Russian News

Summaries and links to news items
Null
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2021 1:06 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Null » Tue Dec 28, 2021 12:00 am

great work . like i'm reading william pierce again

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:37 am

It is a lengthy article but it should be read by all who want to look deeper into the underlying causes of what goes on around Ukraine and Russia. The tens of millions of White victims of Kremlin’s terror of the last century cry for this truth to be said. There should be no mistake: the Putin’s state is the continuation of USSR; everyone thinking otherwise is utterly delusional. The article below deals with this topic in detail.

The Ukrainian Dilemma
The Ukrainian conflict has divided not only Russian society but even the nationalist movement in Europe. Even American conservative/traditionalist groups were affected by this division on this question, although there this topic has no immediate relevance.

Some racially conscious people tend to support Putin’s Russia because it struggles against globalist hegemony of USA-NATO-EU monster. It seems to be logical if looking from far away. People who think so construct the following logical chain: USA-NATO-EU axis tries to impose its will on all countries of Eastern Europe and it would lead to the spread of the liberal rotten ideology in those lands and would strengthen positions of the globalist monster. Russia, being opposed to this spread, is automatically considered as good. The reasoning of David Duke and other pro-Russian western nationalists goes along this logical line. But even more so; David Duke asserts that Putin’s Russia is a traditionalist country that rejected communism and returned to its former path; Putin cares for ethnic Russians and tries to revive family values and combats moral corruption.

I need even to systematize the basic assertions of those who support Putin:
1) Putin opposes globalist system, opposes NATO expansion and its aggressive wars throughout the world, therefore, Putin is the force for good.
2) Putin restored Russian greatness; restored Russian army; kicked out Jewish oligarchs
3) Putin is a Russian nationalist; he cares for ethnic Russians; he helps Russian families to have more children; he opposes harmful moral influence of the modern western culture; he restores Russian traditional values.

I would name them the “David Duke’s arguments”. He too often repeats these points.
First of all I should state that I have no intention of mocking or disparaging David Duke’s position. He has his rational for thinking so and he can argumentatively defend his position. But it is why it is all too important to clarify this matter. David Duke is a very respected and believed to by many White people in America and throughout the world. Therefore, his delusions (or misconceptions) instantly become the delusions of many other people.

I can’t even say that Duke is not right in his assertions. I suppose that many people remember when in 1990es some images of Mars were obtained where it appeared as if there are objects resembling Egyptian pyramids. But after few years the more precise images were made of the same place and it had become obvious that the previous images were mistakenly interpreted. It happens frequently so. You look at something and imagine something else because it is far away and poorly discernable. The situation is aggravated if you want to see something and your imagination starts to adjust reality to your preconceptions.
Most probably David Duke fell victim of this set of factors. Therefore, this question needs to be addressed in details.

1) Putin as a fighter-hero against globalism. This assertion is the strongest and the most buttressed by facts. Everyone can see that Putin is serious in his opposition to NATO and USA hegemony. And this factor alone is bound to create a substantial following among western conservative/traditionalist auditory because it becomes ever more alienated to the rulers of their countries. After suffering from flagrant injustices of the rotten pseudo-liberal regime in the last few years, the normal White people in the West look at Putin and see how he combats against the same enemy. Inevitably they start to relate to Putin as an ally and even as a hero-savior. At least they rationalize this position by the well-known formula “enemy of my enemy is my friend”. All of it makes sense. I wouldn’t even call it a delusion. It is a correct evaluation of the overall geopolitical situation. Yes, the West is ruled by the most hostile (to White Race) forces, therefore, any opposing center of power should be perceived as a possible ally. It could be reduced to the Patrick Slattery’s formula “it is better to be ruled by Chinese than by Jews”. It makes sense. The same logic goes in relation to Putin’s Russia, especially so because Russia in any imaginable scenario would not be a force to control the whole world. Therefore, Russian regional dominance and counterweight to USA-NATO-EU axis of Evil is perceived as something good. I can even agree with it to some extent.
But, the devil is in details. What seems obvious and logical from far away turns out to be something different when you examine it closely.

Yes, Putin’s Russia opposes the West for its own reasons. But it is not an opposition to the rotten liberal system but the hostility to the West as such, as it was. If you look closely to the internal Russian propaganda, you can perfectly see how it concocts the image of western enemy based on historical examples. Their whole propaganda narrative can be reduced to the following sequence:
“they were always our enemies; Teutonic order had invaded Russian lands, but were beaten off by our saint-prince Alexander of Novgorod.
Afterward, Poles had used our temporary weakness and ripped away our western lands and even captured Moscow but were expelled by our glorious militiamen under Minin and Pozharski.
Napoleon tried to annihilate Russia, burned Moscow but was expelled with his whole army annihilated; and our Russian army pursued this vile scoundrel up to the gates of Paris.
The greedy Austro-Hungary and imperial Germany assaulted our Slavic brothers in Balkans and we were compelled to defend them in 1914.
In 1941, without any reason at all, the fascist-German hordes had surreptitiously gathered at the border and invaded out peaceful country, which was absolutely unprepared to any war. But our glorious people were able to stop this onslaught, to turn back the tide and to annihilate this awful enemy.
Russia saved the world from the “brown plague”. But the West remained ungrateful and started again its vile activities resulting in Cold War. They again wanted to annihilate our peaceful country and surrounded us by hundreds of military bases and nuclear rockets. And we again were compelled to spend all our money for arms and to ruin our own economy.
After collapse of USSR, the western bankers (it is never said that they were the Jewish criminals of both local and western extraction) robbed Russia and plunged it into abject poverty.
But in 1999 the glorious savior came to power and started to restore Russia to its former greatness. But the vile west again, as it was always the case, tries to do everything possible to undermine out peaceful country and to destroy our people; therefore, we again should spend all our money for arms and to be ready to sacrifice our lives in mortal combat for mother-Russia”

This shit is fed from all TV channels, newspapers, government-sponsored internet sites and text-books. From the earliest age Russian children are inculcated with this oversimplified and distorted version of history. West is always presented as the main source of hostility toward Russia; as the main reason for all our problems. Therefore, it is little wonder that the majority of Russian population adopt this vision as their own. They can’t even understand that it was implanted into their heads.

Yet again I need to repeat that the Putinist propaganda creates hostile image of the West as such, not of the modern “liberal” system. They try to persuade local audience that the West was always something evil.
To understand this fact you need to listen what say those who believed this propaganda most, that is those who answered the call to arms and joined Putinist separatist forces in the war in Eastern Ukraine. I have listened many of their ravings. It is very useful because these simple creatures express the essence of the propaganda that was implanted in their heads without colorful wordings of official narrative that conceals the overall hostility of the message. They say it in a straightforward and unmitigated fashion. Here some of the mental pearls of those people: “we will go to Kiev, to Berlin, to Washington, if needed; we will destroy this source of evil once and for all”; “they always wanted to annihilate Russia, but they would fail, because we will destroy them”; “Let’s turn their own countries and cities into battlegrounds as they did it with our land”; “they intentionally downed their own passenger air liner to smear our country”; “the western intelligence agencies sent their spies and saboteurs to provoke unrest inside our country, therefore, we need to identify them and to destroy”.

But the most precious pearl of this insanity comes not even from those drunken vagabonds on the Donbas frontline but from the main Kremlin’s TV propagandist Dmitri Kiselev who in 2014 stated the following: “Russia can turn USA into a heap of radioactive ash if needed”. He said it with a straight and serious expression, without a hint of a joke. What you would expect from the overall population of Russia? They are programmed with hate toward Europe and West as such. It needs to be repeated yet again: Kremlin cultivates hate to the White European Western Civilization, not to the rotten pseudo liberal post-WW2 regimes, which it was itself instrumental in creating. Kremlin never criticizes the post-WW2 global system that resulted in the whole present day mayhem. On the contrary, Kremlin essentially strives to return to the situation of 1945, when Soviet Russia and USA controlled the world.
Therefore, when you hear Kremlin’s criticism of the West, you should clearly understand what it really means.

The external Kremlin’s propaganda is somewhat different. In Soviet times the two main social segments to whom this propaganda was addressed were poor workers and non-whites. The first were incited to hate anyone above them in terms of income, the second ones were incited to hate all whites because they were “the main cause of all miseries of non-white peoples”. Yes, it was the Soviet propaganda that started first this whole set of lies about supposed white wickedness and racial injustice. The Soviet agents started to spread this message in USA since 1920es. What we see now is the advanced result of this work.

But now, the Kremlin’s propaganda was modified to suit the changed circumstances. They can see that the White middle class and working class are the most potent disaffected groups of society. Therefore, the RT propaganda tries to utilize this potential for its own nefarious ends. The Lavrov’s seemingly pro-white remarks and some RT commentaries dealing with anti-white crimes are tailored to attract the millions of White People (by the way, Lavrov has Armenian father and mother of unknown origin, supposedly Jewish; the identity of his mother is concealed, which fact in itself is very suggestive. It is known that she worked at the Soviet Ministry of Foreign Trade, which was notoriously infested with Jews). The method is very simple but very effective. First, they tell some truth, win the minds of the people and afterward feed them any lies they need to advance their immediate political goals. The perfect example is the situation around Ukraine. RT has won wide sympathies among White People in the West and uses it now to spread falsehood about the war in Ukraine. The thinking process of an average man works as follows: “if they said truth about our internal dire situation, they say truth about those affairs too; they are a reliable and trustworthy source”. As simple as this; and it works.

But it doesn’t mean that Kremlin has abandoned its old-fashioned hate-mongering against White Race. Not at all; they continue to incite non-whites against White People. It is done in more subtle way, but it is done all the same and all the time. You can discern it simply by carefully analyzing RT programs. They present the whole situation in the West in such a way as if it is all the result of the inherent ineptitude of White People, of the traditional western aristocracy. Certainly, they never mention the fact that the ruling elite in Europe and USA was completely replaced by alien elements. Therefore, they very adroitly turn the main victims into the main villains. And, certainly, Jews are always beyond any reproach; they are always victims and never villains. In this regard RT turns out to be not better than CNN or any other fakenews source. But it, certainly, sometimes provides useful incriminating information against their fellow-criminals who rule the West at present. But we should always remember that it is the conflict between two rival gangs; nothing more. There is nothing to relate to in any of these camps.

But as it was already said, the main qualification of Putin’s Russia in the eyes of honest White People is its struggle against globalism. The immediate military help to Asad in Syria and supply of arms to Iran are the obvious facts in support of this perception. I fully concede on these points that Kremlin is engaged in real hostilities against Western system. It is undeniable. If before Syrian war it could seem that the whole anti-western rhetoric was a mere posturing, the participation of Russian troops in Syrian war have dispelled any doubts about seriousness of Putin’s hostility towards USA-NATO-EU axis.

