The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Kevin MacDonald Archive
Spencer J. Quinn’s "Solzhenitsyn and the Right"
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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
ORDER IT NOW

Solzhenitsyn and the Right
Spencer J. Quinn
Antelope Hill Publishing, 2021

Spencer J. Quinn’s Solzhenitsyn and the Right summarizes a large portion of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s voluminous body of work, but its focus isn’t entirely on Solzhenitsyn. It is replete with parallels between pre- and post-revolutionary Russia/Soviet Union and the present situation in the West.

Fundamentally, Solzhenitsyn was a Russian patriot, and certainly not in a civic nationalist sense:

In his memoirs, he refers to Russians as his people and Russia as his country, and never does the fate of either escape his concern. He identified with the Russian people and so he bled when they bled, cried when they cried, and cheered when they cheered. He also longed for the Russian soil when he was away from it. Religion, tradition, and patriotism bound him to his people, and his people to each other, as in any enduring civilization. … For Solzhenitsyn, nationalism was more about blood than what it says in one’s passport. (3, 5)

Not surprisingly given such attitudes, he was highly critical of the West where he was exiled for almost 15 years, repeatedly “predicting the West’s downfall” because of its individualism, Enlightenment values, and lack of religious fervor. (4) And, as Quinn notes, he is proving to be right as a result of the immigration tsunami that has transformed Western societies into battlegrounds of conflicting and incompatible peoples and cultures, and where the native European-derived peoples are routinely vilified by elites in the media, the university, major corporations, and the political class in the societies they created. Of these, Solzhenitsyn identified the media as the most influential: it “distorts and embellishes its reportage to be as sensationalist as possible in order to ‘miseducate’ public opinion and garner profits and influence.” (17) In particular, the media appeals to and encourages weakness, whether in the food we eat (often resulting in obesity and its attendant diseases like diabetes), how we spend our leisure, how important we regard material wealth, or the value one places on conforming to the media’s moral imperative to admit and care for an unending stream of migrants who will eventually displace the peoples of the West. As always the demise of Western societies is presented as a moral issue, with payment to the descendants of colonial peoples and slaves quite possibly requiring the forfeit “of everything it owns.” (21)

Quinn notes the parallel between Soviet communism and the contemporary West:

While for Solzhenitsyn this Evil took the form of Communist and totalitarian governments which for the most part existed outside the West, today it appears as the equally totalitarian anti-white Left which lurks among us and has laid claim to our universities, our media, our corporations, and nearly all of our other institutions. It is this Left which has imported its shock troops from the Third World, and it is this Left which the West’s ‘conservative’ leadership has continually bowed down to and appeased. (22)

The composition of Western elites matters, and in particular the media elites. Fundamentally, they hate us. And, although Jews, with their long list of (imagined and real) historical grudges, are highly overrepresented in all areas of Western elites, they are by far most overrepresented as owners and creators in the media.

Solzhenitsyn spent eight years in a Gulag and survived assassination attempts by the KGB. Quinn notes that even this sort of Soviet oppression is more extreme than what we see in the West now, there are certainly the beginning signs of similar repression—travel restrictions, bank account and credit card suspensions for dissidents, banning and shadow banning on social media, double standards of justice in which the legal system throws the book at rightists and typically refuses to even investigate or indict leftists—as exemplified by the consequences of the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally and the recent January 6 protest. There is no reason at all to suppose that the West couldn’t end up being at least as oppressive as the USSR. Powerful interests are seeking just that. “If the Far Left ever succeeds in gaining control over a major government (as it did in Russia in 1917), then the Dissident Right can expect oppression similar to what Solzhenitsyn and other figures faced in the Soviet Union.” (11)

Jewish Issues

Pyotr Stolypin, Prime Minister of Russia from 1906–1911, was assassinated in 1911 by a Jewish radical, Mordecai Bogrov, at a time when such radicalism was common among Jews. Jews hated Stolypin because, as Solzhenitsyn described it, “he boosted Russian interests too blatantly and too insistently—the Russianness of the Duma as a representative body, the Russianness of the state.” (26; italics in text) Solzhenitsyn believed Stolypin’s assassination was catastrophic because it unleashed “the first eddies in a swirl of nihilism, war, and death which would soon consume Europe.” (27) Quinn notes that Solzhenitsyn “dared to depict Bogrov in a way resembling Jewish stereotypes” (30)—a lying, two-faced manipulator, physically weak and neurotic but highly intelligent. “There was nothing the Russians could do, other than cede power to the Jews, that would satisfy him” (31). And indeed, he was motivated by his Jewish identity and sense of Jewish interests: “I was fighting for the benefit of the Jewish people.” (34)

Parallels to the Present

After describing Lenin’s psychopathic personality (e.g., his duplicity and his “enmity toward everything traditional, natural and morally wholesome,” (43) Quinn notes that “the left has not changed much since Lenin’s day, merely exchanging class for race in the twenty-first century. The same bunch that called for the civil rights of non-Whites is now calling for the open oppression of whites. Just as with Lenin, what the Left says it wants and what it truly wants are two different things. … A stroll through Twitter or anti-white Hollywood in the 2020s will show quite clearly that the left’s violent fantasies against their perceived enemies haven’t gone away and aren’t going anywhere.” (44)

The February Revolution which led to the Provisional Government resulted from well-organized, well-funded activists, just as we see today in the wake of George Floyd’s death; “they are also engaging in the kind of violence, ruthless intimidation, and hateful rhetoric that Solzhenitsyn documents in March 1917.” As today, rightists in 1917 trusted the leftists, who were clearly attempting to end the monarchy, to be “acting in good faith when they clearly weren’t.” And as today, the left is full of promises for a utopian future free of strife and oppression if only power is ceded to them. Solzhenitsyn: “Tranquility would only come to Russia when the present government system had been ripped out at the root.” (54; italics in text) Solzhenitsyn comments on the police being intimidated and rendered powerless, and Quinn draws the contemporary parallel: “During America’s riots in the summer of 2020, how many times did the police stand down or kneel to the rioters? How many times did we see the police actively take the side of the rioters, or refuse to protect innocent people from them?” (57) As now, the media was on the side of the rioters, not only presenting fake news, e.g., on police violence against rioters, but also, as Solzhenitsyn notes, intimidating those with power from enforcing the law: “Columns in the liberal newspapers alone made the governors pale and attempt to justify their measures. … They could not kill their own people” (57)—quite unlike the Bolsheviks who had no compunctions about mass murder against their perceived enemies.

As Quinn notes, the main message of March 1917 is that the Bolshevik Revolution did not have to happen, and neither does the current revolution playing out throughout the West. “The Left does not have to win. But for today’s Right to check the Left and achieve victory, it will need leaders who possess the nerves and confidence that the Russian leaders depicted by Solzhenitsyn entirely lacked”—something sorely lacking at this point. (63; emphasis in text) As Solzhenitsyn noted in his play Prisoners,

We clutch at life with convulsive intensity—that’s how we get caught. We want to go on living at any, any price. We accept all the degrading conditions, and this way we save—not ourselves—we save the prosecutor. But he who doesn’t value his life is unconquerable, untouchable. There are such people. (70; italics in text)

At this point, the Right in the West needs such people to win.

We can only imagine how many intelligent, well-meaning Russians were swayed by the liberal-left media, wanting to be seen as a good person, and conforming to whatever mandates the left proposed. They supported the left and looked forward to the utopian, classless future promised by the Bolsheviks. What is clear now is that there are millions of White voters throughout the contemporary West, many of them calling themselves conservatives, who have been eager to embrace today’s promised utopian future of racial harmony and equal outcomes for all races.

Two Hundred Years Together

The longest section of Solzhenitsyn and the Right discusses Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together, placing “much of the blame for the October Revolution, the atrocities of the early Soviet period, and subversive Left-wing behavior in general squarely on the shoulders of the Jews. [Solzhenitsyn] also … exonerates much of Tsarist Russia from the charge of anti-Semitism, which Jewish authors never seem to tire of leveling. … Dissidents on the Right should take advantage of Solzhenitsyn’s fame and cite him as often as possible in the battlefield of ideas—especially when it comes to the Jewish question.” (83, 84)

Jews were heavily overrepresented in Lenin’s inner circle and indeed, in Lenin in Zurich “Solzhenitsyn offers tantalizing evidence that the October Revolution would not have occurred (or would not have been successful) without actions carried out by Jews at its most critical moments.” (47)

Nevertheless, Solzhenitsyn often bent over backwards not to be negative about Jews. Quinn notes that “Solzhenitsyn was no anti-Semite. There are many passages in this work that demonstrate a desire to show justice, even tenderness, toward Jews. It cannot be denied that he had great respect for them” (84)—a trait, as Quinn notes, that is entirely lacking in vast majority of Jewish writers commenting on the behavior of White gentiles toward Jews. And commenting on Jewish characters in his play Republic of Labor, Solzhenitsyn noted in Two Hundred Years Together that he had fictionalized them somewhat because the truth “would be inevitably considered anti-Jewish incitement (as if that trio of Jews was not inflaming it in real life, caring little about consequences).” (78)

Departing from Solzhenitsyn, Quinn eschews any perspective that flinches from dealing honestly with Jews. White nations are in the process of being subjugated and the great majority of Jews, including many wealthy, politically involved Jews and Jews with prominent positions in the media, support this revolution. Of course, this does not mean that White advocates should be dishonest, only that they should not flinch from the truth. So despite what Solzhenitsyn would have advocated, “the value and importance of Two Hundred Years Together cannot be overstated.” (86) What follows then are three chapters listing the “misdeeds” (87) of the Jews.

Solzhenitsyn notes that Jews began to be represented among revolutionaries in the 1870s after originally being underrepresented. The reason for this was that leftist revolutionaries often viewed Jews as exploiters—a perspective that disappeared from revolutionary rhetoric after Jews became prominent among them. This is an important point that is missing from typical accounts by Jewish historians. From Separation and Its Discontents (Ch. 2, pp. 41–42):

Emancipation often accentuated the importance of resource competition as a source of anti-Semitism. Lindemann (1991, 17) notes that Jews in pre-emancipation Russia “were viewed by the authorities and by much of the rest of population as a foreign, separate, exploitative, and distressingly prolific nation.” The official Russian view was that emancipation had resulted in Jews economically dominating and exploiting the Slavic peasants (Judge 1992, 9, 11). The following passage, from an article published in 1893 by M. Pierre Botkine, the Secretary of the Russian Legation in Washington, was also emphasized by Goldwin Smith (1894, 248) in his anti-Jewish writing. It combines the issue of economic domination with the loyalty issue … :

The Hebrew, as we know him in Russia, is “the eternal Jew.” Without a country of his own, and as a rule, without any desire to become identified with the country he for the time inherits, he remains, as for hundreds of years he has been, morally unchangeable and without a faculty for adapting himself to sympathy with the people of the race which surrounds him. He is not homogeneous with us in Russia; he does not feel or desire solidarity with us. In Russia he remains a guest only—a guest from long ago, and not an integral part of the community. When these guests without affinity became too many in Russia, when in several localities their numbers were found injurious to the welfare and the prosperity of our own people as a whole, when they had grown into many wide-spreading ramifications of influence and power, and abused their opportunities as traders with or lenders of money to the poor—when, in a word, they became dangerous and prejudicial to our people—is there anything revolting or surprising in the fact that our government found it necessary to restrict their activity? . . . Is it just that those who have never had to confront such a situation should blame us for those measures?

