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
Why I Voted for "The Russian Amendment" to the Russian Constitution
🔊 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

As of today, voting has started on the Putin amendments to the 1993 Russian Constitution, which was imposed on us under tank barrels and sponsored by the US State Department.

As a result of the coronavirus, the voting will run from June 25 to July 1, with people being given the chance to vote from home or, in a new innovation for Russia, online (at least in Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod). I did so myself today, the process was quick, simple and accomplished through the Gosuslugi state e-services portal.

My primary reason for voting YES is that, unlike the globalist 1993 Constitution, this one would define the “carriers of the Russian language” to be the “state-forming” people of the Russian Federation (государствообразующий народ), which is really a round-about way of saying ethnic Russians without really saying it.

This is something that Russian nationalists and some nationalist-adjacent people, such as Konstantin Malofeev and elements of the Russian Orthodox Church, had insisted upon – and we (mostly) got what we asked for.

Comments of the Constitutional Court which clarify the Official Line [PDF]:

The provision on the Russian language as the language of the state-forming people, as part of the multinational union of equal peoples of the Russian Federation (Article 68, part 1, of the Constitution of the RF in the present edition), is based on the objective recognition of the role of the Russian people [russkie] in the formation of Russian statehood, whose continuer is the Russian Federation. It does not detract from the dignity of other people, and cannot be considered as incompatible with the provisions of the Constitution of the RF on the multinational people of the Russian Federation (Article 3, part 1), with the equal rights and freedoms of the person and citizen irrespective of his/her ethnicity (Article 19, part 2), or with the equal rights and self-determination of peoples (preamble).

That’s a lot of bureaucratese, but it’s ultimately pretty unambiguous.

As I pointed out, most Eastern European countries and for that matter many of the Russian Federation’s own ethnic minority republics are “national states” according to their Constitutions. And, in rejoinder to the more “multinational” sovoks, it need be noted that even the RSFSR Constitution of 1978 mentioned ethnic Russians (russkie) in its preamble. I do not believe that Russians are inferior to Poles, Hungarians, or Tatars and that as such we do not deserve our own national state.

Although some of the more autistic Russian nationalists have insisted on opposing the amendment on account of there being no explicit mention of “russkie”, I consider this to be a moot point. The energetic opposition of self-hating Russian liberals, multinational “noviops” and ethnic minority nationalists to the amendments proves that they, at least, know what’s up.

The new Constitution also makes reference to Russia’s “thousand year history of statehood” (thus at least implicitly claiming successorship over the political carapace it assumed during this period, as opposed to the 1993 Constitution treating it as a novel, historyless formation), makes mention of God, and defines marriage as a union between man and woman. Incidentally, the US Embassy seems to have taken especially sharp exception to that latter part:

Politologically, apart from some vague additional social guarantees that were transparently made to increase turnout, the main change is of course that it “nullifies” Putin’s existing terms, allowing him to theoretically run for another couple of six year terms after 2024. I do not think Putin will, at least past 2030, though it should be noted that even if he powers through until 2036, he would still be only a year older than Biden would be at the end of his term in 2024.

In any case, this is not a huge concern for me. And as I also said, I think the main function of the amendment is to give Putin more options come 2024, flexibility that will be needed given the increasingly fraught geopolitical situation with respect to the Great Bifurcation and the apparent disintegration of traditional American identity. And even if he does run again and again, this has become less of an issue for me, I have become a lot happier with Putin since c.2018, as he has moved in an increasingly nationalist-technocratic direction.

Two examples from just the past day continue to illustrate that.

First, in a documentary released on June 21, Putin implicitly noted that Russia was shorn of many of its traditional, historical territories in 1991. This is not an isolated occurrence, he has been increasingly overt about this in the past couple of years:

Firstly, Crimea has always been ours, even from the legal point of view. Secondly, we did not get it – the people living in Crimea decided to reunite with Russia, and this is the highest degree of manifestation of democracy.

When the Soviet Union was created, the right of withdrawal was stipulated in the treaty. Since the procedure of withdrawal was not specified, the question arises: if this or that republic became part of the Soviet Union, got a huge amount of Russian lands, traditional Russian historical territories, and then suddenly decided to leave this union. Let it at least leave with what she came. And not to carry away gifts received from the Russian people with it.

Incidentally, as pointed out by blogger denalt, the new Constitution even has a point clarifying the political rights of territories that subsequently join the Russian Federation. While the Constitution bars Russians from the Presidency if they had ever held a foreign citizenship or residency permit, and requires that they have been resident in Russia for the previous 25 years, an explicit exception is made for such territories, which include Crimea now and possibly other recovered “gifts” in the future.

Second, Russia introduced some further economic reforms. The most notable has been that Russia has ditched its flat income tax of 13%, adding an additional bracket of 15% for those making more than 5 million rubles ($72,000) a year. The flat tax has long been a Communist bugbear, and I assume this was done to assuage some of their concerns while making what is in reality a very limited concession.