But what it proves actually? Could it be considered as a genuine anti-globalist stance of Putin’s system? Hardly so, considering the overall Soviet legacy of communist globalism.
The main delusion of David Duke consists of believing that Putinist system is something fundamentally different from its Soviet predecessor. But hard facts say otherwise. First of all, the whole governmental and administrative structure from top to bottom has remained in place; it was never dismantled. All those people who occupied their positions at the end of USSR, have remained in their positions for many years afterward and now are replaced by their children and grandchildren. But even more important is the fact that the special services, the military and security units that are the backbone of the system use de-facto hereditary system. It means that children of people serving there go to serve in the same units. It holds true since 1930es. What it means? It means that the grandchildren of those who annihilated Polish officers in Katyn forest are now serving in the high positions of the Russian special forces. It needs to be noted in this regard that a few years ago the State Duma accepted a law that forbids anyone to dig out this kind of information. It means, that if someone has found the fact that such and such officer is the grandson of the known mass murderer of the Stalinist past, the person who disclosed such information is liable for criminal prosecution. Beside it, state archives containing such information are closed and there were hints that they will be never disclosed (at least as long as this regime remains in power).
Why is it so important? Is it really relevant that the progeny of the Stalinist criminals occupy high position in Putinist army and law-enforcement agencies? Yes, the events of the last years have shown that this fact is of key importance. The behavior of the Russian military and special forces ever more show the signs of their continuity with their Soviet predecessor organizations. We can see the predominance of the same cannibalistic mentality and utter disregard to human sufferings and moral considerations. They are unremorseful in any circumstances, be it downing of passenger airplane or torturing and killing of Ukrainian POW. They are ready to commit any atrocity and instantly deny any responsibility. They have learnt perfectly the Cheka modus operandi and are intent to use it as widely as possible. To sum up on this topic: the whole military and law-enforcement system of the Putinist government is the continuation of the Soviet oppressive apparatus. Even the symbols are the same. Most of the units of Russian army continue to use the same Soviet emblems with red star. You would not even find any crosses of Tsarist times in modern Russian army.

Yet one aspect that needs to be pointed out is the fact that up to the present day the whole set of Soviet paraphernalia remains in place in civil life as well. All Russian cities, towns and villages continue to have their own Lenin’s and Marx’s streets and squares. Hundreds of Russian cities, towns and geographical locations continue to bear the names of Soviet rulers. Only few were renamed in the immediate wake of Soviet collapse. But nothing was renamed on the Putin’s watch. Each time the concerned groups of citizens demand return of the historic name to their town or street, the authority use their favorite denial on the grounds of economic considerations (it would incur unplanned expenditures in local budgets to substitute the names). Everyone understands that it is only an evasion. They change all names of geographical locations when they want to (in East Prussia they didn’t left a single German name for any place). But when Russian people want to substitute the name of some communist murderer for a historic name that was used before, they are kicked out, citing the economic unviability of such changes. The people in the West don’t know this fact but it illustrates perfectly where the true allegiances of the Putinist system lie. They are all too keen to “preserve historical legacy of our Soviet heroes” but they concoct grimace of revulsion at any suggestion of honoring real Russian heroes of pre-Soviet times. Certainly, thousands of Lenin’s statues remain in place and any suggestion of removing them is met not only by denial but by threats of prosecution for “reviling historical legacy of our country”. It should be noted that in 2014, when Putinist gangs retook some places that were held by Ukrainian forces, they immediately restored Lenin’s statues where they were. It speaks volumes of who those separatists are. Certainly, they are not Russian nationalists, as they sometimes erroneously portrayed in some western media, but the neo-communist gangs that are ready to commit any crime if required by their Kremlin masters.

Yes, Kremlin is engaged in a struggle against Western ZOG globalism. But not as an enemy of globalism as such but as a competing globalist concept. Yes, the Kremlin’s Eurasionist visions sharply conflict with NATO visions, therefore, some kind of collision is inevitable. Putin needs Ukrainian, Belarusian and Kazakhstan territories for his Eurasian empire to be a viable project. Russian Federation as it is cannot project power to the extent needed for Kremlin’s long-term goals. Therefore, the invasion of those territories in question is inevitable. The only alternative is the eventual collapse of this Putinist quasi-empire, because it would not be able to bear on its own the whole weight of multiple fronts battles against all its enemies. Kremlin needs new territories, additional resources and population to implement its ambitious imperial projects. Therefore, it is useless to discuss who is guilty in events around Ukraine or Kazakhstan. It is absolutely irrelevant whether those events flared up because of natural causes or were helped from outside. In any case Kremlin uses those situations to advance its geopolitical agenda; not less than USA do this.

So, we can see that the conflict "Kremlin versus NATO" is a real thing but we need to understand this conflict deeper than many people tend to do. We should not oversimplify it to the level of “good against evil” regardless of whom we assign which value. Both sides are hostile to our vision and our long-term goals. But in the same time it is justifiable to adopt tactic of favoring the underdog to prevent the dominant force from gaining upper hand. The triumph of NATO would be utterly undesirable, because it would allow it to spread its poison further afield. Proceeding from this assumption the limited conditional support of Putin’s quasi-empire in its struggle against NATO is justifiable and understandable. But it should never grow into wholehearted support of this cannibalistic neo-communist system.

But it is relevant only for American and other West European nationalists. The perspective from the point of view of Eastern European nationalists is very different. Ukrainian, Polish, Baltic, Finnish nationalists cannot adopt this outlook for simple reason that the Kremlin’s threat to their lands is of immediate nature. They have no such luxury as to look at the events from the aloof position of independent observer on the other side of the Pond. In case of any conflict they would be the immediate targets of Kremlin’s strike. Therefore, all abstract geopolitical notions lose their weight and seem as something silly and utterly irrelevant. Yes, the liberal West is the problem; yes, it spreads mental poison of multiculturalism; yes, Hollywood destroys minds of young generation. The East European nationalists know all of it; they don’t need to be reminded about those factors. This situation could be compared with the following example: if you are faced with a prospect of your house being robbed by a negro thug and your investments being decimated by Jewish stock market profiteers, you are surely to be more concerned with the first threat, even if it would entail less actual losses than the second one. Because if negro robber comes into your house, there is great possibility that he not only takes your valuables in the house but kills all its inhabitants, just for fun. It is why Americans are more concerned with negro robbers than with Jewish banksters. And it is why Ukrainians, Lithuanians, Latvians and Estonians are much more concerned about prospects of being annihilated by their eastern neighbor than being corrupted by Hollywood. I repeat, it doesn’t mean that Eastern European nationalists don’t understand the true essence of western liberalism. I know some nationalists from Baltic states who express this idea precisely in this fashion.

Therefore, it is utterly unjust when some American conservative/traditionalists start to berate Eastern nationalists for their supposed “narrow-mindedness” in their hostility toward Putin’s regime. Actually, it is narrow-mindedness of the American conservatives who can’t understand intricacies of the Eastern European affairs. The peoples of East Europe have suffered too much under the Kremlin’s tyranny to engage in any kind of geopolitical games with it. They know who they are dealing with and they don’t want repetition of the same historical mistakes. They are ready to unite with whomever only to deter the most potent threat from the east. It is hardly possible to blame them for this position. This position could seem an unbalanced one for a distant observer but it is the only possible one for those who live next door to Putin’s Russia. My advice to all American racially aware people: don’t be dismissive toward East European nationalists, because they have much greater practical experience than you are. The history of Eastern Europe is far more complicated and undulated than the linear history of America, which was very poor on events. They are bound to have deeper understanding than you are what concerns their relations with Russia, especially the neo-communist Russia. Therefore, it is a mere common sense to believe them about what really happens in Eastern Europe (especially in Ukraine), than to believe this refurbished Soviet propaganda loudspeaker RT.

But it doesn’t mean that all nationalists should immediately saddle their horses and gallop on the Ukrainian frontline; far from it. As I already said, the situation there is very complicated.
What David Duke is right about is to point out to the heavy influence of Jews in Ukraine. It is correct. The fact that a Jew is a Ukrainian president illustrates this fact perfectly. Jews for centuries had significant role in Ukraine. By the way, many of American prominent Jews originate from Ukraine. Therefore, the Jewish community in Ukraine has very strong backing from American Jews, especially those in US government. At present Jews consider Putin’s Russia as an unpleasant nuisance that interferes with their agenda, therefore, they tend to support its enemies. What we see in Ukraine is the temporary alliance of Jews with local people in front of the common enemy (but as we well know Jews are apt to change alliances on the fly and to open the gates of besieged cities). But this loose alliance doesn’t mean that “Ukrainians fight for Jewish interests”, as David Duke listeners are likely to infer.
All those who closely monitor the Ukrainian situation know perfectly well about Jewish outcry about Azov regiment (the former volunteer militia unit that was later incorporated into overall interior affairs ministry’s structure). The US Congress forbade any American help or training to this unit. And some American Jews even demanded to disband this unit altogether. But Jews are not too powerful. They cannot go against the whole nation. Therefore, for the time being they would tolerate even such phenomenon as Azov regiment. Why not if it fights against nascent Kremlin’s empire? I repeat: the majority of Jews now consider the Putin’s state as their enemy. It is mainly due to the figment of their historical perceptions. They hate any greatness even in such perverted form as Putin’s quasi-empire. But some Jews are firmly behind Putin’s state and rightly so; because Putin proved to be a staunch ally of local Jewish interests. But Jews tend to like social chaos; they don’t like order even in the form of Putin’s police state. To freely operate Jews need total corruption of society and state apparatus because it allows them arranging all kinds of illegal interactions. But any viable empire needs to establish some order, some set of strict rules for all its subjects; otherwise, any imperial project is bound to fail. Precisely this fact is crucial in understanding the divergence of interests between Putin and Jews. Putin did all possible favors for Jews but they would not forgive him an attempt to establish more or less orderly society, even if Jews themselves occupy elevated position in this society. Their hatred of social order surpasses all other considerations. The relations between Putin and Jews resemble very much the relations of Trump with Jews. It is the same story of unrequited love.

But returning to the question of whether western nationalist should go to war in Ukraine or not? After weighing all pros and cons I can give a definite answer to this pressing question. And this question is unconditional NO. Not because Ukrainian cause is unworthy or because Putin is “our friend”; But because it is too dangerous in present political circumstances to discover ourselves too openly. Our enemies are more or less in control of the overall situation in Europe and other white countries, therefore, if an all too obvious oppositional group emerges, especially if it is an armed group, they can easily eliminate it. They can find any convenient pretext for this.