Our peasantry has only recently been organized in their existing social relations, and is not yet well educated, or well trained in the exercise of social rights or obligations under their present system. . . . If we take into consideration the character of the Slavonian folk, it is easy to understand why our meek, ignorant, and easy-going peasantry fell under the control of the Jews, who, as a class, are far better educated and more thrifty, and have the aptitude for commerce and for money making which distinguishes their race everywhere—and who readily perceived and soon abused their superiority in those particulars, after the emancipation of the serfs had deprived them individually of the safeguards the old system of things had afforded them. This Jewish influence was everywhere oppressive, and now and then became an unbearable yoke. The peasants in some localities, having lost all patience, were guilty of violent excesses, mobbed the Jews, and destroyed their property. (Botkine 1893, 613–614)

Solzhenitsyn presents numerous Jewish writers who basically say the same thing: that diaspora Jews do not identify with the country they reside in. Israeli author A. B. Yoshua: “The Galut [diaspora] is an immoral creature. He uses all the benefits of his host country but at the same time he does not identify with it.” (129) As has often been the case, Zionists had a much more realistic perspective on Jews, and often regarded Jews as a separate ethnicity and acknowledged that anti-Semitism was a natural reaction to Jews as foreigners. A statement published by the Zionist Federation of Germany after the National Socialists came to power stated “Zionism has no illusions about the difficulty of the Jewish condition, which consists above all in an abnormal occupational pattern and in the fault of an intellectual and moral posture not rooted in one’s own tradition” (SAID, Ch 5, 161).

Continuing SAID (Ch. 2, 42–43) on Jews as oppressors in nineteenth-century Russia:

In 1881 a government document decried the failure of its twenty-year-long campaign to fuse the Russian and Jewish populations and perceived the problem to be “the exploitation [by the Jews] of the indigenous population and mostly of the poorer classes” (in Frankel 1981, 64). This was the view of official American government observers as well (see Goldstein 1990, 36, 290), and it was also apparent in the Jewish revolutionary socialist Hayim Zhitlowski (1972, 129): “Whenever I turned my eyes to ordinary, day-to-day Jewish life, I saw only one thing, that which the antisemites were agitating about: the injurious effect of Jewish merchantry on Russian peasantry. No matter how I felt, from a socialist point of view, I had to pass a death sentence not only on individual Jews but on the entire Jewish existence of individual Jews” (italics in text).[i]The following report from British Vice-Consul L. Wagstaff sums up the public perception of the social and economic causes of anti-Semitism leading to the pogroms of 1881 in Russia and reflects many of the themes of this section and the previous section:

It is chiefly as brokers or middlemen that the Jews are so prominent. Seldom a business transaction of any kind takes place without their intervention, and from both sides they receive compensation. To enumerate some of their other occupations, constantly denounced by the public: they are the principal dealers in spirits; keepers of “vodka” (drinking) shops and houses of ill-fame; receivers of stolen goods; illegal pawnbrokers and usurers. A branch they also succeed in is as government contractors. With their knowledge of handling money, they collude with unscrupulous officials in defrauding the State to vast amounts annually. In fact, the malpractices of some of the Jewish community have a bad influence on those whom they come in contact with. It must, however, be said that there are many well educated, highly respectable Jews in Russia, but they form a small minority. . . . They thoroughly condemn the occupations of their lower brethren. . . . They themselves acknowledge the abuses practised by some of their own members, and suggest remedial measures to allay the irritation existing among the working classes.

Another thing the Jews are accused of is that there exists among them a system of boycotting; they use their religion for business purposes. . . . For instance, in Bessarabia, the produce of a vineyard is drawn for by lot, and falls, say to Jacob Levy; the other Jews of the district cannot compete with Levy, who buys the wine at his own price. In the leasing by action of government and provincial lands, it is invariably a Jew who outbids the others and afterwards re-lets plots to the peasantry at exorbitant prices. . . .

Their fame as usurers is well known. Given a Jewish recruit with a few roubles’ capital, it can be worked out, mathematically, what time it will take him to become the money-lender of his company or regiment, from the drummer to the colonel. Take the case of a peasant: if he once gets into the hands of this class, he is irretrievably lost. The proprietor, in his turn, from a small loan gradually mortgages and eventually loses his estate. A great deal of landed property in south Russia has of late years passed into the hands of the Israelites but principally into the hands of intelligent and sober peasants.

From first to last, the Jew has his hand in everything. He advances the seed for sowing, which is generally returned in kind—quarters for bushels. As harvest time comes around, money is required to gather in the crops. This is sometimes advanced on hard conditions; but the peasant has no choice; there is no one to lend him money, and it is better to secure something than to lose all. Very often the Jew buys the whole crop as it stands in the field on his own terms. It is thus seen that they themselves do not raise agricultural products, but they reap the benefits of others’ labour, and steadily become rich, while proprietors are gradually getting ruined. In their relation to Russia they are compared to parasites that have settled on a plant not vigorous enough to throw them off, and which is being sapped of its vitality.

The vice-consul also noted that peasants often say when they see the property of a Jew, “That is my blood.” The complaints of the pogromists also included charges that Russian girls in service at Jewish households were sexually exploited.

Gentile revolutionaries were also prone to anti-Semitic pronouncements. In 1869 the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin stated of the Jews that “their history, since well before the Christian era, has imprinted on them a trait essentially mercantile and bourgeois, which means, taken as a nation, they are par excellence the exploiters of the work of others, and they have a horror and a natural fear of the masses of the people, whom, moreover, they hate, openly or secretly” (in Rather 1990, 178). The revolutionary party Narodnaia Volia took a tolerant view toward the 1881 pogroms and issued the following statement to the Ukrainian people:

The people in the Ukraine suffer worst of all from the Jews. Who takes the land, the woods, the taverns from out of your hands? The Jews. From whom does the muzhik [peasant], often with tears in his eyes, have to beg permission to get to his own field, his own plot of land?—the Jews. Wherever you look, wherever you go—the Jews are everywhere. The Jew curses you, cheats you, drinks your blood. . . . But as soon as the muzhiki rise up to free themselves from their enemies as they did in Elizavetgrad, Kiev, Smela, the tsar at once comes to the rescue of the Jews: the soldiers from Russia are called in and the blood of the muzhik, Christian blood, flows. . . . You have begun to rebel against the Jews. You have done well. Soon the revolt will be taken up across all of Russia against the tsar, the pany [landowners], the Jews. (In Frankel 1981, 98)[ii]Other pronouncements from revolutionaries during the period stated that “one should not hit the Jew because he is a Jew and prays to his own God . . . but because he plunders the people, sucks the blood of the workingman”; and, “The Jew owns the bars and taverns, rents land from the landowners and then leases it out to the peasant at two or three times the rate, he buys wheat on the field, goes in for money lending and charges percentages so high that people call them simply ‘Yiddish’ rates” (in Frankel 1981, 100). A Jewish socialist, Pavel Borisovich Akselrod, analyzed the situation by writing that “however great the poverty and deprivation suffered by the Jewish masses . . . the fact remains that, taken overall, some half of them function as a nonproductive element, sitting astride the neck of the lower classes in Russia” (in Frankel 1981, 105). These comments agree with the assessment of the British Vice-Consul quoted in note 21. …

Importantly, the previous footnote concludes: “In later years, Jews assumed a much larger role in the revolutionary movement in Russia. This resulted in a very different interpretation of the 1881 pogroms. Writing in 1905 during another period of pogroms, the Jewish socialist theorist Shimen Dubnov attributed the 1881 pogroms to “imaginary economic factors,” while the recent pogroms had been the result of “revenge for the revolutionary activity of the Jews” (in Frankel 1981, 136). Workers and peasants were active participants in the 1905 pogroms as well.” In other words, what had originally been a movement dominated by non-Jews had been transformed in a manner congruent with Jewish interests. Solzhenitsyn notes that by the 1880s and 1890s Jews became disproportionately involved in revolution—between a quarter and a third of revolutionaries were Jews and Jews constituted 37 percent of political prisoners despite being only 5 percent of the population.

Like 1960s Jewish radicals (The Culture of Critique, Ch. 3), Russian-Jewish radicals of the late nineteenth century tended to come from wealthy families and were not estranged from their families, both of which were often the case with non-Jewish radicals.

One thing that may surprise many, given the representations of Jews in the popular media and the occupational and social class profile of Jews in the West, is how violent these Jewish revolutionaries were. Solzhenitsyn notes that the 1903 pogrom in Gomel, Belarus was started when “armed and organized gangs of Jews had instigated the pogrom against Russians. … All the casualties were Russian.” But when the troops arrived, they protected the wealthy Jewish parts of the city, “and to show their appreciation, the Jews fired guns and threw stones at them.” (89) These Jews were angry because of the Kishinev pogrom which had happened 6 months previously. Nevertheless, when many Jews showed how violent and sadistic they could be after the Bolsheviks came to power, there was widespread surprise. As I noted in a review of Yuri Slezkine’s The Jewish Century:

Many of the commentators on Jewish Bolsheviks noted the ‘transformation’ of Jews: In the words of another Jewish commentator, G. A. Landau, ‘cruelty, sadism, and violence had seemed alien to a nation so far removed from physical activity.’ And another Jewish commentator, Ia. A Bromberg, noted that: the formerly oppressed lover of liberty had turned into a tyrant of “unheard-of-despotic arbitrariness”…. The convinced and unconditional opponent of the death penalty not just for political crimes but for the most heinous offenses, who could not, as it were, watch a chicken being killed, has been transformed outwardly into a leather-clad person with a revolver and, in fact, lost all human likeness (Slezkine, 183–184).

This psychological “transformation” of Russian Jews was probably not all that surprising to the Russians themselves, given [Maxim] Gorky’s finding that Russians prior to the Revolution saw Jews as possessed of “cruel egoism” and that they were concerned about becoming slaves of the Jews.

Quinn notes that all of the blameworthy aspects of Jewish behavior in Gomel have been whitewashed by Jewish historians, and that Jewish accounts of the Kishinev pogrom routinely ignore Jewish behavior as implicated. Moreover, as Andrew Joyce has documented, Jewish accounts at the time played up various hoaxes of Jewish victimization (“Babies were literally torn to pieces by the frenzied and bloodthirsty mob,” as a New York Times article claimed).

And it’s no surprise that Jews became the primary theorists of revolution—they “tirelessly propounded anarchism, socialism, and other disruptive ideologies.” (91) It’s also fascinating that a pro-Jewish party and the Jewish press supported the Duma’s refusal to lift restrictions on Jews, likely as a strategic move to retain Jewish ardor in the revolutionary efforts. As Quinn notes, “we should never take the Left, especially the Jewish left at its word. Any progressive agenda is merely a smokescreen for destroying traditional gentile power structures and replacing them with totalitarianism.” (93; italics in text) And regarding the press, it’s no surprise that, as Solzhenitsyn notes, it “was dominated by left-wing or radical Jews who occupied key positions” (94) And it’s hard not to relate to the lament of a Russian newspaper editor in 1905 who noted that “The Jews have bet heavily on the card of revolution” and that Russians “who think seriously have understood that in such movements the press represents a force and that this force is not in their hands, but in that of their adversaries.” (94) In all of this, Solzhenitsyn bends over backwards to present Jewish actions favorably, but, as Quinn notes, “struggles with his evenhandedness [and] his efforts get more strained as the book goes on.” (105)

So it’s no surprise that Jews were overrepresented in the October Revolution or subsequent governments—6 of 12 of the conspirators and, according to mass murderer Lazar Kaganovich, “the vast majority of the presidium at the table were Jews,” as well as at least half of Lenin’s first Soviet Politburo. (103)

Not that other peoples weren’t involved. While Russians remained a minority in the power structure, other groups­—Poles, Latvians, Georgians also played a role, and the Russians who did participate were basically psychopaths. As I noted in the Preface to the 2002 edition of The Culture of Critique (p. 32):

It is interesting that many of the non-Jewish Bolsheviks were members of non-Russian ethnic groups or, as noted in CofC, were married to Jewish women. It was a common perception during the early stages of the Soviet Union that the government was dominated by “a small knot of foreigners” (Szajkowski 1977, 55). Stalin, Beria, and Ordzhonikidze were Georgians; Dzerzhinsky, the ruthless head of the Checka (Secret Police) during the 1920s, was a Pole with strong pro-Jewish attitudes. The original Cheka was made up largely of non-Russians, and the Russians in the Cheka tended to be sadistic psychopaths and criminals (Werth 1999, 62; Wolin & Slusser 1957, 6)—people who are unlikely to have any allegiance to or identification with their people.

