was also the veneration of icons and other objects of gold and silver. I understand that this sort of thing is important to Orthodox Christians, but for me it would be impossible. Something inside me would say: No!!!

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don’t have to kiss the icons. They’re also “pozzed.”

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It’s socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West. As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

    • Replies: @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It’s socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

     

    It's a bit of column A and a bit of column B. Polish Catholicism is not representative of Catholicism at large, think priests praying with a polish flag at the altar. It is almost a separate branch of Catholicism with a Polish nationalist bent.
    Even in the rest of EE, Catholicism is entirely different. With the priesthood being almost the main promoters of liberal values including the LGBT kind.

    Orthodoxy is inherently conservative because its lack of a centralized leadership means long marches will be long, arduous, and ultimately useless in terms of social capital, being a priest is not as prestigious and the organization is much more heteronormative.
    Russian Orthodoxy is also a national religion, and imbued with ethnic identity. Being an active member of the organization and not feeling any sense of national identity is impossible. It's like being a Japanese Buddhist monk and not recognizing the inherent Japanese character of your religion.
    , @Anatoly Karlin

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.
     
    Unfortunately, there is something to that:

    https://twitter.com/akarlin88/status/1212645927388930048
    , @The Big Red Scary

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place.
     
    This may be. Perhaps I am just strange enough or young enough to adapt, but I got mostly used to it after about a few months, and completely used to it after a few years, so that I can hardly imagine any other way. The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don’t have to kiss the icons. They’re also “pozzed.”
     
    Are you referring to the "The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America", whose cathedral is in Ottawa? I know them well.

    https://www.archdiocese.ca/

    Unfortunately, they sometimes have pews. While all the members necessarily kiss icons, they aren't going to make you do so if you visit them. I'm not sure what you mean by "pozzed" in this context. It is true that the women are a little too liberated for their own good (many of them have "careers", and not all of them wear scarves), but there is no danger of lady priests, let alone lady bishops, and I don't even think they have altar girls (unlike modern Catholic churches). As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, priests are necessarily married, and almost always have a respectable number of children, as do most parishioners.

    You will occasionally find mixed-race marriages in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox position on nationality is complex. On the one hand, Christianity is a universalist religion, and Orthodox liturgical texts consider the Orthodox to be a race. On the other hand, their is a consistent recognition that the different national characters of the churches comprising the Orthodox Church are blessed and should be preserved.

    There are some North American and British Orthodox academics defending sexual degeneracy. While I am optimistic that this will ultimately go nowhere, it could eventually lead to a schism.

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity.
     
    "Socially conservative" is a relative term. In the first century Roman Empire, Christian treatment of women and slaves as fellow human beings, but with a distinct role to play in society, was radically liberal, while prostitution, abortion, and man-on-boy pederasty were more or less tolerated. The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity, and simply by not changing, while the rest of the world swam left, you ended up on the "far right". And this was to be expected, since there was never a stable equilibrium into which "progressive" Christianity could settle.

    What is true about the Orthodox Church in general is that theology, liturgical practice, and personal piety and morality remain essentially unchanged since the fourth century, so apparently it is a stable equilibrium. Concerning the Russian Orthodox Church in particular, the fact remains that it is the only surviving institution from pre-revolutionary Russia, the unique living root of Russian nationality.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West.
     
    Agreed.


    As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.
     
    There has been no stable equilibrium in Western society for hundreds of years, so if a solution exists, it is going to be much more radical than most are willing to contemplate.

    God save the Queen!
  54. @Peter Frost
    "While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country"

    I believe I can.

    "As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples?"

    When I went to local shopping malls I saw a surprising number of black faces on advertising posters. Yet none of the posters showed Central Asian faces, even though there were many Central Asians among the shoppers.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    I had the same impression while watching a TV series on the life of Stalin's daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva. It dwelt at some length on her relationship with Brajesh Singh, an Indian living in Moscow. There was a scene in which she got angry and said something like: "This is a man who has come from another country to work here and make a contribution to our society, and he should be treated just like the rest of us!" In reality, he was too ill to do any work, and one might wonder whether her relationship with him was simply a stratagem. After receiving permission to take his ashes to India, she used that opportunity to defect to the West.

    "Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function"

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place. There was also the veneration of icons and other objects of gold and silver. I understand that this sort of thing is important to Orthodox Christians, but for me it would be impossible. Something inside me would say: No!!!

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don't have to kiss the icons. They're also "pozzed."

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It's socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West. As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It’s socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    It’s a bit of column A and a bit of column B. Polish Catholicism is not representative of Catholicism at large, think priests praying with a polish flag at the altar. It is almost a separate branch of Catholicism with a Polish nationalist bent.
    Even in the rest of EE, Catholicism is entirely different. With the priesthood being almost the main promoters of liberal values including the LGBT kind.

    Orthodoxy is inherently conservative because its lack of a centralized leadership means long marches will be long, arduous, and ultimately useless in terms of social capital, being a priest is not as prestigious and the organization is much more heteronormative.
    Russian Orthodoxy is also a national religion, and imbued with ethnic identity. Being an active member of the organization and not feeling any sense of national identity is impossible. It’s like being a Japanese Buddhist monk and not recognizing the inherent Japanese character of your religion.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    I am surprised no one mentioned an important difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Catholic priests are supposed to be “celibate”, which in reality promotes homosexuality. In Orthodox Christianity, you cannot become a parish priest unless you are married. However, the hierarchs of the Orthodox Church come from monastic orders, so they might be as perverted as Catholic hierarchs. But the rank-and-file parish priests are essentially required to be normal.
  55. @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It’s socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

     

    It's a bit of column A and a bit of column B. Polish Catholicism is not representative of Catholicism at large, think priests praying with a polish flag at the altar. It is almost a separate branch of Catholicism with a Polish nationalist bent.
    Even in the rest of EE, Catholicism is entirely different. With the priesthood being almost the main promoters of liberal values including the LGBT kind.

    Orthodoxy is inherently conservative because its lack of a centralized leadership means long marches will be long, arduous, and ultimately useless in terms of social capital, being a priest is not as prestigious and the organization is much more heteronormative.
    Russian Orthodoxy is also a national religion, and imbued with ethnic identity. Being an active member of the organization and not feeling any sense of national identity is impossible. It's like being a Japanese Buddhist monk and not recognizing the inherent Japanese character of your religion.

    I am surprised no one mentioned an important difference between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Catholic priests are supposed to be “celibate”, which in reality promotes homosexuality. In Orthodox Christianity, you cannot become a parish priest unless you are married. However, the hierarchs of the Orthodox Church come from monastic orders, so they might be as perverted as Catholic hierarchs. But the rank-and-file parish priests are essentially required to be normal.

  56. Well, against my better judgement, I have decided to write this to you here in the loaded commentary section. Because I owe it to the Russians whom I grew up with and who were as dear to me as my family, my flesh and blood, my right eye, to at least write this to one Russian on the other side. And you are not the worst recipient.

    The USA is getting very serious now about a new Cold War with China, twenty years too late, clumsily and misguided, but here we are. It’s truly happening now. The wars between our two countries have determined the 20th century and its post WW 2 order which became first the Western world order, then the claim of the global liberal world order lead by our Western hegemon the USA and its Anglo-Saxon, then Jewish elite. If Stalin and Hitler had truly allied, it would have been the Russian-German century which it only unofficially was and officially the Jewish-American one, but that’s history. It was nevertheless a time when European man still could rightfully believe himself master of this earth and potentially the universe. This is no longer the case, irreversibly. And this is a dramatic change of consequences for the Western psyche that have not even fully manifested yet.
    The rise of China, or rather return, is the most significant political development in the last 500 years, only comparable to the discovery of the Americas and it will change the entire global world order. Forever. And America’s elites, Jewish and gentile alike, know this. Russia and Europe know it as well.

    Thus, when Washington looked for an opportune target of defiance, a target for allegations of hybrid warfare: of economic and (dis)information warfare and geostrategic chess play, they targeted Russia. Your example in OP the most recent one. Because Washington knew, despite the propaganda on both sides, that Russia post Soviet Union had not much of true global projection capabilities left and it was therefor an easier target. And the real threat, the big boss and true competitor in the background, was already known since decades: China. Kissinger, despite his economic profits from Chinese connections, had advocated for allying with Russia against China for many years. In vain. Therefor if Washington dared to directly hit China, then only if they could go for a hard hit that was deemed worth it, like arresting Meng Wanzhou. Leaving the general conflict regarding Europe’s cooperation with Huawei on the 5G expansion, the Chinese North Stream 2 so to speak, up to pathetically weak “5G gives you cancer and makes Corona” propaganda of disinformation campaigns.

    Europe’s position is on the fence and not quite as clearly formulated as that of Washington yet. Although Merkel’s fake conservative opposition, Blackrock lobbyist and German Atlantic Bridge head Friedrich Merz has already called for confronting China many months ago. Right now this geo political change can be portrayed through an Atlanticist lens, but not forever.

    What is fundamentally rising today? Authoritarianism. But the walled city is more true for the American Empire, as “Fortress Europe” generally simply shows a believe in the ordering state authority. A collapse of the EU is also American wishful thinking who have treated the EU and Germany like China for years now and are increasingly hostile. What is in decline? The wokeness of the left. This is a push from within, except maybe for the Anglosphere left, and from without by the right adopting social populism and which is also friendly towards the Kremlin. An alternative to China’s global great harmony vision by more liberal leftists such as Sigmar Gabriel has been an empty failure, because it was still attached to the now failed and refuted liberalism which was a cultural export from the Anglosphere into continental Europe in the first place. Post Brexit more irrelevant than ever. And Germany before the post world war order, the not colonized, “real” Germany was not a Western country. Much closer to Russia’s situation today. And in the greater picture there is a metaphysical alignment and transcendental category of a German-Russian unity of the soul. See for example on my side from Schopenhauer to Tolstoi, but on the other side from Tolstoi to Rudi Dutschke.

    We have therefor a situation in Europe with a general order which believes in the state, social conservatism and classic leftism which makes it a target of opportunity for both China and Russia. Eurasianism is also much more than a pipe dream today. It is the political reality of Belt and Road, Northstream 2, Huawei 5G, Russian-German resource integration and China is the largest trade partner of my country for half a decade now. The USA still second, but unable to bring Europe to heel with mere economic and disinformation warfare. Although they do increasingly try. After two decades of Neocon policy, which have completely disenchanted my believe in Jewish genius with their incompetence and horrible leadership, Europe is slowly but surely shifting away from America and integrating into a Chinese lead Eurasian sphere of influence. Which is something I simply observe.

    There are few people who are so similar and yet so different as Anglo-Saxons and Germans, and there are few people who are so different and yet so very similar as Germans and Russians. And what was culturally and ethnically true will now be mirrored politically. Because it will be Russia now that will be the junior partner of the great Chinese brother and fill a reminiscent role that the GDR held in relation to the Soviet Union. And the Red Prussians may increasingly sing along. Therefor, anti-racist propaganda in Russia may portray blacks, but it will be Central Asians and Chinese that immigrate to St. Petersburg and Moskau in large numbers. I think Russia’s future will be very similar to political life in the GDR in which Major Putin’s career began. So Russian-German integration is all good and fine, but it will not be “Duginism”; China will largely decide our futures.

    Given the gravity of the situation, Washington may more than ever try to agitate Europe against Russia and China. This, if successful, would inevitably result in more serious conflicts and more deaths than in Ukraine. But there is a large consensus on both the center right and center left that never again Germans should die in a war with Russia and no more Russians should be killed by German soldiers. Thus, the more Washington pivots towards war and given America’s war track record in the last decades and behavior towards EU and Germany, the more it will actually align with the Chinese-Russian block. Although I also don’t believe in true political integration into greater Eurasia.

    It is not a future I desired. I would have preferred to see a true Western century at least more along the lines of Europe and America in the 1980s when Germany was still somewhat of a democratic social nationalist state: with an ethnic homeland and social market economy. Or ideally a return of the world of Алекса́ндра Фёдоровна or Екатерина Великая. But the greed and incompetence of mostly America’s elite, but also Europe’s, has forfeited it. Although the recent developments in Russia are also nothing I like in particular.

    Neither the USA nor Europe are castles of sand, but the global liberal world order is, which was mostly an Anglosphere order. From this both Russia and China do and will profit. It is unlikely that Russians and Germans will effectively serve in the same army as in the GDR-Soviet Union days, but it is also far from guaranteed that Europe will become a military threat to the China-Russia block. Although Washington desires the Western far right to transition into something similar to Azov. Real China hate will remain an American phenomenon and at best transparently exported into Europe.

    Therefor my conclusion is that it is very unlikely that we will be forced to kill each other in a future proxy-war between the USA and China. It also didn’t happen in Ukraine after all. Which is at least some good news.

    p.s. regarding Fat Heimbach: Very transparent federal agent. Knew it since years. Transition from solidly middle class college liberal, dating an Ashkenazi Jew Ashley-Ray “communism kills” Goldenberg, to public wignat caricature. With a full character development arc: from controlled opposition college group leader and derailing its initial rational premise, to immediate mass media platform, to a grotesque public caricature of the positions and movement of your designated target including trailer trash drama, to finally magically reformed anti-white leftist, ex-Neo Nazi with another public career, on the dime of America’s true ruling elite. Wouldn’t even be the most extreme case in our post Gladio world order of hybrid warfare. There are strong rumors that the German feds were running the leadership of Blood & Honour and its militant arm Combat 18 for years.

    • Agree: Owen C.
    • Thanks: Anatoly Karlin
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Your analysis has many merits, but here is its greatest weakness: you ignore about two thirds of the world. You ignore India, Latin America, as well as large and pretty populous East Asian countries Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, etc. East Asians (the people, not bought and paid for elites) are sick and tired of Pax Americana, but they don’t want Pax Sinica, either. The same applies to Latin America and India. That’s what Putin counts on, hoping to create a multi-polar world without a single hegemon committing crimes with impunity, like the Empire used to. Germany, especially as a leader of continental Europe, has a chance to become one of these poles of power, but it would need to get rid of both compradore “liberal” elites and rapefugees. Hard, but not impossible. In this scenario nobody becomes China’s GDR, everybody pursues his interests, while observing the rules (which the Empire refuses to do, and this is becoming its downfall).
    , @Anatoly Karlin
    Some interesting ideas here - agree with some, not so much on others.

    Although Washington desires the Western far right to transition into something similar to Azov.
     
    I think this is very correct.
  57. @Vaterland
    Well, against my better judgement, I have decided to write this to you here in the loaded commentary section. Because I owe it to the Russians whom I grew up with and who were as dear to me as my family, my flesh and blood, my right eye, to at least write this to one Russian on the other side. And you are not the worst recipient.

    The USA is getting very serious now about a new Cold War with China, twenty years too late, clumsily and misguided, but here we are. It's truly happening now. The wars between our two countries have determined the 20th century and its post WW 2 order which became first the Western world order, then the claim of the global liberal world order lead by our Western hegemon the USA and its Anglo-Saxon, then Jewish elite. If Stalin and Hitler had truly allied, it would have been the Russian-German century which it only unofficially was and officially the Jewish-American one, but that's history. It was nevertheless a time when European man still could rightfully believe himself master of this earth and potentially the universe. This is no longer the case, irreversibly. And this is a dramatic change of consequences for the Western psyche that have not even fully manifested yet.
    The rise of China, or rather return, is the most significant political development in the last 500 years, only comparable to the discovery of the Americas and it will change the entire global world order. Forever. And America's elites, Jewish and gentile alike, know this. Russia and Europe know it as well.

    Thus, when Washington looked for an opportune target of defiance, a target for allegations of hybrid warfare: of economic and (dis)information warfare and geostrategic chess play, they targeted Russia. Your example in OP the most recent one. Because Washington knew, despite the propaganda on both sides, that Russia post Soviet Union had not much of true global projection capabilities left and it was therefor an easier target. And the real threat, the big boss and true competitor in the background, was already known since decades: China. Kissinger, despite his economic profits from Chinese connections, had advocated for allying with Russia against China for many years. In vain. Therefor if Washington dared to directly hit China, then only if they could go for a hard hit that was deemed worth it, like arresting Meng Wanzhou. Leaving the general conflict regarding Europe's cooperation with Huawei on the 5G expansion, the Chinese North Stream 2 so to speak, up to pathetically weak "5G gives you cancer and makes Corona" propaganda of disinformation campaigns.

    Europe's position is on the fence and not quite as clearly formulated as that of Washington yet. Although Merkel's fake conservative opposition, Blackrock lobbyist and German Atlantic Bridge head Friedrich Merz has already called for confronting China many months ago. Right now this geo political change can be portrayed through an Atlanticist lens, but not forever.

    What is fundamentally rising today? Authoritarianism. But the walled city is more true for the American Empire, as "Fortress Europe" generally simply shows a believe in the ordering state authority. A collapse of the EU is also American wishful thinking who have treated the EU and Germany like China for years now and are increasingly hostile. What is in decline? The wokeness of the left. This is a push from within, except maybe for the Anglosphere left, and from without by the right adopting social populism and which is also friendly towards the Kremlin. An alternative to China's global great harmony vision by more liberal leftists such as Sigmar Gabriel has been an empty failure, because it was still attached to the now failed and refuted liberalism which was a cultural export from the Anglosphere into continental Europe in the first place. Post Brexit more irrelevant than ever. And Germany before the post world war order, the not colonized, "real" Germany was not a Western country. Much closer to Russia's situation today. And in the greater picture there is a metaphysical alignment and transcendental category of a German-Russian unity of the soul. See for example on my side from Schopenhauer to Tolstoi, but on the other side from Tolstoi to Rudi Dutschke.

    We have therefor a situation in Europe with a general order which believes in the state, social conservatism and classic leftism which makes it a target of opportunity for both China and Russia. Eurasianism is also much more than a pipe dream today. It is the political reality of Belt and Road, Northstream 2, Huawei 5G, Russian-German resource integration and China is the largest trade partner of my country for half a decade now. The USA still second, but unable to bring Europe to heel with mere economic and disinformation warfare. Although they do increasingly try. After two decades of Neocon policy, which have completely disenchanted my believe in Jewish genius with their incompetence and horrible leadership, Europe is slowly but surely shifting away from America and integrating into a Chinese lead Eurasian sphere of influence. Which is something I simply observe.

    There are few people who are so similar and yet so different as Anglo-Saxons and Germans, and there are few people who are so different and yet so very similar as Germans and Russians. And what was culturally and ethnically true will now be mirrored politically. Because it will be Russia now that will be the junior partner of the great Chinese brother and fill a reminiscent role that the GDR held in relation to the Soviet Union. And the Red Prussians may increasingly sing along. Therefor, anti-racist propaganda in Russia may portray blacks, but it will be Central Asians and Chinese that immigrate to St. Petersburg and Moskau in large numbers. I think Russia's future will be very similar to political life in the GDR in which Major Putin's career began. So Russian-German integration is all good and fine, but it will not be "Duginism"; China will largely decide our futures.

    Given the gravity of the situation, Washington may more than ever try to agitate Europe against Russia and China. This, if successful, would inevitably result in more serious conflicts and more deaths than in Ukraine. But there is a large consensus on both the center right and center left that never again Germans should die in a war with Russia and no more Russians should be killed by German soldiers. Thus, the more Washington pivots towards war and given America's war track record in the last decades and behavior towards EU and Germany, the more it will actually align with the Chinese-Russian block. Although I also don't believe in true political integration into greater Eurasia.

    It is not a future I desired. I would have preferred to see a true Western century at least more along the lines of Europe and America in the 1980s when Germany was still somewhat of a democratic social nationalist state: with an ethnic homeland and social market economy. Or ideally a return of the world of Алекса́ндра Фёдоровна or Екатерина Великая. But the greed and incompetence of mostly America's elite, but also Europe's, has forfeited it. Although the recent developments in Russia are also nothing I like in particular.

    Neither the USA nor Europe are castles of sand, but the global liberal world order is, which was mostly an Anglosphere order. From this both Russia and China do and will profit. It is unlikely that Russians and Germans will effectively serve in the same army as in the GDR-Soviet Union days, but it is also far from guaranteed that Europe will become a military threat to the China-Russia block. Although Washington desires the Western far right to transition into something similar to Azov. Real China hate will remain an American phenomenon and at best transparently exported into Europe.

    Therefor my conclusion is that it is very unlikely that we will be forced to kill each other in a future proxy-war between the USA and China. It also didn't happen in Ukraine after all. Which is at least some good news.


    p.s. regarding Fat Heimbach: Very transparent federal agent. Knew it since years. Transition from solidly middle class college liberal, dating an Ashkenazi Jew Ashley-Ray "communism kills" Goldenberg, to public wignat caricature. With a full character development arc: from controlled opposition college group leader and derailing its initial rational premise, to immediate mass media platform, to a grotesque public caricature of the positions and movement of your designated target including trailer trash drama, to finally magically reformed anti-white leftist, ex-Neo Nazi with another public career, on the dime of America's true ruling elite. Wouldn't even be the most extreme case in our post Gladio world order of hybrid warfare. There are strong rumors that the German feds were running the leadership of Blood & Honour and its militant arm Combat 18 for years.

    Your analysis has many merits, but here is its greatest weakness: you ignore about two thirds of the world. You ignore India, Latin America, as well as large and pretty populous East Asian countries Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, etc. East Asians (the people, not bought and paid for elites) are sick and tired of Pax Americana, but they don’t want Pax Sinica, either. The same applies to Latin America and India. That’s what Putin counts on, hoping to create a multi-polar world without a single hegemon committing crimes with impunity, like the Empire used to. Germany, especially as a leader of continental Europe, has a chance to become one of these poles of power, but it would need to get rid of both compradore “liberal” elites and rapefugees. Hard, but not impossible. In this scenario nobody becomes China’s GDR, everybody pursues his interests, while observing the rules (which the Empire refuses to do, and this is becoming its downfall).

    • Agree: Aedib
    • Replies: @Vaterland
    Well, I don't really want Pax Sinica either and neither do most Europeans, I think. There are some anti-German far leftists in the Greens who are the only ones to have explicitly said they wanted Chinese conditions such as Robert Habeck. But even though they are praised by the left-wing German media they are so radical and unreliable, they are at best applicable as useful idiots who would need to be purged in the case of a real take over of China. Similar what happened to many initial Communist Revolutionaries.

    The reason why I didn't mention these other countries, is because they are effectively vassals of one power or the other. Take for example India and Vietnam. Now in the new era of total confrontation between the USA and China they are being propped up as the new manufacturing base by and for the US elite, not the American heartland. Do they really have a realistic chance at truly independent positions, especially geopolitcally? I don't think so. Narendra Modi is acting pretty servile towards Uncle Sam, too. A de facto third world country like the Flips has even less chances. South America was mostly nothing but a proxy battlefield between the Soviet Union and American Empire during the Cold War and it has remained so. Fascists backed by neo-liberal Chicago Jews like Pinochet could be tolerated, because of its dependence and impotence.

    The most realistic countries are Japan and Korea, but Japan's rise to power was effectively crushed by the USA and its allies with economic warfare. Something the USA cannot do anymore to China, because their greed for fat profits and cheep labor really did get the capitalists of the USA to sell Chicoms the rope with which they will hang them, to paraphrase Lenin. And Japan's peak, when Tokyo alone was worth as much as all of Canada, was in the 1990s. Thirty years ago. South Korea is even more Americanized than Germany and North Korea is a Chinese vassal. The difference might be, that they truly know who runs the show in the USA, but so do Euro elites. They just don't say it, they simply go to AIPAC like Sebastian Kurz.

    Now, I wish I could believe in international law, human rights and human dignity, the self determination of all peoples in a truly multi-polar world order and all these beautiful things. But this is neither what my own biography, nor life experience, nor history support. What is destiny? Politics. What is the natural state of politics? The logic of warfare. What drives man? Ego, will to power, lust. Natural and sexual selection in a social framework. The winner exterminates the loser and gets to write history which becomes public truth. If the USA hadn't needed West Germany as a buffer state against Stalin who knows, if not more of the Morgenthau Plan had been executed. And I know for a fact that the USA was ready to nuke all of Central Europe to win the Cold War, if contained thermonuclear warfare was a possibility. So this is the reality of the one country which has talked so profusely about international law, the global liberal world order and human dignity and the evils of totalitarian regimes. As they then went on to murder millions in "rogue states". Madeleine Albright has taught me forever what to think of these elites. Could Russia and China truly guarantee international law in a multi-polar world order? Do they even want to? In the end Russia's independence is backed by its nuclear weapons.