I suspect that at some point the Ukrainian Jews in government would decide to eliminate Azov regiment and some other units with obvious nationalist inclinations. And there is very convenient way of doing this. For example, they could put these units in such a place where it would be easy for Russian separatist forces to annihilate them. I am almost sure that Jews for years consider such a setup. It would be especially easy if large-scale fighting resumes.
Yet another alternative is to disband those units altogether with arrest of all those who would oppose this measure. If Ukrainian nationalist would start to fight back it would give pretext for “antiterrorist operation” when all of them could be physically annihilated.
Azov regiment is a sitting duck that could be easily eliminated when its enemies decide to do this. Therefore, I warn all our people not to join this or any similar units in Ukraine. It is too dangerous and of very little use. But on emotional level our sympathies should be with them; no question about it.

Even nationalists in Ukraine itself should refrain from going to the frontline. It is unnecessary sacrifice. There is army for this. The hard core nationalist forces should do the main work inside this country. There is sure to be real internal war inside Ukraine proper, because there are too many traitors with pro-Soviet pro-Putin sympathies. Beside it, there are many of those who sincerely love EU and all this globalist bullshit. They too are the problem. All those social groups are enemies of any nationalist movement and at some point this mutual enmity is sure to flare up. It would be the time to act. But the combined arms warfare is the business of army units with career officers and conscript soldiers. I am against throwing nationalist volunteers in such meet grinders. It can only weaken our forces. Therefore, my advice for Ukrainian nationalists is to withdraw all valuable assets from frontline and to concentrate on the work inside Ukraine proper.

To sum up: we have established that Putin’s regime is the real enemy of the western globalist force but it doesn’t mean that Putin shares our ideals and views. We can sympathize with some actions and rhetoric of the Kremlin but we should never forget that the long-term vision of Putin’s regime is opposite to our vision.


2) Putin restored Russian greatness; restored Russian army; kicked out Jewish oligarchs

This part of David Duke’s claim is ostensibly plausible for outsiders but turns out to be defective under closer examination.
If someone would judge Putin’s Russia by watching RT and Victory Day parades on Red Square, he surely would conclude that Russia is again a great country that commands the land, sees and air above and around itself. The Kremlin’s propagandists did a good job in spreading this false message. Russian/Soviet rulers are masters at deception and bluff. It is enough to remember how Khrushchev threatened America with hundreds of ICBM with nuclear warheads when in reality there were only 7 of them in the whole Soviet Union (and even those were on liquid fuel and required many days of preparation before launch). But American rulers believed this bluff and were ready to make concessions.

Most of what Putin is bragging about are the developments of the projects started yet in 1980es. Since then very little was done in Russia in the fields of scientific research. Therefore, all these fairy-tales about swarms of hypersonic missiles with nuclear warheads and high-precision targeting is an exaggeration of what Russia really has. They parrot American military, as they always did, but they are surely a few steps back in regard of technologies. Soviet Union always relied on military industrial espionage for gaining technologies. There is very little what Soviet engineers and scientists were able to achieve on their own. And it is hardly possible that after destruction of the whole industry in 1990es and collapse of the educational system, suddenly, there happened to be hundreds of engineers and scientists who are able to handle such difficult tasks. If it was not possible back in Soviet Union, now it is even less possible. Inside Russia only the most stupid people believe those fairy tales about “Russian arms are the most advanced in the world”. This idea was heavily promoted by Kremlin’s propaganda in recent years but reality is very different.

To prove this I don’t need even to delve deeply into the subject. I only need to remember how universities operated in the early 2000es and afterward. The whole higher education system was transformed into a marketplace where everyone could buy anything he wanted if he had money for it. Certainly, they continued to accept people who successfully passed exams, but the great majority of students were the paid-for trash who shouldn’t have higher education at all. And this whole crowd has inundated all spheres of Russian life, including Russian military industry. And it is supposed that those “engineers”, who were not able to pass any exam without paying certain amount of money under the table, now are successfully developing the most advanced weapons systems? “Come on, man” as would Joe Biden say.

The level of technical scientific expertise of Russian industry have fell to such a low level, that Russia can’t do anything on its own. It imports everything. I am sure that all “new” missiles are the combination of old Soviet types with Chinese computer systems. Therefore, the resurgence of Russian military industry is mostly a sham. Yes, the state invests heavily in this field but results are less than modest. Or to put it bluntly: the state throws its money down the drain. The only perceptible results are luxuries villas of CEOs of state run military industry plants and research facilities. The level of corruption and embezzlement reached such an extent that even the state itself was compelled to acknowledge it and to arrest many of those CEOs but it didn’t improve the overall situation.
But what about Russian army itself? Even if you have no good military industry, you can have good army units, like it is the case in Arab countries. But in Putin’s Russia the situation in army corresponds perfectly with the situation in military industrial complex. They are able to organize excellent shows of their supposed achievements but under scrutiny all of this happens to be a sham.

There are few tens of thousands of efficient battle-ready troops but all other hundreds of thousands are a dead weight that drains Russian state budget. The Russian army is an epitome of inefficiency, corruption, brutality and all kinds of criminality. All social vices that Russian society suffers from are present in army on even greater scale. To this should be added ever increasing share of non-Russian Asian soldiers. This last factor reduces the overall intellectual level of the army (many of the Asian conscripts are not able even to speak and write in Russian) and humiliates Russian soldiers who feel themselves ever more alienated and oppressed. The army of Russian Federation becomes a Muslim army where calls “Allakh akbar” have become the new normal. Muslim conscripts, acting like a gang, oppress ethnic Russian conscripts, extorting money from them and compelling to do all kinds of dirty work. The officers prefer not to interfere into this abysmal state of affairs. I doubt that such an army would perform well under real battle stress. If thrown into war it would look like it was in the war against Finland in 1939, if not worse. To sum up: the army of Russian Federation is not a Russian army; or to be more precise – it is the anti-Russian army.

Therefore, the idea that Putin had restored Russian army is absolute sham having nothing to do with reality. Yes, army is lavishly financed by Putin’s system but its combat efficiency remained as it was in 1990es; and its ethnic composition drastically deteriorated in the last two decades.

The best confirmation of this assertion is the fact that Putin didn’t invade Ukraine in 2014. It was the best opportunity ever presented and many experts wonder why he didn’t use it. But the answer lies on the surface: because Putin’s military wasn’t ready for such large-scale operation. They did what they could: occupied Crimea and created mayhem in the Eastern Ukraine, always pretending that they could unleash the wholesale invasion any moment they like. But it was the usual Kremlin’s bluff. People in the West have difficulties in understanding this mentality; only locals can see through Kremlin’s lies; you need to live here to understand how this system works.

I am sure that present Putin’s posturing at the Ukrainian border is yet another large-scale bluff. As it was correctly noted by many mainstream military experts, Putin was greatly emboldened by American internal disarray and Afghan failure. The American-Chinese tensions too play a role. The Kremlin’s rulers see that American military is too overstretched and try to use this weakness to the utmost.

There are about 175 thousands of Russian troops in the regions adjacent to Ukrainian border. It could seem a huge force, but if we consider the length of the Russian-Ukrainian border and the vastness of the possible theater of operations, this number would be inadequate to execute the full occupation of Ukraine. This number is comparable to the number of troops used by US-led coalition in Iraq in 2003. And all experts (including American officers who participated in this operation) note that the number of ground forces was inadequate and that they were overstretched even having absolute air superiority. Ukraine has area 1.5 times greater than Iraq’s area. Iraq is mostly a deserted flat land but Ukraine has very diverse terrain with forests and swamps in the north and forested mountains in the west. These areas would present especially great challenge for any occupational force. Actually, Kremlin would need at least 500 thousand troops to subjugate the whole of Ukraine. And it is doubtful that it would be able to master such a great number of battle-ready troops (Russian army is about 1 million with ground forces with about 350 thousand, but as I said, most of them are of low quality). I suppose that these 175 thousands is the upper limit of what Kremlin can master. Yes, they can gather few hundreds thousands of reservists but their battle value would be close to zero in modern warfare.

Therefore, my conclusion is that Putin has no intentions of going to full-scale war with Ukraine, but tries to gain most from the difficulties of NATO-USA-EU axis.
But as it was always the case in history, the actual events defy any plans and calculations. What begins as a bluff or limited military operation frequently turns into a big war. Rulers always tend to overestimate their ability to control situation. At some point events start to unravel according to their own logic and rulers become only obedient slaves of those events. It can easily happen this time, because, even if the key players perceive all of this as a play, the multitude of low level participants of these events think that this is for real and this perception could ultimately push the situation beyond the supposed limit. Besides the two major sides of the conflict (Russia versus NATO) there are local players with their own interests. I am sure that Polish politicians consider plans of counter invasion in case Russian troops go beyond Dnepr and Kiev. For Poland these territories are too of vital interests, because these lands were for centuries under their rule. And Poland could easily play the same dirty game (Putin’s style) of sending 30-50 thousands of “volunteers” (hastily discharged from the army for such an occasion) instead of its regular army. And such a factor could be of critical importance. I am sure that Polish special forces operate in Ukraine already now. It means that even if NATO as such would stay aside from the war, such countries like Poland, Hungary and Rumania are sure to participate in it in some way or another.

Kremlin’s strategists understand the whole set of difficulties that a full-scale invasion of Ukraine would entail, but the ultimate decision belongs to the very narrow group of people whose misperceptions could turn events in the most unexpected direction. For example, the lack of ground forces could be easily compensated by use of tactical nuclear weapons; the Russian generals for years nurture this idea that promises to solve all problems. In 2014 Putin publicly said that he was ready to use nuclear weapons if any outside force would try to prevent occupation of Crimea. Therefore, we have a glimpse of mentality of those people.

The only way for Putin’s Russia to successfully invade and occupy the whole of Ukraine and to beat off all bordering countries who could try to intervene is to use tactical nuclear weapons. If Putin decided to go to war, he is ready to use nuclear weapons. Actually, if nuclear weapons of small power are used against purely military targets, the war would not look especially different from similar NATO wars. The very fact of nuclear weapons use could not mean an immediate start of the global nuclear war. Even the civil population would be not affected too severely, because modern nuclear weapons are made in such a way as to minimize long-term radiation effects. I suppose that Kremlin rulers could consider something along these lines.

If nuclear weapons were used, the Ukrainian army as an organized force would be eliminated in a few hours, which would allow Russian army to advance as quickly as the speed of their vehicles allow. The key targets would be taken by air assault and airborne units. The parachute units could be landed immediately at the western border of Ukraine to bar possible invasion of Poland. Therefore, the whole war would be reduced to the mop up operation and subsequent police operation of seeking and destroying remaining groups of guerillas. Therefore, the main phase of the war could be completed in a week. The civil population would be cowed by shock of absolute devastation produced by nuclear weapons; there would be very few wishing to continue resistance.
Certainly, such a scenario would mean thorough transformation of the whole global system but it is another question. I doubt very much that the demoralized USA and other NATO countries would dare to stand against such an onslaught. Certainly, they would organize economic blockade of Russia but it would be of little effect as long as Russia can cooperate with China.