Quinn notes that Solzhenitsyn accepts “for the sake of argument” that Bolshevik Jews were renegade Jews (Otshchepentsy), but then wonders why these same Jews hesitate to apply this argument to Russian Bolsheviks. The above indicates that the Russian Bolsheviks tended not to identify with their people—marrying into a group that was widely despised by Russians and counting among them “sadistic psychopaths and criminals.” On the other hand, there is a great deal of evidence that in general Jewish communists retained a strong sense of Jewish identity. This is a critical question because a standard Jewish rationale for Jewish involvement in communism was that these revolutionaries were not really Jews—that they had become entirely removed from any Jewish identity. From The Culture of Critique (Ch. 3):

Several factors favor our supposing that Jewish identification occurred in a substantial percentage of ethnic Jews [in the USSR]: (1) People were classified as Jews depending on their ethnic background at least partly because of residual anti-Semitism; this would tend to impose a Jewish identity on these individuals and make it difficult to assume an exclusive identity as a member of a larger, more inclusive political group. (2) Many Jewish Bolsheviks, such as those in Evsektsiya [an explicitly Jewish section of the Communist Party] and the JAC [Jewish Anti-fascist Committee), aggressively sought to establish a secular Jewish subculture. (3) Very few Jews on the left envisioned a postrevolutionary society without a continuation of Judaism as a group; indeed, the predominant ideology among Jewish leftists was that postrevolutionary society would end anti-Semitism because it would end class conflict and the peculiar Jewish occupational profile. (4) The behavior of American communists shows that Jewish identity and the primacy of Jewish interests over communist interests were commonplace among individuals who were ethnically Jewish communists. … (5) The existence of Jewish crypsis in other times and places combined with the possibility that self-deception, identificatory flexibility, and identificatory ambivalence are important components of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy (see Separation and Its Discontents, Ch. 8). …

Consider the case of Polina Zhemchuzhina, the wife of Vyacheslav Mikhailovich Molotov (Premier of the USSR during the 1930s) and a prominent revolutionary who joined the Communist Party in 1918. (Among other accomplishments, she was a member of the Party Central Committee.) When Golda Meir visited the Soviet Union in 1948, Zhemchuzhina repeatedly uttered the phrase “Ich bin a Yiddishe tochter” (I am a daughter of the Jewish people) when Meir asked how she spoke Yiddish so well (Rubenstein 1996, 262). “She parted from the [Israeli delegation] with tears in her eyes, saying ‘I wish all will go well for you there and then it will be good for all the Jews’ ” (Rubenstein 1996, 262). Vaksberg (1994, 192) describes her as “an iron Stalinist, but her fanaticism did not keep her from being a “good Jewish daughter.”

Consider also the case of Ilya Ehrenburg, the prominent Soviet journalist and anti-fascist propagandist for the Soviet Union whose life is described in a book whose title, Tangled Loyalties (Rubenstein 1996), illustrates the complexities of Jewish identity in the Soviet Union. Ehrenburg was a loyal Stalinist, supporting the Soviet line on Zionism and refusing to condemn Soviet anti-Jewish actions (Rubenstein 1996). Nevertheless, Ehrenburg held Zionist views, maintained Jewish associational patterns, believed in the uniqueness of the Jewish people, and was deeply concerned about anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. Ehrenburg was an organizing member of the JAC, which advocated Jewish cultural revival and greater contact with Jews abroad. A writer friend described him as “first of all a Jew. . . . Ehrenburg had rejected his origins with all his being, disguised himself in the West, smoking Dutch tobacco and making his travel plans at Cook’s. . . . But he did not erase the Jew” (p. 204). “Ehrenburg never denied his Jewish origins and near the end of his life often repeated the defiant conviction that he would consider himself a Jew ‘as long as there was a single anti-Semite left on earth’ ” (Rubenstein 1996, 13). In a famous article, he cited a statement that “blood exists in two forms; the blood that flows inside the veins and the blood that flows out of the veins. . . . Why do I say, ‘We Jews?’ Because of blood” (p. 259). Indeed, his intense loyalty to Stalin’s regime and his silence about Soviet brutalities involving the murder of millions of its citizens during the 1930s may have been motivated largely by his view that the Soviet Union was a bulwark against fascism (pp. 143–145). “No transgression angered him more than anti-Semitism” (p. 313).

A powerful residual Jewish identity in a prominent Bolshevik can also be seen in the following comment on the reaction of ethnic Jews to the emergence of Israel:

It seemed that all Jews, regardless of age, profession, or social status, felt responsible for the distant little state that had become a symbol of national revival. Even the Soviet Jews who had seemed irrevocably assimilated were now under the spell of the Middle Eastern miracle. Yekaterina Davidovna (Golda Gorbman) was a fanatic Bolshevik and internationalist and wife of Marshal Kliment Voroshilov, and in her youth she had been excommunicated as an unbeliever; but now she struck her relatives dumb by saying, “Now at last we have our motherland, too.” (Kostyrchenko 1995, 102)

Solzhenitsyn, despite wanting to share blame for the October Revolution and the atrocities that followed, states that “Jews were the driving force behind the October Revolution.” (106) The horror of the early Soviet regime is almost impossible to comprehend. Solzhenitsyn describes the early days of the Russian Civil War not as a war, but as the “liquidation of a former adversary” (108). It was routine to execute their victims without trial, the only “evidence” needed being the social class membership of the victims.

Solzhenitsyn, commenting on the change in attitude among Soviet Jews after Jews became targets of Soviet oppression after World War II:

The Soviet government was as unjust and cruel [after the Revolution] as it was to be in 1937 and 1950. But in the Twenties the bloodlust did not raise alarm or resistance in the wider Jewish population since its force was aimed not at Jewry. (115)

Further, “Solzhenitsyn mordantly points out how convenient it was for his critics to profess outrage over these crimes [i.e., the hundreds of thousands of deaths involved in the construction of the Belomor Canal between Lake Onega and the White Sea] only decades after they had been committed. At the time, however, nearly all Jewish voices were silent; and most remain till this day—except when they want to heap more scorn on Solzhenitsyn as an anti-Semite.” (122)

Similarly, criticism of the USSR among Jews in the United States did not become widespread until there were signs that Jews were being persecuted in the USSR. Indeed, the origins of the neoconservative movement (a Jewish intellectual and political movement) can be traced to the 1950s. For example, Sydney Hook was “deeply concerned about the emergence of anti-Semitism in the USSR.”

Until the Moscow Trials of the 1930s he was blind to the violence and oppression in the USSR. During a visit to the USSR in 1929, “I was completely oblivious at the time to the systematic repressions that were then going on against noncommunist elements and altogether ignorant of the liquidation of the so-called kulaks that had already begun that summer. I was not even curious enough to probe and pry, possibly for fear of what I would discover.” During the 1930s, when the Communist Party exercised a dominant cultural influence in the United States, “the fear of fascism helped to blur our vision and blunt our hearing to the reports that kept trickling out of the Soviet Union.” Even the Moscow Trials were dismissed by large sectors of liberal opinion. It was the time of the Popular Front, where the fundamental principle was the defense of the Soviet Union. Liberal journals like the New Republic did not support inquiries into the trials, citing New York Times reporter Walter Duranty as an authority who believed in the truth of the confessions. (“Neoconservatism as a Jewish Movement,” p. 36)

Solzhenitsyn portrays the 1930s as the height of Jewish power in the USSR: “Despite offering the caveat that Jews never constituted all of these powerful organizations, Solzhenitsyn goes on for pages detailing the Jewish dominance of Soviet economics, diplomacy, culture, and politics during the 1930s. … And this was occurring while Stalin was supposedly purging Jews from the Party” (119, 120)

Ethnic networking was pervasive, including in the Gulag and in the construction of the Belomor Canal noted above. Quinn on the Gulag: “They were known to recruit other Jews for privileged positions among the medical staff, even if those they recruited had no medical training” (120) Solzhenitsyn again goes into voluminous detail, naming Jews so privileged, and then noting “Is it really reasonable to suppose that Jews were digging soil with their shovels and racing with their hand-barrows and dying under those barrows from exhaustion and emaciation?” He also notes one non-Jew with the name Bernstein who received privileged treatment because he was thought to be a Jew: “Jews took him for one of their own and never failed to help him when he needed it.” Which reminds me that a well-known article by media critic William Cash provided anecdotal evidence that individuals disguised themselves as Jews in their attempst to become accepted in the movie industry. (SAID, Ch. 2, note 40, p. 84)

Quinn discusses the negative Jewish reception to his work. Even before Two Hundred Years Together, Solzhenitsyn stated, “Even at the height of the battle at the [USSR’s] Secretariat of the Writers’ Union I was not inveighed against with such bile, such personal, passionate hate, as I was now by America’s pseudo-educated elite.” (147) Regarding the reception of Two Hundred Years Together, Quinn notes that Jewish writers have “said little about the vast suffering of Russians during the Soviet period or cared to refute Solzhenitsyn’s linking of high-level Jews … to the suffering.” (130)

No surprise there. Nothing has changed. The Jewish unwillingness to see the enormity of Jewish behavior during the Soviet period and really for the entire gamut of Western history continues into the present. Quinn makes the obvious conclusion: “As whites slowly become minorities in their homelands, Solzhenitsyn’s calls for hope and reconciliation sound more and more like the stuff of fantasy. … How much longer can we afford to hope?” (131) Indeed.

And I agree with Quinn that “white identity is the only solution to Jewish conquest.” (134) In the Russian case, Solzhenitsyn shows that even a rather tepid sense of Russian ethnocentrism was enough to make many Jews leave Russia in the later decades of the Soviet regime. Quinn concludes: “If it can be done there, it can be done anywhere.” (134, emphasis in original) Nevertheless, only the rise of Vladimir Putin, who tamed the Jewish oligarchs who had basically inherited the Soviet economy after the fall of the USSR, prevented the Jews from once again dominating Russia—a source of much of the hatred toward Russia that we see today, especially from neoconservatives.

Besides an upsurge in White identity—which does seem to be happening, we therefore need strong leadership at the political level, and that is sorely lacking. The courage that has been in evidence in so much of the history of the West and enabled its many accomplishments is in short supply. And, as Solzhenitsyn noted in his much-maligned Harvard address of 1978, “Must one point out that from ancient times a decline in courage has been considered the first symptom of the end?” (21)

Spencer J. Quinn’s Solzhenitsyn and the Right is essential reading, and certainly not only for those already well read on White identity and White interests. It will also be a red pill for many who continue to be under the spell of the current culture of Western suicide.