    So take my own country: It is the strongest economy in Europe, the one country which basically keeps the whole deal afloat. It actually had a serious army in the Cold War as well. And as you mentioned it should be a true leader of an independent Europe. But is it? Even more significant than its physical occupation and alignment with Washington and exchangeability of its trans-Atlantic elites, is its full colonization by Americanism/Globalism. Never before have I felt so homeless and uprooted both culturally and politically as today. Internally 90s Russia, but with money. And that was well before the rapefugee stuff. The world I desire is dead since over a century and if the mainstream Germans have an identity it is mostly an imitation or copy of imported ideas, Americanism, or even the Soviet Union in Eastern Germany.

    A new, authentic and independent Germany would have to be invented and formulated by cultural geniuses like Goethe and Kant, born out of an authentic desire of the masses, crafted by real statesman like Bismarck. Can we find such people in Germany today...? And where are the great cultural currents from Europe that give true impetus to them? And even if, it would naturally lead to a severe confrontation with Washington. Which is very, very dangerous and could only be compared to WW 1 in the age of nuclear weapons. Being a vassal on the other hand is comfortable and you don't need to risk anything. So most just live with the rot and as politicians get bought. Europe is ruled by opportunists. Barroso was Maoist youth, then EU apparatschik, then Goldman Sachs. Merkel talked like the AfD in the beginning, then declared multi-culturalism as failed, then aligned with the far left, all in the pursuit of her personal power. The most characteristic trait of current year Germany is its lack of characteristic traits and Merkel is the fitting leader for this void.

    Thus the only real moment of defiance was done by Schröder and Fischer against the Neocons and the refusal to go into Iraq. But they were liberal left-wingers, 1968ers, even "former" anti-German radcoms like Fischer who believed in Auschwitz as the foundation myth of the new Germany and this is the reason why they were able to do it. Because in everything else they were in line with the visions of the USA for my country; the "anti-fascist consensus". And their defiance itself too was not rooted in a German identity, or "Germanness", but a current of international socialism which was also Russia friendly which then lead to the the friendship of Schröder and Putin.

    It's an age of administrating Empires. Unless a Napoleon, or Mohammed shows up; or Hitler or Stalin for that matter. Even Putin may proof to not be enough. Now, if Europe wants to be truly independent, the EU would need to become an actual empire with centralized power. How did the USA become a centralized power under Lincoln? With the first true total war, including the first mass use of atrocity propaganda against the South and moralistic framing of the absolutely brutal and sadistic war effort. So I don't nag too much about nasty Eurocrats, but it remains empty so far. And I really don't see the identity politics left, or the identitarian right/Alt-Right, or the liberals and Ziocons which I all more or less dislike to fill it with authentic meaning, folk, Dasein. Personally I also cut my somewhat privileged contacts to the mainstream right when I realized its Zionist agenda, but the Alt-Right/Dissident Right was a complete black hole and is a mess that leads people nowhere.

    The enlightenment has maneuvered us into a dead end. Or rather all social-cultural currents of the West have run their course to their final conclusion in which they abolish themselves: liberalism, socialism, nationalism, even Christianity. And this is why we are unable to live authentically which is the precondition for liberation.
  58. @lloyd
    Do most white Americans care these days? Is it possible the white race is evolving out of existence? There is silicon valley and "dark web". But apart from that where else does the white race shine these days? The present Prime Minister of UK holed up in an oxygen mask is Turkish descent. I hold the eccentric opinion if left to their own devices most so called mixed race people would look up to their white side. Privately in their social life, most actually do. But of course the indoctrination in school and public funding push their non white sides. But people if expected to officially think one way have a historic habit of being contrary wise. Deeudoone may be a portend of the future despite desperate attempts to silence him. I was just listening to Melanie Philips on youtube declaring the Holocaust destroyed the ideal of Western civilisation. I closed it after a few minutes. Who wants to listen to that scarecrow these days except for deluded hasbara?

    Silicon Valley pretty much purged the White men who built it starting 1980. The engineering management coding designing are definitely No Whites Need Apply. The only thing White men are doing there these days is building data centers.

    I suppose if a White man had 20 million and a great patent he could get something started. He’d need an army of highly skilled attorneys to protect him from the hostiles though. Definitely never sell shares to anyone.

  59. lloyd says: • Website

    In that case China will race ahead. They have the families with connections to the Communist revolution. But proportionally they are a small minority and generally stay mostly lazily in the bureaucracy or army. The Communist Party membership is except for them social clubs. Apart from that, it is merit merit merit. At least I say that after ten years in China. Silicon Valley is in California. Texas Silicon Valley might be more meriticious.

  60. @AnonFromTN
    Your analysis has many merits, but here is its greatest weakness: you ignore about two thirds of the world. You ignore India, Latin America, as well as large and pretty populous East Asian countries Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, etc. East Asians (the people, not bought and paid for elites) are sick and tired of Pax Americana, but they don’t want Pax Sinica, either. The same applies to Latin America and India. That’s what Putin counts on, hoping to create a multi-polar world without a single hegemon committing crimes with impunity, like the Empire used to. Germany, especially as a leader of continental Europe, has a chance to become one of these poles of power, but it would need to get rid of both compradore “liberal” elites and rapefugees. Hard, but not impossible. In this scenario nobody becomes China’s GDR, everybody pursues his interests, while observing the rules (which the Empire refuses to do, and this is becoming its downfall).

    Well, I don’t really want Pax Sinica either and neither do most Europeans, I think. There are some anti-German far leftists in the Greens who are the only ones to have explicitly said they wanted Chinese conditions such as Robert Habeck. But even though they are praised by the left-wing German media they are so radical and unreliable, they are at best applicable as useful idiots who would need to be purged in the case of a real take over of China. Similar what happened to many initial Communist Revolutionaries.

    The reason why I didn’t mention these other countries, is because they are effectively vassals of one power or the other. Take for example India and Vietnam. Now in the new era of total confrontation between the USA and China they are being propped up as the new manufacturing base by and for the US elite, not the American heartland. Do they really have a realistic chance at truly independent positions, especially geopolitcally? I don’t think so. Narendra Modi is acting pretty servile towards Uncle Sam, too. A de facto third world country like the Flips has even less chances. South America was mostly nothing but a proxy battlefield between the Soviet Union and American Empire during the Cold War and it has remained so. Fascists backed by neo-liberal Chicago Jews like Pinochet could be tolerated, because of its dependence and impotence.

    The most realistic countries are Japan and Korea, but Japan’s rise to power was effectively crushed by the USA and its allies with economic warfare. Something the USA cannot do anymore to China, because their greed for fat profits and cheep labor really did get the capitalists of the USA to sell Chicoms the rope with which they will hang them, to paraphrase Lenin. And Japan’s peak, when Tokyo alone was worth as much as all of Canada, was in the 1990s. Thirty years ago. South Korea is even more Americanized than Germany and North Korea is a Chinese vassal. The difference might be, that they truly know who runs the show in the USA, but so do Euro elites. They just don’t say it, they simply go to AIPAC like Sebastian Kurz.

    Now, I wish I could believe in international law, human rights and human dignity, the self determination of all peoples in a truly multi-polar world order and all these beautiful things. But this is neither what my own biography, nor life experience, nor history support. What is destiny? Politics. What is the natural state of politics? The logic of warfare. What drives man? Ego, will to power, lust. Natural and sexual selection in a social framework. The winner exterminates the loser and gets to write history which becomes public truth. If the USA hadn’t needed West Germany as a buffer state against Stalin who knows, if not more of the Morgenthau Plan had been executed. And I know for a fact that the USA was ready to nuke all of Central Europe to win the Cold War, if contained thermonuclear warfare was a possibility. So this is the reality of the one country which has talked so profusely about international law, the global liberal world order and human dignity and the evils of totalitarian regimes. As they then went on to murder millions in “rogue states”. Madeleine Albright has taught me forever what to think of these elites. Could Russia and China truly guarantee international law in a multi-polar world order? Do they even want to? In the end Russia’s independence is backed by its nuclear weapons.

    So take my own country: It is the strongest economy in Europe, the one country which basically keeps the whole deal afloat. It actually had a serious army in the Cold War as well. And as you mentioned it should be a true leader of an independent Europe. But is it? Even more significant than its physical occupation and alignment with Washington and exchangeability of its trans-Atlantic elites, is its full colonization by Americanism/Globalism. Never before have I felt so homeless and uprooted both culturally and politically as today. Internally 90s Russia, but with money. And that was well before the rapefugee stuff. The world I desire is dead since over a century and if the mainstream Germans have an identity it is mostly an imitation or copy of imported ideas, Americanism, or even the Soviet Union in Eastern Germany.

    A new, authentic and independent Germany would have to be invented and formulated by cultural geniuses like Goethe and Kant, born out of an authentic desire of the masses, crafted by real statesman like Bismarck. Can we find such people in Germany today…? And where are the great cultural currents from Europe that give true impetus to them? And even if, it would naturally lead to a severe confrontation with Washington. Which is very, very dangerous and could only be compared to WW 1 in the age of nuclear weapons. Being a vassal on the other hand is comfortable and you don’t need to risk anything. So most just live with the rot and as politicians get bought. Europe is ruled by opportunists. Barroso was Maoist youth, then EU apparatschik, then Goldman Sachs. Merkel talked like the AfD in the beginning, then declared multi-culturalism as failed, then aligned with the far left, all in the pursuit of her personal power. The most characteristic trait of current year Germany is its lack of characteristic traits and Merkel is the fitting leader for this void.

    Thus the only real moment of defiance was done by Schröder and Fischer against the Neocons and the refusal to go into Iraq. But they were liberal left-wingers, 1968ers, even “former” anti-German radcoms like Fischer who believed in Auschwitz as the foundation myth of the new Germany and this is the reason why they were able to do it. Because in everything else they were in line with the visions of the USA for my country; the “anti-fascist consensus”. And their defiance itself too was not rooted in a German identity, or “Germanness”, but a current of international socialism which was also Russia friendly which then lead to the the friendship of Schröder and Putin.

    It’s an age of administrating Empires. Unless a Napoleon, or Mohammed shows up; or Hitler or Stalin for that matter. Even Putin may proof to not be enough. Now, if Europe wants to be truly independent, the EU would need to become an actual empire with centralized power. How did the USA become a centralized power under Lincoln? With the first true total war, including the first mass use of atrocity propaganda against the South and moralistic framing of the absolutely brutal and sadistic war effort. So I don’t nag too much about nasty Eurocrats, but it remains empty so far. And I really don’t see the identity politics left, or the identitarian right/Alt-Right, or the liberals and Ziocons which I all more or less dislike to fill it with authentic meaning, folk, Dasein. Personally I also cut my somewhat privileged contacts to the mainstream right when I realized its Zionist agenda, but the Alt-Right/Dissident Right was a complete black hole and is a mess that leads people nowhere.

    The enlightenment has maneuvered us into a dead end. Or rather all social-cultural currents of the West have run their course to their final conclusion in which they abolish themselves: liberalism, socialism, nationalism, even Christianity. And this is why we are unable to live authentically which is the precondition for liberation.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Again, reasonable analysis, but woefully one-sided. You talk about Modi, Merkel, and South American or East Asian tinpot “presidents”, but these are mostly bought and paid for compradores, serving their imperial masters. There are billions of people in those countries, and their worldview is very different. E.g., the Empire recently retook Bolivia via a coup, so that there are even fewer anti-imperial governments in Latin America. However, if you go to any uncensored Spanish-language site on the Internet, the popularity and the strength of anti-Americanism is striking.

    In a way, China serves (not by design) the same function that the USSR served – provides an alternative to the Empire. Realistically, the Empire will be declining for a decade or two yet, while anti-imperial forces of all stripes are gaining. If some smart non-Chinese leader plays his/her hand wisely, the end result won’t be Pax Sinica, but multi-polarity. History shows that when the world has even two poles counterbalancing each other, like before 1991, this forces the players to observe rules. Not always, but most of the time. Even that half-bad situation is vastly superior to imperial monopoly on international banditry.

    Anyway, we’ll see in the next 10 years in what direction the situation moves.
  61. @Peter Frost
    "While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country"

    I believe I can.

    "As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples?"

    When I went to local shopping malls I saw a surprising number of black faces on advertising posters. Yet none of the posters showed Central Asian faces, even though there were many Central Asians among the shoppers.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    I had the same impression while watching a TV series on the life of Stalin's daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva. It dwelt at some length on her relationship with Brajesh Singh, an Indian living in Moscow. There was a scene in which she got angry and said something like: "This is a man who has come from another country to work here and make a contribution to our society, and he should be treated just like the rest of us!" In reality, he was too ill to do any work, and one might wonder whether her relationship with him was simply a stratagem. After receiving permission to take his ashes to India, she used that opportunity to defect to the West.

    "Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function"

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place. There was also the veneration of icons and other objects of gold and silver. I understand that this sort of thing is important to Orthodox Christians, but for me it would be impossible. Something inside me would say: No!!!

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don't have to kiss the icons. They're also "pozzed."

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It's socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West. As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    Unfortunately, there is something to that:

  62. @Vaterland
    Well, against my better judgement, I have decided to write this to you here in the loaded commentary section. Because I owe it to the Russians whom I grew up with and who were as dear to me as my family, my flesh and blood, my right eye, to at least write this to one Russian on the other side. And you are not the worst recipient.

    The USA is getting very serious now about a new Cold War with China, twenty years too late, clumsily and misguided, but here we are. It's truly happening now. The wars between our two countries have determined the 20th century and its post WW 2 order which became first the Western world order, then the claim of the global liberal world order lead by our Western hegemon the USA and its Anglo-Saxon, then Jewish elite. If Stalin and Hitler had truly allied, it would have been the Russian-German century which it only unofficially was and officially the Jewish-American one, but that's history. It was nevertheless a time when European man still could rightfully believe himself master of this earth and potentially the universe. This is no longer the case, irreversibly. And this is a dramatic change of consequences for the Western psyche that have not even fully manifested yet.
    The rise of China, or rather return, is the most significant political development in the last 500 years, only comparable to the discovery of the Americas and it will change the entire global world order. Forever. And America's elites, Jewish and gentile alike, know this. Russia and Europe know it as well.

    Thus, when Washington looked for an opportune target of defiance, a target for allegations of hybrid warfare: of economic and (dis)information warfare and geostrategic chess play, they targeted Russia. Your example in OP the most recent one. Because Washington knew, despite the propaganda on both sides, that Russia post Soviet Union had not much of true global projection capabilities left and it was therefor an easier target. And the real threat, the big boss and true competitor in the background, was already known since decades: China. Kissinger, despite his economic profits from Chinese connections, had advocated for allying with Russia against China for many years. In vain. Therefor if Washington dared to directly hit China, then only if they could go for a hard hit that was deemed worth it, like arresting Meng Wanzhou. Leaving the general conflict regarding Europe's cooperation with Huawei on the 5G expansion, the Chinese North Stream 2 so to speak, up to pathetically weak "5G gives you cancer and makes Corona" propaganda of disinformation campaigns.

    Europe's position is on the fence and not quite as clearly formulated as that of Washington yet. Although Merkel's fake conservative opposition, Blackrock lobbyist and German Atlantic Bridge head Friedrich Merz has already called for confronting China many months ago. Right now this geo political change can be portrayed through an Atlanticist lens, but not forever.

    What is fundamentally rising today? Authoritarianism. But the walled city is more true for the American Empire, as "Fortress Europe" generally simply shows a believe in the ordering state authority. A collapse of the EU is also American wishful thinking who have treated the EU and Germany like China for years now and are increasingly hostile. What is in decline? The wokeness of the left. This is a push from within, except maybe for the Anglosphere left, and from without by the right adopting social populism and which is also friendly towards the Kremlin. An alternative to China's global great harmony vision by more liberal leftists such as Sigmar Gabriel has been an empty failure, because it was still attached to the now failed and refuted liberalism which was a cultural export from the Anglosphere into continental Europe in the first place. Post Brexit more irrelevant than ever. And Germany before the post world war order, the not colonized, "real" Germany was not a Western country. Much closer to Russia's situation today. And in the greater picture there is a metaphysical alignment and transcendental category of a German-Russian unity of the soul. See for example on my side from Schopenhauer to Tolstoi, but on the other side from Tolstoi to Rudi Dutschke.

    We have therefor a situation in Europe with a general order which believes in the state, social conservatism and classic leftism which makes it a target of opportunity for both China and Russia. Eurasianism is also much more than a pipe dream today. It is the political reality of Belt and Road, Northstream 2, Huawei 5G, Russian-German resource integration and China is the largest trade partner of my country for half a decade now. The USA still second, but unable to bring Europe to heel with mere economic and disinformation warfare. Although they do increasingly try. After two decades of Neocon policy, which have completely disenchanted my believe in Jewish genius with their incompetence and horrible leadership, Europe is slowly but surely shifting away from America and integrating into a Chinese lead Eurasian sphere of influence. Which is something I simply observe.

    There are few people who are so similar and yet so different as Anglo-Saxons and Germans, and there are few people who are so different and yet so very similar as Germans and Russians. And what was culturally and ethnically true will now be mirrored politically. Because it will be Russia now that will be the junior partner of the great Chinese brother and fill a reminiscent role that the GDR held in relation to the Soviet Union. And the Red Prussians may increasingly sing along. Therefor, anti-racist propaganda in Russia may portray blacks, but it will be Central Asians and Chinese that immigrate to St. Petersburg and Moskau in large numbers. I think Russia's future will be very similar to political life in the GDR in which Major Putin's career began. So Russian-German integration is all good and fine, but it will not be "Duginism"; China will largely decide our futures.

    Given the gravity of the situation, Washington may more than ever try to agitate Europe against Russia and China. This, if successful, would inevitably result in more serious conflicts and more deaths than in Ukraine. But there is a large consensus on both the center right and center left that never again Germans should die in a war with Russia and no more Russians should be killed by German soldiers. Thus, the more Washington pivots towards war and given America's war track record in the last decades and behavior towards EU and Germany, the more it will actually align with the Chinese-Russian block. Although I also don't believe in true political integration into greater Eurasia.

    It is not a future I desired. I would have preferred to see a true Western century at least more along the lines of Europe and America in the 1980s when Germany was still somewhat of a democratic social nationalist state: with an ethnic homeland and social market economy. Or ideally a return of the world of Алекса́ндра Фёдоровна or Екатерина Великая. But the greed and incompetence of mostly America's elite, but also Europe's, has forfeited it. Although the recent developments in Russia are also nothing I like in particular.

    Neither the USA nor Europe are castles of sand, but the global liberal world order is, which was mostly an Anglosphere order. From this both Russia and China do and will profit. It is unlikely that Russians and Germans will effectively serve in the same army as in the GDR-Soviet Union days, but it is also far from guaranteed that Europe will become a military threat to the China-Russia block. Although Washington desires the Western far right to transition into something similar to Azov. Real China hate will remain an American phenomenon and at best transparently exported into Europe.

    Therefor my conclusion is that it is very unlikely that we will be forced to kill each other in a future proxy-war between the USA and China. It also didn't happen in Ukraine after all. Which is at least some good news.


    p.s. regarding Fat Heimbach: Very transparent federal agent. Knew it since years. Transition from solidly middle class college liberal, dating an Ashkenazi Jew Ashley-Ray "communism kills" Goldenberg, to public wignat caricature. With a full character development arc: from controlled opposition college group leader and derailing its initial rational premise, to immediate mass media platform, to a grotesque public caricature of the positions and movement of your designated target including trailer trash drama, to finally magically reformed anti-white leftist, ex-Neo Nazi with another public career, on the dime of America's true ruling elite. Wouldn't even be the most extreme case in our post Gladio world order of hybrid warfare. There are strong rumors that the German feds were running the leadership of Blood & Honour and its militant arm Combat 18 for years.

    Some interesting ideas here – agree with some, not so much on others.

    Although Washington desires the Western far right to transition into something similar to Azov.

    I think this is very correct.

  63. For those unaware, the pic Anatoly used is the bad guy from Call of Duty 4 (came out in 2007)
    Imran Zakhaev
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHMLl7RWwAA6c_Y?format=png&name=small

    He’s a Russian nationalist who wants to bring back the Soviet Union, he does this by helping a Middle Eastern dictator called Al-Asad get a WMD
    I have no idea why he looks like an Ethiopian
    Activision sometimes hires former spooks and Tom Clancy imitators to write these retarded plots, and it’s always hilarious

    • Replies: @Just Passing Through
    A Russian nationalist who wants to live in an even more multi-ethnic state by bringing back the USSR?
  64. @Vaterland
    Well, I don't really want Pax Sinica either and neither do most Europeans, I think. There are some anti-German far leftists in the Greens who are the only ones to have explicitly said they wanted Chinese conditions such as Robert Habeck. But even though they are praised by the left-wing German media they are so radical and unreliable, they are at best applicable as useful idiots who would need to be purged in the case of a real take over of China. Similar what happened to many initial Communist Revolutionaries.

    The reason why I didn't mention these other countries, is because they are effectively vassals of one power or the other. Take for example India and Vietnam. Now in the new era of total confrontation between the USA and China they are being propped up as the new manufacturing base by and for the US elite, not the American heartland. Do they really have a realistic chance at truly independent positions, especially geopolitcally? I don't think so. Narendra Modi is acting pretty servile towards Uncle Sam, too. A de facto third world country like the Flips has even less chances. South America was mostly nothing but a proxy battlefield between the Soviet Union and American Empire during the Cold War and it has remained so. Fascists backed by neo-liberal Chicago Jews like Pinochet could be tolerated, because of its dependence and impotence.

    The most realistic countries are Japan and Korea, but Japan's rise to power was effectively crushed by the USA and its allies with economic warfare. Something the USA cannot do anymore to China, because their greed for fat profits and cheep labor really did get the capitalists of the USA to sell Chicoms the rope with which they will hang them, to paraphrase Lenin. And Japan's peak, when Tokyo alone was worth as much as all of Canada, was in the 1990s. Thirty years ago. South Korea is even more Americanized than Germany and North Korea is a Chinese vassal. The difference might be, that they truly know who runs the show in the USA, but so do Euro elites. They just don't say it, they simply go to AIPAC like Sebastian Kurz.

    Now, I wish I could believe in international law, human rights and human dignity, the self determination of all peoples in a truly multi-polar world order and all these beautiful things. But this is neither what my own biography, nor life experience, nor history support. What is destiny? Politics. What is the natural state of politics? The logic of warfare. What drives man? Ego, will to power, lust. Natural and sexual selection in a social framework. The winner exterminates the loser and gets to write history which becomes public truth. If the USA hadn't needed West Germany as a buffer state against Stalin who knows, if not more of the Morgenthau Plan had been executed. And I know for a fact that the USA was ready to nuke all of Central Europe to win the Cold War, if contained thermonuclear warfare was a possibility. So this is the reality of the one country which has talked so profusely about international law, the global liberal world order and human dignity and the evils of totalitarian regimes. As they then went on to murder millions in "rogue states". Madeleine Albright has taught me forever what to think of these elites. Could Russia and China truly guarantee international law in a multi-polar world order? Do they even want to? In the end Russia's independence is backed by its nuclear weapons.

    So take my own country: It is the strongest economy in Europe, the one country which basically keeps the whole deal afloat. It actually had a serious army in the Cold War as well. And as you mentioned it should be a true leader of an independent Europe. But is it? Even more significant than its physical occupation and alignment with Washington and exchangeability of its trans-Atlantic elites, is its full colonization by Americanism/Globalism. Never before have I felt so homeless and uprooted both culturally and politically as today. Internally 90s Russia, but with money. And that was well before the rapefugee stuff. The world I desire is dead since over a century and if the mainstream Germans have an identity it is mostly an imitation or copy of imported ideas, Americanism, or even the Soviet Union in Eastern Germany.