Probably of more importance, the corporate tax rate on IT companies has been reduced from the standard 20% to just 3%, putting Russia on par with India and Ireland. This is very good news for Russia, since venture capital funding for IT projects is badly developed relative to most of the developed world and China. In line with this, there have recently been rumors that the Kremlin is trying to poach back Pavel Durov, the based, libertarian, and fasting founder of VK and CEO of Telegram. Possibly adding credence to these rumors is the fact that Telegram has been unblocked in Russia a few weeks ago (not that the block was ever very effective). As it is a well established fact that Putin reads my blog, and bearing in mind that I have constantly called for banning Western social media within Russia… well, Russia has Yandex (Google), it has VK (Facebook) – and Telegram wouldn’t make a bad substitute for Twitter. Though, yes, these are just speculations.

***

Will the Constitutional amendment win?

Obviously it will, solidly – and yes, including accounting for any shenanigans. The polls consistently show a victory for YES (the only exception, Superjob, is a very low quality Internet poll that has always been wrong, I don’t know why people even cite it).

As a referendum on Putin, he might be down from his stellar pre-pensions reform ~80% approval ratings, but his current rating of 60% is still highly respectable by international standards.

Also, as usual, the non-systemic opposition is divided on whether to vote NO or boycott. In a bold and uncharacteristic show of defiance, KPRF leader Zyuganov has actually urged his commies to vote NO.

According to the first exit polls from VCIOM, the result is 72.9% YES and 26.6% NO. Though the result may yet go down, probably the people most enthusiastic about the amendments (such as myself) voted earlier, and 31% of exiting people refused to answer.

FWIW, my own prediction, made a couple of weeks ago, is 65% YES [Twitter; PredictionBook].

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Constitution, Law, Nationalism, Russia 
Hide 84 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. A true power move. Russia has been in an economic stagnation for 7 years, real incomes have been falling continuously and are now at the level of 2010. What is the reply of the high iq russian? Vote for Putin until death. One lost decade is not enough, we need more.

    And all of this because of the pretence of a bullshit ‘fluff’ amendment, literally only there to distract people from the infinite putin term. Reality check, no-one gives a fuck about a meaningless sophism about russian speaking people.

    Putin did not give a fuck about russians in Turkmenistan, he openly called russian nationalists idiots — but somehow the supposed russian nationalist elite lapped this up, just like a senile pensioner laps up the pension amendment, only put there to coax him into approving the removal of term limits.

  3. There is much to praise in today’s Russia, but Soviet bureaucratic legacy still needs to be shaken off. There are only three voting stations in the US, NY, Washington, and Houston. Officially, TN is assigned to Washington, but I am sick and tired of it, so I don’t want to go there. I called Houston consulate and asked whether I can vote there living in TN. The first answer was yes. Within a few minutes the guy who answered me called back (this is unheard of in the USSR, clear progress) and told me that his yes is only valid if I have an official registration in Russia. I told him that I don’t, and he said that in this case I can only vote in Washington. Which means that I won’t vote. Only a bureaucrat can understand how my registration in Russia can possibly affect where I can vote in the US. Humans can’t.

    • LOL: Felix Keverich
  4. Mikhail says: • Website

    Al Jazeera Russia Discussion on Russian Vote

    Featured in the below discussion, James Jatras is an attorney with Republican Party foreign policy experience, who Trump hasn’t appointed – instead favoring neocon-neolib leaning individuals. Trump’s appointments versus what he campaigned on serves as a basis for him to lose votes.

    Note the unbalanced manner of the below discussion in the form of some of the moderator’s subjective comments being in line with two of the three guests.

    https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2020/06/vladimir-putin-president-russia-life-200625183415361.html

  5. Owen C. says:

    From Australia, I wish you guys good luck with the referendum.

  6. @Concerned citizen

    Would you, perchance, have a better solution?

    • Replies: @another anon
  7. @Concerned citizen

    A true power move.

    the main change is of course that it “nullifies” Putin’s existing terms, allowing him to theoretically run for another couple of six year terms after 2024. I do not think Putin will, at least past 2030, though it should be noted that even if he powers through until 2036, he would still be only a year older than Biden would be at the end of his term in 2024.

    Yes, the talk about “nation” is bullshit. This is what this power move is about.

    What is the reply of the high iq russian? Vote for Putin until death.

    You do not have to have high IQ. It is enough to have better memory than gnat and remember previous times in history when people tried to make things better because they lacked blue jeans or something similar, and brought only total ruin.

    Yes, vote for Putin since 2036.
    Then, when the technology will be ready, vote for another amendment that will allow extracting Putin’s brain and installing it into body of giant robot.

    https://www.unz.com/akarlin/putler-president-for-life/

    • Agree: Denis
  8. @Concerned citizen

    It is true that nobody is as blind as someone who refuses to see. Considering that the previous version was adopted by the traitorous Yeltsin regime, Russian constitution needed serious amending. There are many good provisions unrelated to Putin. The primacy of Russian law over any international treaties is one of these (the US had that since times immemorial). Prohibition to cede any territory to anyone is another. There are also some social rules that Russia needs.

    As far as Putin goes, Russia is lucky to have him. No Western nation had anyone of his caliber since de Gaulle. He is not childish and stupid, like Trump, not senile, like Biden. He is not a pathetic nonentity, like most leaders of the imperial vassals.