NATO and USA constantly repeat that they have no military obligation to defend Ukraine, therefore, even if Russia uses tactical nuclear weapons, western rulers can remain neutral. There is no such law that would require anyone to go to war against someone who used nuclear weapon. United States cannot occupy high moral ground in this regard because they were the first in the world who used nuclear weapons.

I suppose that the world is closer than ever to overstep this unwritten taboo on using nuclear weapons. The discussions among generals in USA and Russia about the concept of limited nuclear war go on for the last 20 years. Actually, already in the Russian military doctrine of 2000 we find the following statement: “The Russian Federation reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to the use of nuclear and other mass destruction weapons, as well as in response to a large–scale conventional aggression in critical situations for Russia and its allies.” This last statement allows very wide interpretation, therefore, Russia can justify its use of nuclear weapons as a preventive measure against impending “large-scale aggression”.

It was fundamental departure from the Cold War concept of Mutual Assured Destruction when both sides proclaimed that they would use nuclear weapons only in response to nuclear attack. But after the end of Cold War some American generals and politicians started to advance the idea that it could be useful to have a provision of limited nuclear war, in case when the conventional forces can’t achieve desired results. The very fact of such discussions has destroyed the previous set of perceptions. Russian and Chinese military-political leadership reacted quickly by updating their strategies to meet this new challenge. In the long run it should be acknowledged that it was a grave mistake on the American part to initiate such discussions. But, certainly, these were not Americans as such but Jews inside American government who promoted this idea in order to use, when opportunity arises, tactical nuclear weapons against Iran. But the result of this Jewish-American nuclear warmongering is that now the threshold (doctrinal as well as psychological) for the possible use of nuclear weapons was lowered in the whole world.


If the assertion of Putin being a “glorious fighter against globalism” is partly true, the second notion about Putin being a great savior of Russia is utterly false. Yes, the Putinist system was very successful in creating this image, especially for foreign audience. Even Russian population was initially duped about the true essence of this regime. Due to the substantial improvement in living standards in 2002-2008 Putin enjoyed high popularity among local population (I should note that all true Russian nationalists never liked Putin, because they clearly understood the anti-Russian character of this system as such, regardless of its current wrappings). The economic prosperity of early Putin’s era was based exclusively on high export prices of mineral resources, hydrocarbons first of all. But all those years the system did nothing to restore key industries that were ruined in 1990es. On the contrary, the processes of industrial and technological downfall continued throughout Putin’s reign. The result now is that Russia can’t produce anything on its own, especially high-tech. Much fuss was made around developing local high-tech industry but all those projects had collapsed due to inefficiency and rampant corruption.

The Putin’s officials prefer to provide for their own interests instead of doing anything useful for society. And it is understandable, because they more than anyone else understand the false nature of their system and the fact that it would collapse at some point. Therefore, they try to spend their time in power with great advantage for their families. Almost all high officials have property in foreign countries. Those who have not, actually have but through stooges on whose names huge assets are registered. There were multiple cases when it was discovered that insignificant people had hundreds of millions in property and bank accounts in foreign countries.

The whole Putinist system functions as one huge criminal syndicate where criminality and corruption are built in the system itself, instead of being social aberrations. You can’t be a high state official in Russia and not being involved in corruption and embezzlement of public funds.

Taken into account those facts, it is little wonder that Russian industrial capacities continued to deteriorate all those years of seeming economic boom. Yes, Russia had sharp income increase in the years 2002-08 but it was due not to real productivity growth but due to high oil prices, which allowed Russian government to increase all sorts of spending, including increase of salaries to state employed personnel. Therefore, the whole Putin’s economic miracle was nothing more than spending spree of oil dollars, but not a real economic recovery. Actually, the bulk of Russian industry is in abysmal shape, even worse than it was in 1990es. Russia is on the path of becoming a totally de-industrialized country that depends wholly on imports. All victorious proclamations of Kremlin’s officials about revival of Russian industry turn out to be nothing but outright lies. All those new production facilities that were built in the last twenty years are assembly lines for foreign corporations that use this trick to dodge local tax collection. They import disassembled cars, TV-sets, refrigerators and assemble them at local “plants”. This trick allows foreign corporations to evade taxes and to Russian government to have those false statistics of “domestically produced” high-tech products. In reality, there is nothing of value that could be produced on still remaining Russian plants. The whole industrial might that was real yet 30 years ago was lost. Therefore, the idea that Putin has recovered Russian economy is utterly false.

The widely advertised image that Putin has freed Russia from Jewish oligarchs has to be addressed too. As it is the case with almost everything about Putin’s regime, there are true superficial components in it. Yes, Putin had kicked our few the most brazen Jewish oligarchs but there are dozens of other Jewish oligarchs who have remained and who had become an inalienable part of the overall Putinist corrupt system. The economic position of Jewish community in Russia had improved yet more under Putin’s rule, the fact that was noted by the chief rabbi Berl Lazar. Yes, many Jews dislike Putin in the same way like many Jews dislike Trump; for simple reason that Jews always need to dislike someone. Actually, if there is any ethnic group that benefited more than others in Putin’s Russia it is Jews, but they are least grateful, as it is their custom throughout centuries; they are always ready to trample down and to spit upon their benefactors. The liberal opposition in Russia is dominated by Jews who are the most vociferous and most malicious critics of Putin’s regime. As I said, they perceive any greatness (even the fake one, like modern Russia) as a threat to their ethnic interests. They perceive that they were harmed by Putin’s state because it curtailed some of the most egregious criminal economic activities of 1990es, when Jews veritably privatized the whole Russian economy. Jews are never satisfied; they crave ever more, even if it leads to their own downfall. Actually, Putin has saved Jews, because if he had not curtailed their plunder of Russian economy, Russians would revolt and deal with Jews and their local abettors as they deserve. But due to the relative prosperity of Putin’s early years, Russians were calmed down. But now, when income of the majority of Russians falls and they start to understand that they are regarded by the state as disposable trash, the anger is growing. And Jews try to exploit this anger to their own advantage. Their sweet dream is to incite “stupid Russian swine” to bloody revolt which would allow Jewish professional troublemakers to jump in power as “people’s representatives”, using their rhetorical skills and undercover political machinations. Having their people in power, the whole Jewish community would be able again to suck all blood from the “Russian pig”. In essence, they want to repeat 1990es (now, there are Jews in Russian government too, but their influence is counterbalanced by other groups).

The myth about supposed restoration of the greatness of Russian army was already dealt with above. The only point that needs to be repeated is that with each passing year the Russian army becomes ever less Russian in its ethnic composition. It means that the ever greater number of people from non-Russian hostile ethnic groups receive access to the most deadly weapons of Russian military arsenal. At some point this factor will have the most devastating consequences for ethnic Russians. Ethnic Russians are becoming the most humiliated group of conscripts in Russian military, because they have no diaspora supporting network that other ethnic groups have. Russian conscripts are compelled to survive as detached individuals in the most difficult circumstances of living in Russian military. In the same time, any troubles of non-Russian Asian conscripts instantly raise outcry from their diasporas. Therefore, it creates the situation when ethnic Russians become the most attractive target for any criminal dealings inside Russian army (extortion, compelling to criminal activities and even male prostitution; there are most despicable things going on inside Russian corrupt military under the overall façade of polished brilliance that everyone can see on display on Red Square). This fact alone is enough to proclaim the whole idea of “restoration of Russian military might” being a farce and even insult to Russian people.



3) Putin is a Russian nationalist; he cares for ethnic Russians; he helps Russian families to have more children; he opposes harmful moral influence of the modern western culture; he restores Russian traditional values.

This last third point of the overall false representation of Putin’s regime in the eyes of Western conservative circles is outrageously untrue. If the first point is partially true, the second point is true in appearance, the third point is untrue to such an extent that even disproving it requires no special effort. It is enough to look to what extent the overall position of ethnic Russians has deteriorated under Putin’s watch to stop lauding this criminal regime that did so much harm to Russians that no foreign enemy ever have done.

It is enough to mention that Russians are the poorest ethnic group in Russia (comparing incomes of people of the same educational levels). Russians are overrepresented among alcoholic and drug addicts; Russians are dealt with more severely in courts, because there is no one to defend them; Russian women have more abortions per capita than other ethnic groups; Russian families have fewer children than Asian ethnic groups; Russians receive less social benefits than other ethnic groups, but in the same time Russians are the main contributors to the state budget. This situation can be described in a simple formula: the state takes everything from ethnic Russians and gives nothing back except constant insults, recriminations and threats. Kremlin’s media is apt at vilifying Russians in the most vicious but covered way. They always present Asian non-Russians as heroes and hard-working decent people and ethnic Russians as villains, drunkards, violent criminals and good-for-nothing vagabonds. This outrageous practice is especially rampant in various entertaining talk-shows where Jewish (and Sabbath goy) anchors exercise their verbal skills in humiliating Russians and extolling non-Russians. The same goes on in “Russian” movie industry. Russians are invariably “bad” and non-Russians are invariably “good”. It had reached such an extent that even the simple mainstream people started to note it. They write their grievances in youtube commentaries and on other sites. Many of those anti-Russian programs and movies receive disproportionally negative ratings. Russian people start to see that the so called “elite” that rules them and whom they constantly see on TV are nothing more than a bunch or traitors and haters of everything that is Russian.

In the last few years the trend started to be seen that many commentaries on youtube contain the idea that Putin’s regime wants to replace ethnic Russians with Asians. And those commentaries write not Russian nationalists but moderate Russians who yet few years ago voted for Putin. People start to see that they were betrayed and that there is no future for them and their children. They see that Asian hordes occupy Russian living space and behave like conquerors. The ever increasing wave of Asian crime against ethnic Russians accelerates the speed of ethnic awakening. People start to notice the all too obvious difference between TV portrayal of events and actual reality on the streets.

David Duke frequently mentions the idea that “Putin promotes family values and helps Russian families to raise children”. Yes, this is what Kremlin’s propaganda wants to present to the western conservative audience. But let’s look at how it all stands in reality. Yes, since 2007 the Russian state pays about 8500 dollars for the second child in a family (and later they started to pay for the first and third child with additional various benefits for those who have even more than three children). Taken into account that an average Russian salary is 600 dollars (in many regions only 200-300 dollars), this payment looks very impressive. But as it is always the case in Russia, you need to look deeper to understand the reality as it is.