    A new, authentic and independent Germany would have to be invented and formulated by cultural geniuses like Goethe and Kant, born out of an authentic desire of the masses, crafted by real statesman like Bismarck. Can we find such people in Germany today...? And where are the great cultural currents from Europe that give true impetus to them? And even if, it would naturally lead to a severe confrontation with Washington. Which is very, very dangerous and could only be compared to WW 1 in the age of nuclear weapons. Being a vassal on the other hand is comfortable and you don't need to risk anything. So most just live with the rot and as politicians get bought. Europe is ruled by opportunists. Barroso was Maoist youth, then EU apparatschik, then Goldman Sachs. Merkel talked like the AfD in the beginning, then declared multi-culturalism as failed, then aligned with the far left, all in the pursuit of her personal power. The most characteristic trait of current year Germany is its lack of characteristic traits and Merkel is the fitting leader for this void.

    Thus the only real moment of defiance was done by Schröder and Fischer against the Neocons and the refusal to go into Iraq. But they were liberal left-wingers, 1968ers, even "former" anti-German radcoms like Fischer who believed in Auschwitz as the foundation myth of the new Germany and this is the reason why they were able to do it. Because in everything else they were in line with the visions of the USA for my country; the "anti-fascist consensus". And their defiance itself too was not rooted in a German identity, or "Germanness", but a current of international socialism which was also Russia friendly which then lead to the the friendship of Schröder and Putin.

    It's an age of administrating Empires. Unless a Napoleon, or Mohammed shows up; or Hitler or Stalin for that matter. Even Putin may proof to not be enough. Now, if Europe wants to be truly independent, the EU would need to become an actual empire with centralized power. How did the USA become a centralized power under Lincoln? With the first true total war, including the first mass use of atrocity propaganda against the South and moralistic framing of the absolutely brutal and sadistic war effort. So I don't nag too much about nasty Eurocrats, but it remains empty so far. And I really don't see the identity politics left, or the identitarian right/Alt-Right, or the liberals and Ziocons which I all more or less dislike to fill it with authentic meaning, folk, Dasein. Personally I also cut my somewhat privileged contacts to the mainstream right when I realized its Zionist agenda, but the Alt-Right/Dissident Right was a complete black hole and is a mess that leads people nowhere.

    The enlightenment has maneuvered us into a dead end. Or rather all social-cultural currents of the West have run their course to their final conclusion in which they abolish themselves: liberalism, socialism, nationalism, even Christianity. And this is why we are unable to live authentically which is the precondition for liberation.

    Again, reasonable analysis, but woefully one-sided. You talk about Modi, Merkel, and South American or East Asian tinpot “presidents”, but these are mostly bought and paid for compradores, serving their imperial masters. There are billions of people in those countries, and their worldview is very different. E.g., the Empire recently retook Bolivia via a coup, so that there are even fewer anti-imperial governments in Latin America. However, if you go to any uncensored Spanish-language site on the Internet, the popularity and the strength of anti-Americanism is striking.

    In a way, China serves (not by design) the same function that the USSR served – provides an alternative to the Empire. Realistically, the Empire will be declining for a decade or two yet, while anti-imperial forces of all stripes are gaining. If some smart non-Chinese leader plays his/her hand wisely, the end result won’t be Pax Sinica, but multi-polarity. History shows that when the world has even two poles counterbalancing each other, like before 1991, this forces the players to observe rules. Not always, but most of the time. Even that half-bad situation is vastly superior to imperial monopoly on international banditry.

    Anyway, we’ll see in the next 10 years in what direction the situation moves.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    Well, although I generally do agree, you need a capable and willing elite/ruling class who have a clear vision to achieve a real change and transformation. Billions of people may well desire a change, but if they get it is an entirely different question. There is certainly a majority of people in my country which are anti-(neo)liberalism, both on the right and left, but if they can win against the trans-Atlantic top-down directives is an entirely different question. And right now I see no one on either side who would even be able to seriously take up this fight. For example the shooting star of the AfD Björn Höcke I find rather awkward and cringey, he's also hardly a genius... let alone a Bismarck.

    Also: old West-Germany offered pretty much everything both the Berniebros and the Non-Neo-Nazi part of the Alt-Right desire. But over the decades a lot of this was successfully chipped away, by both neo-liberal capitalism and the woke left, mostly via US imports. And what was left of actually German culture, mentality and traditions was replaced, colonized, destroyed and perverted. And neither the conservatives, nor the left-overs of the GDR left prevented this. So I need some good evidence to be more optimistic for developing countries.

    But yes, Murica/the West/the elite only really let the pigs out with deregulation, top-down class warfare, open border cheap labor, outsourcing and hedge fund boogaloo when the SU had collapsed. There was no longer a need for a nice face of capitalism. Not sure, if China will be able to provide the new alternative to tame 'the billionaire class'. Right now at least they are in NUKE THE CHINKS!!! mode. So absolutely: an alternative path, third position, or European independence would sadly have to be 'anti-American'.

    However, most fascinating to me was to see that a form of National Socialism is coming to the USA now. But not the costume and Hollywood caricature of it:
    https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1248323677898366978

    Chamath Palihapitiya really sounds like Mr. Hilter in one of his late 20s early 30s speeches. I even heard it in the voice of him: as radical pajeet spoke, the only thing missing was a drop of "international elements" and someone in the audience shouting "JUDEN!" And more than nine million people watched this. Significant. Yet the Americans have no idea of course, because they only know the Hollywood portrayal or at least only the war mode derailment. But who of them has read Gottfried Feder for example?

    A few years ago I speculated on a course for the American answer to the global elite problem, that the (far) right would ditch the costume Neo-Nazi parades and embrace Americanism instead. That, if there emerged an anti-(financial)capitalism that came decidedly not from the woke left, but also from the right, it would get very uncomfortable for the hostile and predatory elites, because there would be a bi-partisan and broad consensus. And that it would most likely have to come from a civic nationalist approach and could not include European folkish ideas, because they contradict the nature of the USA which is all about experiments, new beginnings and cutting your roots to become something categorically new: the American. And the only ones who really didn't do that were the dual-citizen Zionists with disturbing consequences. So even without the "racist!" problem white nationalists could easily be marginalized and seen as weirdos in a US context. Especially if they decided their hills to die on were 'holocaust denial' and "Hitler should have won the war! The USA is pure evil!" But also that the so called American conservatives would actually be an obstacle, because they are merely another brand of liberals.

    Therefor to the fulfillment of my speculations Chamath Palihapitiya brought a non-strawman key position of true revolution into the US mainstream to an audience of many millions. Savitri Devi would be proud. And a political sledgehammer to Blackrock and hedge funds can only be good for all of us.
  65. @Peter Frost
    "While it is true that you probably cannot and should not influence politics in a foreign country, I rather doubt you can really influence politics in your own country"

    I believe I can.

    "As for the pro-immigration messaging, could you give examples?"

    When I went to local shopping malls I saw a surprising number of black faces on advertising posters. Yet none of the posters showed Central Asian faces, even though there were many Central Asians among the shoppers.

    The same is largely true for Russian TV shows. This is all rather strange in a country that still has few people of African origin. I get the impression that this is a reflection not of current reality but of a desired future reality.

    I had the same impression while watching a TV series on the life of Stalin's daughter, Svetlana Alliluyeva. It dwelt at some length on her relationship with Brajesh Singh, an Indian living in Moscow. There was a scene in which she got angry and said something like: "This is a man who has come from another country to work here and make a contribution to our society, and he should be treated just like the rest of us!" In reality, he was too ill to do any work, and one might wonder whether her relationship with him was simply a stratagem. After receiving permission to take his ashes to India, she used that opportunity to defect to the West.

    "Religion serves many utilitarian purposes– providing continuity with the past, a coherent collection of social norms, and an identity centered on shared rituals– without which a society cannot function"

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place. There was also the veneration of icons and other objects of gold and silver. I understand that this sort of thing is important to Orthodox Christians, but for me it would be impossible. Something inside me would say: No!!!

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don't have to kiss the icons. They're also "pozzed."

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity. It's socially conservative because the Iron Curtain protected it from Western influences for over seventy years. We see the same phenonmenon elsewhere in Eastern Europe. Polish Catholics are more conservative than Catholics in the West. I attended a Protestant church in Russia, and it was like going back to the world of my childhood.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West. As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place.

    This may be. Perhaps I am just strange enough or young enough to adapt, but I got mostly used to it after about a few months, and completely used to it after a few years, so that I can hardly imagine any other way. The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don’t have to kiss the icons. They’re also “pozzed.”

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”, whose cathedral is in Ottawa? I know them well.

    https://www.archdiocese.ca/

    Unfortunately, they sometimes have pews. While all the members necessarily kiss icons, they aren’t going to make you do so if you visit them. I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed” in this context. It is true that the women are a little too liberated for their own good (many of them have “careers”, and not all of them wear scarves), but there is no danger of lady priests, let alone lady bishops, and I don’t even think they have altar girls (unlike modern Catholic churches). As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, priests are necessarily married, and almost always have a respectable number of children, as do most parishioners.

    You will occasionally find mixed-race marriages in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox position on nationality is complex. On the one hand, Christianity is a universalist religion, and Orthodox liturgical texts consider the Orthodox to be a race. On the other hand, their is a consistent recognition that the different national characters of the churches comprising the Orthodox Church are blessed and should be preserved.

    There are some North American and British Orthodox academics defending sexual degeneracy. While I am optimistic that this will ultimately go nowhere, it could eventually lead to a schism.

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term. In the first century Roman Empire, Christian treatment of women and slaves as fellow human beings, but with a distinct role to play in society, was radically liberal, while prostitution, abortion, and man-on-boy pederasty were more or less tolerated. The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity, and simply by not changing, while the rest of the world swam left, you ended up on the “far right”. And this was to be expected, since there was never a stable equilibrium into which “progressive” Christianity could settle.

    What is true about the Orthodox Church in general is that theology, liturgical practice, and personal piety and morality remain essentially unchanged since the fourth century, so apparently it is a stable equilibrium. Concerning the Russian Orthodox Church in particular, the fact remains that it is the only surviving institution from pre-revolutionary Russia, the unique living root of Russian nationality.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West.

    Agreed.

    As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.

    There has been no stable equilibrium in Western society for hundreds of years, so if a solution exists, it is going to be much more radical than most are willing to contemplate.

    God save the Queen!

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @Peter Frost

    The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.
     
    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants. It's not simply because they are too old or too inflexible. They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed”
     
    I'm not sure myself. I looked up the word in the Urban Dictionary and found this definition of "poz party":

    A party in which:
    1. HIV positive (poz) gay men have sex with each other.
    2. HIV negative (neg) gay men have sex with HIV positive men in order to become HIV positive.
    Hey Steve, let's go to the poz party and receive the gift of AIDS! Lots of hot guys will be there!
     
    Hmm ... No that's not what I meant. For me, a "pozzed" person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures. In practice, that means abolishing nations and national borders, abolishing marriage and the family, and abolishing gender.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”
     
    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I've met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn't their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term.
     
    Indeed, social conservatism does not mean the same thing for a Hindu or a Muslim as it does for a Christian. Furthermore, there are differences between the three branches of Christianity. As a Protestant, I have no problem with women being ministers. Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    "The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity."

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative. I went to confirmation class but refused to be confirmed because I couldn't accept the Minister's literal interpretation of the Bible: the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc. I also argued with him about the "cleansing" of the land of Canaan. He said it was necessary because the Jews were God's chosen people. I said that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it.

    Yes, there was a Social Gospel wing, but they were a minority, and they were careful about not going too far. All of that changed in the 1980s, not because of changes within the church but because of changes within Canadian society. Some congregations remained conservative, and there were still a few as late as the 2000s. Now, they're gone ... because conservatism is gone within Canadian society.

    This is part of a larger problem that transcends the United Church and Canada: conservatives lost the culture war, particularly during the key years when "conservatives" like Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher were in power.


    God save the Queen!
     
    I respect the Queen, and I hope the monarchy can be salvaged. But I would readily sacrifice the monarchy to save our culture and identity.
  66. @The Big Red Scary

    I agree, but Russian Orthodoxy is ill suited to Western culture. I have attended Russian Orthodox services, and each time I felt like a stranger in a strange place.
     
    This may be. Perhaps I am just strange enough or young enough to adapt, but I got mostly used to it after about a few months, and completely used to it after a few years, so that I can hardly imagine any other way. The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.

    There are Westernized Orthodox churches in Canada. The services are in English, there are benches you can sit on, and you don’t have to kiss the icons. They’re also “pozzed.”
     
    Are you referring to the "The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America", whose cathedral is in Ottawa? I know them well.

    https://www.archdiocese.ca/

    Unfortunately, they sometimes have pews. While all the members necessarily kiss icons, they aren't going to make you do so if you visit them. I'm not sure what you mean by "pozzed" in this context. It is true that the women are a little too liberated for their own good (many of them have "careers", and not all of them wear scarves), but there is no danger of lady priests, let alone lady bishops, and I don't even think they have altar girls (unlike modern Catholic churches). As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, priests are necessarily married, and almost always have a respectable number of children, as do most parishioners.

    You will occasionally find mixed-race marriages in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox position on nationality is complex. On the one hand, Christianity is a universalist religion, and Orthodox liturgical texts consider the Orthodox to be a race. On the other hand, their is a consistent recognition that the different national characters of the churches comprising the Orthodox Church are blessed and should be preserved.

    There are some North American and British Orthodox academics defending sexual degeneracy. While I am optimistic that this will ultimately go nowhere, it could eventually lead to a schism.

    Russian Orthodoxy is not socially conservative because of something inherent to that branch of Christianity.
     
    "Socially conservative" is a relative term. In the first century Roman Empire, Christian treatment of women and slaves as fellow human beings, but with a distinct role to play in society, was radically liberal, while prostitution, abortion, and man-on-boy pederasty were more or less tolerated. The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity, and simply by not changing, while the rest of the world swam left, you ended up on the "far right". And this was to be expected, since there was never a stable equilibrium into which "progressive" Christianity could settle.

    What is true about the Orthodox Church in general is that theology, liturgical practice, and personal piety and morality remain essentially unchanged since the fourth century, so apparently it is a stable equilibrium. Concerning the Russian Orthodox Church in particular, the fact remains that it is the only surviving institution from pre-revolutionary Russia, the unique living root of Russian nationality.

    There is something profoundly wrong with the dominant ideology of the West.
     
    Agreed.


    As I see it, the solution is not to run away but to confront that ideology on its home turf.
     
    There has been no stable equilibrium in Western society for hundreds of years, so if a solution exists, it is going to be much more radical than most are willing to contemplate.

    God save the Queen!

    The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants. It’s not simply because they are too old or too inflexible. They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed”

    I’m not sure myself. I looked up the word in the Urban Dictionary and found this definition of “poz party”:

    A party in which:
    1. HIV positive (poz) gay men have sex with each other.
    2. HIV negative (neg) gay men have sex with HIV positive men in order to become HIV positive.
    Hey Steve, let’s go to the poz party and receive the gift of AIDS! Lots of hot guys will be there!

    Hmm … No that’s not what I meant. For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures. In practice, that means abolishing nations and national borders, abolishing marriage and the family, and abolishing gender.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term.

    Indeed, social conservatism does not mean the same thing for a Hindu or a Muslim as it does for a Christian. Furthermore, there are differences between the three branches of Christianity. As a Protestant, I have no problem with women being ministers. Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    “The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity.”

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative. I went to confirmation class but refused to be confirmed because I couldn’t accept the Minister’s literal interpretation of the Bible: the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc. I also argued with him about the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan. He said it was necessary because the Jews were God’s chosen people. I said that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it.

    Yes, there was a Social Gospel wing, but they were a minority, and they were careful about not going too far. All of that changed in the 1980s, not because of changes within the church but because of changes within Canadian society. Some congregations remained conservative, and there were still a few as late as the 2000s. Now, they’re gone … because conservatism is gone within Canadian society.

    This is part of a larger problem that transcends the United Church and Canada: conservatives lost the culture war, particularly during the key years when “conservatives” like Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher were in power.

    God save the Queen!

    I respect the Queen, and I hope the monarchy can be salvaged. But I would readily sacrifice the monarchy to save our culture and identity.

    • Thanks: Blinky Bill
    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants... They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.
     
    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical. One reason for this is, I think, simply the higher base rate of low church Protestants in North America. A more interesting reason is perhaps that the evangelicals still take bible reading very seriously, which for some leads to contradictions that can be resolved only by returning to Apostolic Tradition, even if that means adopting new cultural traditions.

    For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures
     
    The seeds of the apozacalypse have always been present in various Christian heresies, particularly of the gnostic variety. It is no coincidence that the English Puritans were the radical political liberals of their day, rejecting the age-old authority of Throne, as well as religious iconoclasts rejecting not only the authority of the Altar, but the very presence of the divine in the material world. Like the Bolsheviks, the Puritans of the time did not reject the biological reality of sex, but yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative, and it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    If you don't believe it, see "American Malvern", from Time magazine, March 16, 1942, a report on a conference of the Federal Council of Churches in the US (dominated by mainline Protestants, but including many other denominations, even many Orthodox jurisdictions). This conference advocated among other things a "world government", "strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty", "better treatment for Negroes", and "worldwide freedom of immigration". That jolly good fellow Mencius Moldbug has kindly provided a scan so that I don't have to go to Biblioteka po imeni Lenina to find a copy:

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/archive/American_Malvern.pdf

    (As for better treatment of Negroes, I'm all for it: we should do everything we can to help the Negroes restore peace and good order to their communities.)


    Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.
     
    A straw man. The word priest, as you no doubt know, comes from the Greek word presbyteros, he who presides over the assembly (his wife is presbytera), while the word bishop comes from the Greek word episcopos, he who oversees. And I suspect you know why in a traditional Orthodox church there are no pews and the people stand facing the altar, as does the priest. (There is an interesting history of how Orthodox bishops came to assume imperial symbols, as ethnarchs in the millet system, but this is a digression.)

    The fundamental problem is not so much that we seek to maximize personal autonomy, but that without hierarchy, personal autonomy is unbounded, having neither maxima nor minima.


    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada.
     
    I'm sorry to hear that. In other threads, I have expressed my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Orthodox in particular, but this is more a discussion to have with AP and Mr. Hack.

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative.
     
    I'll defer to you on this. By the time I moved to Canada, the rainbow flag was already flying proudly outside the United Church, and what I have read perhaps exaggerates the importance of the Social Gospel in the founding of the United Church of Canada. Maybe there was no Canadian Malvern. Nonetheless, yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative.

    the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc... the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan
     
    A synthesis of traditional Christianity with modern science and history, like the patristic synthesis of Christianity and Hellenistic philosophy, is sorely needed. At the same time, it is, I believe, an empirical fact that most Christians who accept a scientific worldview eventually degenerate, so it seems difficult to find a stable form of such a synthesis. At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.
    , @Mr. Hack

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.
     
    I find this very hard to believe, although I haven't been to Canada in many years. In my youth, I visited Canada many times (Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Thunder Bay and Toronto) and got to know a good many Ukrainians that lived there. They were all pretty conservative people, not very distinguishable from their American counterparts, sharing very similar backgrounds including a propensity for upper mobility. There are about a dozen or so of these Canukes that migrate down to Arizona during the winter months (where I live now) and they still walk and talk pretty much the same way that I've always remembered. No gays or any pot smokers in the bunch. Perhaps, AP has a different or more varied opinion on the topic, as he lives much closer to the Canadian border and visits there today on a more regular basis?...
    , @AP

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.
     
    Strange. I don't know Orthodox Ukrainians in Canada; my Canadian relatives are Greek Catholic are all very conservative. I'm not sure why Orthodox would be different. I can speculate, however: may of them are descendants of Greek Catholics who became Orthodox in the early waves of immigration due to refusal to go to a Roman Catholic Church when there weren't enough Greek Catholic parishes early on. Thus, despite their remarkable retention of the Ukrainian language over may generations they may be much more morally "Canadianized" than other Ukrainians in Canada due to belonging to families who have been in Canada for a few generations longer.

    Probably one of the most the most famous Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Canada is Faith Goldy:

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

    She had been very active in the Greek Catholic Church.

    Of course Trudeau's foreign minister Chrystia Freeland is a Greek Catholic. OTOH, Ed Stelmach, an active Greek Catholic was the conservative premier of Alberta, Canada's most conservative province:

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

    ::::::::::::

    I know quite a few Orthodox Ukrainians in the USA. Most seem to be conservative, but that's just anecdotal.
  67. @Korenchkin
    For those unaware, the pic Anatoly used is the bad guy from Call of Duty 4 (came out in 2007)
    Imran Zakhaev
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EHMLl7RWwAA6c_Y?format=png&name=small

    He's a Russian nationalist who wants to bring back the Soviet Union, he does this by helping a Middle Eastern dictator called Al-Asad get a WMD
    I have no idea why he looks like an Ethiopian
    Activision sometimes hires former spooks and Tom Clancy imitators to write these retarded plots, and it's always hilarious

    A Russian nationalist who wants to live in an even more multi-ethnic state by bringing back the USSR?

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    Tell you a secret: every nation that was present in the USSR is still present in Russia. So, Russia is not less multi-national, except that the proportion of ethnic Russians in today’s Russia is higher than it was in the USSR.
  68. @Just Passing Through
    A Russian nationalist who wants to live in an even more multi-ethnic state by bringing back the USSR?

    Tell you a secret: every nation that was present in the USSR is still present in Russia. So, Russia is not less multi-national, except that the proportion of ethnic Russians in today’s Russia is higher than it was in the USSR.

    • Replies: @Korenchkin
    You gotta love Central Asians whining about Russian oppression and celebrating their "liberation" while migrating by the millions to RF to get dem Constructionbux
    Although I shouldn't point fingers, Serbs aren't any better vis a vi Germany
    It has been lovely time lampooning returning diaspora who spent the better part of their time shitting on Serbia on social media, now they're returning en masse to the backwards shithole
  69. @Peter Frost

    The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.
     
    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants. It's not simply because they are too old or too inflexible. They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed”
     
    I'm not sure myself. I looked up the word in the Urban Dictionary and found this definition of "poz party":

    A party in which:
    1. HIV positive (poz) gay men have sex with each other.
    2. HIV negative (neg) gay men have sex with HIV positive men in order to become HIV positive.
    Hey Steve, let's go to the poz party and receive the gift of AIDS! Lots of hot guys will be there!
     
    Hmm ... No that's not what I meant. For me, a "pozzed" person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures. In practice, that means abolishing nations and national borders, abolishing marriage and the family, and abolishing gender.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”
     
    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I've met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn't their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term.
     
    Indeed, social conservatism does not mean the same thing for a Hindu or a Muslim as it does for a Christian. Furthermore, there are differences between the three branches of Christianity. As a Protestant, I have no problem with women being ministers. Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    "The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity."

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative. I went to confirmation class but refused to be confirmed because I couldn't accept the Minister's literal interpretation of the Bible: the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc. I also argued with him about the "cleansing" of the land of Canaan. He said it was necessary because the Jews were God's chosen people. I said that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it.

    Yes, there was a Social Gospel wing, but they were a minority, and they were careful about not going too far. All of that changed in the 1980s, not because of changes within the church but because of changes within Canadian society. Some congregations remained conservative, and there were still a few as late as the 2000s. Now, they're gone ... because conservatism is gone within Canadian society.

    This is part of a larger problem that transcends the United Church and Canada: conservatives lost the culture war, particularly during the key years when "conservatives" like Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher were in power.


    God save the Queen!
     
    I respect the Queen, and I hope the monarchy can be salvaged. But I would readily sacrifice the monarchy to save our culture and identity.

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants… They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical. One reason for this is, I think, simply the higher base rate of low church Protestants in North America. A more interesting reason is perhaps that the evangelicals still take bible reading very seriously, which for some leads to contradictions that can be resolved only by returning to Apostolic Tradition, even if that means adopting new cultural traditions.