Notes

[i] The following report from British Vice-Consul L. Wagstaff sums up the public perception of the social and economic causes of anti-Semitism leading to the pogroms of 1881 in Russia and reflects many of the themes of this section and the previous section:

It is chiefly as brokers or middlemen that the Jews are so prominent. Seldom a business transaction of any kind takes place without their intervention, and from both sides they receive compensation. To enumerate some of their other occupations, constantly denounced by the public: they are the principal dealers in spirits; keepers of “vodka” (drinking) shops and houses of ill-fame; receivers of stolen goods; illegal pawnbrokers and usurers. A branch they also succeed in is as government contractors. With their knowledge of handling money, they collude with unscrupulous officials in defrauding the State to vast amounts annually. In fact, the malpractices of some of the Jewish community have a bad influence on those whom they come in contact with. It must, however, be said that there are many well educated, highly respectable Jews in Russia, but they form a small minority. . . . They thoroughly condemn the occupations of their lower brethren. . . . They themselves acknowledge the abuses practised by some of their own members, and suggest remedial measures to allay the irritation existing among the working classes.

Another thing the Jews are accused of is that there exists among them a system of boycotting; they use their religion for business purposes. . . . For instance, in Bessarabia, the produce of a vineyard is drawn for by lot, and falls, say to Jacob Levy; the other Jews of the district cannot compete with Levy, who buys the wine at his own price. In the leasing by action of government and provincial lands, it is invariably a Jew who outbids the others and afterwards re-lets plots to the peasantry at exorbitant prices. . . .

Their fame as usurers is well known. Given a Jewish recruit with a few roubles’ capital, it can be worked out, mathematically, what time it will take him to become the money-lender of his company or regiment, from the drummer to the colonel. Take the case of a peasant: if he once gets into the hands of this class, he is irretrievably lost. The proprietor, in his turn, from a small loan gradually mortgages and eventually loses his estate. A great deal of landed property in south Russia has of late years passed into the hands of the Israelites but principally into the hands of intelligent and sober peasants.

From first to last, the Jew has his hand in everything. He advances the seed for sowing, which is generally returned in kind—quarters for bushels. As harvest time comes around, money is required to gather in the crops. This is sometimes advanced on hard conditions; but the peasant has no choice; there is no one to lend him money, and it is better to secure something than to lose all. Very often the Jew buys the whole crop as it stands in the field on his own terms. It is thus seen that they themselves do not raise agricultural products, but they reap the benefits of others’ labour, and steadily become rich, while proprietors are gradually getting ruined. In their relation to Russia they are compared to parasites that have settled on a plant not vigorous enough to throw them off, and which is being sapped of its vitality.

The vice-consul also noted that peasants often say when they see the property of a Jew, “That is my blood.” The complaints of the pogromists also included charges that Russian girls in service at Jewish households were sexually exploited.

[ii] Other pronouncements from revolutionaries during the period stated that “one should not hit the Jew because he is a Jew and prays to his own God . . . but because he plunders the people, sucks the blood of the workingman”; and, “The Jew owns the bars and taverns, rents land from the landowners and then leases it out to the peasant at two or three times the rate, he buys wheat on the field, goes in for money lending and charges percentages so high that people call them simply ‘Yiddish’ rates” (in Frankel 1981, 100). A Jewish socialist, Pavel Borisovich Akselrod, analyzed the situation by writing that “however great the poverty and deprivation suffered by the Jewish masses . . . the fact remains that, taken overall, some half of them function as a nonproductive element, sitting astride the neck of the lower classes in Russia” (in Frankel 1981, 105). These comments agree with the assessment of the British Vice-Consul quoted in note 21. …

(Republished from The Occidental Observer by permission of author or representative)
 
Hide 94 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Anonymous[867] • Disclaimer says:

    This is an edited version of a comment I recently posted on this same essay over at the Occidental Observer: https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2021/10/25/spencer-quinns-solzhenitsyn-and-the-right/

    Whites are very obviously getting replaced in their native lands. And by allowing themselves to be led around like infants they are speeding up this replacement, and ensuring the collapse of White Western culture.

    It’s one thing, though, to be replaced slowly over time. It will be totally something else if the replacement is done over just a few years through the use of imprisonment camps.

    And I believe prison camps are soon to be utilised to speed up the replacement of Whites. We need to be aware, very aware.

    [MORE]

    Decades of TV, media and education, managed by Jews, has dumbed us down far more than we can imagine. This has dulled our natural senses. We need to re-set ourselves by finding and using our senses again. There are millions of years of practice behind our senses. We need to use them, listen to them, and trust them again.

    Take the many Western patriots and White nationalists that believe Russia’s dictator, Putin, is a man who will align with Western nationalist values when, or if, true conservatives again get power in the West. These people are clutching at straws and by doing so are speeding up the destruction of White culture and their homelands.

    The following is a little history on Putin and his long-term close associations and cooperation with – and love of – Ashkenazi Jews.

    Vladimir Putin started his career in the mid-1980s as a KGB officer in Dresden, East Germany – he would have known and worked with the Ashkenazi Merkel during this time. In 1990, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, he moved to Leningrad (now Saint Petersburg) where he very quickly became the city’s KGB/FSB boss.

    It was in Leningrad that Putin began his meteoric rise to what was in effect the god-father of a mafia clan. In 2007 it was estimated that Putin had amassed a \$40 billion fortune.

    In 1996 Putin moved to Moscow where he was appointed a big-wig in Boris Yeltsin’s administration. Then in December 1999 Putin became president of Russia.

    How did this Mr Nobody from a Dresden KGB field office waltz into Leningrad and, almost overnight, become a powerhouse in the Russian criminal and political world? Then nine years later he trotted over to Moscow and became president of Russia?

    For this to happen, you have to be in bed with very powerful people.

    When Putin started out in Leningrad his boss was the mayor, Anatoly Aleksandrovich Sobchak. Putin worked well with this extremely wealthy Ashkenazi Jew and maintained a lifelong close friendship with him.

    Boris Berezovsky was another rich Ashkenazi Jew that Putin was very close to in his Leningrad days. Berezovsky is rumoured to have been the real power behind Yeltsin – he’d have been instrumental in Yeltsin handing the Russian presidency over to Putin.

    Berezovsky eventually fled to the UK where he was granted asylum. This was just another controlled act by the Ashkenazi to lead anti-Jew/Globalists in Russia and the West to believe that Putin was a White patriot. It was also done to distance Putin from the corruption and incompetence of the Yeltsin era – as I’ve said, Berezovsky was closely associated with the Yeltsin administration and a lot of Yeltsin’s sins departed with him.

    Ashkenazi Jews actually view England as being more their homeland than they do Israel. The seed of the Ashkenazi originated in and around the ancient civilisation of Sumer, Mesopotamia. From there this seed migrated north and established a kingdom known as Kharza near the Caspian Sea – they eventually got chased out of this region but were accepted and allowed to settle in Europe.

    The area now known as Israel means nothing to them. Their ancestors never lived there. It’s simply a Global headquarters for them, and a place they can flee to if their world domination plans go wrong.

    So, it’s no big deal for Jews like Berezovsky to decamp from Russia and set up home in England, where he’ll actually see himself as living his retirement among more refined Jews.

    Vladimir Putin’s strings stretch almost to the top of International Jewry. While in Leningrad Putin met and became close friends with the Ashkenazi international script writer, Henry Kissinger.

    In the early 1990s Kissinger visited Leningrad under the guise of boosting international investment in what was known as the “Kissinger-Sobchak Commission”. He was really there, though, to access damage control on the collapsing Ashkenazi Soviet Empire, and to direct and manage the transition to a stable and Jew controlled dictatorship.

    Kissinger went to Russia to ensure that it would be on-side and able to participate when the New World Order plan was implemented – and he successfully got that job done.

    Another fundamentalist Ashkenazi who is a close friend of Putin is Berel Lazar. This Italian Orthodox Jew was brought to Russia and installed as the Chief Rabbi by Putin in the 1990s. Lazar is actually known as Putin’s rabbi.

    Berel Lazar controls an Orthodox Jewish movement known as Chabad, or sometimes as Lubavitch or Chabad-Lubavitch. Chabad is a Jewish movement that has spent billions of dollars establishing a network of almost 4,000 institutions worldwide. It has set up institutions in 49 American states, and possibly also in the 50th one by this time. Soros and Lazar are two sides of the one coin.

    The billions of dollars spent by Chabad to set up these institutions was supplied by Russian, US and European Ashkenazi Jews. One of the stated aims of Chabad is to: “Provide outreach to unaffiliated Jews and humanitarian aid, as well as religious, cultural and educational activities at Chabad-run community centres, synagogues, schools, camps, and soup kitchens.”

    (I’d bet my right arm that their “educational activities” doesn’t entail promoting young Jewish boys to believe they are girls, and advising them to take female hormones. Or teaching them that Negro’s are their intellectual superiors.)

    There are 6.4 million Jews in the United States, and hardly 0.3 percent of them below the bread-line. Why then spend billions of dollars setting up Jew “soup-kitchens” and “outreach programmes” in all of the states?

    Or might these “institutions” actually be training and control centres so as to have in place Ashkenazi Cheka units to provide “security” in the forthcoming totalitarian US? The Muslims who were trained in Afghanistan by the CIA to be efficient sociopathic seek and arrest units, and now being imported wholesale into the US, just might be earmarked to populate this new US Cheka force.

    Notice how the Washington Post reports that Putin slams “cancel culture” and “trans rights” and calls teaching gender fluidity a “crime against humanity”.

    Yet if 10,000 people demonstrated against SARS CoV-2 vaccines in New York, the WP would not report it, or if they did, they’d pretend that there were only 10 people at the demonstration.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/22/putin-valdai-speech-trump-cancel-culture/

    The general modus operandi of the MSM is to not report anything or anybody that questions or speaks against progressive ideology. But yet the MSM reports every utterance made by Putin against progressive “values”. As they also do when China erases Negros from movie advertisements, and when the CCP confines children to no more than three hours a week of video games and internet access.

    It’s doubly odd that the MSM publicises these railings against their “values” and “ideology” because it is exactly what White nationalists would want to hear. Is there a patriot or White nationalist anywhere that would not agree with what Putin said about transgenderism? Hardly.

    The MSM don’t report on the anti-vax demonstrations because they don’t want to encourage others to question the vaccines. They also don’t want others to know that there is a high number of people against vaccine mandates. The MSM wants everyone that is anti-vax to believe they are in a very small minority.

    Thus, it should naturally follow that the MSM would also do its utmost to hide the fact that there are governments and people that are utterly against transgenderism and Negros. They should want the anti-transgender and anti-Negro people to be discouraged and also to believe they are in a small minority.

    But they do the exact opposite. They endlessly report everything Putin’s says against progressive ideology, which therefore promotes him as a White hat to Western nationalists.

    The reason:
    The Ashkenazi are conducting a somewhat cleverly controlled operation against the nationalists and patriots of the West. Putin and China are simply following the screen-play given to them by the Jews.

    This operation has given the Western nationalists White hats to cling on to and Black hats to despise. Top White hats in the West are: Trump in the US; Le Pen and Zemmour in France; Batten and Farage in the United Kingdom. And, of course, Putin in Russia.

    I’ll just go with the US and Russia. Notice how Trump is portrayed in the MSM as to wanting a close amiable relationship with the “White hat” Putin. Look through their propaganda over the last half decade and you’ll see that Putin and Trump are portrayed as having similar moral codes in regards to society, patriotism and politics.

    Putin even went all out in 2016 to steal the election for Trump. Politically wise, you couldn’t get two people more on the one page than this! Or so the MSM wants you to believe.