First of all we need to look at who are the main beneficiaries of those payments. From the very beginning it was obvious that the most fertile groups of society would receive the bulk of this money. And who they are? Gypsies, Muslims from North Caucasus and newly accepted citizens from Central Asia. So, the circle has closed. Who pays into budget from which this money is bestowed? Yes, ethnic Russians pay into the state budget. And who are the main beneficiaries of all kinds of social programs? Yes, non-Russian Asians. No one from among true nationalists doubted how it would turn out to be. The Russian mainstream crowd was joyous at the beginning but now start to understand that they were duped yet again; yet again from so many times in the last century under the Jewish rule. Russian pay and die, Asians multiply and spread far and wide. And anyone daring to say publicly against this outrageous situation is instantly proclaimed “extremist” and thrown into jail. The Russian courts are apt to mete a quick justice against powerless, especially if they are ethnic Russians. Russians are forbidden to defend their ethnic interests. Russian ethnic nationalism is forbidden by law (it is prohibited to create a political organization defined according to ethnic identity; certainly, this law is applied exclusively against Russians; all other non-European ethnic groups have their own organizations).

What is the result of this lauded Putin’s “family friendly” policy? Ethnic Russians are in sharp decline; each year there are more dead than new-born among Russians. The state covers this up by counting the overall population numbers, without ethnic differentiation. But even this statistics gives the slight decrease in population year to year. But the system has the audacity to proclaim the success of its “family friendly” policy because now population decreases “only by 300 thousands a year instead of 1 million in 1990es”. But the reality is that the whole increase in new-born babies is due to non-Russian high birth-rate. Russians are dying-out under Putin even faster than under Yeltsin. Russians don’t procreate because they have no conditions for this and they feel too downtrodden and humiliated in all aspects to consider anything outside of simple day to day survival. The situation is too dire to describe it by words. All those who see the situation first-hand, feel burning anger against anyone lauding Putin. I was surprised very much how adversely some Russian people reacted to David Duke’s positive remark about Putin in his 2017 speech at League of the South conference (I have translated it and posted on youtube; it was available for two years before it was purged). This video was seen by 15000 people and had more than 300 commentaries. At least 50 of those commentaries contained sharp criticism of this pro-Putin remark. In all other aspects people liked David Duke’s ideas. This inadvertent public opinion sample gives much to think about. I was critical about this pro-Putin stance of David Duke too but I didn’t suppose that it would evoke so much anger. It shows how people really feel about Putin’s regime. And it is good, because it shows that Russian people are not stupid crowd, like Jews think, but people with deep understanding and great generational experience. They see through the systemic lies, however they concealed and spiced. And the true anti-Russian nature of the Putin’s state becomes ever more obvious for the wider sections of society.

As it is the case in all other White countries, the recipients of all social programs are non-whites but the main taxpayers are White People. The situation is not different in Russia. In some sense it is even worse here because this anti-White and anti-European policy is a chief legacy of the Soviet ideology. Putin and his gang were nurtured by the ideology of Marx and Lenin and there is no evidence to believe that this gang has changed their core values. Their mode of behavior show them to be the true followers of comrade Lenin who preached utter disregard for any constraints of international law and norms of morality. They can do anything if it serves their interests and they would vehemently deny any responsibility for any crime they committed or were instrumental in accomplishing it. We can see consistently the application of this Leninist method of global political struggle in all actions of Soviet secret services since 1917. They committed so many crimes in all parts of the world that it is easier to say where they were not involved. Especially we should note the key role of Soviet Committee of State Security (KGB) in organizing negro terror network in South African Republic, Rhodesia, Angola and other neighboring countries in order to destroy White states in this region. The Soviet military assistance was essential factor in dismantling White rule in all parts of the world after WW2. And this supposedly “conservative” “family-friendly” “defender of Christian values” mister/comrade Putin was raised in this organization, was inculcated with this mindset and he acts accordingly. All his politics and all his methods are from KGB cook-book. And it would be utter folly to expect from such a creature some kind of national identity policy or even conservative traditional values policy. Yes, the Kremlin rulers play this card both for internal and external consumption but they absolutely don’t care about any values, because they have none. They are obsessed with money and power; they have lost any Russian ethnic identity (those who are biologically Russian) long ago and they have no compunctions in dismantling Russian nation and replacing it with Asian conglomerate of savages, because it serves their selfish materialistic goals.

Yes, Mister David Duke, there is nothing in Putin that you have imagined or wanted there to be. It is nothing more than a figment of your imagination, which is forgivable folly for a foreigner, even the foreigner who knows Russia well. Putin is the continuation of the same story that your book “Secret Behind Communism” narrates about.

I don’t want to blame David Duke, but I want to warn other people from falling into the same trap of delusion. Yes, people want to believe that there is some bright spot on the other side of the globe. And it is understandable, taken into account how the situation in the United States has deteriorated in the last few years. People always were inclined in difficult times to imagine some non-existent happy place where everything is well and where truth and honesty triumph above evil and falsehood.

The funny thing is that here in Russia the same phenomenon is apparent. Many people up to the present day believe that USA and other western countries are the “free world” where people can live as they want and where everyone can say and think whatever he likes. Russians tend to believe that America is something that they have seen in old movies. They too want to believe that there is some bright and happy place on the other side of the globe where they should go from this cursed land of rampant Putinism, total dishonesty and corruption. But the harsh truth is that there is no such place in the world where we could escape and enjoy happy life. If we want positive changes we should start them ourselves. Only we can do it and it should be done here where we live. It is our duty and our destiny. Yes, there are some places from where White People should go out for simple reason that those places are bound to be untenable in the middle-term future; it is South Africa first of all. The sooner White People go out of there the better for them; those who remain, most probably would perish in the ethnic cleansing spree by black savages supplied and incited by Chinese, Arabs, Persians and, certainly, Jews. We should understand that all non-white peoples hate White Race (consciously or subconsciously) for simple reason of its genetic superiority. Superiority is always hated and the moment the superior being exhibits some weakness and inability to defend itself, it is jumped upon by all subhuman creatures and destroyed. We can see how this biological mechanism works in real time. The savages of the world crave the approaching moment of seemingly inevitable final reckoning with the “evil whitey”. We are evil in their eyes because we are superior; in the same way as shepherd dog is an epitome of evil in the eyes of a lap dog. Therefore, their hatred is a biologically determined reaction; nothing can change it. The only way to pacify such hostile feelings is to beat those savages into submission when they would not be able even to think about any hostile actions against White Man.

The greatest sin of Russians was their instrumental role (under Jewish tutelage and governance, certainly) in unplugging this animalistic hatred of non-whites toward White People. And this fact is not even concealed in Russian official historiography. On the contrary, all Soviet/Russian text-books on modern history proudly proclaim the important role played by Soviet Union in “supporting national liberation struggle against colonialism and racial oppression”. What else anyone needs to know about this state and about those who are in charge here? Yes, they are proud that their special services organized killings of White People in Rhodesia and SAR and that they supplied weapons to all subhuman creatures in all parts of the world to kill Frenchmen, Englishmen, Belgians, Americans and they justify this criminal assistance by the hollow meaningless notion of “struggle against imperialism”.

Someone would think that it is a digression on my part but it is not. Yes, because what is happening around Ukraine is the product of the same warped mentality that committed all above mentioned atrocities against White Race. And it would be an utter folly to believe otherwise. The Putinist system has nothing to do with White racial interests. It is as hostile to our interests as any other “western democracy”. They are the branches of the same poisonous tree that had flourished on the ruins of destroyed Europe since 1945. And the only way to restore Europe and to save White Race is to cut down this whole tree, instead of choosing which of its branches are less poisonous.

We should be neutral in this whole criminal struggle of the western and eastern gangs. It is their business, not ours. The only matter that we should concern ourselves is how to survive in the event of big war. Any possible war of any modern state against another in any geopolitical configuration and under any banner and pretext should be considered as essentially anti-White event because there is no pro-White state in the modern world and we should not fall into the trap of believing that there is some state that somehow more akin to our worldview than other states. Even if some of them are less openly hostile to our worldview (and to the Natural Law as such) it doesn’t mean that we should consider them as our allies. If mice are less dangerous than rats it doesn’t mean that mice should be welcomed in the house. Let mice, rats and vipers fight between themselves for the time being; our business is to stay as far from this fight as possible.

I write this article exclusively for the people who understand racial reality of life, because only they can understand the underlying mechanisms and causes of the global events. These people, although relatively few in numbers, are more valuable for evolution than millions of mainstream dupes watching CNN and MTV, whose opinions and delusions are of absolutely no concern to me (who are the dead weight of civilization and of zero value to evolution). Therefore, the main task for me is to provide as clear as possible perspective on what is going on in Russia and neighboring countries. Our people (the few of real understanding) should have the deepest insight in what goes on and to avoid all widespread delusions.

To sum up the main idea of the article:
1) The confrontation between Putin’s Russia and the “liberal” West is real and based on conflicting and competing globalist visions.
2) Both sides are anti-national and anti-traditional. Both sides have delusional globalist ideas and insane believes in universal deracinated society. The only difference for them is who would command in this supposed globalist world.
3) Both sides are the offshoots of the post-WW2 world order based on negation of traditional European values and false “humanist” ideals. Both sides perceive any ethnic identity as a threat to their agenda.
4) Ukraine (and other East European countries) is caught between those two competing monsters and is compelled by circumstances to choose sides in otherwise alien competition.
5) The Ukrainian nationalists struggle against the real threat of hostile power from the east (they are not some kind of puppets as Russian propaganda and its conservative western parrots depict them). In essence it is a continuation of the war fought in 1918-1920 and in 1941-1955 (guerilla war against Soviet terror state); the same actors, the same ideals. In this particular case Russia represents globalist force and Ukraine is the side that fights for its identity.
6) There is a global dimension of this Russian-Ukrainian war. If looked from this perspective where Ukraine is an ally of NATO and USA, Russia looks more as a righteous defender of identity that struggles against globalist system. Therefore, this whole question is multifaceted and can’t be evaluated as a simple phenomenon.
7) Putin’s regime is a successor of Soviet state in all its aspects; the same core internationalist ideology (with the only tangible difference of allowing private economic activities) and the same people (and their descendants) in power. The modern Russia has nothing in common with tsarist Russia except of some state symbols borrowed from Russian empire.
This state inherited all anti-Russian characteristics of its Soviet predecessor. It would not be an exaggeration to assert that Putin’s state is systemically anti-Russian because it is built on the assumption that the main threat emanates from the Russian identity awakening. Therefore, it does everything in its power to suppress Russian ethnic identity. The ethnic replacement policy is the logical outcome of this systemic mindset. In this aspect the both systems (Russian and American) are strikingly similar. Both systems consider their native populations as the main threat for themselves.