    For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures

    The seeds of the apozacalypse have always been present in various Christian heresies, particularly of the gnostic variety. It is no coincidence that the English Puritans were the radical political liberals of their day, rejecting the age-old authority of Throne, as well as religious iconoclasts rejecting not only the authority of the Altar, but the very presence of the divine in the material world. Like the Bolsheviks, the Puritans of the time did not reject the biological reality of sex, but yesterday’s revolutionary is todays’s conservative, and it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    If you don’t believe it, see “American Malvern”, from Time magazine, March 16, 1942, a report on a conference of the Federal Council of Churches in the US (dominated by mainline Protestants, but including many other denominations, even many Orthodox jurisdictions). This conference advocated among other things a “world government”, “strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty”, “better treatment for Negroes”, and “worldwide freedom of immigration”. That jolly good fellow Mencius Moldbug has kindly provided a scan so that I don’t have to go to Biblioteka po imeni Lenina to find a copy:

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/archive/American_Malvern.pdf

    (As for better treatment of Negroes, I’m all for it: we should do everything we can to help the Negroes restore peace and good order to their communities.)

    Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    A straw man. The word priest, as you no doubt know, comes from the Greek word presbyteros, he who presides over the assembly (his wife is presbytera), while the word bishop comes from the Greek word episcopos, he who oversees. And I suspect you know why in a traditional Orthodox church there are no pews and the people stand facing the altar, as does the priest. (There is an interesting history of how Orthodox bishops came to assume imperial symbols, as ethnarchs in the millet system, but this is a digression.)

    The fundamental problem is not so much that we seek to maximize personal autonomy, but that without hierarchy, personal autonomy is unbounded, having neither maxima nor minima.

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada.

    I’m sorry to hear that. In other threads, I have expressed my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Orthodox in particular, but this is more a discussion to have with AP and Mr. Hack.

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative.

    I’ll defer to you on this. By the time I moved to Canada, the rainbow flag was already flying proudly outside the United Church, and what I have read perhaps exaggerates the importance of the Social Gospel in the founding of the United Church of Canada. Maybe there was no Canadian Malvern. Nonetheless, yesterday’s revolutionary is todays’s conservative.

    the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc… the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan

    A synthesis of traditional Christianity with modern science and history, like the patristic synthesis of Christianity and Hellenistic philosophy, is sorely needed. At the same time, it is, I believe, an empirical fact that most Christians who accept a scientific worldview eventually degenerate, so it seems difficult to find a stable form of such a synthesis. At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.

    • Agree: AP
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack

    At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.
     
    What scandal? I thought that it was "the truth that would set us free"? :-)
    , @Matra
    it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    The cult of Moldbug. I can't think of why a Jew would want us to believe that.
    , @Peter Frost

    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical.
     
    This may be more of an American thing. In Canada, especially in Quebec, religious identity has strong ethnic, cultural, and linguistic overtones. Conversion from one religious tradition to another is not something people do lightly, and there are good reasons.

    When I left the United Church of Canada, I did consider joining the Catholic Church but eventually changed my mind. First of all, it seemed scarcely different. Yes, there were differences in liturgy and practice, but in the realm of current issues I could hardly see any differences. For example, the local parish had a talk on the subject of divorce, and I attended out of curiosity. The guest speaker, a divorcee, explained the reason for her divorce: her husband was a poor conversationist. So she left him. The priest had a pained expression on his face, but he said nothing.

    I like to think I have an open mind, and I recognize there are circumstances that could justify divorce. Nonetheless, divorce -- and the resulting serial polygyny -- is imposing a terrible toll on our society. When people go through one live-in relationship after another, they seem to lose the ability to bond. And if the woman brings children from a previous relationship, the new relationship is even more fragile.

    In any case, I didn't change my mind about the Catholic Church simply because it seemed no better. Rather, I gradually realized it came out of a very different cultural and historical tradition. It wasn't my church. It was someone else's. I remember saying to myself: "Here I am giving up my identity for something that will be just as screwed up in another ten or fifteen years. So what will I do then? Join another church?"

    Yeah, I hear you. "Join an Orthodox Church!" Orthodox churches are socially conservative to the extent that they are isolated from modern culture. When English becomes the language of use they gradually fall into line with the mainstream culture. And this tendency is encouraged by the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Being pro-Ukraine means being pro-West, and being pro-West means being pro .... [You can fill in the blanks].

    Keep in mind that Christian churches of any sort are now very marginal in the creation of culture. Turn on the TV, open a newspaper, listen to the radio, go to the mall -- the message is always the same, and it's being manufactured by people who, for one reason or another, have a deepseated grudge against people like me.

    In theory, churches could create a parallel culture, but this is something they have trouble doing. I often listen to Christian radio stations, and most of the time I hear "Christian" rock or "Christian" rap. I actually like some rock music, but I dislike cheap imitations. Why not play traditional Christian music? And if that seems weird, why not play updated versions of traditional hymns?

    I could go and on, but by now you probably understand my position. At some point, one has to stop running away. Perhaps Christianity is screwed. Perhaps Canada is screwed. Perhaps European civilization in its entirety is screwed. Whatever. At some point, one has to stay put, stand up, and speak out.

  70. @AnonFromTN
    Tell you a secret: every nation that was present in the USSR is still present in Russia. So, Russia is not less multi-national, except that the proportion of ethnic Russians in today’s Russia is higher than it was in the USSR.

    You gotta love Central Asians whining about Russian oppression and celebrating their “liberation” while migrating by the millions to RF to get dem Constructionbux
    Although I shouldn’t point fingers, Serbs aren’t any better vis a vi Germany
    It has been lovely time lampooning returning diaspora who spent the better part of their time shitting on Serbia on social media, now they’re returning en masse to the backwards shithole

    • Replies: @JL
    Central Asians old enough to have come of age in the Sovok yearn for it even more than their Russian peers. At least, all the ones I've ever spoken to do. I've heard some hostile words directed at Gorbachev over the years, but the worst invective was uttered by a fifty-something-year-old Tajik.
    , @AnonFromTN
    Yep, those pesky Russian occupiers forced long-suffering Central Asians to wash, brush their teeth, treat women as humans, etc. Now with freedom they abandoned all these degrading practices and restored their centuries-old customs.
    , @Blinky Bill
    Central Asian Stronk !!!

    https://i.redd.it/nutigqxv1x441.jpg

    Showing Russian Nationalist how it's done !! 😂😂😂

  71. JL says:
    @Korenchkin
    You gotta love Central Asians whining about Russian oppression and celebrating their "liberation" while migrating by the millions to RF to get dem Constructionbux
    Although I shouldn't point fingers, Serbs aren't any better vis a vi Germany
    It has been lovely time lampooning returning diaspora who spent the better part of their time shitting on Serbia on social media, now they're returning en masse to the backwards shithole

    Central Asians old enough to have come of age in the Sovok yearn for it even more than their Russian peers. At least, all the ones I’ve ever spoken to do. I’ve heard some hostile words directed at Gorbachev over the years, but the worst invective was uttered by a fifty-something-year-old Tajik.

  72. @Korenchkin
    You gotta love Central Asians whining about Russian oppression and celebrating their "liberation" while migrating by the millions to RF to get dem Constructionbux
    Although I shouldn't point fingers, Serbs aren't any better vis a vi Germany
    It has been lovely time lampooning returning diaspora who spent the better part of their time shitting on Serbia on social media, now they're returning en masse to the backwards shithole

    Yep, those pesky Russian occupiers forced long-suffering Central Asians to wash, brush their teeth, treat women as humans, etc. Now with freedom they abandoned all these degrading practices and restored their centuries-old customs.

  73. @Peter Frost

    The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.
     
    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants. It's not simply because they are too old or too inflexible. They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed”
     
    I'm not sure myself. I looked up the word in the Urban Dictionary and found this definition of "poz party":

    A party in which:
    1. HIV positive (poz) gay men have sex with each other.
    2. HIV negative (neg) gay men have sex with HIV positive men in order to become HIV positive.
    Hey Steve, let's go to the poz party and receive the gift of AIDS! Lots of hot guys will be there!
     
    Hmm ... No that's not what I meant. For me, a "pozzed" person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures. In practice, that means abolishing nations and national borders, abolishing marriage and the family, and abolishing gender.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”
     
    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I've met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn't their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term.
     
    Indeed, social conservatism does not mean the same thing for a Hindu or a Muslim as it does for a Christian. Furthermore, there are differences between the three branches of Christianity. As a Protestant, I have no problem with women being ministers. Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    "The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity."

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative. I went to confirmation class but refused to be confirmed because I couldn't accept the Minister's literal interpretation of the Bible: the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc. I also argued with him about the "cleansing" of the land of Canaan. He said it was necessary because the Jews were God's chosen people. I said that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it.

    Yes, there was a Social Gospel wing, but they were a minority, and they were careful about not going too far. All of that changed in the 1980s, not because of changes within the church but because of changes within Canadian society. Some congregations remained conservative, and there were still a few as late as the 2000s. Now, they're gone ... because conservatism is gone within Canadian society.

    This is part of a larger problem that transcends the United Church and Canada: conservatives lost the culture war, particularly during the key years when "conservatives" like Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher were in power.


    God save the Queen!
     
    I respect the Queen, and I hope the monarchy can be salvaged. But I would readily sacrifice the monarchy to save our culture and identity.

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    I find this very hard to believe, although I haven’t been to Canada in many years. In my youth, I visited Canada many times (Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Thunder Bay and Toronto) and got to know a good many Ukrainians that lived there. They were all pretty conservative people, not very distinguishable from their American counterparts, sharing very similar backgrounds including a propensity for upper mobility. There are about a dozen or so of these Canukes that migrate down to Arizona during the winter months (where I live now) and they still walk and talk pretty much the same way that I’ve always remembered. No gays or any pot smokers in the bunch. Perhaps, AP has a different or more varied opinion on the topic, as he lives much closer to the Canadian border and visits there today on a more regular basis?…

  74. @The Big Red Scary

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants... They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.
     
    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical. One reason for this is, I think, simply the higher base rate of low church Protestants in North America. A more interesting reason is perhaps that the evangelicals still take bible reading very seriously, which for some leads to contradictions that can be resolved only by returning to Apostolic Tradition, even if that means adopting new cultural traditions.

    For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures
     
    The seeds of the apozacalypse have always been present in various Christian heresies, particularly of the gnostic variety. It is no coincidence that the English Puritans were the radical political liberals of their day, rejecting the age-old authority of Throne, as well as religious iconoclasts rejecting not only the authority of the Altar, but the very presence of the divine in the material world. Like the Bolsheviks, the Puritans of the time did not reject the biological reality of sex, but yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative, and it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    If you don't believe it, see "American Malvern", from Time magazine, March 16, 1942, a report on a conference of the Federal Council of Churches in the US (dominated by mainline Protestants, but including many other denominations, even many Orthodox jurisdictions). This conference advocated among other things a "world government", "strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty", "better treatment for Negroes", and "worldwide freedom of immigration". That jolly good fellow Mencius Moldbug has kindly provided a scan so that I don't have to go to Biblioteka po imeni Lenina to find a copy:

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/archive/American_Malvern.pdf

    (As for better treatment of Negroes, I'm all for it: we should do everything we can to help the Negroes restore peace and good order to their communities.)


    Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.
     
    A straw man. The word priest, as you no doubt know, comes from the Greek word presbyteros, he who presides over the assembly (his wife is presbytera), while the word bishop comes from the Greek word episcopos, he who oversees. And I suspect you know why in a traditional Orthodox church there are no pews and the people stand facing the altar, as does the priest. (There is an interesting history of how Orthodox bishops came to assume imperial symbols, as ethnarchs in the millet system, but this is a digression.)

    The fundamental problem is not so much that we seek to maximize personal autonomy, but that without hierarchy, personal autonomy is unbounded, having neither maxima nor minima.


    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada.
     
    I'm sorry to hear that. In other threads, I have expressed my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Orthodox in particular, but this is more a discussion to have with AP and Mr. Hack.

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative.
     
    I'll defer to you on this. By the time I moved to Canada, the rainbow flag was already flying proudly outside the United Church, and what I have read perhaps exaggerates the importance of the Social Gospel in the founding of the United Church of Canada. Maybe there was no Canadian Malvern. Nonetheless, yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative.

    the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc... the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan
     
    A synthesis of traditional Christianity with modern science and history, like the patristic synthesis of Christianity and Hellenistic philosophy, is sorely needed. At the same time, it is, I believe, an empirical fact that most Christians who accept a scientific worldview eventually degenerate, so it seems difficult to find a stable form of such a synthesis. At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.

    At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.

    What scandal? I thought that it was “the truth that would set us free”? 🙂

  75. AP says:
    @Peter Frost

    The fundamentalist Protestant church in which I grew up is now completely foreign to me.
     
    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants. It's not simply because they are too old or too inflexible. They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.

    I’m not sure what you mean by “pozzed”
     
    I'm not sure myself. I looked up the word in the Urban Dictionary and found this definition of "poz party":

    A party in which:
    1. HIV positive (poz) gay men have sex with each other.
    2. HIV negative (neg) gay men have sex with HIV positive men in order to become HIV positive.
    Hey Steve, let's go to the poz party and receive the gift of AIDS! Lots of hot guys will be there!
     
    Hmm ... No that's not what I meant. For me, a "pozzed" person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures. In practice, that means abolishing nations and national borders, abolishing marriage and the family, and abolishing gender.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”
     
    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I've met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn't their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    “Socially conservative” is a relative term.
     
    Indeed, social conservatism does not mean the same thing for a Hindu or a Muslim as it does for a Christian. Furthermore, there are differences between the three branches of Christianity. As a Protestant, I have no problem with women being ministers. Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.

    "The United Church of Canada came out of the Social Gospel movement, which shortly became the Progressive movement, and has now turned into SJWism. In short, you grew up in a radically liberal branch of Christianity."

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative. I went to confirmation class but refused to be confirmed because I couldn't accept the Minister's literal interpretation of the Bible: the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc. I also argued with him about the "cleansing" of the land of Canaan. He said it was necessary because the Jews were God's chosen people. I said that genocide is wrong regardless of who does it.

    Yes, there was a Social Gospel wing, but they were a minority, and they were careful about not going too far. All of that changed in the 1980s, not because of changes within the church but because of changes within Canadian society. Some congregations remained conservative, and there were still a few as late as the 2000s. Now, they're gone ... because conservatism is gone within Canadian society.

    This is part of a larger problem that transcends the United Church and Canada: conservatives lost the culture war, particularly during the key years when "conservatives" like Mulroney, Reagan, and Thatcher were in power.


    God save the Queen!
     
    I respect the Queen, and I hope the monarchy can be salvaged. But I would readily sacrifice the monarchy to save our culture and identity.

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.

    Strange. I don’t know Orthodox Ukrainians in Canada; my Canadian relatives are Greek Catholic are all very conservative. I’m not sure why Orthodox would be different. I can speculate, however: may of them are descendants of Greek Catholics who became Orthodox in the early waves of immigration due to refusal to go to a Roman Catholic Church when there weren’t enough Greek Catholic parishes early on. Thus, despite their remarkable retention of the Ukrainian language over may generations they may be much more morally “Canadianized” than other Ukrainians in Canada due to belonging to families who have been in Canada for a few generations longer.

    Probably one of the most the most famous Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Canada is Faith Goldy:

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

    She had been very active in the Greek Catholic Church.

    Of course Trudeau’s foreign minister Chrystia Freeland is a Greek Catholic. OTOH, Ed Stelmach, an active Greek Catholic was the conservative premier of Alberta, Canada’s most conservative province:

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

    ::::::::::::

    I know quite a few Orthodox Ukrainians in the USA. Most seem to be conservative, but that’s just anecdotal.

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    N=1

    My godfather was born in Kiev during the war to Ukrainian nationalists, somehow ended up with his family in the US, where he lost faith for a time and became a hippie, before returning to the Orthodox Church. His profession required him to be very compassionate and tolerant to all kinds of dysfunctional people, but at least by the time I knew him, he was a very solid, traditional man. While he retained some form of Ukrainian identity, and spoke Ukrainian but not Russian quite well, he saw himself primarily as an Orthodox American.
    , @Mr. Hack
    I wan't aware of who Faith Goldy was (an unusual name for a person of Ukrainian descent), and decided to look up her website. She's quite the firecracker and certainly would fall squarely into the mainstream of alt-right activists. She would fit in nicely here at the UNZ Review, and Ron Unz could do worse than include her within his entourage of bloggers...
  76. @AP

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.
     
    Strange. I don't know Orthodox Ukrainians in Canada; my Canadian relatives are Greek Catholic are all very conservative. I'm not sure why Orthodox would be different. I can speculate, however: may of them are descendants of Greek Catholics who became Orthodox in the early waves of immigration due to refusal to go to a Roman Catholic Church when there weren't enough Greek Catholic parishes early on. Thus, despite their remarkable retention of the Ukrainian language over may generations they may be much more morally "Canadianized" than other Ukrainians in Canada due to belonging to families who have been in Canada for a few generations longer.

    Probably one of the most the most famous Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Canada is Faith Goldy:

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

    She had been very active in the Greek Catholic Church.

    Of course Trudeau's foreign minister Chrystia Freeland is a Greek Catholic. OTOH, Ed Stelmach, an active Greek Catholic was the conservative premier of Alberta, Canada's most conservative province:

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

    ::::::::::::

    I know quite a few Orthodox Ukrainians in the USA. Most seem to be conservative, but that's just anecdotal.

    N=1

    My godfather was born in Kiev during the war to Ukrainian nationalists, somehow ended up with his family in the US, where he lost faith for a time and became a hippie, before returning to the Orthodox Church. His profession required him to be very compassionate and tolerant to all kinds of dysfunctional people, but at least by the time I knew him, he was a very solid, traditional man. While he retained some form of Ukrainian identity, and spoke Ukrainian but not Russian quite well, he saw himself primarily as an Orthodox American.

    • Thanks: AP
  77. @AP

    Are you referring to the “The Archdiocese of Canada in the Orthodox Church in America”

    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada. I’ve met quite a few, and they brag about how open they are to alternative lifestyles and orientations. Not like you-know-who. That probably isn’t their official doctrine, but changes to doctrine tend to lag behind changes to practice.
     
    Strange. I don't know Orthodox Ukrainians in Canada; my Canadian relatives are Greek Catholic are all very conservative. I'm not sure why Orthodox would be different. I can speculate, however: may of them are descendants of Greek Catholics who became Orthodox in the early waves of immigration due to refusal to go to a Roman Catholic Church when there weren't enough Greek Catholic parishes early on. Thus, despite their remarkable retention of the Ukrainian language over may generations they may be much more morally "Canadianized" than other Ukrainians in Canada due to belonging to families who have been in Canada for a few generations longer.

    Probably one of the most the most famous Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Canada is Faith Goldy:

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

    She had been very active in the Greek Catholic Church.

    Of course Trudeau's foreign minister Chrystia Freeland is a Greek Catholic. OTOH, Ed Stelmach, an active Greek Catholic was the conservative premier of Alberta, Canada's most conservative province:

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

    ::::::::::::

    I know quite a few Orthodox Ukrainians in the USA. Most seem to be conservative, but that's just anecdotal.

    I wan’t aware of who Faith Goldy was (an unusual name for a person of Ukrainian descent), and decided to look up her website. She’s quite the firecracker and certainly would fall squarely into the mainstream of alt-right activists. She would fit in nicely here at the UNZ Review, and Ron Unz could do worse than include her within his entourage of bloggers…

    • Replies: @AP
    She is half Greek and half Ukrainian but belongs to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. I guess her parents chose to name her "Faith" rather than "Vira."
  78. @Mr. Hack
    I wan't aware of who Faith Goldy was (an unusual name for a person of Ukrainian descent), and decided to look up her website. She's quite the firecracker and certainly would fall squarely into the mainstream of alt-right activists. She would fit in nicely here at the UNZ Review, and Ron Unz could do worse than include her within his entourage of bloggers...

    She is half Greek and half Ukrainian but belongs to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. I guess her parents chose to name her “Faith” rather than “Vira.”

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I get that, but "Goldy?" If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of "Goldberg", that is a very common Jewish surname...(her father's surname is apparently "Bazos"). Do you know whether she's written anything about her convictions as a "Ukrainian Catholic" (it's my understanding that the term "Greek-Catholic" and "Byzantine Catholic" are now considered archaic and should be referred to as "Ukrainian Catholic)?
  79. @The Big Red Scary

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants... They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.
     
    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical. One reason for this is, I think, simply the higher base rate of low church Protestants in North America. A more interesting reason is perhaps that the evangelicals still take bible reading very seriously, which for some leads to contradictions that can be resolved only by returning to Apostolic Tradition, even if that means adopting new cultural traditions.

    For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures
     
    The seeds of the apozacalypse have always been present in various Christian heresies, particularly of the gnostic variety. It is no coincidence that the English Puritans were the radical political liberals of their day, rejecting the age-old authority of Throne, as well as religious iconoclasts rejecting not only the authority of the Altar, but the very presence of the divine in the material world. Like the Bolsheviks, the Puritans of the time did not reject the biological reality of sex, but yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative, and it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    If you don't believe it, see "American Malvern", from Time magazine, March 16, 1942, a report on a conference of the Federal Council of Churches in the US (dominated by mainline Protestants, but including many other denominations, even many Orthodox jurisdictions). This conference advocated among other things a "world government", "strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty", "better treatment for Negroes", and "worldwide freedom of immigration". That jolly good fellow Mencius Moldbug has kindly provided a scan so that I don't have to go to Biblioteka po imeni Lenina to find a copy:

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/archive/American_Malvern.pdf

    (As for better treatment of Negroes, I'm all for it: we should do everything we can to help the Negroes restore peace and good order to their communities.)


    Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.
     
    A straw man. The word priest, as you no doubt know, comes from the Greek word presbyteros, he who presides over the assembly (his wife is presbytera), while the word bishop comes from the Greek word episcopos, he who oversees. And I suspect you know why in a traditional Orthodox church there are no pews and the people stand facing the altar, as does the priest. (There is an interesting history of how Orthodox bishops came to assume imperial symbols, as ethnarchs in the millet system, but this is a digression.)

    The fundamental problem is not so much that we seek to maximize personal autonomy, but that without hierarchy, personal autonomy is unbounded, having neither maxima nor minima.


    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada.
     
    I'm sorry to hear that. In other threads, I have expressed my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Orthodox in particular, but this is more a discussion to have with AP and Mr. Hack.

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative.
     
    I'll defer to you on this. By the time I moved to Canada, the rainbow flag was already flying proudly outside the United Church, and what I have read perhaps exaggerates the importance of the Social Gospel in the founding of the United Church of Canada. Maybe there was no Canadian Malvern. Nonetheless, yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative.

    the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc... the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan
     
    A synthesis of traditional Christianity with modern science and history, like the patristic synthesis of Christianity and Hellenistic philosophy, is sorely needed. At the same time, it is, I believe, an empirical fact that most Christians who accept a scientific worldview eventually degenerate, so it seems difficult to find a stable form of such a synthesis. At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.

    it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    The cult of Moldbug. I can’t think of why a Jew would want us to believe that.

    • Replies: @The Big Red Scary
    Moldbug is a very interesting character, but hardly the first to make this observation.
    , @Vaterland
    It's both really. The woke left in Germanistan is made up of protestant pastors, de facto atheist secularized protestants and Jews as the super-structural authority - as they are the Brahmin caste of the post WW 2 liberal word order. Protestantism is the godfather of liberal individualism, critical rationalism (Critical Theory godhead Theodor W. Adorno converted to Protestantism and Kant too was a very devout Protestant), also a form of prudish materialism and finally Marxism. I'd say Marx was a secularized rabbinical Protestant and I think of protestants, despite their long abandoned historical anti-Semitism, as spiritual Jews. Angela Merkel too is the daughter of the Red Kasner; a protestant pastor who moved into the GDR post WW 2 to reconcile communism with Christianity. A work which Merkel continues. Nazis were also mostly voted by Protestants. Only pre Vatican 2 traditional Catholicism and non-degenerated Orthodoxy are not roads which lead directly to hell.