    And White nationalists and patriots in the West lap it up. They drink it in so much, it runs down their chins and chests. Even the alt-media lap it up and spend vast resources and time feeding it to their readers.

    The intended outcome for this controlled operation is that in the West the progressives and their ideology are earmarked for defeat.

    You can put your life savings on Trump winning the next presidential election in the US. Or they might dump Biden before the next election is due, and arrange to install Trump before 2024. The halfwit, Kamala Harris, will never be president because this would risk firing up nationalists to rebel; and the Ashkenazi are too near their goal to risk that.

    The Globalists planned for Trump to win in 2016. He was put in as a sop to White nationalists so as to give the Globalists time to run their SARs CoV-2 criminal scam. This is why Hillary was so enraged, she missed out on being president for the simple reason that the timing of the Covid-19 scam was a bit off.

    Dementia laden and disgusting Biden and his sidekick Harris were installed in 2020 for no other reason than that their sheer nauseating incompetence will lull White nationalists into a false sense of security when they reinstall Trump in 2024.

    As will a nice warm bath feel twice as good if before taking it you first spend five minutes sitting in a freezing cold one.

    With Trump back in the White House and on the same page as CCP and Putin, and giving the impression he’s enacting policies to eradicate progressive ideology and clean up the educational institutions, White patriots will relax to the point of being comatose. They’ll be delighted to see their progressive nemesis being defeated and put back in their boxes and other traitors and criminals being thrown in jail.

    The White hat Trump, though, is an Ashkenazi stooge. To compare him to Putin, Trump is a Jew puppet while Putin is one of their 5-star generals. Many of the perceived White hats in Europe are also probably Jew stooges – or the Ashkenazi have black-mail material on them.

    I can picture the scenario they’ll use to put Trump back in the White House, whilst at the same time making him even more popular with White nationalists. They’ll conduct a managed war with China that is ostensibly about Taiwan. The US under Biden and his band of idiots will be defeated in this war. This will be an absolute humiliation for America, and particularly patriotic White Americans. Especially coming hot on the heels of the US defeat and rout in Afghanistan.

    Putin and his Ashkenazi backers did something similar in 1999 before he took the Russian presidency. Shortly before he took power, he had 4 or 5 apartment blocks across Russia blown up, killing hundreds of people. Then Putin took the presidency and blamed the bombings on separatists in a nearby state and sent war planes to bomb their capital.

    The Russian people, naturally, had been terrified by the apartment bombings and loved the decisive retaliation taken by no-nonsense Putin. He was just the strong White nationalist leader they had longed for.

    Thus, defeat by China will mean the senile Biden and his cohorts will have to go. The reinstalled “White hat”, Trump, via intermediary Putin, will negotiate an “honourable” peace treaty with China – the CCP will follow the Ashkenazi screen-play and give Trump a very good deal.

    Then the US will have Trump, sparkling like a new pin, in the White House, with all of nationalist America believing he’s the Messiah.

    With Trump untouchable, the order will them be given to arrest treasonous Americans and those involved in the SARs CoV-2 vaccine criminality. White nationalists will applaud this and all sections of the US media will churn out news about those arrested and faithfully report on the trials and sentences handed down.

    White American nationalists will think they’ve been transported to Paradise. They’ll believe that the US is back in the real world. Trump will be sainted, he’ll be the immaculate and infallible one.

    But during this extended honeymoon, and under the cloak of cleaning up traitors and criminals, the Ashkenazi controlled Trump administration will be silently hauling in the White nationalist leadership, and all those perceived to have the ability to lead a rebellion.

    The Ashkenazi will also have another cloak in place, under which they can clean up White patriots, in Trump’s second administration. This cloak is currently being constructed using the SARs CoV-2 vaccines. It’s going to take about three years for the majority of the vaccines to start showing their adverse and poisonous effects.

    The people that are unquestionably accepting the vaccines are progressives, liberals and Antifa types. These currently view themselves as being at one with the Globalist power structure. Like spoiled children, they won’t be able to believe it when they realise that the people they have worshipped and served for so long, the people whose bidding they’ve carried out without payment, have turned on them. Not only turned on them, but have actually poisoned them.

    It’s going to be a double whammy for these idiots. Trump will be in power and they will have already seen their much loved “values” and “ideologies” being swept off the streets and out of educational institutes.

    Then in early 2024 the vaccine poisons will start to kick in and the progressives and Antifa goons will watch their fellow travellers get ill and drop dead like flies from weird and hitherto unknown diseases. Doctors will be scarce because a lot of them will be in jail for aiding and abetting the geocidal vaccine scam.

    The Ashkenazi have grade-inflated these “doctors” through their medical colleges, and therefore feel they own them. When the Ashkenazi own something, they view it as their right to put it down.

    It’s then that progressives will finally realise how stupid they were. It’s only then will it finally dawn on them how wonderful it was when all Americans lived in a land with free speech and fair elections and tight borders, where thugs and criminals got thrown in jail.

    It’s then the fools will realise they shot their own feet off. And they are going to be mad. Very mad. But they never blame themselves for upsets in their lives, they always blame someone else.

    Thus, the poisoned Antifa goons and progressives will burn and riot like there’s no tomorrow when they realise they’ve been dosed with poison – by a smiling Negro nurse – that’s going to kill them at any minute.

    Then there’s the Negros and BLM. These fools will also have seen that there was no pot of gold waiting at the end of the BLM rainbow. They too will have been swept off the streets like so much trash and their easy pickings from smashed up stores will have dried up. So, they’ll get on board with the poisoned progressive fools in a quest for vengeance and also because rioting and destruction comes naturally to them.

    As we know, the Ashkenazi never let a crisis go to waste. The rioting by the poisoned Antifa, progressives and Negros will give them cover to sweep up even more White nationalists and patriots, and thrown them into camps alongside the genuine rioters.

    Trump isn’t White America’s friend. Far from it. It’s through his perceived friendship that the Globalists are finally going to snuff the life out of White America.

    The alt-media that promote the Ashkenazi propaganda about Putin and the CCP being on the same page as White Western nationalists need to educate themselves.

    Remember that Putin and the CCP are reading from the Ashkenazi screen-play. And both think as little of White Western nationalists as do the Khazars.

    • Disagree: Sarah, Derer
    • Thanks: Catdompanj
  2. Thanks Kevin. Great history lesson.

  3. Kevin MacDonaldsays:
    October 25, 2021 at 3:14 pm
    My reading is that Putin does not persecute Jews but he doesn’t let them have real power (including media power which they had in Yeltsin days) either.

    • Replies: @Howard gh
  4. There was one man who tried to solve this problem …

  5. ‘…Nevertheless, only the rise of Vladimir Putin, who tamed the Jewish oligarchs who had basically inherited the Soviet economy after the fall of the USSR, prevented the Jews from once again dominating Russia—a source of much of the hatred toward Russia that we see today, especially from neoconservatives…’

    It would be interesting to see this argument developed and supported. Can the fall of the oligarchs be related to the sudden Russophobia of the American Jewish establishment?

    Another way of looking at it would be to wonder why we took so long to realize how catastrophic the Yeltsin years were. Jews riding high, wide, and handsome in Russia seems to have been mighty fine with our Jews — but can this response be described?

    • Agree: Derer
  6. Anon[357] • Disclaimer says:

    The Bolshevik ‘Holocaust’ is a good means to introduce the subject to Normies

  7. Howard gh says:
    @Robert Dolan

    >>>Nevertheless, only the rise of Vladimir Putin, who tamed the Jewish oligarchs who had basically inherited the Soviet economy after the fall of the USSR, prevented the Jews from once again dominating Russia—a source of much of the hatred toward Russia that we see today, especially from neoconservatives.

    Putin literally grew up studying the Talmud. He festers his praise in the religious Chabadnik community for the Eurasian Jewish congress.

    See decent expose of Putin and the JQ here: https://saidit.net/s/conspiracy/comments/8i3z/putin_our_savior/

    • Replies: @Z-man
  8. Certainly an interesting book review, but I’ll be waiting for a while until the price comes WAY down to examine a copy.

    I think I can make a minor remark about “Two Hundred Years Together“. When an English version first surfaced on the Internet I downloaded a PDF as a matter of course. For future reference – the thing is not a short read!

    While looking for that online file again I ran into this at the Solzhenitsyn Center:

    Meanwhile, readers need to be forewarned that any and all English versions available on the Internet (with two important exceptions listed below) are illegal, pirated, a gross violation of international copyright law, and/or entirely unauthorized; often poorly and loosely translated; and redact passages, and indeed whole chapters, that apparently do not support the prejudices of those behind these illegal editions. English-language readers who wish to learn more about the book are invited to consult the resources listed below.

    So you’re now officially warned – if you download the book from the archive.org link, you’re a pirate and also acquiring a ‘bad’ translation.

    https://archive.org/details/200YearsTogether

    Don’t know what the Official and Proper English translation will say.

    It may be a coincidence, but just about the time Two Hundred Years Together
    became available, Solzhenitsyn went from an acclaimed, heroic, and great writer to a dog-breath person who has basically disappeared from view.

    Saying bad things about God’s Favorite People, even when they lived a hundred twenty years ago, and in a far away land, is definitely frowned upon in the Wag-the-dog States of America.

  9. Solzhenitsyn makes a false glorification of Stolypin. The Stolypin coup d’etat of 1907 sealed the fate of the Czarist monarchy long before Stolypin’s assassination. The revolution of 1905, which was a spontaneous combustion that spread across the whole country by its own momentum, had made it clear that the sentiment of the Russian population was towards the Left. If Stolypin had been willing to allow the Duma to remain then Russia would have seen the emergence of parliamentary government in which the Mensheviks, Social Revolutionaries and Popular Socialists would have formed dominant coalitions for at least the next 15 years, with the Bolsheviks likely acting as a minority opposition group. Stolypin couldn’t accept this as the reality and so he cancelled the Duma and thus sealed thee fate of Czarist Russia. Solzhenitsyn is simply drawing up a false glorification of the man.

    • Replies: @Lysias
  10. “1930s as the height”

    Given Solzhenitsyn’s record it will be well worth a meticulous examination of every single assertion he makes. It has already been noted by such authors as David Marple that Solzhenitsyn gets completely wrong the matter of the number of commissars and number of Jews among said commissars in the first Soviet government. Solzhenitsyn claims that “in the first Soviet government three were Russian, one Georgian, one Armenian and seventeen Jews.” In reality the Council of People’s Commissars had 15, not 22, members and of these Leon Trotsky was the only Jew. 10 were Russians (this was later increased to 11 with Yelizarov), 2 Ukrainians, 1 Pole, plus Trotsky as the 1 Jew. Given Solzhenitsyn’s general unreliability on such things one should not take his word on anything which he says about Jews holding positions in the 1930s without the most meticulous cross-checking.

    • Disagree: Robert Dolan
  11. “routine to execute their victims without trial”

    The Whites did more than their ample share of this among Russian peasants who had taken over the lands traditionally held by the aristocracy. Without even counting the pogroms against Jews, the White terror easily matched the Red terror in the Russian civil war. Solzhenitsyn simply tries to downplay the reality of the conflict among Russians which led to the defeat of the Whites.

    • Replies: @mulga mumblebrain
  12. @Anonymous

    One thing IS clear on any plans the elite have that involve someone who is wildly popular, they make use of that popularity for their own ends. And, unfortunately, people fall for it every time and realize what has happened when it’s far too late. As the late longshoreman street philosopher Eric Hoffer, has pointed out in his 1950’s book, “The True Believer”, all the popular media personalities on radio, in books and magazines, who were for the people, will then inevitably go over to the side that has the power and be against the people.

  13. Anonymous[661] • Disclaimer says:

    They’ve done a helluva job erasing Solzhenitsyn and his books, haven’t they? No wonder. His work is a complete blueprint to what is happening today and what will inevitably happen tomorrow if America continues to succumb to the Jewish left.

    Quinn’s book is on my reading list.

  14. @Patrick McNally

    Yeah, I’ve seen that people are, so to speak, “relaxed” with numbers….

    Although, Solzhenitsyn is not an anti-judaist, he’s just sloppy.

    • Replies: @Gidoutahere
  15. I have not finished your article/review yet, but thank you for this important history lesson and book recommendation, Mr. MacDonald. (Same for you too, Commenter #867, with your take underneath the [MORE] tag.) I look forward to reading more of Solzhenitsyn, as so far I have only read his A Day in the Life of Ivan DenisovichPeak Stupidity Review.

    As they say “history may not repeat, but it sure rhymes”. There has been no doubt in my mind for half a decade at least that we are seeing the rhyming of history right now with century-ago central and eastern Europe. I’ve written in “None Dare Call them Commies” that, no, these antifa and BLM useful idiots and the Establishment full of the ctrl-left don’t read Marx and Lenin and usually can’t get through more than a 144-character tweet, but these are the same people. They work for destruction of traditional society. In the words of ex-Cuban Humberto Fontova, they are “Los Resentidos”.

    We are at the time in history when the Commies are crawling out of the woodwork again.

    As to this part from Mr. Solzhenitsyn:

    “If the Far Left ever succeeds in gaining control over a major government (as it did in Russia in 1917), then the Dissident Right can expect oppression similar to what Solzhenitsyn and other figures faced in the Soviet Union.”

    Remember, it rhymes, but it doesn’t necessarily repeat. There is still one major difference between early 20th-century Russia and early 21st-century America: Guns. Lots of guns. Keep stocking up, Americans. Don’t worry about the ammo still being a little high.

    Read your Solzhenitsyn, Americans, if nothing else, just that one paragraph from The Gulag Archipelago. You all know it. Keep it nearby in your mind.

    • Thanks: RestiveUs
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  16. Z-man says:
    @Howard gh

    Nevertheless, only the rise of Vladimir Putin, who tamed the Jewish oligarchs who had basically inherited the Soviet economy after the fall of the USSR, prevented the Jews from once again dominating Russia—a source of much of the hatred toward Russia that we see today, especially from neoconservatives.

    Yes that and Putin’s reestablishment of Orthodox Christianity in Mother Russia. If it’s anybody they hate more than life itself it’s Jesus.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
    , @Dutch Boy
  17. @Achmed E. Newman

    Read your Solzhenitsyn, Americans

    Here they are …

    [MORE]

    • Disagree: RestiveUs
    • Replies: @RestiveUs
  18. @Z-man

    There must be some reason for the jews’ intense hatred of Russia and their insane desire to go to war with Russia (I mean…..send dumb white boys to fight and die in Russia)

    Putin might well be totally compromised, but he does good things for his people.

    I would take Putin over Biden any day.

    As to the claims that Solzhenitsyn was a “liar,” you can fuck off with that. They loved him until they realized he was telling the truth about organized jewry, at which point he became yet another naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

    “The Gulag Archipeligo” was a big part of my awakening, and if only one tenth of that book is true, it’s still a horrifying description of what happens when bloodthirsty jews take over your country.

    • Replies: @Z-man
    , @Ace
  19. @Bardon Kaldian

    David Marple, huh? And where did he source his #’s?

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  20. @Gidoutahere

    http://www.hist.msu.ru/ER/Etext/DEKRET/snk.htm

    Декрет II Всероссийского съезда Советов
    об образовании Рабочего и Крестьянского правительства

  21. @Colin Wright

    Which Putin? Paranoiacs say there are 5-6 Putins…

    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  22. I think Solzhenitsyn is controlled opposition. Who else gets published in New York?

    Ditto Ayn Rand and these communist assholes like at the Hudson Institute.

  23. @Bardon Kaldian

    ‘Which Putin? Paranoiacs say there are 5-6 Putins…’

    One would think people would get tired of inventing improbable theories. It really does get old after a while.

    ‘My grandmother’s dog started howling the moment JFK was shot — and the rest of us didn’t hear the news for another four hours.’

    ‘Coincidence? I don’t think so…’

    I actually had to think about that. I thought of another illustration — then I realized that it was probably going to step on someone’s improbable theory.

  24. @Bardon Kaldian

    Well, that’s nice. If you can read that you are probably suspect far more than Sozhenitsyn.

  25. Anon[357] • Disclaimer says:
    @Colin Wright

    …. Can the fall of the oligarchs be related to the sudden Russophobia of the American Jewish establishment…..

    Yes most certainly yes

    • Agree: Thomasina
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
  26. anon[307] • Disclaimer says:

    it is worthy of note that while stalin actually succeeded in making the soviet union an industrial superpower from nothing in less than a decade…

    mao’s imitation, “the great leap forward”, failed miserably, and china only developed after it let wypipo run things.

    kmac’s fellow IQ-ist psychology professors who boost for mongos need to look themselves in the mirror and ask, “am i retarded?”

    btw, why did kmac grossly overestimate jewish IQ?

    i guess because his anti-semitism isn’t as important to him as the false belief that psychology is a science and that psychology professors aren’t retarded.

    sad.

    • Troll: Dave Bowman
  27. Kevin McDonald on 26/10/[email protected]:30(+2)

    https://www.unz.com/article/spencer-quinns-solzhenitsyn-and-the-right/

    |Solzhenitsyn| the_right|

    “Quinn notes that even this sort of Soviet oppression is more extreme than what
    we see in the West now, there are certainly the beginning signs of similar
    repression—travel restrictions, bank account and credit card suspensions for
    dissidents, banning and shadow banning on social media, double standards of
    justice in which the legal system throws the book at rightists and typically
    refuses to even investigate or indict leftists”

    …and this on a far larger relative to population scale. …and this in the
    same “Jewish mindset” method and manner as then and there.

    The single Jew has many accomplices, in the style and trend of Yeltsin. “They”
    look the part.

    “Nevertheless, Solzhenitsyn often bent over backwards not to be negative
    about Jews. Quinn notes that “Solzhenitsyn was no anti-Semite. There are
    many passages in this work that demonstrate a desire to show justice, even
    tenderness, toward Jews.”

    …hence get published. All authors that have some “public-intellectual”
    ambitions try to stay within convention, reap the rewards of ‘career’. The
    worst ever, Chomsky, Hedges, GGreenwald… To not include McDonald, the author,
    can it be that the “White European descendants” are not serviced from the
    Jewish concise strategy of “forced regression to the mean(the Black one, the
    Muslim one, The low education, low genetic potential anything one)”, by “upping
    the breeding intra race” at se. The White population in the larger part, in the
    US, is probably ill conceived for upping the genetic qualities that defined
    it’s best moments in it’s history. Thus selective breeding for cognitive
    capacitation, health, and resilience within racial boundaries is at order.

    Our impression is that K. McDonald does not want to go there, just that defines
    his “public intellectual” pragmatism. He is of course well aware of the
    “out-breeding the others(bigger numbers as opposite to better quality matches)”
    logic bullocks. The Jewish population is a fraction of
    the White one and “thriving”. Genetics, the biology of genetics, statistics,
    “AI”(automated statistics) lifted a veil that can be applied to the cause …as our Cousins
    do with zest. Whites stick to the five-thousand word out of focus narrative as to pose as
    serious.

    It would be imperative to address this remark, if the author wants to keep any
    credibility in the long term. Not necessarily at unz.com(Jewish to the core),
    and larger audiences, but as in his customary, spinning it out in a book. My
    suggestion is genuine, we wish McDonald to be read, be relevant in the longer
    time-line.

    Who did i offend as to be censured this time around?

  28. @Bardon Kaldian

    GoogleTran is your friend:

    Decree of the II All-Russian Congress of Soviets
    on the formation of the Workers ‘and Peasants’ government

    October 26 (November 8) 1917

    Verified by edition: Decrees of the Soviet government. T.I.
    Moscow, State Publishing House of Political Literature, 1957.

    [MORE]

    PAGE

    All-Russian Congress of Soviets of Workers, Soldiers and
    peasant deputies decides:
    To form to govern the country, until convocation
    Constituent Assembly, Provisional Workers ‘and Peasants’
    government, which will be called the Council of the People’s
    Commissaries. Management of certain branches of the state
    life is entrusted to commissions, the composition of which must ensure
    the implementation of the program proclaimed by the Congress, in close
    unity with mass organizations of workers, women workers, sailors,
    soldiers, peasants and employees. Government power belongs to
    collegiums of chairmen of these commissions, i.e. The People’s Council
    Commissaries.

    Control over the activities of the people’s commissars and the law
    their displacement belongs to the All-Russian Congress of Workers’ Soviets,
    peasant and soldier deputies and its Central
    To the Executive Committee.
    At the moment, the Council of People’s Commissars is composed of
    the following persons:

    Chairman of the Council – Vladimir Ulyanov (Lenin).
    People’s Commissar for Internal Affairs – A. I. Rykov.
    Agriculture – V.P. Milyutin.
    Labor – A.G. Shlyapnikov.
    Military and naval affairs – a committee composed of: V.A. Ovseenko
    (Antonov), N.V. Krylenko and P.E. Dybenko.
    For trade and industry – V.P. Nogin.
    Public education – A.V. Lunacharsky.
    Finance – I.I.Skvortsov (Stepanov).
    For foreign affairs – L.D.Bronshtein (Trotsky).
    Justice – G. I. Opokov (Lomov).
    For food – I.A. Teodorovich.
    Posts and telegraphs – N.P. Avilov (Glebov)
    Chairman for Nationalities Affairs – I.V. Dzhugashvili
    (Stalin).
    The post of People’s Commissar for Railway Affairs temporarily
    remains unsubstituted (vacant).

    • Replies: @Gidoutahere
  29. @anon

    What are you babbling about?

    White people aren’t running China. WTF are you talking about?

    The jews wrecked Russia, wrecked the economy, slaughtered millions pf people.

    Ashkenazi IQ is somewhat higher than Sephardic, and somewhat higher than the average European.
    But Kevin has also mentioned that there are far more high IQ whites than high IQ jews, because of the much larger size of the white population.

    KMAC wrote three large TOMES on the jewish people……groundbreaking scholarship…..has written a zillion brilliant articles…..runs a top shelf website…..is recognized as the godfather of the dissident right.

    What have YOU done?

    • Agree: Automatic Slim
    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  30. Z-man says:
    @Robert Dolan

    There must be some reason for the jews’ intense hatred of Russia and their insane desire to go to war with Russia (I mean…..send dumb white boys to fight and die in Russia)

    Me and the other poster just gave you the two most important reasons, fer heavens sake!

  31. By the way- why don’t you people, obsessing about Jews, actually read something “bad” about them? Instead of perpetually whining this & that, read classic works of Anti-Semitic Canon & broaden your knowledge about them. They are your enemies, and you should know thy enemy. True, I haven’t read it all, because most of it is dull, but Marr is readable, Wagner is readable, ca. 40% of “Mein Kampf” is readable, “Table Talk” is hilarious, while Ford is good in bits & pieces. I’ve added Gobineau and Rosenberg, along with the canonical H.S. Chamberlain. Protocols are dull, but, de gustibus non est disputandum.

    So- let great Hymie conspiracy reading session begin. Yay …

  32. @Robert Dolan

    Not to lay claim on geniality, but MacDonald has blind spots that are unforgivable on the intellectual level. These blind spots are to preserve his “legit” status and keep being a obscurantist stooge, and get financed. “A license to kill” what matters. What i am referring at, is his not touching “breeding for quality” of the White European Descend peoples. Ashkenazim do! It would trigger the “Nazi” in commoner terms, so well kept at the top of the argumentation as a doorstop by our cousins.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  33. @Bardon Kaldian

    Relaxed with numbers. 6M Jews died in the holohoax, now that’s relaxed with numbers.

  34. I’m glad you mentioned “Mein Kamph” in the context of as being 40% readable. When he goes into the history of obscure regional wars in Europe.my eyes begin to glaze over and slows down my reading rate to about 20 words per minute. “Mein Kampf “is an extremely turgid book to navigate, in my opinion.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    , @John Wear
  35. @Patrick McNally

    At last-a little sanity. It was a vicious Civil War, a class war with foreign intervention, and atrocities on all sides.

  36. @anon

    China grew, from 1949 to 1978, at about 10% pa, from a very, very, low base. The reconstruction of the infrastructure of the country, the education of its people, the emancipation of women, the raising of life expectancy from less than forty to nearly seventy, the liberation of Tibet from feudal theocracy etc, were all achieved. Dumb anon.

  37. @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    Tastes differ. In my opinion, Hitler was an interesting writer. As I said elsewhere …

    Hitler was much maligned by “good Germans” as a mediocre writer (true, he was not a great stylist). Just, he is still very readable, with flashes of unexpected & bizarre humor.

    Judging Hitler solely by his Bible, “Mein Kampf” (and not by more interesting Table Talk) is an ambiguous task. When I read him to get the gist, he did not leave much impression: German destiny lies in the colonization of the East & Jews are guilty of everything. These two themes he repeats endlessly, so one is left with the feeling of reading one & the same thing again & again. After 20% of “Mein Kampf”, one gets the impression that Hitler has nothing new to offer.

    It is true, but Hitler still remains, despite too frequent lapses into sentimentality, kitsch & silliness, a magnetic writer. “Mein Kampf” is haunted by a vision, growing Hitler’s vision of life not only as the struggle, but as something inherently vicious, cruel as Aztec gods feasting on human sacrifice. And while this vision is evidently authentic, it is not just a metaphysical-historical metaphor. His most memorable parts are saturated by his experiences in pre-war Vienna, as well as with his political activity after the Great War. Images of decay & rot dominate – but not without humor. Hitler frequently digresses, and “Mein Kampf” could also be read as a stream-of-consciousness philosophical novel, although written in a rather conventional manner.

    He is also funny. He frequently bares his soul, confessional-style. For instance, the text is studded with phrases like: I was deeply shattered in the essence of my being. I did not know what to do with my life. I felt there was a great Destiny waiting for me- but I was not sure. What if I am wrong? What will others think of me? For hours, I would contemplate my existence and was torn between doubt and ecstasy.

    In other words, “Mein Kampf”‘s humor suffuses reader’s feelings as if he is reading an ideologized soap opera, a Russian-type hysterical confession replete with sincere platitudes better suited for a Woodyallean comedy (without sex, of course).

    I remember a few funny parts, especially when he analyzes the collective psychology of imperial Germany’s military circles & industry. Serious elements of his analysis are well worth reading & I think they still apply to any society in crisis. But, when he delves into details, the entire affair becomes comedy gold. In just 2-3 pages, Hitler discusses how the German Navy was polarized re issue whether to produce 283 mm naval guns or 305 mm ones (they opted for 283 mm). Hitler rages about that decision & concludes: Laziness & defeatism! Had rotten and dumb admirals decided to go for 305 mm guns, we would have certainly sunk the entire British Fleet and sent them to the bottom of the sea. Ha! The whole war was lost because of incompetence combined with laziness. Less than 25 millimeters had robbed us of victory!

    No, in my view, he’s not boring …

    Such passages make Mein Kampf an entertaining read, at least in parts.

    • Thanks: Dr. Charles Fhandrich
    • Replies: @Dr. Charles Fhandrich
  38. Solzhenitsyn would understand the devious White Christian scum lining up to grab for Jew donor loot at the fraudulent Hazony Horseshit National Conservatism conference in Florida at the end of October.

    The same rancid coward filth like Marco Rubio and Josh Hawley and JD Vance and the rest will be crawling on their bellies like money-sniffing politician whore slaves and saying everything the Jew donors want them to say.

    Biden did the same by using the Charlottesville business as a ploy to clam rake big loot out of Jew donors:

  39. @PetrOldSack

    You are utterly full of shit.

    His “legit” status?

    Legit for WHAT?

    “Get financed?”

    You dumb fuck. He’s kicked off of everything.

    What in the hell are you talking about?

    I asked before….what have YOU done?

    • Replies: @PetrOldSack
  40. anon[307] • Disclaimer says:

    step number one for all serious, non gay op, anti-semites is…

    STOP LYING!

    cheka heads:

    Dzerzhinsky — goy
    Menzhinsky — goy
    yagoda — jew (for 2 years until killed by stalin)
    yezhov — goy
    beria — goy

    by the time of barbarossa, there was ONLY ONE jew in the politburo, iron felix.

    judeo-bolshevism is a LIE.

    or appears to be today.

    but maybe lots of memory holing.

    did the nazis really believe that jews controlled the USSR in june 1941?

    • Disagree: Robert Dolan
  41. John Wear says:
    @Dr. Charles Fhandrich

    In regard to “Mein Kampf,” if you are like me and don’t speak German, a lot depends on the translator.

    I find the Ralph Manheim translation to be an extremely difficult and boring read. This is the translation typically sold in most bookstores.

    By contrast, the James Murphy translation of “Mein Kampf” is a far better read. In fact, the James Murphy translation is so superior to the Ralph Manheim translation that I have often wondered if Ralph Manheim intentionally made his translation difficult to read.

  42. @anon

    You engage in factual inaccuracies either due to naivete, lack of understanding of jewish physiognomy and behavior, or you are just a Shlomo trying to confuse other readers here.

    BTW, 4 of those 5 were biologically part-jew, one a spiritual jew, and I don’t have time or inclination to provide details or deal with your other bogus statements.

  43. @Zachary Smith

    Meanwhile, readers need to be forewarned that any and all English versions available on the Internet . . . are illegal, pirated, a gross violation of international copyright law, and/or entirely unauthorized

    Hilarious.

    The “Solzhenitsyn Center” officially denounces samizdat in the strongest possible terms.

  44. niceland says:
    @John Wear

    Who’s translation is available here on the Unz Review?
    https://www.unz.com/book/adolf_hitler__mein-kampf/

    And could you please drop me a link to your WW2 book?

    Thanks!

    • Replies: @John Wear
  45. John Wear says:
    @niceland

    The translation of “Mein Kampf” on Unz Review is not the James Murphy translation. So I assume it is the Ralph Manheim translation.

    The link to my book on Ron Unz’s website is at https://www.unz.com/book/author/john_wear/. If you ever want to purchase my book, you can go the the Barnes Review website at https://barnesreview.org/product/germanys-war/.

    • Replies: @niceland
  46. Exile says:
    @John Wear

    Try the Thomas Dalton translation – he even has a side-by-side version with the German original. And read Dr. Dalton’s recent stuff here at Unz.

    https://www.thomasdaltonphd.com/mein-kampf-vol-1-english

    • Thanks: John Wear
  47. ytcarl says:

    The Jewish role in the Russian revolution is important to be remembered.
    Not least because the murderous actions of Hitler and the Nazis was partly a response to such.
    Racism is a dynamic process; not just something created in a vacuum.

  48. Wild Bill says:
    @Anonymous

    That is quite a prognostication. Just two years to make it happen too. If it comes to pass, I want first dibs on writing your biography. We will call it “The Modern Day Nostradamus”

  49. niceland says:
    @John Wear

    Thanks Mr Wear.

    Buying your book would probably set me back \$50 with shipping + taxes. Please let me know if you have donation account somewhere – It would be my pleasure to compensate you for your work (and my reading) with same amount.

    • Replies: @John Wear
  50. profnasty says:
    @Anonymous

    Putin is honest and strong.
    You? Yadda yadda, trust the plan.
    Some eggheads do nothing but criticize. Trump is no better than Putin. A lot no better.

  51. anon[219] • Disclaimer says:
    @Robert Dolan

    sorry. of course i meant “iron lazar”. got my irons confused. iron felix was a goy.

    kamenev, zinoviev, trotsky…all whacked by stalin. lenin was a quarter jewish.

    basically the same thing that’s happened during the putinshchina. the russian oligarchs went from 90% jewish to maybe only 20% last time i checked.

    and the communists were sure to win the election until a few jews met with yeltsin and said, “we’ll fund your campaign if you sell us state owned assets for a song.”

    so this is one good thing putin has done, just like his georgian predecessor as tsar.

  52. RestiveUs says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    …No, they’re just socializing.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  53. @Bardon Kaldian

    His description of the train ride back to the “Fatherland” to a hospital with other wounded was moving. When they crossed into Germany, they could not even look at each other but sat quietly, now being reminded of what they were fighting for,etc..

  54. @John Wear

    That must be my problem with the book, the Ralph Manheim translation. That is the one I have and have read. I’ll try to get the Murphy translation one day. Thanks.

  55. ziggurat says:

    In addition to doom-documenting and doom-dissecting, please consider involving yourself in a practice called “Going Free”.

    This practice is intended to free ourselves (both individually and collectively) from the anti-white narrative whose denouement would be White Erasure throughout the West.

    Learn about “Going Free” from these sources:
    — Book: Go Free: A Guide to Aligning with the Archetype of Westernkind
    — Weekly Show: “No White Guilt” on YouTube
    — WebSite: NoWhiteGuilt.org
    — Art: WhiteArtCollective.com
    — Home-Schooling Modules: SchoolOfTheWest.world

  56. @Anonymous

    Is your post an argument for or against Trump and Putin? Try editing it for contradictions after you’re back on schedule with the lithium dose. Remember-lithium is contraindicated with insufflation of bath salts and quarts of Chivas Regal.

    • LOL: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @Anonymous
  57. @Patrick McNally

    I just re-checked Solzhenitsyn’s count. It’s corroborated by many other sources. Why are you posting bullshit?

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  58. John Wear says:
    @niceland

    You can purchase my book on The Barnes Review website for \$25 plus shipping and handling.

    I do not have a donation account set up. I am in relatively good financial shape and do not need the money. If you have extra money, you might consider making a donation either to The Barnes Review or to Germar Rudolf. I am sure they could both put your money to good use.

    • Thanks: niceland
  59. @RestiveUs

    ? Humor is, it seems, something that has ceased to exist ……

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  60. Dutch Boy says:
    @Z-man

    I would think atheists like MacDonald wouldn’t be all that comfy with re-establishing Christianity as a basis for a society either. It is my understanding that very few Russians actually attend Orthodox services, so Putin has a long way to go.

    • Replies: @Z-man
  61. Petermx says:
    @anon

    Vladimir Putin; 80 – 85% of First Soviet Government were Jews

    It was widely known in Europe and beyond that Jews played the leading role in communism and the USSR but only Germany stepped up to halt the mass murder the Jews unleashed on the USSR and prevent it from taking over Europe. Even Churchill wrote an article on the Jews leading role in communism.

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  62. @Anon

    ‘…. Can the fall of the oligarchs be related to the sudden Russophobia of the American Jewish establishment…..’