In evaluating all events (both local and global) we should free our minds from the chains of public opinion and prevalent trends in media sources. The first qualifier should be: how it relates to White racial identity? Is it good or bad for the White Race? Who is the main enemy of our race and who is the temporary ally?

There is the key axiom for White Race: we have no friends, because evolution is a competition and the most successful competitor is the most hated by all others. We are bound to be hated because we are better. It is a folly on the part of White People to strive to be liked by all kinds of aliens.

Goering once said (at least these words are attributed to him): “We don’t expect to be liked; it is enough if we are feared”. It was about attitude to the NS movement but it holds true to the whole racial question.
The White People should become much tougher than they are; much more unforgivable and intolerant. The inherent white tendency to kindness had mutated into self-destructing tendency of preference of aliens and rejection of own kin. This harmful mutation should be cured by the most uncompromising methods. All remaining White People should be as intolerant to outsiders as possible. Tolerance to anything non-white should be considered as unforgivable capital crime.

How these existential laws relate to the topic of Ukraine? The relation is very simple and straightforward. We should always remember of who is who in any conflict. Ukrainians in the last century had fought on the side of European identity but the Kremlin’s army of Russian-speaking slaves was the main weapon of the most brutal and insane globalist project. This key fact should be the main gauge in evaluating this current conflict.

Thomas S NJ
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:31 pm

Re: Russian News

Post by Thomas S NJ » Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:35 pm

I must admit I am one of those who has been outside-looking-in types that believed Putin's Russia to be a bastion for nationalism and a potential new haven for our Race. I suppose it gave me hope to think that there was already an example of our Race recovering from defeat at teh hands of the judeo-bolshevists. Thank you, Wolf, for your detailed reporting from behind the lines.
H0195

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Wed Jan 19, 2022 12:11 pm

Thomas S NJ wrote:
Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:35 pm
I must admit I am one of those who has been outside-looking-in types that believed Putin's Russia to be a bastion for nationalism and a potential new haven for our Race. I suppose it gave me hope to think that there was already an example of our Race recovering from defeat at teh hands of the judeo-bolshevists. Thank you, Wolf, for your detailed reporting from behind the lines.
Yes, there are millions of good Europeans and Americans who sincerely believe in Putin being a force for good. It should be admitted that Kremlin's propaganda apparatus is very effective. They know how to win a target audience. But it is important to be really open-minded and to consider any matter from different points. I tried to be as objective as possible in presenting Putin's Russia. I wanted to inform such people as you, the honest White Men, who lack the inside knowledge about Russia; to dispel some lingering misconceptions and false beliefs concerning the post-Soviet system.

I am glad if it would be useful to as many of our people as possible. The problem is that many people tend to firmly hold to their false beliefs, even if presented with hard undeniable facts. Sometimes illusions are too dear to the heart to abandon them. It is the same with Trump followers. They stick to their false savior despite all too clear evidence that he is an obedient Sabbath goy. But Putin is even less real "savior" than Trump. These personalities evolved in reverse order. Trump started as a militant defender of American values (and by implication a defender of White People) but over time slid into the usual "conservative" path. Putin started as a systemic nonentity but due to circumstances has evolved into some kind of "fighter against globalism". But in both cases these men are fakes. We should not take them seriously, regardless of what they say.

Putin-loving is a serious illness among White Americans and it should be cured. You should not allow a hostile foreign propagandist entity (RT) to influence your thinking processes. But it doesn't mean that you should not watch RT or Kremlin-sponsored sites; they sometimes provide very good information about the USA and other western countries, exposing the rotten essence of "western democracies". But RT blatantly lies about Russian internal affairs and about events where Russia is immediately involved (Ukraine especially). In this case, they lie even more than CNN and other "trustworthy media sources".

Actually, the mainstream western media are more or less correct in their reporting about Russian internal affairs (about corruption, crime, suppression of any opposition political activity, torture in prisons, police brutality). Certainly, they tend to oversimplify everything (due to the ever more deficient intellectual abilities of TV reporters) but they have no motive to hide Kremlin’s dirty side (except of the Jewish role, which continues to be very important in Putin’s Russia but which no one dares to expose). To sum up: you can use RT as an information source but should filter each their word; they are not journalists in a straight sense of the word, but agents of influence, the informational warfare branch of Kremlin's special services. They don't simply report events but implant in the public mind useful for them version of events. When you know this fact, you can detect it and neutralize this influence.

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Thu Jan 20, 2022 5:18 am

Commentary to the NV article '“Gun Control”: the Ostensible Agenda Is not the Real Agenda' https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/01/gu ... al-agenda/

The scoundrels in power always tried to take away arms from people. The idea behind “gun-control” is all too obvious: the system wants to ensure itself from possible troubles when it starts its far-reaching social experiments (like Soviet collectivization).

One of the most elucidating examples in this regard is the gun-confiscation order issued by Bolsheviks in spring 1918 in Don Cossacks' region. In the Russian empire, Cossacks had their light weapons as a private possession. They enjoyed a high level of autonomy from central authorities. But Bolsheviks wanted to curtail this independence and to take away all guns from the hands of their subjects.
But Cossacks reacted differently from all others, mostly passive, strata of Russian society. They revolted and chased away Bolshevik scoundrels from the Don region. The Don revolt marked the beginning of the all-out Civil War in Russia.

This example shows how the order to surrender all privately owned guns can spark an armed revolt. And it is the only logical reaction to such an order because if someone wants to deprive you of your means of defense, he does it because of obvious malicious intents. Therefore, you have no other options except fighting back; and it is obvious that it is easier to do when you have guns than when you have none. The very fact of state authorities issuing such an order should be considered as a declaration of war, there should be no doubts about it.
I suppose that the scoundrels-in-chief of Biden's administration understand this and they try to chip away gun-rights bit by bit. They do it by limiting types of guns allowed to be bought (limiting magazine capacities, size, type of stock, and so on); and they constantly invent new pretexts of denying gun rights for specific categories of citizens. The ever-increasing list of newly invented by Jewish psychiatrists “mental disorders” serves this purpose very well. Nowadays they can label anyone “mentally unstable” and on this basis deny the right to buy a gun. Using all those surreptitious methods, these scoundrels could cut away as much as half of the population from the possibility to defend themselves.

I suppose, that they would toughen the restrictions along the “educational” side of the matter. They would declare something of the sort: “to possess a gun you need to be professionally trained in this field, otherwise, it would only harm you and those around you”. As it is usual, all their actions are made exclusively “to protect your own health and wellbeing”. By the way, all crimes of the Bolshevik state were made in the name of the people. When they would start the massive gun-grabbing in the USA, it too would be explained on the grounds of "public health and security concerns". The methods and subterfuges are always the same.

They are sure to consider the possible massive protests and even armed revolts in some places against this. It is why they started first with cleansing military ranks from possible enemies. They are readying the military for the task of conducting an internal war against the White population. Therefore, all concerns of the conservatives about the US military being unprepared to fight against China are laughable. The US military is not needed anymore to fight a big conventional war against foreign armies. It is needed at home to fight against White People. In this regard, its capacity only increases when they accept all kinds of “minorities” and perverts. They would be happy to shoot at White People.
When the system decides that it is ready to start all-out gun-grabbing, first, it would position army units at all key points. They could even provoke yet one spate of negro unrest throughout the country. It would permit them to move army units inside all major cities and to impose curfew and other extraordinary measures. Afterward, “to protect public interests and to prevent further unrests” they would order the total confiscation of guns, including shotguns. Certainly, this measure would not impact negro and Mexican gangs, but only White People.

I am sure that the system would try to take away all guns under the smoke-screen of some events like the 2020 riots. Besides, they need a few cases of “vigilante lynching” when White Men would fight back against negro depredations. These cases would be used as proves that guns needed to be taken away. They could even organize something outrageous, like shooting at the back of the head a dozen of negroes. This “Nazi crime” would be an ideal pretext for any gun-grabbing order on the part of ZOG administration. Most probably their special agencies are working out some of these scenarios. They would either groom real crazies for this provocation (like they did so successfully with “Muslim terrorists”) or, if none are found, they would do it themselves. Afterward, they would kill a few known "neo-nazis” and declare them to be the perpetrators of the “mass killing of African Americans” (“we tried to arrest them, but they resisted, so, we were compelled to annihilate them”). It is all too obvious. Considering how they inflate this whole fairy-tale about “white supremacism” they plan something along these lines.

In any case, the Americans should be ready to respond in kind. Not with armed revolt, because this scenario is expected and guarded against (they are always ready to repeat Waco as many times as needed); but with an equal amount of counter-lies and deceptions. When the order comes to surrender arms, you should comply and surrender your old rusty shotgun. But everything else declare to be stollen the last night by a mob of rioters (it is even possible to burn down a couple of your old barns and smash some outdated TV and computers for this version to be realistic). After police had seen that your property was damaged, they would believe you. Nothing else is needed. They would be out and your guns would be where you put them. Certainly, from then on, they would be illegal, but who cares when you are dealing with a criminal system?

We can’t win this struggle acting openly. You can fight the rats only using rats' methods. You can't stand against liars if you always say the truth. The only way to destroy liars is to lie to them even more. The honesty toward liars is a crime against oneself.
But all of this is impossible to accomplish at once when events start to happen. You need to be ready beforehand. There should be a few alternative locations where you can put your guns. The whole stock of ammunition should be distributed in a few caches outside of your dwelling. You need to have at home only as much as is needed for immediate defense purposes.

Here comes the key question: the need for mental transformation, the need to change our own mentality. The White Man for too long has evolved as a law-abiding citizen, therefore, it is very hard for him to overstep certain lines. But when you are dealing with criminals hiding in the clothes of the law, you have no other option. It is the enemy, and you can't combat an enemy abiding by the laws imposed by this very enemy. Yes, you must pretend that you abide by his laws but actually to do what you need to do.

The collision is inevitable, but this time we, White People, should not allow to make “aggressors” of ourselves (like it was in 1861 or 1939). We should wait for the enemy to strike first. It will be possible to fight back in full force only when they start all-out ethnic cleansing against our people. It is sure to happen. At some point, the negro and Mexican gangs would become emboldened enough to start this and the police and army would stay aside because at this point they would consist mostly of the sympathizers of those gangs.
But the reaction should not be too rapid. The mainstream white crowd should “enjoy” black-brown depredations for some time before it would be ready to accept the real alternative to ZOG. In the meantime the task of White militant groups would be to provide defense for themselves; the fate of the mainstream crowd shouldn't especially bother us. At least a hundred thousand of them should die (maybe much more) in ethnic cleansings before others would change their minds of unconcerned TV-watching couch potatoes. But before big bloodshed happens, we should keep as far away from all political events as possible.