    Not to mention that the West will rue the day when Putin is gone. The next Russian leader will be a lot more anti-Western and more ready to act against the Empire and its sidekicks.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
    , @Darby
  9. The rule baring foreigners from the presidency is clearly in anticipation of welcoming a few million wholesome and based American refugees from the Kamala Harris regime.

  10. Mikhail says: • Website
    @AnonFromTN

    Might very well be. Western meddling in Russia played a role in Putin’s rise.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/21/overhyping-us-russian-differences/

    Scott Shane’s February 17 New York Times article “Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections – We Do It, Too”, distinguishes the US and Russian activity in question by claiming that American actions are done for a good cause unlike Russia – a thought shared by former CIA Director James Woolsey. Shane’s piece notes the US role in influencing the 1996 Russian presidential election, without noting an otherwise glaring particular. Many generally believe that the US government intervention in that vote (whether you want to describe it as direct or indirect) tipped the balance in favor of Boris Yeltsin.

    Yeltsin went on to appoint Vladimir Putin as his successor. If one accepts the US role as the deciding factor in the 1996 Russian presidential election, I whole heartedly welcome that move which enabled Putin to become Russian president – something that very well might not have happened if Yeltsin didn’t win in 1996.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  11. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Mikhail

    Not to mention that the West will rue the day when Putin is gone. The next Russian leader will be a lot more anti-Western and more ready to act against the Empire and its sidekicks.

    Might very well be. Western meddling in Russia played a role in Putin’s rise.

    https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/02/21/overhyping-us-russian-differences/

    Excerpt:

    Scott Shane’s February 17 New York Times article “Russia Isn’t the Only One Meddling in Elections – We Do It, Too”, distinguishes the US and Russian activity in question by claiming that American actions are done for a good cause unlike Russia – a thought shared by former CIA Director James Woolsey. Shane’s piece notes the US role in influencing the 1996 Russian presidential election, without noting an otherwise glaring particular. Many generally believe that the US government intervention in that vote (whether you want to describe it as direct or indirect) tipped the balance in favor of Boris Yeltsin.

    Yeltsin went on to appoint Vladimir Putin as his successor. If one accepts the US role as the deciding factor in the 1996 Russian presidential election, I wholeheartedly welcome that move which enabled Putin to become Russian president – something that very well might not have happened if Yeltsin didn’t win in 1996.

  12. @Daniel Chieh

    Would you, perchance, have a better solution?

    It could be someone who will raise your real income and give you some more toys and cookies, because you are good boy who deserve it.

    Or it could be true liberal who will bring back true freedom of the 90’s.

    Or it could be true communist who will bring back true revolution of 1917.

    Or it could be true believer who will back true Christian morals of 16th century.

    Or it could be true patriot, who will send you with rifle in hand to return “stolen Russian lands”.

    Trust your luck, spin the cylinder and take your chance!

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
    , @Daniel Chieh
  13. Miro23 says:

    … and defines marriage as a union between man and woman. Incidentally, the US Embassy seems to have taken especially sharp exception to that latter part.

    Just shows how important LGBT is to the US elite (in other words, how effective it is in harming Anglo society).

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @Seraphim
  14. Anatoly,

    What reasons do the communists give to vote NO

    And do they have much influence on their voting block.

    I read a blog by Colonel Cassad, who is a communist from Sevastopol; he has always hated Putin. Is this typical of communists?

    Personally I don’t understand why anyone in Russia would vote Communist considering what they did to the country and the type of people that’s rose within that structure includes Yeltsin!!!

  15. @Future Guest worker

    Personally I don’t understand why anyone in Russia would vote Communist considering what they did to the country and the type of people that’s rose within that structure includes Yeltsin!!!

    Because they want to bring back the time of national greatness, just like American boomers who also idolize the 50’s.

    Because they are based and redpilled, and there was no more based and redpilled man in history than Stalin.

    • LOL: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
  16. @Future Guest worker

    Boris Rozhin is a funny person. He is a high-IQ stalinist, who is secretly a racist and a Russian chauvinist. Rozhin is moderately critical of the Putin regime, because that what every intelligent person would do. I don’t know why he worships Stalin though, I suppose weirdness comes from high iq.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Dmitry
  17. szopen says:

    Laws on paper are only as valid as long as there are powers which can protect them. In Polish constitution we also have marriage defined as union of man and women. It was very clear that this was introduced to protect Poland from introducing LGBT marriages. Yet, since at least decade we have lawyers and activists arguing that no, it actually does not say what it was intended to say, by interpreting some vague nuances of the language in their favour.

    • Agree: Denis
  18. Seraphim says:
    @Miro23

    That’s to say that the Anglo society buggered itself. Quite a performance.