    Traditional Europe is Western-Roman Catholicism and Eastern-Roman Orthodoxy. Everything else is a form of heresy. Liberalism, Capitalism, International Marxism, National Socialism, Americanism...
    , @EldnahYm
    These kinds of views are promoted by people with an axe to grind. One for example rarely ever hears the term "WASP" at all except when being used by Catholic and Jews(two group we're supposed to believe are in opposition to each other) to express their resentments towards protestant old stock Americans(or Canadians, the same phenomena exists there). It's no different than when ethnic minorities complain about white people.

    The very term "mainline Protestantism" is rather slippery. People who use the term will often in the same sentence criticize Protestants both for being radical religious non-conformists, but then also claim they are responsible for modern liberal orthodoxy. The defense of this seeming contradiction will be to the effect that what began as dissident ideas, themselves become dominant. But in practice it seems more like people with an axe to grind will just make up anything to denigrate their enemies. They aren't concerned with the actual origin of ideas. It's easy to cherry pick examples to support a particular position. It is even easier still when pulling from what are actually different traditions that do not have an agreed upon position.

    An even casual glance at ideas of the early 20th century will show that liberalism was not the inevitable result of Protestantism. Eugenics, white racialism, isolationism, advocacy of firearm ownership, the right to form militias, and ideas which would today be called survivalism were not uncommon at the time, but almost exclusively among people of northern European or Swiss Protestant ancestry. The rest of the world contributed jack all to these traditions.

    Meanwhile a history of Catholicism does not seemed to have helped at all in the case of France or Ireland. The idea that Catholicism is somehow resistant to liberalism is fantasy. It looks more like Catholic countries are simply more economically backwards on average, but as they develop they also become more liberal. In countries with significant numbers of Protestants and Catholics, what Catholic political parties seem to do is shift right wing politics away from more radical forms, while being incapable of shifting the voting patterns of their more left wing members.
  80. @Matra
    it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    The cult of Moldbug. I can't think of why a Jew would want us to believe that.

    Moldbug is a very interesting character, but hardly the first to make this observation.

  81. @AP
    She is half Greek and half Ukrainian but belongs to the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church. I guess her parents chose to name her "Faith" rather than "Vira."

    I get that, but “Goldy?” If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of “Goldberg”, that is a very common Jewish surname…(her father’s surname is apparently “Bazos”). Do you know whether she’s written anything about her convictions as a “Ukrainian Catholic” (it’s my understanding that the term “Greek-Catholic” and “Byzantine Catholic” are now considered archaic and should be referred to as “Ukrainian Catholic)?

    • Replies: @AP

    I get that, but “Goldy?” If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of “Goldberg”, that is a very common Jewish surname
     
    Голдій is a Ukrainian surname. Searching facebook, there are several people with that surname in Lviv and Ternopil oblasts.

    Do you know whether she’s written anything about her convictions as a “Ukrainian Catholic” (it’s my understanding that the term “Greek-Catholic” and “Byzantine Catholic” are now considered archaic and should be referred to as “Ukrainian Catholic)?

     

    I don't follow her and heard of her by chance.

    According to wiki:

    "She was a director on the board of the Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute Foundation from October 7, 2015, until her resignation on May 30, 2017."

    A link for wiki leads to this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20181005203319/https://www.catholicregister.org/ysn/ysn-news/item/20069-catching-up-with-youth-speak-news-alumni

    The journey for truth has taken YSN alumni from The Register to spheres where they support the Catholic faith and journalism. Television reporter Faith Goldy is one whose YSN years (2008-09) blossomed into a journalism career.

    “I wanted to marry Superman when I grew up, so I had to become Lois Lane,” jokes Goldy.

    A deacon from her Ukrainian Catholic parish orchestrated Goldy’s application to YSN.

    “From there it snowballed. I went from YSN to Michael Coren’s old program at CTS. He had me on as a token young person. I started editing U of T’s political science journal, and then when Michael got his gig (at Sun News Network), he brought me along as a young Christian kid who was poised to comment on various issues. And within a matter of a year, I was a full-time employee. So really it was my position in YSN that catapulted my entire career in journalism, without a doubt.”

    :::::::::::::::::

    I think everyone associated with her past is now a bit embarrassed due to her being blacklisted.

  82. AP says:
    @Mr. Hack
    I get that, but "Goldy?" If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of "Goldberg", that is a very common Jewish surname...(her father's surname is apparently "Bazos"). Do you know whether she's written anything about her convictions as a "Ukrainian Catholic" (it's my understanding that the term "Greek-Catholic" and "Byzantine Catholic" are now considered archaic and should be referred to as "Ukrainian Catholic)?

    I get that, but “Goldy?” If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of “Goldberg”, that is a very common Jewish surname

    Голдій is a Ukrainian surname. Searching facebook, there are several people with that surname in Lviv and Ternopil oblasts.

    Do you know whether she’s written anything about her convictions as a “Ukrainian Catholic” (it’s my understanding that the term “Greek-Catholic” and “Byzantine Catholic” are now considered archaic and should be referred to as “Ukrainian Catholic)?

    I don’t follow her and heard of her by chance.

    According to wiki:

    “She was a director on the board of the Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute Foundation from October 7, 2015, until her resignation on May 30, 2017.”

    A link for wiki leads to this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20181005203319/https://www.catholicregister.org/ysn/ysn-news/item/20069-catching-up-with-youth-speak-news-alumni

    The journey for truth has taken YSN alumni from The Register to spheres where they support the Catholic faith and journalism. Television reporter Faith Goldy is one whose YSN years (2008-09) blossomed into a journalism career.

    “I wanted to marry Superman when I grew up, so I had to become Lois Lane,” jokes Goldy.

    A deacon from her Ukrainian Catholic parish orchestrated Goldy’s application to YSN.

    “From there it snowballed. I went from YSN to Michael Coren’s old program at CTS. He had me on as a token young person. I started editing U of T’s political science journal, and then when Michael got his gig (at Sun News Network), he brought me along as a young Christian kid who was poised to comment on various issues. And within a matter of a year, I was a full-time employee. So really it was my position in YSN that catapulted my entire career in journalism, without a doubt.”

    :::::::::::::::::

    I think everyone associated with her past is now a bit embarrassed due to her being blacklisted.

    • Replies: @AP
    Her twitter is blocked but a fragment from a tweet shows up on on google. Someone commented that her name sounded Jewish and she responded "It's actually Ukrainian and 100% Catholic — Віра Голдій. Not that I expect a Jewish man who ascribed *British accents* to every Ukrainian ..."
  83. @AP

    I get that, but “Goldy?” If she were half Jewish, it might make some sense as a shortening of “Goldberg”, that is a very common Jewish surname
     
    Голдій is a Ukrainian surname. Searching facebook, there are several people with that surname in Lviv and Ternopil oblasts.

    Do you know whether she’s written anything about her convictions as a “Ukrainian Catholic” (it’s my understanding that the term “Greek-Catholic” and “Byzantine Catholic” are now considered archaic and should be referred to as “Ukrainian Catholic)?

     

    I don't follow her and heard of her by chance.

    According to wiki:

    "She was a director on the board of the Metropolitan Andrey Sheptytsky Institute Foundation from October 7, 2015, until her resignation on May 30, 2017."

    A link for wiki leads to this:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20181005203319/https://www.catholicregister.org/ysn/ysn-news/item/20069-catching-up-with-youth-speak-news-alumni

    The journey for truth has taken YSN alumni from The Register to spheres where they support the Catholic faith and journalism. Television reporter Faith Goldy is one whose YSN years (2008-09) blossomed into a journalism career.

    “I wanted to marry Superman when I grew up, so I had to become Lois Lane,” jokes Goldy.

    A deacon from her Ukrainian Catholic parish orchestrated Goldy’s application to YSN.

    “From there it snowballed. I went from YSN to Michael Coren’s old program at CTS. He had me on as a token young person. I started editing U of T’s political science journal, and then when Michael got his gig (at Sun News Network), he brought me along as a young Christian kid who was poised to comment on various issues. And within a matter of a year, I was a full-time employee. So really it was my position in YSN that catapulted my entire career in journalism, without a doubt.”

    :::::::::::::::::

    I think everyone associated with her past is now a bit embarrassed due to her being blacklisted.

    Her twitter is blocked but a fragment from a tweet shows up on on google. Someone commented that her name sounded Jewish and she responded “It’s actually Ukrainian and 100% Catholic — Віра Голдій. Not that I expect a Jewish man who ascribed *British accents* to every Ukrainian …”

    • Thanks: Mr. Hack
  84. @Korenchkin
    You gotta love Central Asians whining about Russian oppression and celebrating their "liberation" while migrating by the millions to RF to get dem Constructionbux
    Although I shouldn't point fingers, Serbs aren't any better vis a vi Germany
    It has been lovely time lampooning returning diaspora who spent the better part of their time shitting on Serbia on social media, now they're returning en masse to the backwards shithole

    Central Asian Stronk !!!

    [MORE]

    Showing Russian Nationalist how it’s done !! 😂😂😂

  85. @Hyperborean

    How extremely noble were the KGB in allowing most of the protests and eventual separation of USSR and Warsaw pact countries–without resorting to much or any repression and torture?Americans wouldn’t act as noble.
     
    As we all know, the noble hand displayed a graceful and magnanimous attitude in 1953, 1956 and 1968, far beyond what its duties and responsibilities bound it to.

    Truly, children shall hear epics and ballads of the noble hand's obliging and lenient nature for eons and generations.

    Unfortunately you sabotaged your own point by not referencing anything bad from the last quarter of a century of the Warsaw Pact.
    True ,the US put great pressure for the USSR not to do much in the polish Solidarity protests in the early 1980s- but they certainly weren’t enabling any widespread violence if they didn’t put any pressure.
    Anyway, cretinous US funded student protests get the wholly proportionate responses they deserved in each of those “revolutions”. De Gaulle realised this too late.

  86. • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Lots of hyperbole and innuendo that in the final analysis the article concludes that the Conservative party of Canada is trying to achieve:

    "a peacekeeping mission along the Ukraine-Russia border"
     
    Why all the histrionics?
    , @AP
    The author of this piece appears to be typical antifa garbage:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ER_cvOeWAAAsm9E.jpg

    Website is run by an RT guy who also posts articles about the wonders of Cuba and evil colonialism.

    It's funny to see a Vlasovite condemn Ukrainian-Nazi cooperation, by using an antifa source.
  87. @Mikhail
    Related to this thread:

    https://thegrayzone.com/2020/03/26/canadian-conservative-party-bandera-canada/

    Lots of hyperbole and innuendo that in the final analysis the article concludes that the Conservative party of Canada is trying to achieve:

    “a peacekeeping mission along the Ukraine-Russia border”

    Why all the histrionics?

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Not like AP's histrionics in # 89 of this thread.
  88. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    Related to this thread:

    https://thegrayzone.com/2020/03/26/canadian-conservative-party-bandera-canada/

    The author of this piece appears to be typical antifa garbage:

    Website is run by an RT guy who also posts articles about the wonders of Cuba and evil colonialism.

    It’s funny to see a Vlasovite condemn Ukrainian-Nazi cooperation, by using an antifa source.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • LOL: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    A broken clock isn't always wrong. He didn't tell me anything new.

    Is the below kosher?

    https://web.archive.org/web/20050205051751/http://russian-americans.org/CRA_Art_Captive.htm

    This book further confirms:

    https://www.amazon.com/Captive-Nations-Bernadine-BAILEY/dp/B000HF7HJK

  89. @AnonFromTN
    Again, reasonable analysis, but woefully one-sided. You talk about Modi, Merkel, and South American or East Asian tinpot “presidents”, but these are mostly bought and paid for compradores, serving their imperial masters. There are billions of people in those countries, and their worldview is very different. E.g., the Empire recently retook Bolivia via a coup, so that there are even fewer anti-imperial governments in Latin America. However, if you go to any uncensored Spanish-language site on the Internet, the popularity and the strength of anti-Americanism is striking.

    In a way, China serves (not by design) the same function that the USSR served – provides an alternative to the Empire. Realistically, the Empire will be declining for a decade or two yet, while anti-imperial forces of all stripes are gaining. If some smart non-Chinese leader plays his/her hand wisely, the end result won’t be Pax Sinica, but multi-polarity. History shows that when the world has even two poles counterbalancing each other, like before 1991, this forces the players to observe rules. Not always, but most of the time. Even that half-bad situation is vastly superior to imperial monopoly on international banditry.

    Anyway, we’ll see in the next 10 years in what direction the situation moves.

    Well, although I generally do agree, you need a capable and willing elite/ruling class who have a clear vision to achieve a real change and transformation. Billions of people may well desire a change, but if they get it is an entirely different question. There is certainly a majority of people in my country which are anti-(neo)liberalism, both on the right and left, but if they can win against the trans-Atlantic top-down directives is an entirely different question. And right now I see no one on either side who would even be able to seriously take up this fight. For example the shooting star of the AfD Björn Höcke I find rather awkward and cringey, he’s also hardly a genius… let alone a Bismarck.

    Also: old West-Germany offered pretty much everything both the Berniebros and the Non-Neo-Nazi part of the Alt-Right desire. But over the decades a lot of this was successfully chipped away, by both neo-liberal capitalism and the woke left, mostly via US imports. And what was left of actually German culture, mentality and traditions was replaced, colonized, destroyed and perverted. And neither the conservatives, nor the left-overs of the GDR left prevented this. So I need some good evidence to be more optimistic for developing countries.

    But yes, Murica/the West/the elite only really let the pigs out with deregulation, top-down class warfare, open border cheap labor, outsourcing and hedge fund boogaloo when the SU had collapsed. There was no longer a need for a nice face of capitalism. Not sure, if China will be able to provide the new alternative to tame ‘the billionaire class’. Right now at least they are in NUKE THE CHINKS!!! mode. So absolutely: an alternative path, third position, or European independence would sadly have to be ‘anti-American’.

    However, most fascinating to me was to see that a form of National Socialism is coming to the USA now. But not the costume and Hollywood caricature of it:

    Chamath Palihapitiya really sounds like Mr. Hilter in one of his late 20s early 30s speeches. I even heard it in the voice of him: as radical pajeet spoke, the only thing missing was a drop of “international elements” and someone in the audience shouting “JUDEN!” And more than nine million people watched this. Significant. Yet the Americans have no idea of course, because they only know the Hollywood portrayal or at least only the war mode derailment. But who of them has read Gottfried Feder for example?

    A few years ago I speculated on a course for the American answer to the global elite problem, that the (far) right would ditch the costume Neo-Nazi parades and embrace Americanism instead. That, if there emerged an anti-(financial)capitalism that came decidedly not from the woke left, but also from the right, it would get very uncomfortable for the hostile and predatory elites, because there would be a bi-partisan and broad consensus. And that it would most likely have to come from a civic nationalist approach and could not include European folkish ideas, because they contradict the nature of the USA which is all about experiments, new beginnings and cutting your roots to become something categorically new: the American. And the only ones who really didn’t do that were the dual-citizen Zionists with disturbing consequences. So even without the “racist!” problem white nationalists could easily be marginalized and seen as weirdos in a US context. Especially if they decided their hills to die on were ‘holocaust denial’ and “Hitler should have won the war! The USA is pure evil!” But also that the so called American conservatives would actually be an obstacle, because they are merely another brand of liberals.

    Therefor to the fulfillment of my speculations Chamath Palihapitiya brought a non-strawman key position of true revolution into the US mainstream to an audience of many millions. Savitri Devi would be proud. And a political sledgehammer to Blackrock and hedge funds can only be good for all of us.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    I don’t know enough about German political scene to have an opinion about who might be possible leader of Germany when (and if) it becomes an independent country, rather than an occupied imperial vassal. Judging by her actions, I think Chancellor Kohl was right in his book: Merkel is a nonentity and pretty dumb, to boot. However, as far as I know, he himself elevated her for whatever reason. I collaborate with several labs in Germany, but never discussed politics with my collaborators.

    The demise of parasitic financial capitalism would be very good for humanity, but currently the leaches essentially own the governments of the Empire and its vassals. Thus, current governments would do their level best to protect the parasites. Our only hope is that current elites degenerated to the point of becoming pathetically inept. The response to coronavirus showed very clearly who is capable and who is ham-handed good-for-nothing moron. While the morons spin the narrative in the Empire and its sidekicks, about four fifth of humanity sees the real score.

    However, you are right that for popular feelings to become actions the people need a leader. That person must have vision and charisma. Even minimal charisma would do: current “leaders” of the EU and individual European countries are bland and uninspiring. They are like that for a reason: they are leaders of vassal states blindly following imperial policies, so from imperial standpoint, brains and personality would get in the way of their function. Maybe Latin America is more likely to produce someone capable of confronting the Empire: Latinos tend to be more passionate, whereas it appears that most Europeans lost the drive. A pity. Europe deserves to be something, but if it remains leaderless, it would remain nothing, just an imperial plaything, whoever happens to become the Empire. Russians do have drive, but Russia needs other forces that would prevent Chinese dominance after the US self-destructs. Unless Europe shakes off pseudo-leftist multi-culti and the rest of current BS in the next ~10 years, it is doomed. That would be a serious loss for humanity. Then again, human civilization suffered many losses before, yet it survived and kept moving forward.

  90. @Matra
    it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    The cult of Moldbug. I can't think of why a Jew would want us to believe that.

    It’s both really. The woke left in Germanistan is made up of protestant pastors, de facto atheist secularized protestants and Jews as the super-structural authority – as they are the Brahmin caste of the post WW 2 liberal word order. Protestantism is the godfather of liberal individualism, critical rationalism (Critical Theory godhead Theodor W. Adorno converted to Protestantism and Kant too was a very devout Protestant), also a form of prudish materialism and finally Marxism. I’d say Marx was a secularized rabbinical Protestant and I think of protestants, despite their long abandoned historical anti-Semitism, as spiritual Jews. Angela Merkel too is the daughter of the Red Kasner; a protestant pastor who moved into the GDR post WW 2 to reconcile communism with Christianity. A work which Merkel continues. Nazis were also mostly voted by Protestants. Only pre Vatican 2 traditional Catholicism and non-degenerated Orthodoxy are not roads which lead directly to hell.

    Traditional Europe is Western-Roman Catholicism and Eastern-Roman Orthodoxy. Everything else is a form of heresy. Liberalism, Capitalism, International Marxism, National Socialism, Americanism…

  91. @The Big Red Scary

    Most conservative Christians in the West cannot go that route, especially Protestants... They feel attached to their cultural traditions, like most people.
     
    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical. One reason for this is, I think, simply the higher base rate of low church Protestants in North America. A more interesting reason is perhaps that the evangelicals still take bible reading very seriously, which for some leads to contradictions that can be resolved only by returning to Apostolic Tradition, even if that means adopting new cultural traditions.

    For me, a “pozzed” person seeks to maximize personal autonomy by abolishing all traditional social structures
     
    The seeds of the apozacalypse have always been present in various Christian heresies, particularly of the gnostic variety. It is no coincidence that the English Puritans were the radical political liberals of their day, rejecting the age-old authority of Throne, as well as religious iconoclasts rejecting not only the authority of the Altar, but the very presence of the divine in the material world. Like the Bolsheviks, the Puritans of the time did not reject the biological reality of sex, but yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative, and it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    If you don't believe it, see "American Malvern", from Time magazine, March 16, 1942, a report on a conference of the Federal Council of Churches in the US (dominated by mainline Protestants, but including many other denominations, even many Orthodox jurisdictions). This conference advocated among other things a "world government", "strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty", "better treatment for Negroes", and "worldwide freedom of immigration". That jolly good fellow Mencius Moldbug has kindly provided a scan so that I don't have to go to Biblioteka po imeni Lenina to find a copy:

    https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/archive/American_Malvern.pdf

    (As for better treatment of Negroes, I'm all for it: we should do everything we can to help the Negroes restore peace and good order to their communities.)


    Nor do I feel the need to have an intermediary between myself and God.
     
    A straw man. The word priest, as you no doubt know, comes from the Greek word presbyteros, he who presides over the assembly (his wife is presbytera), while the word bishop comes from the Greek word episcopos, he who oversees. And I suspect you know why in a traditional Orthodox church there are no pews and the people stand facing the altar, as does the priest. (There is an interesting history of how Orthodox bishops came to assume imperial symbols, as ethnarchs in the millet system, but this is a digression.)

    The fundamental problem is not so much that we seek to maximize personal autonomy, but that without hierarchy, personal autonomy is unbounded, having neither maxima nor minima.


    I was thinking more about Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Canada.
     
    I'm sorry to hear that. In other threads, I have expressed my concerns about the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Ukrainian Orthodox in particular, but this is more a discussion to have with AP and Mr. Hack.

    Uh, no. I grew up in the 1970s, and most United Church congregations were still conservative, often very conservative.
     
    I'll defer to you on this. By the time I moved to Canada, the rainbow flag was already flying proudly outside the United Church, and what I have read perhaps exaggerates the importance of the Social Gospel in the founding of the United Church of Canada. Maybe there was no Canadian Malvern. Nonetheless, yesterday's revolutionary is todays's conservative.

    the Creation, the Garden of Eden, the Flood, etc... the “cleansing” of the land of Canaan
     
    A synthesis of traditional Christianity with modern science and history, like the patristic synthesis of Christianity and Hellenistic philosophy, is sorely needed. At the same time, it is, I believe, an empirical fact that most Christians who accept a scientific worldview eventually degenerate, so it seems difficult to find a stable form of such a synthesis. At the very least, I think it is important not to scandalize babushka by discussing too loudly the precise degree of her Neanderthal ancestry.

    While Catholics and high church Anglicans might find it easier to convert to Orthodoxy, among converts to Orthodoxy in the US and Canada, there are far more low church Protestants, both mainline and evangelical.

    This may be more of an American thing. In Canada, especially in Quebec, religious identity has strong ethnic, cultural, and linguistic overtones. Conversion from one religious tradition to another is not something people do lightly, and there are good reasons.

    When I left the United Church of Canada, I did consider joining the Catholic Church but eventually changed my mind. First of all, it seemed scarcely different. Yes, there were differences in liturgy and practice, but in the realm of current issues I could hardly see any differences. For example, the local parish had a talk on the subject of divorce, and I attended out of curiosity. The guest speaker, a divorcee, explained the reason for her divorce: her husband was a poor conversationist. So she left him. The priest had a pained expression on his face, but he said nothing.

    I like to think I have an open mind, and I recognize there are circumstances that could justify divorce. Nonetheless, divorce — and the resulting serial polygyny — is imposing a terrible toll on our society. When people go through one live-in relationship after another, they seem to lose the ability to bond. And if the woman brings children from a previous relationship, the new relationship is even more fragile.

    In any case, I didn’t change my mind about the Catholic Church simply because it seemed no better. Rather, I gradually realized it came out of a very different cultural and historical tradition. It wasn’t my church. It was someone else’s. I remember saying to myself: “Here I am giving up my identity for something that will be just as screwed up in another ten or fifteen years. So what will I do then? Join another church?”

    Yeah, I hear you. “Join an Orthodox Church!” Orthodox churches are socially conservative to the extent that they are isolated from modern culture. When English becomes the language of use they gradually fall into line with the mainstream culture. And this tendency is encouraged by the conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Being pro-Ukraine means being pro-West, and being pro-West means being pro …. [You can fill in the blanks].

    Keep in mind that Christian churches of any sort are now very marginal in the creation of culture. Turn on the TV, open a newspaper, listen to the radio, go to the mall — the message is always the same, and it’s being manufactured by people who, for one reason or another, have a deepseated grudge against people like me.

    In theory, churches could create a parallel culture, but this is something they have trouble doing. I often listen to Christian radio stations, and most of the time I hear “Christian” rock or “Christian” rap. I actually like some rock music, but I dislike cheap imitations. Why not play traditional Christian music? And if that seems weird, why not play updated versions of traditional hymns?

    I could go and on, but by now you probably understand my position. At some point, one has to stop running away. Perhaps Christianity is screwed. Perhaps Canada is screwed. Perhaps European civilization in its entirety is screwed. Whatever. At some point, one has to stay put, stand up, and speak out.