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Fri Feb 04, 2022 6:03 pm

Some thoughts about the commentary made by a reader “Victor” under my article on NV

30 January, 2022 8:24 am
American nationalists and Nat Van editors, be vigilant! The so-called Wolf Stoner is not a Russian nationalist. Rather, he is a (Pro)-Ukrainian Russophobe from the punitive “Azov” regiment or even a special-service agent from CIA / Mi6 / Mossad. In his series, he wrote a lot of straight lies and slanders about Russia and heroic defenders of the Donbass.
The thousands of victims of the Ukrainian terror in the last eight years cry for this truth to be said.
Ukrainian executioners in the Donbass and their masters in the US and NATO are true white trash!


This commentary by “Victor” deserves especial attention. I will explain what do I mean. There are plenty of other readers who expressed their disagreements with some of my views or assertions. But all those commentaries were made by real people, which fact could be easily seen by analyzing their texts. There is a real thought process behind all those commentaries.

But in this particular case we have something very different. I doubt greatly that it is made by a usual reader of NV site.

Here in Russia we have great experience in dealing with such kind of commentators. They are called “Kremlin’s bots” or “Kremlin’s trolls”. It is well-known fact that the Russian special services employ great number of people whose job is to surf internet, spread rumors and ideas favorable to Kremlin, swing public opinion in its favor and to find “enemies”. It is mostly these “Kremlin’s bots” or “Kremlin’s trolls” who are responsible for most of court cases when people are criminally charged and prosecuted for their commentaries. They have become the veritable scourge of Russian society; people fear their activities. Sometimes these “trolls” provoke people in internet discussion to something openly offensive or threatening, screenshot this comment and immediately relay this information to the “center E” (the anti-extremist agency dedicated almost exclusively to combat thought crimes). Thousands of Russians were convicted for such imaginary crimes (the punishments are mostly mild and range from fines to suspended sentences of 2 years) but sometimes people were given real jail terms.

Dealing with this kind of threat for at least a decade, we have accumulated some useful experience how to identify such “trolls”. Most of them are utterly unimaginative people and simply while out their working days by copying and pasting the same kind of hackneyed messages on all popular sites to create an impression of massive support for Putin. Some of them are especially proficient in insulting in all imaginable ways anyone opposing the system; it works excellently; average people are very sensitive to such insults and prefer not comment at all (and it is precisely what is needed – to shut up any criticism). This “trolling” activity is especially noticeable on the most popular sites. These key battlegrounds of the informational warfare are defended by the system most vigorously. Any hostile commentary directed against Putin’s system attracts at least a dozen of replies from “trolls” (posing as real users). Their hallmark is to insult, accuse of being a traitor, paid-agent of CIA, to make threats like “we will find you” and the constant repetition of the officially sanctioned narrative.

Besides monitoring Russian-language media, they survey international media too. It was even publicly announced that “our competent organs” (the favorite euphemism among KGB/FSB agents about themselves) will monitor foreign media and keep track of the most hostile to Russian interests sources and individuals” (by Russian interests they, certainly, mean the interests of the ruling gang).

It is known that Kremlin tries to influence the conservative and right-wing media in the West in order to gain most from the internal problems in those countries. As usual, they seek the useful idiots who would do their bidding for free. Certainly, the level of interference in the West by Kremlin’s “trolls” is much less pronounced due to the fact that it requires too much resources to hire foreign-language specialists and because Kremlin fears to unleash the full-scale informational campaign in foreign countries.

This comment shows very definite hallmarks of “troll’s” concoction. First of all, it lacks human component, because its author simply does his tedious work. He prints rapidly the prefabricated set of clichés and moves further because he has yet much work to do on tens of other sites. He tries to look passionate and sincere but it all too stilted to be true. The real people don’t express their genuine thoughts in such a fashion. Even if someone disagrees strongly, it looks differently.

But the most important factor is the composition of the key arguments. It strikes me as being too standard. The western readership is less exposed to the mainstay items of the Putinist propaganda but here in Russia we know it all too well. Every point that “Victor” writes is the precise, word for word, repetition of the standard Kremlin’s clichés in relation to Ukraine, Azov regiment and critics of Putin’s regime; absolute lack of originality. Even when a dumb man writes, he does it differently. “Victor” isn’t dumb; he does his work diligently. Here we should understand the key difference between our real readership and outsiders who lack proper understanding of our ideas and worldview. They simply can’t operate in our environment unnoticed.

Let’s remember what we are all doing when faced with a new task (especially when it is not interesting but needs to be done, like fixing the broken toilet cistern valve). Yes, we try to find the most accessible and brief information about this subject and to solve the problem as quickly as possible. We are not interested in deep research of the given matter. We fix the problem and move forward. The same is with “Victor”. He (or his coworkers) has found this “hostile to his country” article and follows the rigid instructions of his service; that is to post a fervent denunciation of this article. Certainly, he must do it from the supposed nationalist side, as if he is a nationalist himself and he strongly disagrees.

Let’s analyze this comment sentence by sentence.
“American nationalists and Nat Van editors, be vigilant!”.
I suppose that it is a funny way to address an American readership. Too unnatural, but it is how Russian text-books teach English. “Victor” tries to attract attention to what he has to say and does it how he was taught by his teachers in school and university.
Afterward follows the typical Russian expression “so-called” that Russian special services and state media use extensively when write or speak about their enemies. By using this expression, they try to reject any value of a person or an organization; it presupposes that it is something fake, unworthy or even criminal, “so-called”.

“Rather, he is a (Pro)-Ukrainian Russophobe from the punitive “Azov” regiment”.
Here we have two established clichés that are universally used by all Russian state agencies and media. “Russophobia” is a term used almost exclusively by Kremlin’s officials when they try to vilify their opponents or foreign politicians. But this word is rarely used by ordinary people in everyday life.

Since the very first appearance of Azov battalion in June 2014 when it cleared Mariupol of pro-Putin separatists, the Kremlin’s media went berserk in vilifying and slandering this volunteer formation. They used all imaginable dirty informational tricks to smear it. The word “punitive” is an obligatory addition to Azov when it is mentioned in Kremlin’s media. Here I need to stress again, that common people, including those who dislike Ukraine, don’t use this word. The word “karateli” simply isn’t a part of modern Russian mainstream vocabulary. But Kremlin widely uses it to create an artificial parallel to the personnel of German anti-guerilla formations that in Soviet documents and literature were called “karateli”.

In the same sentence “Victor” expands into mentioning CIA, MI6 and Mossad connections. The accusations of being a paid agent of CIA is the most popular item in the Soviet/Russian vocabulary when someone is needed to be presented as an enemy. On this point I can concede that all mainstream pro-Kremlin Russians could use such an accusation against anyone expressing pro-Ukrainian views. But MI-6 is too outlandish for an average Russian. There are very few who know what it means. Mossad is never mentioned in Kremlin’s media. Here it is added solely to gain trust among “fascist readership”. The guy tries to be “one of us”, so he needs to put something like this. By the way, I need to note that “Victor” carefully avoided any openly anti-semitic remarks, substituting it with the innocent mentioning of Mossad. Because he knows that if he would be too ardent in trying to be “one of us”, it could evoke some suspicions among his superiors (what if he truly thinks so?).

“In his series, he wrote a lot of straight lies and slanders about Russia and heroic defenders of the Donbas”.
Nothing unusual in the beginning of this sentence. He states as certain conclusion that all negative information expressed in the article is false. This kind of wholesale denial without specifics is very common among various people, especially among Sovietized Russians. But the second part of the sentence is yet one pearl: “…heroic defenders of Donbas”. It could be not noticeable to American readers but we, Russians, were brainwashed for decades with such wording about “heroic defenders of Sevastopol”, “heroic defenders of the fortress Brest”, “heroic defenders of Moscow” and so on and on for infinity down to the tiniest village that has its own museum filled with rusty Mosin rifles and fairy-tales about its “heroic defenders that fought Nazis”. The trash of this sort is from the same Soviet templates-set that was used to describe events of WW2. Kremlin’s agencies extensively use this kind of primitive WW2-style propaganda to describe the events in Ukraine. It evokes only revulsion among all intelligent layers of Russian society; but it has traction among the most backward Russians, especially among drunkard workers whose only source of information is TV.

After this, “Victor” uses yet one usual trick of substituting key words in one of my introductory sentences. This technic is used all too often among professional Kremlin’s propagandists. It is an effective trick but lacks substance. There are no “thousands of victims of Ukrainian terror” and there is no such phenomenon as “Ukrainian terror”. The 14 thousand that died in this war are the victims of Kremlin’s decision to hold to Ukraine at all costs. There is not a single incident when Ukrainian state agents or “extremists” had infiltrated into Russia and committed terrorist acts; therefore, all loose talks about “Ukrainian terror” are totally inappropriate.

At the end follows yet one hackneyed template about “…their masters in the USA and NATO”, who are white trash, according to “Victor”. It is the only reference to White racial identity in his comment and to this attributed the word “trash”. I suppose that this remark discloses “Victor’s” real outlook toward the whole Western world. I think that all of us are “white trash” in his eyes.

After having analyzed this comment, I came to the conclusion that the most probable author of it is a worker in charge of monitoring English media. The existence of such a unit in SVR (Foreign Intelligence Service) is a known fact. They read everything, analyze and report to their superiors; besides it, they disseminate all kinds of rumors that favor Russian foreign policy. And, certainly, they slander critics of Putin’s regime. All of it is done under false identities in order to swing the local public mood in a required direction.

As I said in my article, in the last few years Russian intelligence services started actively exploiting the White racial discontent for their nefarious ends. Therefore, they are sure to read National Vanguard along with all other prominent pro-White sites, such as Occidental Observer and American Renaissance. And my article, for sure, is an unpleasant nuisance among the overall favorable picture of Putin’s Russia that dominates western nationalist circles. I am glad that they have shown their snout.

By the way, it shows the lack of professional skills, because they have engaged in a verbal duel on the unknown turf and without proper training. I even suppose that “Victor” is a female operative from Russia. The diligent women tend to learn their lessons too well and implement those skills too rigidly. It is why there are so many hackneyed propagandist expressions in one small comment. It is a well-done homework of a former school girl.

Maybe I am mistaken. It is impossible to be sure in such matters, but I think that the probability of this version is the highest of all other possible explanations.

Yes, it could be a real Russian man who ardently supports Putin. But such men are the least likely candidates to read NV in their free time. My everyday experience suggests that such kind of men are most likely to spend their evenings watching soccer on TV and drinking beer, not reading “Turner Diaries” or listening Kevin Alfred Strom’s programs.