  19. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    is a high-IQ

    Well, perhaps this can be true, in terms of the statement “he has high-IQ relative for someone with a developmental disorder”

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
    , @Ano4
  20. @Dmitry

    The dude won a dozen of local chess championships and you should read his blog: Rozhin has a great deal of raw intelligence that lets him see past his ideological inclinations. He has a better grasp of domestic and international politics, than Karlin.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Samosat
  21. Darby says:
    @AnonFromTN

    Politically, Putin seems to be a genius. He is what Western politicians wish they could be but can’t because they lack the brains, along with other qualities.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  22. @another anon

    It could be someone who will raise your real income

    Real incomes are rising, and did rise 2010-2020. Real income had a catastrophic trough in the “liberal” 1990’s. That’s why the popularity of liberals in Russia (called “liberasty” there, the closest equivalent being “libtrards”) is in single digits. You can find detailed infor here:
    https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/russia/annual-household-income-per-capita

    Or it could be true liberal who will bring back true freedom of the 90’s.

    Now, that’s out of question, at least for the next few decades. People vividly remember the horrors of 1990’s. “True reforms of the 90’s” killed more Russians than Civil war, Stalin’s repressions, and WWII combined.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  23. @Darby

    Politically, Putin seems to be a genius.

    As French say, Macron wants to be like Putin, but the leash gets in the way.

  24. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    Like half of people on the internet, I browse his blog for years. Well, I browsed it, in the past tense. The final time was when he was spamming for days about how Iran didn’t shoot the Ukrainian 737, when the whole world – including every mainstream website in America – already knew that Iran has shot the plane. He was less informative than the BBC or CNN.

    past his ideological inclinations.

    As a blogger, his best posts are linking to posts on Stalin and the Soviet Union. There he knows something and is usually accurate.

    On the other hand, when he starts spamming about civil aviation in Iran – an unknowledgeable fat kid, who should go back to the chessboard.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
  25. @Dmitry

    This sounds personal. Don’t take it the wrong way, but I think that your Jewish background prevents you from evaluating Rozhin fairly.

    It’s well established that Jews are extremely biased people, who like to insult and smear goyim they dislike. You should look into yourself and honestly ask what causes you to insult Rozhin every time you mention the guy. I’m well aware that his coverage of Israel has been less than friendly.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  26. Samosat says:
    @Felix Keverich

    He has a better grasp of domestic and international politics, than Karlin.

    Could you be more specific? I find Karlin quite good.

    • Replies: @Dmitry
    , @Mikhail
  27. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    Jews are extremely biased people, who like to insult and smear goyim they dislike.. You should look into yourself and honestly

    I’m sure I will be a goy for such type of Jews. Also isn’t Rozhin is obsessed with complaining about antisemitism. Mostly his posts are like https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3752980.html Rozhin is not in an exciting intellectual war with Jews; he is no Carl Schmitt or Heidegger. The problem is that he is a producer of one-sided clickbait, and your claims about “raw intelligence” and “high-IQ” did not seem evident in what I read from him (although I found interesting Rozhin’s posts on Stalin).

    I understand that insulting someone’s favourite websites is like attacking their taste in music, but don’t take it personally. Most blogs are junk food. Are you boasting about the intelligence of your favourite porn stars and instagram stories, or the gourmet qualities of McDonald’s? You can enjoy such content without an implausible overestimation of it.

    • Replies: @Felix Keverich
  28. @Dmitry

    And what would YOU know about “intellectual wars”? You’re obsessed with Rozhin’s appearance. Like he is one of your Instagram girls. 😂

    • Replies: @Dmitry
  29. Dmitry says:
    @Samosat

    I think Karlin is usually a level higher of sophistication than Rozhin’s. (Although Rozhin is more fair in writing about Stalin or the Soviet Union).

    For example, if I look on his blog today – Rozhin’s style of “analysis” of how protests in America are causing coronavirus.
    https://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/5978370.html

  30. Dmitry says:
    @Felix Keverich

    I post for entertainment and he provides it visually.

    Most of the famous bloggers are clickbaiting us with a clownish appearance though – it must be one of the secrets of being successful in the profession. Only Steve Sailor looks suspiciously like a normal person.

  31. Ano4 says:
    @AnonFromTN

    killed more Russians than Civil war, Stalin’s repressions, and WWII combined.

    That would be around 50 million dead between 1991 and 1999. I think you are exaggerating a little. Although I agree that times were tough. But as I am getting older I sometimes start feeling a bit nostalgic about these crazy years. And then I watch again Generation P and everything goes back to normal.

    😁

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  32. Ano4 says:
    @Dmitry

    Every time a see a picture of Boris Rozhin I think of a capybara.

  33. AK –
    “As it is a well established fact that Putin reads my blog”

    Can you substantiate? That would indeed be quite an interesting piece of info to know

    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
  34. @Ano4

    If you count excess deaths and below normal births, and take into account that Russia population-wise is about half of the USSR (i.e., prorated number would be no more than 25 million), you would obtain the number that suggests that “liberal 90’s” were more devastating than Bolshevik revolution, civil war, WWII, and all communist terror campaigns combined.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  35. Ano4 says:
    @AnonFromTN

    If you look into Mendeleev’s demographic studies and his projections, you will easily see that nothing was as bad for Russian (Veliko/Malo/Belo) demographics as 1917 revolution.

    Revolution is the root of all the multiple evils Russians have experienced for the last 100 years, Perestroika included.