  92. @Vaterland
    Well, although I generally do agree, you need a capable and willing elite/ruling class who have a clear vision to achieve a real change and transformation. Billions of people may well desire a change, but if they get it is an entirely different question. There is certainly a majority of people in my country which are anti-(neo)liberalism, both on the right and left, but if they can win against the trans-Atlantic top-down directives is an entirely different question. And right now I see no one on either side who would even be able to seriously take up this fight. For example the shooting star of the AfD Björn Höcke I find rather awkward and cringey, he's also hardly a genius... let alone a Bismarck.

    Also: old West-Germany offered pretty much everything both the Berniebros and the Non-Neo-Nazi part of the Alt-Right desire. But over the decades a lot of this was successfully chipped away, by both neo-liberal capitalism and the woke left, mostly via US imports. And what was left of actually German culture, mentality and traditions was replaced, colonized, destroyed and perverted. And neither the conservatives, nor the left-overs of the GDR left prevented this. So I need some good evidence to be more optimistic for developing countries.

    But yes, Murica/the West/the elite only really let the pigs out with deregulation, top-down class warfare, open border cheap labor, outsourcing and hedge fund boogaloo when the SU had collapsed. There was no longer a need for a nice face of capitalism. Not sure, if China will be able to provide the new alternative to tame 'the billionaire class'. Right now at least they are in NUKE THE CHINKS!!! mode. So absolutely: an alternative path, third position, or European independence would sadly have to be 'anti-American'.

    However, most fascinating to me was to see that a form of National Socialism is coming to the USA now. But not the costume and Hollywood caricature of it:
    https://twitter.com/CNBC/status/1248323677898366978

    Chamath Palihapitiya really sounds like Mr. Hilter in one of his late 20s early 30s speeches. I even heard it in the voice of him: as radical pajeet spoke, the only thing missing was a drop of "international elements" and someone in the audience shouting "JUDEN!" And more than nine million people watched this. Significant. Yet the Americans have no idea of course, because they only know the Hollywood portrayal or at least only the war mode derailment. But who of them has read Gottfried Feder for example?

    A few years ago I speculated on a course for the American answer to the global elite problem, that the (far) right would ditch the costume Neo-Nazi parades and embrace Americanism instead. That, if there emerged an anti-(financial)capitalism that came decidedly not from the woke left, but also from the right, it would get very uncomfortable for the hostile and predatory elites, because there would be a bi-partisan and broad consensus. And that it would most likely have to come from a civic nationalist approach and could not include European folkish ideas, because they contradict the nature of the USA which is all about experiments, new beginnings and cutting your roots to become something categorically new: the American. And the only ones who really didn't do that were the dual-citizen Zionists with disturbing consequences. So even without the "racist!" problem white nationalists could easily be marginalized and seen as weirdos in a US context. Especially if they decided their hills to die on were 'holocaust denial' and "Hitler should have won the war! The USA is pure evil!" But also that the so called American conservatives would actually be an obstacle, because they are merely another brand of liberals.

    Therefor to the fulfillment of my speculations Chamath Palihapitiya brought a non-strawman key position of true revolution into the US mainstream to an audience of many millions. Savitri Devi would be proud. And a political sledgehammer to Blackrock and hedge funds can only be good for all of us.

    I don’t know enough about German political scene to have an opinion about who might be possible leader of Germany when (and if) it becomes an independent country, rather than an occupied imperial vassal. Judging by her actions, I think Chancellor Kohl was right in his book: Merkel is a nonentity and pretty dumb, to boot. However, as far as I know, he himself elevated her for whatever reason. I collaborate with several labs in Germany, but never discussed politics with my collaborators.

    The demise of parasitic financial capitalism would be very good for humanity, but currently the leaches essentially own the governments of the Empire and its vassals. Thus, current governments would do their level best to protect the parasites. Our only hope is that current elites degenerated to the point of becoming pathetically inept. The response to coronavirus showed very clearly who is capable and who is ham-handed good-for-nothing moron. While the morons spin the narrative in the Empire and its sidekicks, about four fifth of humanity sees the real score.

    However, you are right that for popular feelings to become actions the people need a leader. That person must have vision and charisma. Even minimal charisma would do: current “leaders” of the EU and individual European countries are bland and uninspiring. They are like that for a reason: they are leaders of vassal states blindly following imperial policies, so from imperial standpoint, brains and personality would get in the way of their function. Maybe Latin America is more likely to produce someone capable of confronting the Empire: Latinos tend to be more passionate, whereas it appears that most Europeans lost the drive. A pity. Europe deserves to be something, but if it remains leaderless, it would remain nothing, just an imperial plaything, whoever happens to become the Empire. Russians do have drive, but Russia needs other forces that would prevent Chinese dominance after the US self-destructs. Unless Europe shakes off pseudo-leftist multi-culti and the rest of current BS in the next ~10 years, it is doomed. That would be a serious loss for humanity. Then again, human civilization suffered many losses before, yet it survived and kept moving forward.

    • Replies: @Vaterland
    Merkel's rise was equally mysterious to me as the rise of Herr Schickelgruber. From a total lolcow to dictator with absolute power. And from what I've been told Onkel Helmut promoting Mama Merkel was a nepotistic deal struck by the father of Thomas de Maizière who was friends with Kohl. And then Merkel copied Kohl in the strategy to hammer down or manipulate all competent competition away, so that she is equally surrounded by personality midgets and yes men. One reason why we had almost Stalin/Netanyahu like standing ovations for Merkel in 2015 instead of just anyone rejecting this insanity.

    Our only hope is that current elites degenerated to the point of becoming pathetically inept.
     
    Oh I am quite confident that we are on a good track for that! Especially for the USA. Unfortunately we also live here, so prepping is in order. And I think Germans have still passion. After the Americans derailed with Charlottesville we still have Pegida since almost a decade now, AfD mass demonstrations and other movements. What is lacking is a true vision, a new Weltanschauung to overcome the nihilism, occupation and forment a cultural-civilizational rebirth. The new high culture which was promised to us in the Greeko-Germanism in the 19th century with Wagner as the most prominent genius of that movement.

    For myself it is quite clear what I want. For Germany: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF5BbtMTBxc

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


    For Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Plan

    Some visions of Germans for Russia never change, it seems.
  93. @AP
    The author of this piece appears to be typical antifa garbage:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ER_cvOeWAAAsm9E.jpg

    Website is run by an RT guy who also posts articles about the wonders of Cuba and evil colonialism.

    It's funny to see a Vlasovite condemn Ukrainian-Nazi cooperation, by using an antifa source.

    A broken clock isn’t always wrong. He didn’t tell me anything new.

    Is the below kosher?

    https://web.archive.org/web/20050205051751/http://russian-americans.org/CRA_Art_Captive.htm

    This book further confirms:

  94. @Mr. Hack
    Lots of hyperbole and innuendo that in the final analysis the article concludes that the Conservative party of Canada is trying to achieve:

    "a peacekeeping mission along the Ukraine-Russia border"
     
    Why all the histrionics?

    Not like AP’s histrionics in # 89 of this thread.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Within AP's comment #89 is a mild jab at the hypocritical manner in which you parade a link to a thread that tries to paint a one sided attack on Ukrainian nationalists as all being Nazi collaborators. Your being hypocritical in this instance is because you're known as being a fond admirer of General Vlasov and his historical role in Russia during WWII. And we all know who General Vlasov collaborated with during the war.

    As today is Easter Sunday, would it be presumptuous on my part to assume that you might be seen taking part in the annual memorial service held next week at Novo-Diveevo Russian Orthodox convent and cemetery in Nanuet, New York, USA, in memory of General Vlasov?

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg/220px-%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg

  95. @Matra
    it is a historical fact that progressivism as we know it grew out of mainline Protestantism.

    The cult of Moldbug. I can't think of why a Jew would want us to believe that.

    These kinds of views are promoted by people with an axe to grind. One for example rarely ever hears the term “WASP” at all except when being used by Catholic and Jews(two group we’re supposed to believe are in opposition to each other) to express their resentments towards protestant old stock Americans(or Canadians, the same phenomena exists there). It’s no different than when ethnic minorities complain about white people.

    The very term “mainline Protestantism” is rather slippery. People who use the term will often in the same sentence criticize Protestants both for being radical religious non-conformists, but then also claim they are responsible for modern liberal orthodoxy. The defense of this seeming contradiction will be to the effect that what began as dissident ideas, themselves become dominant. But in practice it seems more like people with an axe to grind will just make up anything to denigrate their enemies. They aren’t concerned with the actual origin of ideas. It’s easy to cherry pick examples to support a particular position. It is even easier still when pulling from what are actually different traditions that do not have an agreed upon position.

    An even casual glance at ideas of the early 20th century will show that liberalism was not the inevitable result of Protestantism. Eugenics, white racialism, isolationism, advocacy of firearm ownership, the right to form militias, and ideas which would today be called survivalism were not uncommon at the time, but almost exclusively among people of northern European or Swiss Protestant ancestry. The rest of the world contributed jack all to these traditions.

    Meanwhile a history of Catholicism does not seemed to have helped at all in the case of France or Ireland. The idea that Catholicism is somehow resistant to liberalism is fantasy. It looks more like Catholic countries are simply more economically backwards on average, but as they develop they also become more liberal. In countries with significant numbers of Protestants and Catholics, what Catholic political parties seem to do is shift right wing politics away from more radical forms, while being incapable of shifting the voting patterns of their more left wing members.

  96. @Mikhail
    Not like AP's histrionics in # 89 of this thread.

    Within AP’s comment #89 is a mild jab at the hypocritical manner in which you parade a link to a thread that tries to paint a one sided attack on Ukrainian nationalists as all being Nazi collaborators. Your being hypocritical in this instance is because you’re known as being a fond admirer of General Vlasov and his historical role in Russia during WWII. And we all know who General Vlasov collaborated with during the war.

    As today is Easter Sunday, would it be presumptuous on my part to assume that you might be seen taking part in the annual memorial service held next week at Novo-Diveevo Russian Orthodox convent and cemetery in Nanuet, New York, USA, in memory of General Vlasov?

    • LOL: AP
    • Replies: @AnonFromTN

    As today is Easter Sunday
     
    Man, that’s a slip even a rookie spy won’t make. Today is Easter Sunday for Catholics and the spawn of Catholicism (e.g., Protestants of all stripes). Orthodox Easter Sunday is NOT today.
    , @Mikhail
    Anon beat me to the punch on your ignorance of when Easter Sunday is observed among the ROC and many other (if not most) OC.

    Saying that Vlasov collaborated with the Nazis is relative. Poland, the USSR among others, had done likewise at one point or another. Unlike the Ustashe and OUN/UPA, his army and himself don't have the level of negative baggage regarding the mass killing of civilians. Likewise, Vlasov isn't responsible for more Russian deaths than Stalin. These points get overlooked in some of the distantly broad overview of Vlasov.

    Nothing "hypocritical" of my stances. Regarding Vlasov and his army:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    Your use of "fond" might be taken to suggest something contrary to commentary that's factually objective. Yes, I'm familiar with what you posted. Related:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo-Diveevo

  97. @Mr. Hack
    Within AP's comment #89 is a mild jab at the hypocritical manner in which you parade a link to a thread that tries to paint a one sided attack on Ukrainian nationalists as all being Nazi collaborators. Your being hypocritical in this instance is because you're known as being a fond admirer of General Vlasov and his historical role in Russia during WWII. And we all know who General Vlasov collaborated with during the war.

    As today is Easter Sunday, would it be presumptuous on my part to assume that you might be seen taking part in the annual memorial service held next week at Novo-Diveevo Russian Orthodox convent and cemetery in Nanuet, New York, USA, in memory of General Vlasov?

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg/220px-%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg

    As today is Easter Sunday

    Man, that’s a slip even a rookie spy won’t make. Today is Easter Sunday for Catholics and the spawn of Catholicism (e.g., Protestants of all stripes). Orthodox Easter Sunday is NOT today.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I celebrate Easter Sunday (Christ's resurrection) every day of the year, so I don't get real hung up on dates, like some atheists do. :-(

    Don't worry, I'll manage to get my Eater basket blessed next Sunday. :-)

    , @AP
    Finnish and Estonian Orthodox Churches use Gregorian calendar. Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Ukraine, and a large % in USA, use the Julian calendar.
  98. @AnonFromTN

    As today is Easter Sunday
     
    Man, that’s a slip even a rookie spy won’t make. Today is Easter Sunday for Catholics and the spawn of Catholicism (e.g., Protestants of all stripes). Orthodox Easter Sunday is NOT today.

    I celebrate Easter Sunday (Christ’s resurrection) every day of the year, so I don’t get real hung up on dates, like some atheists do. 🙁

    Don’t worry, I’ll manage to get my Eater basket blessed next Sunday. 🙂

  99. @AnonFromTN

    As today is Easter Sunday
     
    Man, that’s a slip even a rookie spy won’t make. Today is Easter Sunday for Catholics and the spawn of Catholicism (e.g., Protestants of all stripes). Orthodox Easter Sunday is NOT today.

    Finnish and Estonian Orthodox Churches use Gregorian calendar. Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Ukraine, and a large % in USA, use the Julian calendar.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    The term “Greek Catholics” is utterly nonsensical for anyone familiar with Christianity. The full name of the Orthodox Church is Orthodox Catholic. It considers Roman Catholic Church heretical.
  100. @AP
    Finnish and Estonian Orthodox Churches use Gregorian calendar. Ukrainian Greek Catholics in Ukraine, and a large % in USA, use the Julian calendar.

    The term “Greek Catholics” is utterly nonsensical for anyone familiar with Christianity. The full name of the Orthodox Church is Orthodox Catholic. It considers Roman Catholic Church heretical.

  101. @AnonFromTN
    I don’t know enough about German political scene to have an opinion about who might be possible leader of Germany when (and if) it becomes an independent country, rather than an occupied imperial vassal. Judging by her actions, I think Chancellor Kohl was right in his book: Merkel is a nonentity and pretty dumb, to boot. However, as far as I know, he himself elevated her for whatever reason. I collaborate with several labs in Germany, but never discussed politics with my collaborators.

    The demise of parasitic financial capitalism would be very good for humanity, but currently the leaches essentially own the governments of the Empire and its vassals. Thus, current governments would do their level best to protect the parasites. Our only hope is that current elites degenerated to the point of becoming pathetically inept. The response to coronavirus showed very clearly who is capable and who is ham-handed good-for-nothing moron. While the morons spin the narrative in the Empire and its sidekicks, about four fifth of humanity sees the real score.

    However, you are right that for popular feelings to become actions the people need a leader. That person must have vision and charisma. Even minimal charisma would do: current “leaders” of the EU and individual European countries are bland and uninspiring. They are like that for a reason: they are leaders of vassal states blindly following imperial policies, so from imperial standpoint, brains and personality would get in the way of their function. Maybe Latin America is more likely to produce someone capable of confronting the Empire: Latinos tend to be more passionate, whereas it appears that most Europeans lost the drive. A pity. Europe deserves to be something, but if it remains leaderless, it would remain nothing, just an imperial plaything, whoever happens to become the Empire. Russians do have drive, but Russia needs other forces that would prevent Chinese dominance after the US self-destructs. Unless Europe shakes off pseudo-leftist multi-culti and the rest of current BS in the next ~10 years, it is doomed. That would be a serious loss for humanity. Then again, human civilization suffered many losses before, yet it survived and kept moving forward.

    Merkel’s rise was equally mysterious to me as the rise of Herr Schickelgruber. From a total lolcow to dictator with absolute power. And from what I’ve been told Onkel Helmut promoting Mama Merkel was a nepotistic deal struck by the father of Thomas de Maizière who was friends with Kohl. And then Merkel copied Kohl in the strategy to hammer down or manipulate all competent competition away, so that she is equally surrounded by personality midgets and yes men. One reason why we had almost Stalin/Netanyahu like standing ovations for Merkel in 2015 instead of just anyone rejecting this insanity.

    Our only hope is that current elites degenerated to the point of becoming pathetically inept.

    Oh I am quite confident that we are on a good track for that! Especially for the USA. Unfortunately we also live here, so prepping is in order. And I think Germans have still passion. After the Americans derailed with Charlottesville we still have Pegida since almost a decade now, AfD mass demonstrations and other movements. What is lacking is a true vision, a new Weltanschauung to overcome the nihilism, occupation and forment a cultural-civilizational rebirth. The new high culture which was promised to us in the Greeko-Germanism in the 19th century with Wagner as the most prominent genius of that movement.

    For myself it is quite clear what I want. For Germany:

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

    For Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_Plan

    Some visions of Germans for Russia never change, it seems.

  102. @Mr. Hack
    Within AP's comment #89 is a mild jab at the hypocritical manner in which you parade a link to a thread that tries to paint a one sided attack on Ukrainian nationalists as all being Nazi collaborators. Your being hypocritical in this instance is because you're known as being a fond admirer of General Vlasov and his historical role in Russia during WWII. And we all know who General Vlasov collaborated with during the war.

    As today is Easter Sunday, would it be presumptuous on my part to assume that you might be seen taking part in the annual memorial service held next week at Novo-Diveevo Russian Orthodox convent and cemetery in Nanuet, New York, USA, in memory of General Vlasov?

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg/220px-%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%89%D0%B5_%D0%B2_%D0%9D%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE-%D0%94%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%B5%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B5_%2813370867853%29.jpg

    Anon beat me to the punch on your ignorance of when Easter Sunday is observed among the ROC and many other (if not most) OC.

    Saying that Vlasov collaborated with the Nazis is relative. Poland, the USSR among others, had done likewise at one point or another. Unlike the Ustashe and OUN/UPA, his army and himself don’t have the level of negative baggage regarding the mass killing of civilians. Likewise, Vlasov isn’t responsible for more Russian deaths than Stalin. These points get overlooked in some of the distantly broad overview of Vlasov.

    Nothing “hypocritical” of my stances. Regarding Vlasov and his army:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    Your use of “fond” might be taken to suggest something contrary to commentary that’s factually objective. Yes, I’m familiar with what you posted. Related:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo-Diveevo

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    The point of my asking you whether or not you might attend the memorial services for General Vlasov was not to validate when Orthodox Easter is celebrated this year, just a question related to your "fondness" for the General and his movement, and that you live in the New York area, close to where the services are held. I can assure you that I'm perfectly aware of the correct date, and this was only a "slip of the pen." You are "fond" of the man and what he stood for aren't you?

    You characterization of Vlasov's collaboration with the Nazis is a classic attempt at trying to whitewash the relationship as only a matter of degree falls flat on its face. In the case of Polish "collaboration" I'm not aware of anybody very high up in either the government or in the armed services, specifically as high up as a general that collaborated with the Nazis.

  103. @Mikhail
    Anon beat me to the punch on your ignorance of when Easter Sunday is observed among the ROC and many other (if not most) OC.

    Saying that Vlasov collaborated with the Nazis is relative. Poland, the USSR among others, had done likewise at one point or another. Unlike the Ustashe and OUN/UPA, his army and himself don't have the level of negative baggage regarding the mass killing of civilians. Likewise, Vlasov isn't responsible for more Russian deaths than Stalin. These points get overlooked in some of the distantly broad overview of Vlasov.

    Nothing "hypocritical" of my stances. Regarding Vlasov and his army:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    Your use of "fond" might be taken to suggest something contrary to commentary that's factually objective. Yes, I'm familiar with what you posted. Related:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novo-Diveevo

    The point of my asking you whether or not you might attend the memorial services for General Vlasov was not to validate when Orthodox Easter is celebrated this year, just a question related to your “fondness” for the General and his movement, and that you live in the New York area, close to where the services are held. I can assure you that I’m perfectly aware of the correct date, and this was only a “slip of the pen.” You are “fond” of the man and what he stood for aren’t you?

    You characterization of Vlasov’s collaboration with the Nazis is a classic attempt at trying to whitewash the relationship as only a matter of degree falls flat on its face. In the case of Polish “collaboration” I’m not aware of anybody very high up in either the government or in the armed services, specifically as high up as a general that collaborated with the Nazis.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You twist and turn from reality yet again. Poland's 1934 non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany and its participation in the violation of Czechoslovak borders in 1938, as well as the participation of a noticeable number of Poles (definitely not all) in violent acts against Jews are realities.

    Yes, I'm sympathetic to pro-Russian anti-Communists with a relatively good record, as no one is perfect. Likewise, I don't collectively lump all Germans (as well as others). There's a difference between Rosenberg and Himmler with someone like this person:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfried_Strik-Strikfeldt

    I don't lump all Ukrainians as evidenced by my taking issue with a comment made by the late Robert Parry:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/09052016-ongoing-russian-ukrainian-intricacies-analysis/

    The violent manner of the OUN/UPA and Ustashe contrasts sharply from how Vlasov and the ROA (POA Cyrillic) carried on - something which can't be factually disputed.

  104. @Mr. Hack
    The point of my asking you whether or not you might attend the memorial services for General Vlasov was not to validate when Orthodox Easter is celebrated this year, just a question related to your "fondness" for the General and his movement, and that you live in the New York area, close to where the services are held. I can assure you that I'm perfectly aware of the correct date, and this was only a "slip of the pen." You are "fond" of the man and what he stood for aren't you?

    You characterization of Vlasov's collaboration with the Nazis is a classic attempt at trying to whitewash the relationship as only a matter of degree falls flat on its face. In the case of Polish "collaboration" I'm not aware of anybody very high up in either the government or in the armed services, specifically as high up as a general that collaborated with the Nazis.

    You twist and turn from reality yet again. Poland’s 1934 non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany and its participation in the violation of Czechoslovak borders in 1938, as well as the participation of a noticeable number of Poles (definitely not all) in violent acts against Jews are realities.

    Yes, I’m sympathetic to pro-Russian anti-Communists with a relatively good record, as no one is perfect. Likewise, I don’t collectively lump all Germans (as well as others). There’s a difference between Rosenberg and Himmler with someone like this person:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfried_Strik-Strikfeldt

    I don’t lump all Ukrainians as evidenced by my taking issue with a comment made by the late Robert Parry:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/09052016-ongoing-russian-ukrainian-intricacies-analysis/

    The violent manner of the OUN/UPA and Ustashe contrasts sharply from how Vlasov and the ROA (POA Cyrillic) carried on – something which can’t be factually disputed.

    • Replies: @AP
    You are correct that Vlasov's movement has far less blood on its hands than does Bandera's movement. From this perspective it is comparable to the Galician Division.

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera's "collaboration" with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA's brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don't seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky's equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I'sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera's people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.


    * We have been over this before. Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won't bother conversing with him here. For other readers: Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a "collaborator." Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was "worth" betraying. But that's a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    Collaboration definition. (2) is relevant in this context:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    3: to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected

  105. @Mikhail
    You twist and turn from reality yet again. Poland's 1934 non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany and its participation in the violation of Czechoslovak borders in 1938, as well as the participation of a noticeable number of Poles (definitely not all) in violent acts against Jews are realities.

    Yes, I'm sympathetic to pro-Russian anti-Communists with a relatively good record, as no one is perfect. Likewise, I don't collectively lump all Germans (as well as others). There's a difference between Rosenberg and Himmler with someone like this person:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilfried_Strik-Strikfeldt

    I don't lump all Ukrainians as evidenced by my taking issue with a comment made by the late Robert Parry:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/09052016-ongoing-russian-ukrainian-intricacies-analysis/

    The violent manner of the OUN/UPA and Ustashe contrasts sharply from how Vlasov and the ROA (POA Cyrillic) carried on - something which can't be factually disputed.

    You are correct that Vlasov’s movement has far less blood on its hands than does Bandera’s movement. From this perspective it is comparable to the Galician Division.

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera’s “collaboration” with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA’s brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don’t seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky’s equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I’sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera’s people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.

    * We have been over this before. Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won’t bother conversing with him here. For other readers: Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    Collaboration definition. (2) is relevant in this context:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    3: to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected

    • Replies: @Mikhail

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera’s “collaboration” with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA’s brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don’t seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky’s equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I’sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera’s people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.

     

    Talk about a whine. Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn't come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.