If it were an American of Russian origin who supports Putin, he would use a different style.
Therefore, excluding the less probable variants, I came to the most probable source of this comment.

Now I must say a few words about the possible implications of this alien interference into our media space.
First of all, it means that they read us. Before it, I thought that they don’t do it. I supposed that they have too much work on their hands to snoop on foreign political organizations that have no immediate prospects of gaining real power. But the rise of popularity of the White identity movement in USA probably has changed this attitude. They see that America is crumbling from inside and that there is brewing something very different deep inside the American society. This realization probably induced them to expand their monitoring activities and they now read all prominent White media sources.

Before this comment, there was one similar one about a year ago. But it had more or less human characteristics, despite being filled with clichés and laudations of Putin’s Russia. The author could be a real Russian of patriotic Orthodox beliefs but could be an agent-curator who sometimes interferes in the discussions to steer them into the more favorable direction.
In any case, this seemingly insignificant commentary gives something to think about.

User avatar
Jim Mathias
Posts: 2750
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 8:48 pm

Re: Russian News

Post by Jim Mathias » Sat Feb 05, 2022 3:13 am

That this "attack" utilized some heavy-handed, but unsubstantiated, rhetoric caught my attention. This sort of trolling is common in some political news sites here in America, The Hill ( www.thehill.com ) especially has many such individual "Victors" parroting the Party's view almost word for word and the resemblance in methods was similar.
Activism materials available! ===> Contact me via PM to obtain quantities of the "Send Them Back", "NA Health Warning #1 +#2+#3" stickers, and any fliers listed in the Alliance website's flier webpage.

Thomas S NJ
Posts: 90
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:31 pm

Re: Russian News

Post by Thomas S NJ » Sat Feb 05, 2022 5:09 pm

I actually have a good example handy that should tell us who pulls the strings of guys like "Victor". I like occasionally perusing American Partisan - more often than not to enjoy a good chuckle at their Christian Zionism, but there's good resources there as well - and it caught my eye that their link-out section on the right column has RT ...and just a few blocks down, the Jerusalem Post.

As Wolf has warned us, RT, the Kremlin, and anyone pushing their party line should really be suspect! If Christian Zionists are linking out to it right above the JP, it can't be news we can trust!

https://www.americanpartisan.org/
H0195

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Tue Feb 08, 2022 4:08 pm

Thomas S NJ wrote:
Sat Feb 05, 2022 5:09 pm
I actually have a good example handy that should tell us who pulls the strings of guys like "Victor". I like occasionally perusing American Partisan - more often than not to enjoy a good chuckle at their Christian Zionism, but there's good resources there as well - and it caught my eye that their link-out section on the right column has RT ...and just a few blocks down, the Jerusalem Post.

As Wolf has warned us, RT, the Kremlin, and anyone pushing their party line should really be suspect! If Christian Zionists are linking out to it right above the JP, it can't be news we can trust!

https://www.americanpartisan.org/
Yes, Kremlin definitely continues its old Soviet dirty games in the western countries. Little has changed since Cold War era in this regard. The Kremlin rats compete for influence with Washington rats but all our people are on the line of fire in all those conflicts. We should stop cooperating with these enemy state structures. We should start to acquire independence step by step, little by little to the point when it would be an accomplished fact. We don’t need them; they need us; and we should withdraw our cooperation with the system; it is irrelevant whether it is the Putin’s thugocracy or “western democracy”. Why should we differentiate between vipers and cobras? The whole discussion about who is worse and who is better is totally pointless. It is very important for American nationalists to understand the true nature of Putin’s system and to free their minds from the false images imposed on them by the vile Kremlin’s propaganda. I am very glad that you understand these facts. It would facilitate your ability to identify their nefarious activities among the nationalist movement in USA.

User avatar
Wolf Stoner
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 8:44 am

Re: Russian News

Post by Wolf Stoner » Tue Feb 08, 2022 4:21 pm

My response to the commentary by pj dooner under the NA article "We Need Another Adolf Hitler"
his commentary:

"There’s no question that Hitler did amazing things getting Germany back on its feet but once the war started he made some serious mistakes and miscalculations the most damaging of which, in my opinion, was not framing the invasion of Russia as a mission to liberate the Russian people from Bolshevik jew control and make then German equals and allies. Instead, he adhered to Rosenberg’s belief that since Russian people weren’t able to stop the jews from taking power in the first place they therefore weren’t worthy of being equals and allies.

Goebbels on the other hand advocated for a policy of making the Russian people allies and in fact all other Europeans as well. Goebbels policy mirrors what nearly all White Nationalists want today, that is, to unite all pro-white European people therefore I believe that Goebbels should be held up of a better example of the kind of leader that we need today".


Although I am averse to criticize great leaders, as historians like to do so frequently, on this particular point I fully agree with your idea. The war against USSR was inevitable, no questions about this. Only the people lacking knowledge in this field can say something like “it was Hitler’s mistake to invade Russia”. There was no choice; either invade or to be invaded by the greatest military force that was ever assembled in human history.

The military aspects of the invasion were conducted in the best possible way (not without some hitches, certainly), but the political provisions were inadequate. I suppose that in this regard the German thinking was captive to the old-fashioned German imperial political model.

The Bolshevik methods in this regard were much superior. Since 1917 Bolsheviks widely practiced the method of establishing a “people’s government” for any territory they planned to invade. It provided not only the veneer of lawfulness of the invasions but allowed the most rapid transformation of the conquered land into an ally. This method exploits the basic perceptions of average human beings. The mainstream crowd always wants quietude and peace; therefore, they are happy to accept any government if only this acceptance allows the return of some kind of normal life.

I suppose that if Germany had established Russian, Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian governments even before the invasion started to recruit among POW and civilians, it would allow to turn the tide (in terms of social perceptions) in a matter of weeks. If those new governments would decree immediate disbandment of collective farms, redistribution of land among all peasants, privatization of non-essential industries (food-processing, textile, and all kinds of small crafts) and restored some basic civil liberties, it would be very hard for the Soviet monster to oppose this tide of social change. The transformation of the German-Soviet conflict into the war of national liberation of the imprisoned peoples of USSR was the only way to achieve success because the relation of forces was too disadvantageous to Germany. If this kind of policy was accepted, it would be possible to crush the Soviet monster before American aid could strengthen it enough to fight back.

If the viable Russian and other national governments were established on the liberated territories of USSR in 1941, the whole geopolitical paradigm would have changed. The Soviet terrorist state would have been thrown to the Urals and would crumble completely in a few years’ time. In this case, even the massive aid from USA wouldn’t have saved it.

Napoleon did the same mistake of not proclaiming the reestablishment of the Polish kingdom on the very first day of his Russian campaign of 1812. Besides it, he should have proclaimed the abolishing of serfdom for Russian peasants. Those two factors would have made untenable the unbending position of the Russian emperor Alexander the First. Napoleon could have turned his war into the war of all against all style, where Poles would fight Russians and Russia proper would be engulfed in the bloody peasant revolt against serfdom. And, certainly, those events would impel Caucasian tribes to revolt, and Turkey and Iran would use this opportunity to invade southern parts of the Russian empire. The Romanov empire would be finished in a few months’ time.

I am not a fan of Napoleon but present this case only to demonstrate how the whole situation could be changed if the right set of political actions was implemented. The ability to be flexible and adroit is the key in politics. Only the key values should remain immutable but all other secondary issues could be revised and changed as frequently and as thoroughly as the situation requires.
Lenin’s political maneuvers are the best example of this rule. He was able to dupe the entire world on all relevant issues. His actions were not bound by any moral considerations and he didn’t entertain any ideas of honor in relation to his political opponents. He promised everything for everyone but did abide by his promises no longer than political expediency required. So, the Bolshevik state was able to strike down all its enemies one by one, using their internal squabbles against them.

Certainly, I don’t advocate Lenin’s approach to politics but this example shows how the more adroit actor can outplay the ones who are bound by some notions of honor or lawfulness. You can’t abide by any ideas of honor when you are engaged in a mortal struggle, especially against creatures devoid of any honor and abstract notions of justice.

The Napoleonic Wars and the Second World War are very different events in all aspects. But the procrastination in allowing local peoples to have self-government in both cases led to the regaining of strength by the seemingly destroyed state. It is a very important lesson. It is better to employ other people’s interests to serve your own ends than to shoulder the whole burden and suffer the whole weight of consequences.

The German policy in regard to the liberated territories of USSR is the best example when the narrow-minded nationalism hurts the wider racial cause. We should remember that the majority of the German leadership were not especially keen on the race issue; it was an ethereal idea back then with little practical application. Therefore, it would be very difficult to compel the whole state structure to operate along these far-sighted considerations. Instead, the German state acted as any national state would act in a similar situation.
We should not overestimate Hitler’s ability to determine German policy. He wasn’t a dictator in the sense portrayed in media and movies. He was a popular leader who was compelled always to take into account the predominant mood of German people, especially its higher class. And as I said, the German policy on the newly liberated territories reflected the old-fashioned views of imperial Germany.

There is a mistaken popular view to ascribe all German failures in WW2 personally to Hitler (by saying this I mean the mainstream public, not you), as if he were the omnipotent and omnipresent semi-deity that controlled everything. It is a misconception of a similar sort as the idea that in 1939-41 German military was a wholly mechanized and high-tech (to its time) war machine. The first idea is as far from reality as the second one.

Hitler couldn’t go against the established views and traditions of German society and its administrative apparatus. Yes, we should remember that the National-Socialist government didn’t replace the existing state system but incorporated it into its new state. On the one hand it was a good idea because the great number of people working in various governmental structures were not alienated and society as a whole didn’t suffer a disruption that accompany any violent revolution. But any advantage has its downside. And this downside was the inherited legacy of the former state systems, including the unwieldy national policy and too overbureaucratized structure of various agencies. Hitler himself acknowledged this problem by expressing an idea that he too should have cleansed the whole governmental and military structure as Stalin did; it would have freed him from rats like Stauffenberg and Canaris. But in the actual situation of 1930es, when Germany was encircled by heavily armed hostile states, it was hardly possible to engage in any ambitious internal struggles and social transformations, which would have a weakening effect on the ability of the state to withstand external aggression. Hitler was compelled to conduct a policy of national solidarity instead of internal strife. Therefore, to great extent, all of Hitler’s actions were dictated more by necessity than by his own supposed whims. Hitler was one of the most sane and balanced leaders of the last few hundred years and it is why Germany was able to achieve so much with so little.
For us, the great German legacy presents the wealth of material to study and to upgrade our own understanding of history and our destiny.

Post Reply