    If there would have been no revolution, the population of the Russian Empire would today probably be around 500 million people, with Russians being at least 70% of it.

    • Replies: @AnonFromTN
  36. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Samosat

    Asked with some trepidation, where did you suddenly come from?

    Interesting how some just suddenly appear. Like the Wanderer dude that goes after me on certain issuers like Vlasov.

  37. @Ano4

    Then you have to blame Nicolas II. If his corrupt governments did not supply defective ammo, weapons, uniforms, and food to the army, Russia would have won the battle of Tsushima and the war with Japan, would have fared a lot better in WWI, and there would be no 1917 revolutions (both of them).

    • Replies: @Ano4
  38. Mikhail says: • Website

    Khodorkovsky funded venue on an aspect pertaining to the Russian vote at issue:

    https://imrussia.org/en/analysis/3126-new-russian-identity-makes-way-into-the-constitution

    No mention of Michael Weiss in their “About” section.

  39. Anuxicus says:
    @Concerned citizen

    ” real incomes have been falling continuously and are now at the level of 2010.”

    That only really affects the rich and the elite. Incomes for the poor and the middle classes are growing while those of the elites have been falling.

  40. @another anon

    So, you do not have a better solution.

  41. Ano4 says:

    Putin has said several years ago that he was tired of being at the head of the Russian state. And yet here he is again and again, election after election, referendum after referendum. Even great rulers end-up becoming annoying old men. Besides, Putin has often stated on record that the constitution is sacred. Only to change it afterwards.

    I have no attachment towards Yeltsin’s constitution. Contrary to Putin who built up “Yeltsin Center”, inaugurated it in a pompous ceremony, I have no love lost for Bor’ka Alkash and his drunk antics. But Putin saying one thing and then doing exactly the opposite year after year becomes tiresome.

    By the next Russian elections, Putin would have been presiding over Russia for a generation. Maybe he passed his best before date and needs to have some rest.

    Or the younger generation will end up considering him absolutely ridiculous as it happened to Brezhnev. In fact it has already started with the meme being produced to mock him.

    http://lurkmore.to/%D0%9F%D1%83%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD_%E2%80%94_%D0%BA%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1

    Putin staying president for too long cannot be good for Russia. Anyway, for those who srill remember how Putin’s era started:

    • Replies: @WHAT
    , @anonymous coward
  42. @jewishsceptic

    Putin has implemented policy based on this blog, of course.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @jewishsceptic
  43. Ano4 says:
    @AnonFromTN

    It is true that Russian elites under the last Tsar were divided and corrupt. But the revolution would not have succeeded if it would not have been financed and guided from abroad. It took two generations to subvert and destroy Russian Empire. It took one generation to subvert and destroy USSR. In fact, Russian Empire was more stable and more efficient than the Soviet Regime. We can only hope that Putin’s RosFed is more resilient than its Soviet predecessor. Because next time a collapse happens in the Russian civilization, it might well be the last.

    • Replies: @WHAT
  44. Slavs are not native to most of Russia and even after sometimes centuries of colonialism still do not form the majority in many areas, this isn’t really much different to WASPs passing a law saying they are the “state-forming” native people of the US and therefore should have priority in their own native land.

    I suppose you no doubt regard Vladivostok as as Russian as Moscow, yet would regard Hong Kong as Chinese despite the two situations being no different. Both were formerly Chinese (or at least non-European) wastelands that were built by Europeans.

  45. @Daniel Chieh

    “a well established fact”

    even if you were absolutely correct – a well established fact indicates some direct evidence.
    I’m not arguing for or against this claim. But there are other ways heads of state can get ideas besides reading blogs online (In a foreign language).
    So if there is some actual evidence, I’d like to know

  46. WHAT says:
    @Ano4

    Team Putin will stay in power anyway, le zoomer molodezh can suck a schlong, as usual. VVP was not building administrative cadre reserve for fifteen years just for the lulz.
    The long game is obviously being played there, so any attempt to upset it will not be allowed.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  47. Ano4 says:
    @WHAT

    VVP was not building administrative cadre reserve for fifteen years

    Please name a few of these people you believe will be the bright future of Putin’s Vertical.

    • Replies: @WHAT
  48. WHAT says:
    @Ano4

    You might want to read up on russian revolutions in the beginning of the 20th century.

    Revolutions, yes, because there were more than one, and if 1917 did not succeed, the next one would – because all underlying drivers would still be present. Elite corruption is not even that important in the face of their inability to handle de-serfing the country without creating a tremendous pain(they effectively generated a terrible economic pressure on the peasant at all levels, especially the alt-right`s beloved kulak™ floor, who in reality more often than not was the main usurer of his fellow Russian, in addition to the landlord, who was to be paid an absolutely inordinate sum for the supposedly already free man leaving his side) and the need for rapid industrialization, which necessitated breaking down the agricultural unit. Stolypin and Witte tried their damnedest, but their solutions were tempered to the point of being only half-efficient by Nick-2, who was in turn influenced by the overgrown nobility definitely not willing to sacrifice their income.