    There aren't any Ukrainian nationalists who laud Khmelnytsky (short of his reuniting with Russia)? This piece brings up what he was involved in:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/09/21/getting-russia-wrong-again/

    Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won’t bother conversing with him here.
     
    Pure projection on your part.

    Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.
     
    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR. Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP's BS to the contrary. It's also true that the Nazis and Bandera developed differences. Vlasov's forces played a role in the liberation of Prague from the Nazis as noted in this article:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/
    , @Mikhail
    On the matter of Katyn:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/25072017-julys-russia-related-bloopers-and-putins-manner-analysis/

  106. @AP
    You are correct that Vlasov's movement has far less blood on its hands than does Bandera's movement. From this perspective it is comparable to the Galician Division.

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera's "collaboration" with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA's brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don't seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky's equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I'sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera's people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.


    * We have been over this before. Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won't bother conversing with him here. For other readers: Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a "collaborator." Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was "worth" betraying. But that's a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    Collaboration definition. (2) is relevant in this context:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    3: to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera’s “collaboration” with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA’s brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don’t seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky’s equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I’sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera’s people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.

    Talk about a whine. Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn’t come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.

    There aren’t any Ukrainian nationalists who laud Khmelnytsky (short of his reuniting with Russia)? This piece brings up what he was involved in:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/09/21/getting-russia-wrong-again/

    Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won’t bother conversing with him here.

    Pure projection on your part.

    Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR. Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP’s BS to the contrary. It’s also true that the Nazis and Bandera developed differences. Vlasov’s forces played a role in the liberation of Prague from the Nazis as noted in this article:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    • Replies: @AP
    I suppose I’ll make corrections.

    Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn’t come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.
     
    I didn't dispute the fact that Vlasovites didn’t kill nearly as many civilians as Banderites did. The hypocrisy is when the discussion involved Bandera’s “collaboration.”

    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR
     
    .

    Bandera left for German-controlled territory before the Soviets arrived, thus he was never a Soviet citizen.* The USSR was not his country.

    Because he was never a Soviet citizen, his alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration as that word is defined in the English language.

    Vlasov, OTOH, was a Soviet citizen. Indeed, he was a Soviet general. So his alliance with Nazis clearly was collaboration.

    Mikhail shows to us that he can’t read and can’t learn, but to any other readers, once again the definition of collaboration:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy


    Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP’s BS to the contrary
     
    His cooperation with them against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    *If merely being from an area that later becomes the USSR makes someone who fights against the Soviets a collaborator, then Rosenberg (who was from Estonia) was a collaborator. That is particularly stupid.

    Moreover involuntary citizenship forced upon someone (not the case for Bandera but true of those Galicians who didn’t escape as he did) probably doesn’t make one a collaborator either. Imagine a French person from Alsace being labeled a”collaborator” for helping the Americans against Germany.

  107. @AP
    You are correct that Vlasov's movement has far less blood on its hands than does Bandera's movement. From this perspective it is comparable to the Galician Division.

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera's "collaboration" with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA's brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don't seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky's equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I'sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera's people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.


    * We have been over this before. Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won't bother conversing with him here. For other readers: Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a "collaborator." Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was "worth" betraying. But that's a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    Collaboration definition. (2) is relevant in this context:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    3: to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected

  108. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    The problem with your POV is that your sources (and therefore you) whine about Bandera’s “collaboration” with Nazi Germany when your hero Vlasov is a far greater collaborator.* And while UPA’s brutal slaughter of civilians deserves condemnation, such condemnation coming from Russian nationalists and/or Sovok apologists strikes one as insincere, given that they don’t seem to mind things like Khmelnytsky’s equally brutal treatment of Polish civilians, and/or Katyn. I’sd like to see Russian nationalists who are quick to point out what Bandera’s people did top ethnic Poles, to condemn Khmelnytsky on equal terms.

     

    Talk about a whine. Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn't come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.

    There aren't any Ukrainian nationalists who laud Khmelnytsky (short of his reuniting with Russia)? This piece brings up what he was involved in:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/09/21/getting-russia-wrong-again/

    Mikhail has trouble with information intake so I won’t bother conversing with him here.
     
    Pure projection on your part.

    Vlasov was a Soviet general who after his capture betrayed the Soviet Union and fought for the Germans against his own country. This was clear-cut collaboration. Bandera was never a Soviet citizen and the USSR was never his country; his cooperation with the Nazis against the Soviet Union was therefore not collaboration. Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.
     
    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR. Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP's BS to the contrary. It's also true that the Nazis and Bandera developed differences. Vlasov's forces played a role in the liberation of Prague from the Nazis as noted in this article:

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2019/12/14/czech-russian-relations-and-the-roa-conflicting-historical-narratives/

    I suppose I’ll make corrections.

    Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn’t come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.

    I didn’t dispute the fact that Vlasovites didn’t kill nearly as many civilians as Banderites did. The hypocrisy is when the discussion involved Bandera’s “collaboration.”

    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR

    .

    Bandera left for German-controlled territory before the Soviets arrived, thus he was never a Soviet citizen.* The USSR was not his country.

    Because he was never a Soviet citizen, his alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration as that word is defined in the English language.

    Vlasov, OTOH, was a Soviet citizen. Indeed, he was a Soviet general. So his alliance with Nazis clearly was collaboration.

    Mikhail shows to us that he can’t read and can’t learn, but to any other readers, once again the definition of collaboration:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP’s BS to the contrary

    His cooperation with them against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    *If merely being from an area that later becomes the USSR makes someone who fights against the Soviets a collaborator, then Rosenberg (who was from Estonia) was a collaborator. That is particularly stupid.

    Moreover involuntary citizenship forced upon someone (not the case for Bandera but true of those Galicians who didn’t escape as he did) probably doesn’t make one a collaborator either. Imagine a French person from Alsace being labeled a”collaborator” for helping the Americans against Germany.

    • Troll: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Your points regarding the difference between "collaboration" and "cooperation" are well noted, however, because the differences don't fall within Averko's self defined worldview including his loyal fondness for Vlasov, I don't think that they will register with him.

    Also, I think it's important to emphasize (as you've done), that Bandera not only opposed Soviet rule before he spearheaded a movement that opposed it, but he never was a Soviet citizen, whereas, as far as I know (and I could be wrong) Vlasov was originally loyal to the Soviet cause and only incrementally grew to oppose it, before his collaboration with the Nazis.

  109. @AP
    I suppose I’ll make corrections.

    Nothing hypocritical on my part in noting that Vlasov and his forces didn’t come close to committing atrocities along the lines of the OUN/UPA.
     
    I didn't dispute the fact that Vlasovites didn’t kill nearly as many civilians as Banderites did. The hypocrisy is when the discussion involved Bandera’s “collaboration.”

    The area where Bandera hailed from became part of the USSR before the Nazi attack on the USSR
     
    .

    Bandera left for German-controlled territory before the Soviets arrived, thus he was never a Soviet citizen.* The USSR was not his country.

    Because he was never a Soviet citizen, his alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration as that word is defined in the English language.

    Vlasov, OTOH, was a Soviet citizen. Indeed, he was a Soviet general. So his alliance with Nazis clearly was collaboration.

    Mikhail shows to us that he can’t read and can’t learn, but to any other readers, once again the definition of collaboration:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy


    Bandera did in fact collaborate with the Nazis despite AP’s BS to the contrary
     
    His cooperation with them against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    *If merely being from an area that later becomes the USSR makes someone who fights against the Soviets a collaborator, then Rosenberg (who was from Estonia) was a collaborator. That is particularly stupid.

    Moreover involuntary citizenship forced upon someone (not the case for Bandera but true of those Galicians who didn’t escape as he did) probably doesn’t make one a collaborator either. Imagine a French person from Alsace being labeled a”collaborator” for helping the Americans against Germany.

    Your points regarding the difference between “collaboration” and “cooperation” are well noted, however, because the differences don’t fall within Averko’s self defined worldview including his loyal fondness for Vlasov, I don’t think that they will register with him.

    Also, I think it’s important to emphasize (as you’ve done), that Bandera not only opposed Soviet rule before he spearheaded a movement that opposed it, but he never was a Soviet citizen, whereas, as far as I know (and I could be wrong) Vlasov was originally loyal to the Soviet cause and only incrementally grew to oppose it, before his collaboration with the Nazis.

    • Troll: Mikhail
    • Replies: @AP
    Vlasov fought for the Reds in 1919, rose through the ranks, and became a Soviet general. He suddenly discovered that Stalin was bad after the Germans captured him, after which he then served them. When it became clear that the Germans would lose, he became less subservient toward them, perhaps in search of the next master.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators. Perhaps an argument can be made that Russian or Ukrainian dissidents caught inside the USSR after the Revolution, who never agreed to Soviet rule, never recognized the Bolshevik state as "their country", and who emerged to oppose it when the Germans came, were also not collaborators.

    But Vlasov was clearly a collaborator. Soviet citizen who fought on the side of the Reds in 1919, Communist Party member, Soviet general who switched sides.
  110. @Mr. Hack
    Your points regarding the difference between "collaboration" and "cooperation" are well noted, however, because the differences don't fall within Averko's self defined worldview including his loyal fondness for Vlasov, I don't think that they will register with him.

    Also, I think it's important to emphasize (as you've done), that Bandera not only opposed Soviet rule before he spearheaded a movement that opposed it, but he never was a Soviet citizen, whereas, as far as I know (and I could be wrong) Vlasov was originally loyal to the Soviet cause and only incrementally grew to oppose it, before his collaboration with the Nazis.

    Vlasov fought for the Reds in 1919, rose through the ranks, and became a Soviet general. He suddenly discovered that Stalin was bad after the Germans captured him, after which he then served them. When it became clear that the Germans would lose, he became less subservient toward them, perhaps in search of the next master.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators. Perhaps an argument can be made that Russian or Ukrainian dissidents caught inside the USSR after the Revolution, who never agreed to Soviet rule, never recognized the Bolshevik state as “their country”, and who emerged to oppose it when the Germans came, were also not collaborators.

    But Vlasov was clearly a collaborator. Soviet citizen who fought on the side of the Reds in 1919, Communist Party member, Soviet general who switched sides.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    His checkered career somewhat reminds me of Skoropadsky, who also liked to do the flip-flop, except in his case you could also add in the Ukrainian element to the mix too.
    , @Mikhail

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.
     
    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.

    Vlasov fought for the Reds during the civil war. Over time, people the world over have changed their views. Not all of them are illegitimate for doing so. Vlasov said the revolution was betrayed. On that basis, he didn't betray.
    , @Mikhail
    Bandera was from the land that became part of the USSR. Moreover, he like most svidos probably supported Ukraine's Communist drawn boundaries - a bit of a rhetorical reply to your previous comment (at this thread) lumping sovoks and Rusian nationalists.

    That Bandera was always anti-Soviet unlike Vlasov doesn't by default make the former more earnest. Some anti-Communists are quite repulsive individuals - even when compared to some Communists.

    As an officer, Vlasov was highly regarded prior to his capture. In captivity, he and his forces didn't carry-on like the Ustashe and OUN/UPA. He maintained a pro-Russian and anti-Soviet position, which at one point got him in trouble with some of the Nazi hierarchy. In captivity, he didn't dis Russia like some modern day Russians living in comparatively much freer conditions.
  111. @AP
    Vlasov fought for the Reds in 1919, rose through the ranks, and became a Soviet general. He suddenly discovered that Stalin was bad after the Germans captured him, after which he then served them. When it became clear that the Germans would lose, he became less subservient toward them, perhaps in search of the next master.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators. Perhaps an argument can be made that Russian or Ukrainian dissidents caught inside the USSR after the Revolution, who never agreed to Soviet rule, never recognized the Bolshevik state as "their country", and who emerged to oppose it when the Germans came, were also not collaborators.

    But Vlasov was clearly a collaborator. Soviet citizen who fought on the side of the Reds in 1919, Communist Party member, Soviet general who switched sides.

    His checkered career somewhat reminds me of Skoropadsky, who also liked to do the flip-flop, except in his case you could also add in the Ukrainian element to the mix too.

    • Replies: @AP
    Agree, except Skoropadsky never reduced himself to allying with the Bolsheviks.
    , @Mikhail
    Skoropadsky wasn't more checkered than Petliura:

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/08042016-fuzzy-history-how-poland-saved-the-world-from-russia-analysis/

    https://www.eurasiareview.com/22052011-pavlo-skoropadsky-and-the-course-of-russian-ukrainian-relations-analysis/

  112. @Mr. Hack
    His checkered career somewhat reminds me of Skoropadsky, who also liked to do the flip-flop, except in his case you could also add in the Ukrainian element to the mix too.

    Agree, except Skoropadsky never reduced himself to allying with the Bolsheviks.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Of course you're right, but he did at one time author a hramota that envisioned the federation of Ukraine with Russia. I've always wondered how his chief ideologue and Ambassador to Austria, Vyacheslav Lypinskij, reacted to this new direction? He was, after all quite an adamant Ukrainophile.
  113. @AP
    Vlasov fought for the Reds in 1919, rose through the ranks, and became a Soviet general. He suddenly discovered that Stalin was bad after the Germans captured him, after which he then served them. When it became clear that the Germans would lose, he became less subservient toward them, perhaps in search of the next master.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators. Perhaps an argument can be made that Russian or Ukrainian dissidents caught inside the USSR after the Revolution, who never agreed to Soviet rule, never recognized the Bolshevik state as "their country", and who emerged to oppose it when the Germans came, were also not collaborators.

    But Vlasov was clearly a collaborator. Soviet citizen who fought on the side of the Reds in 1919, Communist Party member, Soviet general who switched sides.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.

    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.

    Vlasov fought for the Reds during the civil war. Over time, people the world over have changed their views. Not all of them are illegitimate for doing so. Vlasov said the revolution was betrayed. On that basis, he didn’t betray.

    • Replies: @AP

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.

    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.
     
    Once again you show everyone how you can't read and can't learn :-)

    Let's review for the third time:

    Definition of Collaborate:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    USSR wasn't Krasnov's country. He was never its citizen. He escaped it. He fought against its creation. Krasnov's country was destroyed by the Bolsheviks. So Krasnov working with the Nazis against the USSR was not collaboration, by definition.

    But USSR was Vlasov's country. He was its citizen. He helped establish it. And he was a general in its military. He betrayed his country only after the Germans captured him.
  114. @AP
    Vlasov fought for the Reds in 1919, rose through the ranks, and became a Soviet general. He suddenly discovered that Stalin was bad after the Germans captured him, after which he then served them. When it became clear that the Germans would lose, he became less subservient toward them, perhaps in search of the next master.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators. Perhaps an argument can be made that Russian or Ukrainian dissidents caught inside the USSR after the Revolution, who never agreed to Soviet rule, never recognized the Bolshevik state as "their country", and who emerged to oppose it when the Germans came, were also not collaborators.

    But Vlasov was clearly a collaborator. Soviet citizen who fought on the side of the Reds in 1919, Communist Party member, Soviet general who switched sides.

    Bandera was from the land that became part of the USSR. Moreover, he like most svidos probably supported Ukraine’s Communist drawn boundaries – a bit of a rhetorical reply to your previous comment (at this thread) lumping sovoks and Rusian nationalists.

    That Bandera was always anti-Soviet unlike Vlasov doesn’t by default make the former more earnest. Some anti-Communists are quite repulsive individuals – even when compared to some Communists.

    As an officer, Vlasov was highly regarded prior to his capture. In captivity, he and his forces didn’t carry-on like the Ustashe and OUN/UPA. He maintained a pro-Russian and anti-Soviet position, which at one point got him in trouble with some of the Nazi hierarchy. In captivity, he didn’t dis Russia like some modern day Russians living in comparatively much freer conditions.

  115. @Mr. Hack
    His checkered career somewhat reminds me of Skoropadsky, who also liked to do the flip-flop, except in his case you could also add in the Ukrainian element to the mix too.
  116. AP says:
    @Mikhail

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.
     
    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.

    Vlasov fought for the Reds during the civil war. Over time, people the world over have changed their views. Not all of them are illegitimate for doing so. Vlasov said the revolution was betrayed. On that basis, he didn't betray.

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.

    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.

    Once again you show everyone how you can’t read and can’t learn 🙂

    Let’s review for the third time:

    Definition of Collaborate:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    USSR wasn’t Krasnov’s country. He was never its citizen. He escaped it. He fought against its creation. Krasnov’s country was destroyed by the Bolsheviks. So Krasnov working with the Nazis against the USSR was not collaboration, by definition.

    But USSR was Vlasov’s country. He was its citizen. He helped establish it. And he was a general in its military. He betrayed his country only after the Germans captured him.

    • Agree: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You keep projecting.

    What you said at this thread:

    Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.
     
    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. Krasnov had more of a Nazi attitude than Vlasov. Over the course of time, Krasnov skirted between the ideas of a united Russia and a separate Cossack state. As was true during the Russian Civil War, in WW II, not all anti-Communist Cossacks backed Krasnov.

    Under Stalin, there was pretty much no second guessing of him tolerated. Hence, people were freer to speak out against him, once out of the USSR. In more recent times, consider North Koreans fleeing North Korea. They open up once out of that country for obvious reasons.

    Once again, Vlasov believed that the revolution was betrayed. In Nazi captivity, Vlasov didn't dis Russia like some modern day Russians living under freer conditions. Hence, your spin is narrow minded ignorance.
    , @Mikhail
    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.
  117. @AP
    Agree, except Skoropadsky never reduced himself to allying with the Bolsheviks.

    Of course you’re right, but he did at one time author a hramota that envisioned the federation of Ukraine with Russia. I’ve always wondered how his chief ideologue and Ambassador to Austria, Vyacheslav Lypinskij, reacted to this new direction? He was, after all quite an adamant Ukrainophile.

    • Replies: @AP
    TBH, federation with Russia under whatever terms Skoropadsky would have gotten (Ukraine having its own army, schools, etc.) was a lesser evil than occupation by the Bolsheviks. With the collapse of the Central Powers, Skoropadsky did not have a lot of options.
  118. @Mr. Hack
    Of course you're right, but he did at one time author a hramota that envisioned the federation of Ukraine with Russia. I've always wondered how his chief ideologue and Ambassador to Austria, Vyacheslav Lypinskij, reacted to this new direction? He was, after all quite an adamant Ukrainophile.

    TBH, federation with Russia under whatever terms Skoropadsky would have gotten (Ukraine having its own army, schools, etc.) was a lesser evil than occupation by the Bolsheviks. With the collapse of the Central Powers, Skoropadsky did not have a lot of options.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    I tend to agree with you, however, in the final analysis the edict didn't help him any and only served to embolden his adversaries that quickly assisted him to his early retirement in Germany.
  119. @AP

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.

    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.
     
    Once again you show everyone how you can't read and can't learn :-)

    Let's review for the third time:

    Definition of Collaborate:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    USSR wasn't Krasnov's country. He was never its citizen. He escaped it. He fought against its creation. Krasnov's country was destroyed by the Bolsheviks. So Krasnov working with the Nazis against the USSR was not collaboration, by definition.

    But USSR was Vlasov's country. He was its citizen. He helped establish it. And he was a general in its military. He betrayed his country only after the Germans captured him.

    You keep projecting.

    What you said at this thread:

    Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.

    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. Krasnov had more of a Nazi attitude than Vlasov. Over the course of time, Krasnov skirted between the ideas of a united Russia and a separate Cossack state. As was true during the Russian Civil War, in WW II, not all anti-Communist Cossacks backed Krasnov.

    Under Stalin, there was pretty much no second guessing of him tolerated. Hence, people were freer to speak out against him, once out of the USSR. In more recent times, consider North Koreans fleeing North Korea. They open up once out of that country for obvious reasons.

    Once again, Vlasov believed that the revolution was betrayed. In Nazi captivity, Vlasov didn’t dis Russia like some modern day Russians living under freer conditions. Hence, your spin is narrow minded ignorance.

    • Replies: @AP

    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd
     
    I think posting the definition of the word "collaborate" three times has been enough.

    I know you can't read and can't learn :-)
  120. @AP

    There were certainly Russians who fought for the Germans, such as Krasnov (a White exile who never became a Soviet citizen), who were certainly not collaborators.

    You rehash stupidity yet again. In terms of actual definition, to collaborate includes what Krasnov did with the Nazis, regardless of whether or not he ever was a Soviet citizen.
     
    Once again you show everyone how you can't read and can't learn :-)

    Let's review for the third time:

    Definition of Collaborate:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    USSR wasn't Krasnov's country. He was never its citizen. He escaped it. He fought against its creation. Krasnov's country was destroyed by the Bolsheviks. So Krasnov working with the Nazis against the USSR was not collaboration, by definition.

    But USSR was Vlasov's country. He was its citizen. He helped establish it. And he was a general in its military. He betrayed his country only after the Germans captured him.

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.

  121. @Mikhail
    You keep projecting.

    What you said at this thread:

    Not everyone allied with the Nazis can correctly be labelled a “collaborator.” Vlasov clearly meets the definition. Now, it may be that the USSR was so evil that it was “worth” betraying. But that’s a different argument. Vlasov was obviously a collaborator.
     
    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd. Krasnov had more of a Nazi attitude than Vlasov. Over the course of time, Krasnov skirted between the ideas of a united Russia and a separate Cossack state. As was true during the Russian Civil War, in WW II, not all anti-Communist Cossacks backed Krasnov.

    Under Stalin, there was pretty much no second guessing of him tolerated. Hence, people were freer to speak out against him, once out of the USSR. In more recent times, consider North Koreans fleeing North Korea. They open up once out of that country for obvious reasons.

    Once again, Vlasov believed that the revolution was betrayed. In Nazi captivity, Vlasov didn't dis Russia like some modern day Russians living under freer conditions. Hence, your spin is narrow minded ignorance.

    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd

    I think posting the definition of the word “collaborate” three times has been enough.

    I know you can’t read and can’t learn 🙂

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong. You're too dense to realize that. ;)
  122. @AP

    Krasnov collaborated with the Nazis. Suggesting otherwise is absurd
     
    I think posting the definition of the word "collaborate" three times has been enough.

    I know you can't read and can't learn :-)

    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong. You’re too dense to realize that. 😉

    • Replies: @AP

    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong.
     
    You couldn't read the last part of that definition: "especially in an intellectual endeavor"

    If Krasnov (or Bandera) had been publishing an academic paper alongside some Nazi scientists than he would indeed have been a Nazi collaborator lol.

    Instead he was engaged in a military endeavor. This is why allies are not considered to be collaborators. Stalin was not a British or American collaborator simply because he worked with them. The Japanese were not Nazi collaborators because they worked with the Nazis. When someone like you can't read or can't learn he says silly things.

    So then we have the relevant definition. This is the fourth time, for the guy who can't read and can't learn. I'll bold it, not that doing so will make a difference given that you can't read or learn:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force

    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    Now to review: USSR wasn't Krasnov's country. Nor Bandera's country. They weren't citizens of this country and it was a foreign and enemy country of both of these people. So cooperating with an enemy of the USSR was not collaborating with them. Krasnov and Bandera were both allies of the Nazis but neither one was a Nazi collaborator.

    But Vlasov was both an ally of the Nazis and a Nazi collaborator, because he was a Soviet citizen, a voluntary one (as evidenced by his fighting for the Reds to establish the Soviet state in 1919) who cooperated and assisted the enemy of his Soviet country.

    I look forward to you showing that you can't read and can't learn in your reply, again. I'm done with you for now.

  123. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong. You're too dense to realize that. ;)

    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong.

    You couldn’t read the last part of that definition: “especially in an intellectual endeavor”

    If Krasnov (or Bandera) had been publishing an academic paper alongside some Nazi scientists than he would indeed have been a Nazi collaborator lol.

    Instead he was engaged in a military endeavor. This is why allies are not considered to be collaborators. Stalin was not a British or American collaborator simply because he worked with them. The Japanese were not Nazi collaborators because they worked with the Nazis. When someone like you can’t read or can’t learn he says silly things.