    ‘Yes most certainly yes’

    I certainly find the supposition plausible — but what evidence can be offered to support it?

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  63. @Eric Novak

    Look up the actual listing of the People’s Commissars. It was 15 people with Trotsky as the only Jew, though if you like you may count as a quarter-Jew. Solzhenitsyn’s claim about 22 people with 17 Jews is just BS. Granted, it’s not as silly as the “66 million” hoax which he propagates in Letter to the Soviet Leaders. But it’s still evidence of his general unreliability on all such claims.

    • Disagree: Derer
    • Replies: @Derer
  64. @Petermx

    Just evidence of a false statement by Putin. Nothing surprising there. As politicians go Putin is far from being the most sinister, but he does BS off on some things like this.

  65. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:
    @Eric Novak

    “Is your post an argument for or against Trump and Putin? Try editing it for contradictions …”

    Hello Moron,

    Talk about a stupid. Obviously, when you decide to prove you are witless, you leave no option for anyone to prove you are not.

    • Replies: @Eric Novak
  66. @Colin Wright

    Putting Jews aside for a moment, it certainly was true that Yeltsin opened up Russia to penetration by foreign investors in a way which Putin has partly reduced. That doesn’t mean that everything Putin has done has been good. There have been charges that Putin has attempted to censor some things in ways which has slowed the development of AI technology in Russia in ways which may in turn damage the economy. I think there may be some legitimate long-range concerns there, although I don’t see Putin as a major global villain right now. But it makes sense to say that some of Putin’s tightening up of Russia as a source of foreign investment opportunities will have played a role in making him more of an official US enemy.

    • Thanks: Colin Wright
  67. Lysias says:
    @Zachary Smith

    There are translations of 200 Years Together into German and French that I believe are authorized. I possess copies of the two volumes of the German translation, which I am in the process of reading.

  68. Lysias says:
    @Patrick McNally

    Russia bears a lot of responsibility for the First World War which caused the Russian Revolution. Certainly because of its precipitate mobilization, but also because there are strong reasons for suspecting Russian government actors were involved in the conspiracy that led to the Sarajevo assassinations. Would Stolypin upon have involved himself in such madness?

    • Replies: @Seraphim
  69. @Robert Dolan

    My part in this discussion of course is insignificant. What i am pointing at is what is left out in the theorem on Jews, Jewish mindsets as individuals and a group by MacDonald, and nowhere to be found in his(and many others apply the same tactics of self-censorship) total body of work: a discussion on the aptitudes of the White Western Europeans descendants as to the matter of breeding, having offspring. It is my feeling that not quantity matters (less then one percent of the White population has somehow access to real power), but the quality of this fraction in matters of cognitive aptitudes and formal data storage that is not “dirty”. Our Cousins do find this a major argument in their philosophy of life, both on the individual and the collective level. Thus act upon it. They do partner matching for these qualities, even when choosing “new blood” outside their gene pool. Since Jews constitute a minority, there must be something in the argument as to prioritizing shamelessly and consistently intellect, health, and generational reference. Again MacDonald stays away for the obvious, in my opinion for the same wrong reasons as almost all “intellectuals” who prioritize career, comfort, fear touchiness of the audience, the angst of being outcast. Nothing new, universal almost a phenomenon. “They” all “do” it (not).

    In the case of the Jewish elites this is not relevant, but an essential issue. They constitute a global glue to which nations, territory, race, class and cast are subordinate.

  70. @Anonymous

    No drinking is permitted after electroconvulsive therapy either. And yes, that means Sterno too. Just a friendly suggestion. 😘

  71. @Zachary Smith

    ‘…So you’re now officially warned – if you download the book from the archive.org link, you’re a pirate and also acquiring a ‘bad’ translation…’

    It’s also likely to be unreliable — you have no sure way of knowing whether you’re getting an accurate rendition of what Solzhenitsyn meant, or merely what the translator would like him to have meant.

    All of us have had the experience of someone twisting our words to fit their agenda. Obviously, with something like Two Hundred Years Together, that’s going to be a real concern.

  72. TheIdiot says:

    Solzhenitsyn is a traitor of his homeland – the USSR (not Russia, this was not his home)

    He is a traitor because this is what he has admitted before dying

    He should have published “The 200 years together” first, in 1973

    And “Archipelag Gulago” in 2000

    The difference between a Hero and a Traitor is in THE ORDER of publishing two important books

    • Replies: @Spender_CGB
  73. TheIdiot says:
    @Colin Wright

    For a Jew in Russia there is no better friend alive than Putin

    As for the dead – the best one that comes to mind is Eltzyn,

    followed (when dead) by Chubais and Gorbatschev

    Who is who as top criminasl of russia – http://www.compromat.ru/

  74. Anon[286] • Disclaimer says:

    “After describing Lenin’s psychopathic personality (e.g., his duplicity and his “enmity toward everything traditional, natural and morally wholesome,””

    Joel Greenberg Providing Investigators With ‘Thousands of Photos and Videos’ Probably Doesn’t Bode Well for Matt Gaetz
    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/matt-gaetz-sex-trafficking-investigation-joel-greenberg-cooperating-1211248/

    “that diaspora Jews do not identify with the country they reside in.”

    Trump Russia Guide
    https://kumu.io/TrumpRussiaGuide/trumprussiaguide

    Trump Russia Ties
    https://app.thebrain.com/brains/a8427b09-d317-a3ed-599a-8d0aa246292d/thoughts/95a404ef-f073-5d75-8b6f-b082b98ab657/notes

  75. On covid, did the U.S. companies decide all by themselves that “the shot” is mandatory or you lose your job because they have looked at all the medical literature? Of course not!!! It’s obvious that the Biden administration, pressured these companies on the mandates, so that the blame could go from them to the companies doing the lefts bidding. You must get the shot,etc.. These leftist bastards are clever in the extreme and fool millions of people regularly on issues involving crime to economic policies to race. Apparently, they have had no success yet, with the famous In and Out, burger chain, privately owned by a Christian family, who is so far, telling the California “authorities” to go jump in a lake..

    • Agree: John Wear
  76. Z-man says:
    @Dutch Boy

    Better than nothing and definitely better than during Soviet days. Church attendance is down everywhere not just Russia. In Italy, the seat of Roman Catholicism, it was always low but now it’s a basket case where heathens and Woke clergy are helping to replace the Italian population.

    • Agree: Dutch Boy
    • Replies: @Dutch Boy
  77. anon[225] • Disclaimer says:

    @Colin Wright #5

    I seem to remember that Putin used to get a lot of good press in the West – a veritable golden boy if you please – until Khodorkovsky was dragged from a plane headed out of Russia screaming that he was an agent of the Rothschilds. After that, the ship slowly turned around and Putin became Putler. You could see it first in the British press, and then it slowly crept into the US mainstream. And that’s when George Soros declared that Putin was very, very bad; and that’s when singing groups that didn’t do any singing started their pussy-rioting.

    • Agree: Derer
  78. Derer says:
    @Anonymous

    Putin reclaimed Russian energy ownership from Yeltsin oligarchs (the list is available), who subsequently fled from Russia to Israel and London. Russia need Putin, he is uncompromising Russian nationalist that keep his country free from pillaging. Actually, US sanctions are a prove that he is doing something right for Russia. The only excuse for your story must have been intoxication.

  79. Derer says:
    @anon

    judeo-bolshevism is a LIE.

    Actually, that statement is a big LIE!

    David R. Francis US ambassador to Russia sent a dispatch to Washington in Jan. 1918:

    “The Bolshevik leaders here, most of whom are Jews and 90% of whom are returned exiles, care little for Russia or any other country but are internationalists and they are trying to start a worldwide social revolution.”

  80. Anonymous[334] • Disclaimer says:

    @Derer #82

    Bertrand Russell said much the same thing in a letter to a friend after his visit to Russia. Only he didn’t stop at simply saying “Jews.” He said they were mostly “Americanized Jews.” Russell appeared to approve the commie’s murdering on the grounds that you have to envision Russia as a nation of “Dostoyevsky characters” to understand the need for harsh discipline.

    • Agree: Derer
    • Thanks: John Wear
  81. Derer says:
    @Patrick McNally

    First Bolshevik Politburo (7) 1917:

    Lenin (mother Jewish – Blank)
    Trotsky (Bronstein)
    Kamenev (Rosenfeld)
    Ziniviev (Aronovich)
    Sokolnikov (Girsh Brilliant)
    Stalin (Georgian)
    Bubnov (Russian)

    Prominent Jewish Bolsheviks: Sverdlov (Isrelovich), Moises Uritsky, Michel Lashevich, Genrigh Yagoda,

    • Thanks: John Wear
    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  82. @TheIdiot

    He is a traitor because this is what he has admitted before dying

    He should have published “The 200 years together” first, in 1973

    To write 200 years together he needed access to the soviet archives, which could only be accessed after the fall of the Soviet Union

  83. Dutch Boy says:
    @Z-man

    I had in mind those who think Putin has changed Russia back to a Christian state. The situation is better but still dismal.

  84. Seraphim says:

    The reason why Solzhenitsyn is so much hated (by the bezbozhnik ‘sovoks’ and the ‘agnostic’ West – ‘left’ and ‘right’ – as well) is summarized by him in his 1983 Templeton Address:

    “Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.” Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.”

  85. Seraphim says:
    @Lysias

    The ‘lot of [Russia’s] responsibility for the First World War’ and therefore a cause of ‘Russian Revolution’ is a myth peddled already in 1914 by the German propaganda in “The German White Book about the outbreak of the German-Russian-French war”, relayed by the Weimar regime and corrupt revisionist historians like Harry Elmer Barnes, wholeheartedly embraced by the Nazis and most recently by conspiracy theorists ‘historians’ privy to the ‘hidden causes of WW1’.

  86. Ace says:
    @Robert Dolan

    I enjoyed that witticism from the late, great Bob Whitaker.

  87. What the Hell is this? Why is this POS allowed to spew his garbage?

    https://archive.org/details/15078044249010733088

  88. @Bardon Kaldian

    Late comment here, Bardon, but I believe RestiveUs’ comment was also meant in humor. That’s what “socializing” comes down to now…

  89. @Derer

    It’s tedious to have to repeat the same facts over and over again to people who never bother to check anything, but here it goes again:

    http://www.archontolgy.org/nations/ussr/cpsu/politburo_hist.php

    The so-called “politburo” which you are referring to was formed before the November Revolution, played absolutely no role at all in the carrying out of the latter, never held any meetings and was dismissed immediately after the seizure of power. The term “politburo” seems to give this a heightened significance simply because in later decades that term was actually used to refer to a very powerful organ within the USSR. But this “politburo” was nothing and never did anything. The only 2 people on that list who are important for carrying out the November Revolution are Lenin and Trotsky, without their having made any reports of whatever sort to anyone else listed on that “politburo.”

    Of course even this version which you’re giving here is not the same hoax as the one peddled by Solzhenitsyn who asserted in his 200 Years book that there was a Central Committee with 22 members, 17 of whom he claimed were Jewish. In reality there was a Central Committee formed right after the November Revolution which contained 15 people. Of these Leon Trotsky was the only actual Jew, although you’re welcome to count Lenin as a quarter-Jew based on his paternal grandfather. Solzhenitsyn’s claim was simply false, whereas you’ve simply pointed to an irrelevant “politburo” which existed but never did anything and never held any power.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
  90. Anonymous[240] • Disclaimer says:
    @Patrick McNally

    The cuck doth protest too much, methinks.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
$
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Kevin MacDonald Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Becker update V1.3.2
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World