    In the end, Reds had a lot more than latvian shooters going for them, and Whites acted like total scum way too often, while not being able to generate a new economic model. Small wonder long-suffering Russian peasant decided to throw his lot with the new guys.

    • Replies: @Jake
  49. WHAT says:
    @Ano4

    I believe Kirienko will be the next president. Debatable though, Putin may be hatching up a completely new face as well. His team stays on regardless.

    If you want to see these people coming up, take a very close look at President`s Administration apparatus, from which a whole lot of people we now see in high places came out. On lower levels they have had these student leadership programs for a while now, plus the usual siloviki wing supplying their candidates as well.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  50. Ano4 says:
    @WHAT

    I believe Kirienko will be the next president

    .

    Isn’t he a Jewish ancestry Scientologist?

    That would be a bold move.

    • Replies: @Mikhail
  51. Jake says:

    Those amendments sound very good. Russian needs them.

    Russian nationalists must face the fact that imperialism always perverts most, perhaps all, of what is truly good about a nationality. That is the understanding behind GK Chesterton’s praise of what he called ‘little England’ and his distrust of, at times dislike and fear of, the British Empire upon which the sun never set.

    Russians must not flex imperial muscle, but must flex Christian Just War to protect Russia.

  52. Jake says:
    @WHAT

    Your post seems focused on finding ways to deny that super rich men from the West, the vast majority of them Jews, sent a fortune into the hands of Russian revolutionaries, without which the Bolsheviks could not have been armed half as well as they were.

    The primary usurer in the Russian Empire was not a former serf, but was a Jew.

    Stolypin was assassinated by a Jew son of a multimillionaire Jew.

    Whites had no ability to enact any kind of economic model as they did not win, and in fact were sold out by the West’s winning nations in World War 1. White atrocities compared to Bolshevik atrocities are like Negro violent crimes compared to white American violent crimes.

  53. Mitleser says:
    @Europe Europa

    The big difference is that Vladivostok is a Russian city and Hong Kong is a South Chinese city which was British-ruled until 1997.
    The British founded that city, but they never integrated it into their nation.

  54. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Ano4

    Kirilenko not Kirienko. Yes, he’s part Jewish. No big deal. Look at Kiev regime controlled Ukraine. It’s not like they’re more tolerant.

    Said it before and will say it again: most Russian patriots aren’t so hung up on Jews as much as they’re on what the given individual offers. Not all of the “purest” (for lack of a better term) Russians are free of Western neocon-neolib manner. Conversely, not all of the Jews are like Ioffe and Gessen.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  55. @Ano4

    You’re nuts if you think that the Russian government works somehow differently than any other large and complex organization.

    Putin is just Russia’s international brand, the country is ruled by a board of directors.

    P.S. The new constitution will introduce a ‘State Council’, the function of which is to be later determined. I.e., they’re not telling us what its powers will be, yet. Obviously a vastly more significant development than any purported fifth or whatever term in office for Putin.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  56. @Europe Europa

    Vladivostok was never ‘Chinese’. It was Manchu, but very sparsely populated.

    The Manchus are ancient ethnic enemies of the Chinese. (The famed wall was built, in part, to keep the Manchu and their co-ethnics out.)

    P.S. You get an ‘F’ for your Chinese history.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
  57. Ano4 says:
    @anonymous coward

    Putin is just Russia’s international brand, the country is ruled by a board of directors.

    Probably more like a consortium of several groups with VVP having an impact on the final decision making or the absence thereof. What I was describing is the fact that a lot of Russian people are becoming tired of this “brand “. If Putin knows what’s best for him and his daughters (nevermind the country) he would find himself a reliable replacement or even just some sockpuppet and slowly go towards the exit. Just like Deng Xiaoping and Lee Kwan Yew did.

    One of the few advantages of the “democratic ” politics is that the sockpuppets and talking heads are changing often enough so the voting plebs have some impression of “progress “. Putin has already dispensed with that, now he is using the supposedly “sacred ” constitution to wipe his arses. The whole thing is really becoming a joke.

    Maybe it’s time they return to a monarchy. Shoygu as the next Khagan Rus with Kadyrov as his Amir Al Qoqaz and Sobyanin as his Grand Duque of Muscovy seems appropriate. Archeofuturism, just like the new Army Cathedral they built…

  58. WHAT says:
    @Jake

    Your post seems focused on repeating endless alt-right fixations on muh jews, lol.

    Whites very much could at least start some kind of socioeconomic change in territories under their control, like Reds did, or come up with a program that promised more than continuation of the usual misery. Instead, they welcomed foreign interventionists and acted like shit towards different classes, especially peasantry. Expropriations and mass executions were their tools just as much as with Reds, and it is Kolchak the traitor that was fiercely hated in Siberia(they literally name especially agressive dogs Kolchak there, right to this very day!), not Lenin.

    In the end peasantry left Whites for Reds, and this was it.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  59. @Ano4

    …a lot of Russian people are becoming tired of this “brand “.

    That’s true, but Putin is mostly for foreign consumption, not domestic. They’re not letting him go till they find another Big Bad Russian to cause fainting spells among New York feminists and soyboys.

    • Agree: Ano4
  60. Mitleser says:
    @Ano4

    I agree that VVP needs to start to retire soon, but if he has to use these guys as examples to follow…

    Just like Deng Xiaoping and Lee Kwan Yew did.

    …he would do another term and remain till 2030.

    • Agree: Ano4
  61. @anonymous coward

    So do you think the whole of Manchuria should be handed to Russia because it’s not Chinese? China is made up of lots of different people any way. Hong Kongers and Beijingers literally couldn’t even understand each other speaking their own languages Cantonese and Mandarin, so are they the same people?

    Likewise lots of countries are made up of people who were previously adversaries of the majority but have been absorbed into the population and their native language and identity no longer exists, this is the case with Manchus, they’ve been absorbed into “Han Chinese” identity and I’m sure there’s plenty of cases of this happening in Russia. The reality is Vladivostok was part of China and was leased from China in the same way Hong Kong was, the difference is the British honoured their commitments and the Russians didn’t.

  62. Ano4 says:
    @WHAT

    You are too obsessed with the Civil War. There was a nearly 50 years process leading to it. Russian Empire was systematically weakened and sabotaged from abroad for two generations.

    [MORE]

    The British continually aiding and abetting different Russian narodniki, nihilists and terrorists was a feature not a bug of the Great Game. The German aiding Russian socialists also was the norm in the Central European politics. Austro-Hungarian Empire weaponizing the Ruthenian identity into its Ukrainian virulent form and developing Old Believer agent networks into Russia was another aspect. Finally France was actively working the Polish Aristocracy and seeding it with republican ideals. Add to this the international finance being unhappy with Russian Empire not being kind enough to their mishpacha and you get a nice picture of where Russia stands in 1900.

    It is quite normal then that Russian Empire was described as weak, regressive, archaic, poor and dirty. As the French saying goes: “Who wants to kill his dog, says that it has rabies “. Same with the Russian Empire which was vilified not because of its many flaws, but because the other Great Powers of the time marked it for extinction.

    Despite all this Russian Empire evolved rapidly in all its aspects: social, cultural, industrial and the most important: demographic. The population of the Empire was en route to becoming the major group of the European population. If the Revolution was averted for just a single generation, Russians today would completely dominate Europe.

    Russian Empire had to be destroyed to avoid this outcome. And it was destroyed. But it was reconstructed as the USSR (a kind of Frankenstein really), so the WWII was unavoidable to try finishing the job of annihilating both Russia and Germany. When that goal was missed because of the enormous sacrifice of Soviet population, they started the Cold War to contain the “beast “.

    Then they invented “convergence ” and starting from the late 50ies worked towards taming the “beast” to put it on leash through different treaties and engagements, political and economic. They seduced the intelligentsia, the creative class, engaged fractions of economic deciders and infiltrated the Nomenklatura with sympathizers. Thus came Perestroika and the “blessed 90ies”.

    It is all part of the same process that started with the Crimean War: Europe against Russia. As long as there is something even remotely resembling Russian Empire at its eastern borders, Europe will never feel safe. Russia must be destroyed for Europe to finally feel secure.

    • Replies: @WHAT
  63. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Europe Europa

    After WW II, the Soviets could’ve chosen to stay in Manchuria. Ditto Austria.

  64. @Europe Europa

    Scratch a White Nationalist and you find a Russophobe.

    • Agree: WHAT
    • Replies: @WHAT
  65. Mikhail says: • Website
    @Ano4

    My bad. Notwithstanding, the originally stated (at this thread) transliteration “Kirienko” is off.

    On a matter raised about him, he’s not considered Jewish, according to Jewish law.

    • Agree: Ano4
  66. @Europe Europa

    The reality is Vladivostok was part of China…

    Are you retarded? Read my post again. Vladivostok was Manchu, who were mortal enemies of the Chinese. At the time the Manchu had a law that any Chinese encroaching on Manchu territory be put to death.

    Yeah, yeah, I know – “arr rook same”, but come on, these gaffes are too much even for a dumb racist like you.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
  67. Alex90 says:
    @Europe Europa

    >So do you think the whole of Manchuria should be handed to Russia

    Why, yes.
    Russians liberated Manchuria in the 40s at the expense of 35k casualties (10k dead, 25k wounded) from the japanese army that stationed nearly one million soldiers.
    Russians built up the whole region anyway with the chinese eastern railway in the 19th century. The modern city of Harbin was designed by Polish engineer Adam Szydłowski and mostly housed settlers from Russian Empire. The mass influx of han chinese in Manchuria is a rather recent development.
    I do not understand why so many people on UNZ cheer for han imperialism.

    • Replies: @Europe Europa
  68. @Alex90

    You could say the same thing about Hong Kong, that was a sparsely populated wasteland legally ceded to Britain that was completely built by the British, yet I bet you wouldn’t claim that it should still be British.

    • Replies: @Mitleser
  69. @anonymous coward

    Manchus no longer exist, they are “Han Chinese” now. Their language is basically extinct, I think about 20 people speak Manchu or something.

    Saying the natives of former Manchu lands today aren’t Chinese is more ridiculous than saying the natives of Vyborg and Karelia aren’t Russian because they’re Karelian/Finnic and historically enemies of the Russians.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  70. @Jake

    Edited to reflect your obvious intent:

    Bolshevik atrocities compared to white atrocities are like Negro violent crimes compared to white American violent crimes.

    Just as today Bolshevik Jews are inciting black violence against Western culture to the temporary detriment of whites and the permanent detriment of blacks.

    Nobody, particularly including blacks, has ever treated blacks as well as the descendants of Christendom have. Yet today after a crescendo of over 65 years Jews have blacks acting as self-destructive Kamikazees attacking whites and the culture derived of Christendom.

    Henry Ford, you were right.

    David Duke, you are right, as the Nation of Islam has learned from you and has attempted to so edify black people in its scholarly series acclaimed here at UR The Secret Relationship between Blacks and Jews.

  71. Mitleser says:
    @Europe Europa

    Because the British ceded it back as they cared more about having good relations with the PRC than HK becoming a proper British city.

  72. Mr. XYZ says:

    As it is a well established fact that Putin reads my blog,

    How exactly do you know this, Anatoly?

  73. @Europe Europa

    Russia took those lands from the Manchu back when the Manchu ‘Empire’ was still a thing, and when the Chinese were forbidden from settling there on the pain of death.

    The Chinese have zero claim to that area; might as well claim that Narendra Modi should be king of Paris because the French ruled over the English some centuries ago.

    • Replies: @Mary Marianne
  74. Putin staying in power after 2024 could deal a blow against the image of Russia as a civilized democracy and damage its reputation among populist right wingers in the West and the Ukrainian population that wants to live in a democracy and consequently hurt Russia’s soft power. It is also the proof that Russia do not have a reliable successor for Putin which is more than worrying.

    It will also reward a leader that has been responsible for 5 to 8 years of evonomic stagnation which is never a good idea. Russia needs economic growth and tech/ science boom urgently if it wants to remain relevant in the coming new world. The only way to achieve it is to jump start Keynesian macro economic policy , the exact contrary of what Putin and his team have been doing until now.

    • Replies: @Ano4
  75. Ano4 says:
    @Maïkl Makfaïl

    not have a reliable successor for Putin which is more than worrying.

    (.. ..)

    Russia needs economic growth and tech/ science boom urgently if it wants to remain relevant in the coming new world. The only way to achieve it is to jump start Keynesian macro economic policy , the exact contrary of what Putin and his team have been doing until now.

    I agree and concur. BTW this is what worries most Russian Industrialists from Партия Дела. I would add that Keynesian economics are also needed to support Russian demographics. Finally, the Russian 1% must be partially expropriated to finance socially oriented nationalist reforms. This should include the oligarchs’ possessions and belongings in the West and target everyone, including VVPs innermost circle. Perhaps they all could pay a one time “forgiveness tax” amounting to some % of their net worth.

  76. WHAT says:
    @Autists Anonymous Rehab Camp Fugitive

    Muh white nationalism is just another brand of anglo globalism.

  77. WHAT says:
    @Ano4

    Take anglo out, and still revolutionary situation would develop and be exploited by somebody. Say germans, or austrians, or whatever.

    Romanovs had their chance, had the mandate for change from the lower rungs of social structure, but preferred to bicker among themselves in the most critical moment, so more passionate personalities prevailed.
    Does not mean I like red revolutionaries.

    • Agree: Ano4
    • Replies: @Ano4
  78. @anonymous coward

    You can dream about getting Chinese land all you want, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to get it. China has nukes, just like Russia does, so it will be mutually assured destruction. Stop being such a greedy bxtch when you haven’t even developed any of the land you already own in the east.

    • Replies: @anonymous coward
  79. Ano4 says:
    @WHAT

    It is true that with the notable exception of the Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovitch and to some extent the last Tsar himself, the last Romanovs were particularly inept.

    I also agree that Russian Empire had no friends, even the French who have heavily invested in the Russian Empire economy, were actually supportive of radical structural reforms.

    All I am saying is that if revolution would have been avoided through whatever miracle: Stolypin and Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovitch surviving for example, or Tsar Nicholas choosing to stay neutral during WWI or accepting a separate peace with Prussian Empire, it would probably would have been way better for Russia and its people.

    As Bulgakov said: “I don’t believe in revolution, but I believe in evolution “.

    Revolutions are evil, all of them, and should be avoided as the poison they are.

    This also applies to the Perestroika, which was a criminal revolution by the corrupt Nomenklatura allied to the organized crime and the rogue elements in the KGB against the interests of the population of the USSR.

  80. @Mary Marianne

    Are you retarded? That land was never Chinese. I know that they arr rook same to you, but the Manchu were ethnic and racial enemies of the Chinese. There’s no particular reason why the Chinese should be now grabbing the lands that formerly belonged to their occupiers and oppressors.

    (The English used to occupy parts of China too, does that make Australia ‘Chinese land’?)

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Anon comments are not allowed. If you are new to my work, *start here*. If you liked this post, and want me to produce more such content, consider *donating*.


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Anatoly Karlin Comments via RSS