    So then we have the relevant definition. This is the fourth time, for the guy who can’t read and can’t learn. I’ll bold it, not that doing so will make a difference given that you can’t read or learn:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force

    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    Now to review: USSR wasn’t Krasnov’s country. Nor Bandera’s country. They weren’t citizens of this country and it was a foreign and enemy country of both of these people. So cooperating with an enemy of the USSR was not collaborating with them. Krasnov and Bandera were both allies of the Nazis but neither one was a Nazi collaborator.

    But Vlasov was both an ally of the Nazis and a Nazi collaborator, because he was a Soviet citizen, a voluntary one (as evidenced by his fighting for the Reds to establish the Soviet state in 1919) who cooperated and assisted the enemy of his Soviet country.

    I look forward to you showing that you can’t read and can’t learn in your reply, again. I’m done with you for now.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You were done before you started, on account of your low intellect exhibited on this and some other matters. To collaborate means to work with. The complete definition includes more than one instance and doesn't contradict my take, while going against your idiotic insistence to the contrary.

    Your rehashed robotic BS continuously ignores other points that address the tripe which you spew. You fail to show how Vlasov collaborated more with the Nazis than Krasnov. If anything, Krasnov more resembled Nazi aims than Vlasov.

    Of the two, Vlasov was more significant on account of his greater following. At least one source says he was able to attract more anti-Communist Cossacks than Krasnov.

    Once again:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.

    Feel free to keep making an ass of yourself.
  124. @AP

    The actual definition of collaborate ( to work with) proves you wrong.
     
    You couldn't read the last part of that definition: "especially in an intellectual endeavor"

    If Krasnov (or Bandera) had been publishing an academic paper alongside some Nazi scientists than he would indeed have been a Nazi collaborator lol.

    Instead he was engaged in a military endeavor. This is why allies are not considered to be collaborators. Stalin was not a British or American collaborator simply because he worked with them. The Japanese were not Nazi collaborators because they worked with the Nazis. When someone like you can't read or can't learn he says silly things.

    So then we have the relevant definition. This is the fourth time, for the guy who can't read and can't learn. I'll bold it, not that doing so will make a difference given that you can't read or learn:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1 : to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2 : to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force

    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    Now to review: USSR wasn't Krasnov's country. Nor Bandera's country. They weren't citizens of this country and it was a foreign and enemy country of both of these people. So cooperating with an enemy of the USSR was not collaborating with them. Krasnov and Bandera were both allies of the Nazis but neither one was a Nazi collaborator.

    But Vlasov was both an ally of the Nazis and a Nazi collaborator, because he was a Soviet citizen, a voluntary one (as evidenced by his fighting for the Reds to establish the Soviet state in 1919) who cooperated and assisted the enemy of his Soviet country.

    I look forward to you showing that you can't read and can't learn in your reply, again. I'm done with you for now.

    You were done before you started, on account of your low intellect exhibited on this and some other matters. To collaborate means to work with. The complete definition includes more than one instance and doesn’t contradict my take, while going against your idiotic insistence to the contrary.

    Your rehashed robotic BS continuously ignores other points that address the tripe which you spew. You fail to show how Vlasov collaborated more with the Nazis than Krasnov. If anything, Krasnov more resembled Nazi aims than Vlasov.

    Of the two, Vlasov was more significant on account of his greater following. At least one source says he was able to attract more anti-Communist Cossacks than Krasnov.

    Once again:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.

    Feel free to keep making an ass of yourself.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Why should AP try checking international law to see whether or not somebody might or might not still be considered a citizen of a country that has undergone a significant change in state governance when that person was not either there when the change took place, or similarly was living in a territory that had since the change been incorporated into the new state, and try to make your case?

    The proof of such a preposterous claim belongs solely on you, the one making such a questionable claim, not on AP. Get off of you lazy ass and do your own homework to substantiate your claims, or continue making "an ass of yourself."
  125. @Mikhail
    You were done before you started, on account of your low intellect exhibited on this and some other matters. To collaborate means to work with. The complete definition includes more than one instance and doesn't contradict my take, while going against your idiotic insistence to the contrary.

    Your rehashed robotic BS continuously ignores other points that address the tripe which you spew. You fail to show how Vlasov collaborated more with the Nazis than Krasnov. If anything, Krasnov more resembled Nazi aims than Vlasov.

    Of the two, Vlasov was more significant on account of his greater following. At least one source says he was able to attract more anti-Communist Cossacks than Krasnov.

    Once again:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.

    Feel free to keep making an ass of yourself.

    Why should AP try checking international law to see whether or not somebody might or might not still be considered a citizen of a country that has undergone a significant change in state governance when that person was not either there when the change took place, or similarly was living in a territory that had since the change been incorporated into the new state, and try to make your case?

    The proof of such a preposterous claim belongs solely on you, the one making such a questionable claim, not on AP. Get off of you lazy ass and do your own homework to substantiate your claims, or continue making “an ass of yourself.”

    • Troll: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You predictably don't have a clear answer on account of your extreme ignorance and limited intellect.

    If true, international law would substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera could be considered Soviet citizens. I don't have to look into it myself.

    Saying that they didn't collaborate with the Nazis unlike Vlasov is sheer nonsense.
  126. @AP
    TBH, federation with Russia under whatever terms Skoropadsky would have gotten (Ukraine having its own army, schools, etc.) was a lesser evil than occupation by the Bolsheviks. With the collapse of the Central Powers, Skoropadsky did not have a lot of options.

    I tend to agree with you, however, in the final analysis the edict didn’t help him any and only served to embolden his adversaries that quickly assisted him to his early retirement in Germany.

    • Disagree: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    He already faced opposition on account of his upper class view of the world relative to the general mood at the time. Petliura was a socialist. There were also the Bolshes.

    WW I and how it was fought brought misery. The rhetoric of a not so well tested (at the time) set of economic beliefs had an appeal to a good number.

    The Ukrainian separatists of that day were relatively well armed in addition to having a belief pattern. Many on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR weren't as committed to that cause.

    Petliura's move for a Ukraine separate from Russia and close to Poland wasn't shared by many of the people he sought to represent (the people in what became the Ukrainian SSR), thereby explaining why in large part he lost. Petliura chose that path with Poland on account of his limited appeal.

    Keeping in mind that Hrushevsky and Vynnychenko went over to the Bolshevik side (not with Petliura) - Vynnychenko later breaking with the Bolshes.

    Skoropadasky's call for an All-Russian Federation involving Russia and Ukraine wasn't something that was completely unacceptable for a good number at the time on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR.

    Also keeping in mind that there were on the fence/oblivious types, who weren't so committed to either side. Just being happy to live a better life.
  127. @Mr. Hack
    Why should AP try checking international law to see whether or not somebody might or might not still be considered a citizen of a country that has undergone a significant change in state governance when that person was not either there when the change took place, or similarly was living in a territory that had since the change been incorporated into the new state, and try to make your case?

    The proof of such a preposterous claim belongs solely on you, the one making such a questionable claim, not on AP. Get off of you lazy ass and do your own homework to substantiate your claims, or continue making "an ass of yourself."

    You predictably don’t have a clear answer on account of your extreme ignorance and limited intellect.

    If true, international law would substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera could be considered Soviet citizens. I don’t have to look into it myself.

    Saying that they didn’t collaborate with the Nazis unlike Vlasov is sheer nonsense.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Mickey, this pool is for adult swimmers only, come back when you learn how to swim. Nobody is going to do your homework for you!
  128. @Mikhail
    You predictably don't have a clear answer on account of your extreme ignorance and limited intellect.

    If true, international law would substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera could be considered Soviet citizens. I don't have to look into it myself.

    Saying that they didn't collaborate with the Nazis unlike Vlasov is sheer nonsense.

    Mickey, this pool is for adult swimmers only, come back when you learn how to swim. Nobody is going to do your homework for you!

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Hackster, where do you swim!? The pools are right now closed. Unless you've an endless pool.

    AP failed miserably in trying to substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera weren't Nazi collaborators unlike Vlasov. It's very bizarre for him to insist that the definition of the word collaborate supports his contention.

    Your input is kind of like that of the third man in during a hockey fight between two players. In this instance, your contribution has been zilch.

  129. @Mr. Hack
    I tend to agree with you, however, in the final analysis the edict didn't help him any and only served to embolden his adversaries that quickly assisted him to his early retirement in Germany.

    He already faced opposition on account of his upper class view of the world relative to the general mood at the time. Petliura was a socialist. There were also the Bolshes.

    WW I and how it was fought brought misery. The rhetoric of a not so well tested (at the time) set of economic beliefs had an appeal to a good number.

    The Ukrainian separatists of that day were relatively well armed in addition to having a belief pattern. Many on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR weren’t as committed to that cause.

    Petliura’s move for a Ukraine separate from Russia and close to Poland wasn’t shared by many of the people he sought to represent (the people in what became the Ukrainian SSR), thereby explaining why in large part he lost. Petliura chose that path with Poland on account of his limited appeal.

    Keeping in mind that Hrushevsky and Vynnychenko went over to the Bolshevik side (not with Petliura) – Vynnychenko later breaking with the Bolshes.

    Skoropadasky’s call for an All-Russian Federation involving Russia and Ukraine wasn’t something that was completely unacceptable for a good number at the time on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR.

    Also keeping in mind that there were on the fence/oblivious types, who weren’t so committed to either side. Just being happy to live a better life.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    You're veering off track, Mickey. The discussion got to the point where it centered around how to properly define somebody that was involved with "collaboration" as versus somebody who would only be involved in "cooperation." Citizenship of the person involved became an important element in making any sort of distinction, to which you commented:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.


    Well, to support your own opinion, and to properly contradict AP, why don't you do some of the heavy lifting yourself and you "check" to see if there's anything there to substantiate your views? Who knows, you might actually find something.

  130. @Mr. Hack
    Mickey, this pool is for adult swimmers only, come back when you learn how to swim. Nobody is going to do your homework for you!

    Hackster, where do you swim!? The pools are right now closed. Unless you’ve an endless pool.

    AP failed miserably in trying to substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera weren’t Nazi collaborators unlike Vlasov. It’s very bizarre for him to insist that the definition of the word collaborate supports his contention.

    Your input is kind of like that of the third man in during a hockey fight between two players. In this instance, your contribution has been zilch.

    • Replies: @Mr. Hack
    Unfortunately, I was about to restart a swimming regime and got hooked up with two different health clubs where I could take advantage of their pools, and then this pandemic struck. In the meantime, I've started walking at the local parks and doing some home calisthenics.

    Well, I don't know whether or not my input has only registered a "zilch" here or not, but others besides yourself can make that call. You may think of me as a sort of referee here, adding some color commentary and trying to keep things on an even keel. :-)
  131. @Mikhail
    He already faced opposition on account of his upper class view of the world relative to the general mood at the time. Petliura was a socialist. There were also the Bolshes.

    WW I and how it was fought brought misery. The rhetoric of a not so well tested (at the time) set of economic beliefs had an appeal to a good number.

    The Ukrainian separatists of that day were relatively well armed in addition to having a belief pattern. Many on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR weren't as committed to that cause.

    Petliura's move for a Ukraine separate from Russia and close to Poland wasn't shared by many of the people he sought to represent (the people in what became the Ukrainian SSR), thereby explaining why in large part he lost. Petliura chose that path with Poland on account of his limited appeal.

    Keeping in mind that Hrushevsky and Vynnychenko went over to the Bolshevik side (not with Petliura) - Vynnychenko later breaking with the Bolshes.

    Skoropadasky's call for an All-Russian Federation involving Russia and Ukraine wasn't something that was completely unacceptable for a good number at the time on the territory of what became the Ukrainian SSR.

    Also keeping in mind that there were on the fence/oblivious types, who weren't so committed to either side. Just being happy to live a better life.

    You’re veering off track, Mickey. The discussion got to the point where it centered around how to properly define somebody that was involved with “collaboration” as versus somebody who would only be involved in “cooperation.” Citizenship of the person involved became an important element in making any sort of distinction, to which you commented:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.

    Well, to support your own opinion, and to properly contradict AP, why don’t you do some of the heavy lifting yourself and you “check” to see if there’s anything there to substantiate your views? Who knows, you might actually find something.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    What BS!

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning. He failed miserably. Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.

    You're carrying on like a punch drunk fool.
  132. @Mikhail
    Hackster, where do you swim!? The pools are right now closed. Unless you've an endless pool.

    AP failed miserably in trying to substantiate that Krasnov and Bandera weren't Nazi collaborators unlike Vlasov. It's very bizarre for him to insist that the definition of the word collaborate supports his contention.

    Your input is kind of like that of the third man in during a hockey fight between two players. In this instance, your contribution has been zilch.

    Unfortunately, I was about to restart a swimming regime and got hooked up with two different health clubs where I could take advantage of their pools, and then this pandemic struck. In the meantime, I’ve started walking at the local parks and doing some home calisthenics.

    Well, I don’t know whether or not my input has only registered a “zilch” here or not, but others besides yourself can make that call. You may think of me as a sort of referee here, adding some color commentary and trying to keep things on an even keel. 🙂

    • LOL: Mikhail
    • Replies: @Mikhail
    Did they freeze your membership (assuming you're on a monthly credit card arrangement)?
  133. @Mr. Hack
    You're veering off track, Mickey. The discussion got to the point where it centered around how to properly define somebody that was involved with "collaboration" as versus somebody who would only be involved in "cooperation." Citizenship of the person involved became an important element in making any sort of distinction, to which you commented:

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen, even if he/she has lived outside that territory since the change.


    Well, to support your own opinion, and to properly contradict AP, why don't you do some of the heavy lifting yourself and you "check" to see if there's anything there to substantiate your views? Who knows, you might actually find something.

    What BS!

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning. He failed miserably. Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.

    You’re carrying on like a punch drunk fool.

    • LOL: Mr. Hack
    • Replies: @AP

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning.
     
    Yes, and you keep showing that you can't read and can't learn :-)

    He failed miserably.
     
    Yes, you failed miserably to read and learn.

    OTOH:

    Collaborate definition:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy


    Krasnov and Bandera weren't Soviet citizens, thus their alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen
     
    You fail here, also and as usual.

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

    While residents of the Russian Empire were initially welcomed by the government to return, after the Russian Civil War, the Bolshevik party leadership engaged in mass denaturalization of Russians who had left.

    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/forced-repatriation-to-the-soviet-union-the-secret-betrayal/

    One group, the Fifteenth Cossack Cavalry Corps, had been fighting in Yugoslavia against Tito. Large numbers within this group and others were not Soviet citizens. They had escaped Russia during or before the Revolution, rescued in British and French warships. They had taken new citizenship or possessed League of Nations passports attesting to their stateless status.

    Throughout the repatriation campaign, both British and American authorities had adhered to an extremely legalistic view of their obligations. Even the British Foreign Office stated after the Yalta Conference that only Soviet citizens, i.e. residents of the Soviet Union after September 1, 1939, were to be compelled to return.

    But in May of 1945 the British Army in Austria handed over thousands of non-Soviet citizens, men, women and children, by the most brutal means imaginable.

    Krasnov was never a Soviet citizen.

    Western Ukraine was not recognized as part of the USSR until after 1941. Any western Ukrainian who had left prior to that point was not a Soviet citizen according to international law and Soviet law. Accordingly, during Soviet times diaspora Ukrainians who were form Galicia could visit the USSR without any fear of being detained as Soviet citizens, while diaspora Ukrainians from pre-1939 Soviet Ukraine risked not being allowed out because they, unlike Galicians who had left before international recognition, were still considered to be Soviet citizens by the Soviets. For this reason my one non-Galician grandparent did not visit Ukraine until after independence.

    Bandera, too, was never a Soviet citizen.

    Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.
     
    They are similar but not the same. Otherwise they would not be different words. Collaborate has a specific meaning - in this case, "to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force." Collaboration is not any cooperation, but a specific kind of cooperation. The kind that involves willingly assisting an enemy of one's country.

    If cooperate and collaborate meant the same thing, FDR could be called a collaborator of Stalin.
    He was not. FDR cooperated with Stalin but was not a Soviet collaborator.
  134. @Mr. Hack
    Unfortunately, I was about to restart a swimming regime and got hooked up with two different health clubs where I could take advantage of their pools, and then this pandemic struck. In the meantime, I've started walking at the local parks and doing some home calisthenics.

    Well, I don't know whether or not my input has only registered a "zilch" here or not, but others besides yourself can make that call. You may think of me as a sort of referee here, adding some color commentary and trying to keep things on an even keel. :-)

    Did they freeze your membership (assuming you’re on a monthly credit card arrangement)?

  135. AP says:
    @Mikhail
    What BS!

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning. He failed miserably. Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.

    You're carrying on like a punch drunk fool.

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning.

    Yes, and you keep showing that you can’t read and can’t learn 🙂

    He failed miserably.

    Yes, you failed miserably to read and learn.

    OTOH:

    Collaborate definition:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy

    Krasnov and Bandera weren’t Soviet citizens, thus their alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen

    You fail here, also and as usual.

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

    While residents of the Russian Empire were initially welcomed by the government to return, after the Russian Civil War, the Bolshevik party leadership engaged in mass denaturalization of Russians who had left.

    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/forced-repatriation-to-the-soviet-union-the-secret-betrayal/

    One group, the Fifteenth Cossack Cavalry Corps, had been fighting in Yugoslavia against Tito. Large numbers within this group and others were not Soviet citizens. They had escaped Russia during or before the Revolution, rescued in British and French warships. They had taken new citizenship or possessed League of Nations passports attesting to their stateless status.

    Throughout the repatriation campaign, both British and American authorities had adhered to an extremely legalistic view of their obligations. Even the British Foreign Office stated after the Yalta Conference that only Soviet citizens, i.e. residents of the Soviet Union after September 1, 1939, were to be compelled to return.

    But in May of 1945 the British Army in Austria handed over thousands of non-Soviet citizens, men, women and children, by the most brutal means imaginable.

    Krasnov was never a Soviet citizen.

    Western Ukraine was not recognized as part of the USSR until after 1941. Any western Ukrainian who had left prior to that point was not a Soviet citizen according to international law and Soviet law. Accordingly, during Soviet times diaspora Ukrainians who were form Galicia could visit the USSR without any fear of being detained as Soviet citizens, while diaspora Ukrainians from pre-1939 Soviet Ukraine risked not being allowed out because they, unlike Galicians who had left before international recognition, were still considered to be Soviet citizens by the Soviets. For this reason my one non-Galician grandparent did not visit Ukraine until after independence.

    Bandera, too, was never a Soviet citizen.

    Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.

    They are similar but not the same. Otherwise they would not be different words. Collaborate has a specific meaning – in this case, “to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one’s country and especially an occupying force.” Collaboration is not any cooperation, but a specific kind of cooperation. The kind that involves willingly assisting an enemy of one’s country.

    If cooperate and collaborate meant the same thing, FDR could be called a collaborator of Stalin.
    He was not. FDR cooperated with Stalin but was not a Soviet collaborator.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    You flop again by not proving how Krasnov and Bandera collaborated with the Nazis unlike Vlasov - something you've erroneously claimed at this and at least one other thread.

    I never disagreed with the observation that Vlasov had been a Soviet citizen, serving in the Red Army, unlike Krasnov and Bandera.

    Ever hear of a thesaurus? Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms. You know what a synonym is? FDR did collaborate with Stalin in moves against the Nazis.

    From the Soviet perspective (a hypocritical one at that in this and some other instances), Krasnov and Bandera behaved criminally on Soviet territory. Granted, in Krasnov's case, this happened during a civil war when the USSR wasn't firmly established.

    You do provide an informative link on how the USSR viewed citizenship over the course of time. As is true with a number of other Wiki entries, there perhaps might be some more pertinent info (like follow-up enactments possibly overlooked) regarding how Bandera and Krasnov would be viewed. Sincerely critical assessments on such matter don't just rely solely on Wiki.

    Regardless, I never said that either of the two were Soviet born. Nor have I referred to them as Soviet nationals. The Soviets had a basis to try them on the similar premise that the WW II Western allies have judged Axis allied individuals. One of numerous examples:

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

    In more recent times, there's the Hague Tribunal, which on former Yugoslavia has essentially carried on like a NATO kangaroo court for EuroAtlantic, big power, neocon and neolib chauvinists.

  136. @AP

    The stated issue concerned collaborator and its meaning.
     
    Yes, and you keep showing that you can't read and can't learn :-)

    He failed miserably.
     
    Yes, you failed miserably to read and learn.

    OTOH:

    Collaborate definition:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collaborate

    1: to work jointly with others or together especially in an intellectual endeavor
    An international team of scientists collaborated on the study.

    2: to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force
    suspected of collaborating with the enemy


    Krasnov and Bandera weren't Soviet citizens, thus their alliance with the Nazis against the Soviets was not collaboration.

    Check international law. It might be that someone born on a territory with a dramatically changed governance (like Russian Empire/Provisional/USSR) might still be considered a citizen
     
    You fail here, also and as usual.

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

    While residents of the Russian Empire were initially welcomed by the government to return, after the Russian Civil War, the Bolshevik party leadership engaged in mass denaturalization of Russians who had left.

    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/forced-repatriation-to-the-soviet-union-the-secret-betrayal/

    One group, the Fifteenth Cossack Cavalry Corps, had been fighting in Yugoslavia against Tito. Large numbers within this group and others were not Soviet citizens. They had escaped Russia during or before the Revolution, rescued in British and French warships. They had taken new citizenship or possessed League of Nations passports attesting to their stateless status.

    Throughout the repatriation campaign, both British and American authorities had adhered to an extremely legalistic view of their obligations. Even the British Foreign Office stated after the Yalta Conference that only Soviet citizens, i.e. residents of the Soviet Union after September 1, 1939, were to be compelled to return.

    But in May of 1945 the British Army in Austria handed over thousands of non-Soviet citizens, men, women and children, by the most brutal means imaginable.

    Krasnov was never a Soviet citizen.

    Western Ukraine was not recognized as part of the USSR until after 1941. Any western Ukrainian who had left prior to that point was not a Soviet citizen according to international law and Soviet law. Accordingly, during Soviet times diaspora Ukrainians who were form Galicia could visit the USSR without any fear of being detained as Soviet citizens, while diaspora Ukrainians from pre-1939 Soviet Ukraine risked not being allowed out because they, unlike Galicians who had left before international recognition, were still considered to be Soviet citizens by the Soviets. For this reason my one non-Galician grandparent did not visit Ukraine until after independence.

    Bandera, too, was never a Soviet citizen.

    Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms.
     
    They are similar but not the same. Otherwise they would not be different words. Collaborate has a specific meaning - in this case, "to cooperate with or willingly assist an enemy of one's country and especially an occupying force." Collaboration is not any cooperation, but a specific kind of cooperation. The kind that involves willingly assisting an enemy of one's country.

    If cooperate and collaborate meant the same thing, FDR could be called a collaborator of Stalin.
    He was not. FDR cooperated with Stalin but was not a Soviet collaborator.

    You flop again by not proving how Krasnov and Bandera collaborated with the Nazis unlike Vlasov – something you’ve erroneously claimed at this and at least one other thread.

    I never disagreed with the observation that Vlasov had been a Soviet citizen, serving in the Red Army, unlike Krasnov and Bandera.

    Ever hear of a thesaurus? Cooperate and collaborate are synonyms. You know what a synonym is? FDR did collaborate with Stalin in moves against the Nazis.

    From the Soviet perspective (a hypocritical one at that in this and some other instances), Krasnov and Bandera behaved criminally on Soviet territory. Granted, in Krasnov’s case, this happened during a civil war when the USSR wasn’t firmly established.

    You do provide an informative link on how the USSR viewed citizenship over the course of time. As is true with a number of other Wiki entries, there perhaps might be some more pertinent info (like follow-up enactments possibly overlooked) regarding how Bandera and Krasnov would be viewed. Sincerely critical assessments on such matter don’t just rely solely on Wiki.

    Regardless, I never said that either of the two were Soviet born. Nor have I referred to them as Soviet nationals. The Soviets had a basis to try them on the similar premise that the WW II Western allies have judged Axis allied individuals. One of numerous examples:

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

    In more recent times, there’s the Hague Tribunal, which on former Yugoslavia has essentially carried on like a NATO kangaroo court for EuroAtlantic, big power, neocon and neolib chauvinists.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS