By Batiushka for the Saker Blog
I do apologise for the rare error which comes from not checking the text enough times. For example, Kuleba is of course the Ukrainian Foreign Minister, not the Minister of the Interior. Thank you, readers, for any factual corrections!
2. Why did the Russian Revolution happen, if everything was going so well before 1917?
There never was a Revolution. It is a myth of Western/Soviet history. But there was a mutiny of the ruling class, effectively a revolt of the uprooted, English- and French-speaking elite, or aristocracy, against Russia. They had great wealth and so they wanted what comes next – power. The people, apart from the bread and circus mob, did not follow, but were too weak and disorganised to resist. The mutiny was organised, abetted and aided by foreign powers, above all by the British from their Embassy in the then capital in Saint Petersburg.
Empires always use the same techniques. Just as the Romans had their client-states and proconsuls or governors (in Jerusalem it was Pontius Pilate) and took the children of the local elite hostage by ‘educating’ (= indoctrinating/ westernising) them in their home capitals and main cities, so did Imperial Britain, and today so does the USA. Local treachery goes a long way when you give all the traitors in the capital a lot of dollars (remember how they flew planes stuffed with billions of dollars into Baghdad?) and some infrastructure (as in a recent classic case, Kiev in 2014). However, do not blame foreign powers entirely – no foreign power can do anything if there is not local treachery. But you can always find locals who will sell their souls for a mess of pottage/dollars.
Although back on 29 March, in my very first writing for The Saker, What Does Nazism Mean?, I explained what Nazism is, there is still confusion. In speaking of Nazism in the Ukraine, the Russian Federation is not speaking of Nazism as a phenomenon that existed for twelve years during the Third Reich and was marked, by other things, by its persecution of the Jews. Nazism, and so denazification, is something far greater, far more ancient, far more profound.
Nazism is the millennial ideology of the (imagined) Superiority of the Western/Westernised World, the ideology of the ‘master race’. It began with the First Reich of the Carolingians of 800-1806, the foundation act of the Western ‘Middle Ages’. And it was repeated in the Second Reich of the Prussian militarists of 1871-1918, long before the Third Reich. Thus, we can call also the Normans Nazis, the Crusaders Nazis, the Conquistadors Nazis, British merchants in India – Nazis. The largely British genocide of Native Americans was a Nazi act, as was the Belgian genocide of the Congolese, as was the Japanese genocide in Chinese Nanking, as was the Hitlerian holocaust of the Slavs (30 million), as was the US genocide of the Vietnamese. Today the USA and its UK/EU/Canadian/Australian etc vassals, ‘the Collective West’, are the Fourth Reich.
Yes, it is true that throughout history probably all countries or ethnic groups or tribes or clans have at some point attacked another country in order to try and grab its resources. The vital difference here is that Western attacks are not one-offs out of greed. They are institutionalised, systematic, justified as part of a millennial ideology, and they are global. Various words have been used to justify this Nazi ideology, from Catholicism to Protestantism, from Spanish to British, from German to Israeli, from freedom to democracy, and from American to Woke. It is all the same thing, still the same evil banditry and brutal thuggery of organised violence behind the excuse. The ‘Cancel Russia’ bookburning of the 2020s is just as Nazi as Hitler’s bookburning of the 1930s. It is the same Anti-Culture of the same Anti-Civilization. Whatever tag you want to give it, ‘Western’, ‘Nazi’, ‘European’, ‘American’, ‘Woke’, it is ultimately all the same Satanism.
This is why the conflict in the Ukraine, which could so easily have remained a purely local affair in the Donbass and been over in 2014, spread to the whole of Novorossija (the east and south of the ‘Ukraine’) and has spread throughout Eastern and Western Europe. Russia’s primary task, indeed mission, and many of us knew this from the very outset and indeed have believed in it all our lives, is to free Europe of ‘Nazism’, to ‘denazify’ Europe. (China can deal with Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Australia and, quite easily, Africa; Russia may deal, quite easily, with Latin America. As for the USA and Canada, like Israel, they will have to be quarantined, isolated and left to rot until they decontaminate themselves, like corpses which over time only leave bleached bones.
This denazification will hopefully chiefly be political, economic and ideological – but it may in some cases also have to be military, as in the Ukraine. This is what Operation Z is about. In writing these very words, I am very modestly taking part in Operation Z and you, in reading these words, are also taking part in Operation Z. Z is the Great Liberation. We have been waiting for this moment all our lives, whether we realised it or not.
4. What are the sources for the article about Russia before the ‘Revolution’, Myths from the Past and the Third Incarnation of Russia since 1721?
There are few sources in English. This is deliberate. Few things resembling the truth about Russia get written or translated – which is of course part of the systematic censorship of Russia. The bibliography below represents only the tip of the iceberg, therefore I would rather call it an essential reading list:
The Diaries of Nicholas II, in 3 Volumes, ed. S. V. Mironenko, Moscow, 2013
Alferiev E. E., Tsar Nicholas II as a Man of Strong Will, New York-Jordanville, 1983
Belousov P. (compiled), The Tsar and Russia, Otchij Dom, Moscow, 2017 (Contains reprints of many important articles by Solonevich, Nekrasov, Obruchev, Obolensky, Pavlov, Tikhmenev, Stremoukhov, Zajtsev and others)
Bokhanov A. N., Rasputin, the Anatomy of a Myth, Moscow, 2000
Bokhanov A. N., Nicholas II, Moscow, Veche, 2008
Borisiuk A. A., The History of Russia Which They Ordered To Be Forgotten, Moscow, Veche 2018 (2nd edition). (Statistical Facts)
Brazol B.L., The Reign of Tsar Nicholas II in Facts and Figures (1894-1917), New York, 1959
Dolmatov V., The Sovereign, Twenty Three Steps Up, Dostoinstvo, Moscow 2015
Fomin S., Gregory Rasputin, An Investigation, 9 Volumes, Moscow, Forum, 2007-2015
Gubanov V. (compiled), The Holy Tsar Nicholas II and the New Russian Martyrs, Stavros, Moscow, 2004
Kapkov K.G., The Spiritual World of Emperor Nicholas II and His Family, Moscow-Livadia, 2017
Kobylin V. The Anatomy of a Betrayal, the Sources of the Anti-Monarchist Conspiracy, Saint Petersburg, 1998 (reprint)
Mirek A., The Emperor Nicholas II and the Destiny of Orthodox Russia, Spiritual Enlightenment, Moscow, 2013
Mironova T., From Beneath the Lie, Vesti, Saint Petersburg, 2005
Multatuli P.V., The Foreign Policy of Emperor Nicholas II (1894-1917), Moscow, 2012
Multatuli P.V., Myths and the Truth about the Emperor of Russia, Nicholas II, Ekaterinburg, 2013
Multatuli P.V., Nicholas II, The Way of the Cross, Smolin, Moscow, 2013
Multatuli P.V., Emperor Nicholas II, The Man and the Monarch, and, Emperor Nicholas II the Martyr, Veche, Moscow, 2018
Multatuli P.V., Emperor Nicholas II, The Tragedy of a Misunderstood Sovereign, Smolin, Moscow, 2018
Oldenburg S. S., The Reign of Nicholas II, Saint Petersburg, Petropol, 1991 (reprint)
Platonov O., Nicholas II, His Life and Reign, Saint Petersburg, 1999
Platonov O., Nicholas II in His Secret Correspondence, Algorithm, Moscow, 2005
Platonov O., A Life for the Tsar, Rodnaya Strana, Moscow, 2015
Reshetnikov L., To Return to Russia, Moscow, 2013
Shargunov Archpriest A., The Miracles of the Royal Martyrs, 2 Volumes, Moscow, 2000
Shargunov Archpriest A., The Tsar, Zlatoust, Moscow, 2013
Zhevakhov N.D. Memoirs, Saint Petersburg, 2014
Den L., The Real Tsaritsa, Nabu Public Domain Reprints, Undated
Maylunas A. and Mironenko S., A Lifelong Passion, Nicholas and Alexandra, Weidenfeld, London, 1996 (Their Correspondence)
Nekrasov G., Nicholas II as Military Commander, Sovereign Journal No 5, Royal Russia, 2017
Rogger H., Jewish Policies and Right-Wing Politics in Imperial Russia, Berkley, 1986
Romanova Olga Alexandrovna, 25 Chapters of My Life, Librario, Kinloss, 2009 (reprint)
Vorres I., The Last Grand Duchess, Olga Alexandrovna, Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, 1964
Wilton E. and Sokolov N., The Last Days of the Romanovs, General Books, Memphis, 2012 (reprint)
Chavelsky G., J’ai Vecu La Fin de la Russie Imperiale, Editions Singulieres, Sete, 2011. (A very good translation and a portrait of the traitors surrounding Tsar Nicholas, written by one of them)
Gilliard P., Le Tragique Destin de Nicolas II et de sa famille, Payot, Paris, 1929
Jacoby Jean, Le Tsar Nicholas II et la Revolution, Fayard, Paris, 1931
Joukoff Archpriest B. (compiled), Nicolas II, Le Dernier Empereur Orthodoxe, Villemoisson, 2015
Loupan V., Nicholas II, Le Saint Tsar, Syrtes, Paris, 2001
5. Who am I?
I am the Russian Orthodox rector of a very large parish in Europe. I have served in many countries in Western Europe and have lived in Russia and the Ukraine. I have also worked as a lecturer in Russian and European history and politics. Enough said.
Thanks for your education on nazism
Most Europeans dont know much about it, myself included
Unfortunately the widespread ignorance of Europeans has allowed them to be led by the nose by malicious leaders
The wake up is coming, I just pray that its not too violent
What do you mean by “lead by the nose”`? The majority of Europeans love to be lead by the nose.
They will resist any attempt and any “wake up, I know what is good and better for you”, as they opposite are convinced that their “better” nazism should be imposed on all of their fellow men.
I am convinced we should cease to think we can convince adult people to change our way is better. If a person is grown up and have received due advices many times, we must respect his attitude, instinct and position, his choice of free will, when we see him run off to the cliff.
Actually in some of these cases we find out that our fellow man knew more than we did, and we both stop wasting irrational time and energy on each other.
Thanks for another very important top level article from TheSaker’s dream team.
Thanks for this. I Knew I was part of somethng bigger & deeper (simply by understanding and ‘reading’ underlines) when the Op-Z aka *Zugzwang reached/met History and the correct side of it.
That definition of Nazism qualifies all Western civilization as Nazis since Pope Alexander VI when he gave his blessing by killing, enslaving and robbing non-whites, whom he qualified as non-humans. This has been the greatest crime of Roman Christianity, in which the Orthodox Church did not participate because it was also non-human.
That is why it is impossible for the West to understand the world they believe belongs to them.
The average western person is very comfortable with believing he or she is superior to the rest of the world. I lived in many western countries and that was my observation… The western man and the joo have similiar beliefs (superior to the rest of mankind) the chosen people.
I don’t know where to begin , since very few of the above are true. I will just point two items.
1. The ‘Romanovs’ had nothing to do with Russia. Pyotr II, installed by the Dolgorukis, was the last ‘Russian’ ruler until Gorbachev. Every single ‘Russian’ Czar since then was not Russian.
Every single czar since Sophia of Anhalt-Zerbst was German with no Russian blood whatsoever. The only ‘czar’ of Russia who mated a Russian was the final one, Mikhail II.
The chief Romanov claimant is Geog of Hohenzollern. He didn’t marry a royal , so according to the rules set up by Pavel I, the ‘Romanovs’ will end with him, even if we accept him as a real Romanov.
2. The Russian Revolution was a revolution of the common Russians against the nobles who have had nothing to with Russia.
Some German blood sneaked into Russian noble families, like Nikoluhuka in Tolstoy’s War and Peace, whose father Andrei had him with a German commoner. However, Tolstoy, a descendant of an old Russian noble family, makes sure German blood does not stay in the Russian upper crust by indicating that Nikolushuka will be killed during the Decabrist revolt.
It is true that non-Russians hijacked the Revolution, but it did get rid of the Germans from the power.
Also, the Revolution removed Russia from the Great War, hurting British and French prospect. It was only Woodrow Wilson (and his backers) which saved their ass back then, which is another story.
Although what followed the Revolution was horrible, at least the intention was good. The Romanovs were German to begin with, and not pointing them out is where the analysis began to be flawed.
The Brits Royalty are Germanic and the Russian Royalty were Germanic……so it’s really been an inbred asset inheritance fight over several hundred years.
You don´t know where to begin? I hope you know where to end. That´s real wisdom.
It´s obvious that you understand nothing about the history – because you can´t draw parallels to current geopolitical situation. What´s happening today brings to light also the past, which is something those western parasites (literally) fear.
That´s the real “Russian threat” they are speaking about – unspeakable crimes of those who ruled the world too long will be revealed.
I would really like if you could explain more about Hijacking of Russian revolution, and Woodrow Wilson comment.
What was shown was that the situation in Russia was not conducive to a ‘revolution of the common Russians against the nobles who have had nothing to with Russia’. It was the war imposed on Russia, who was, at it is clamored, not prepared for the war and was making every effort to avoid it (the Conventions of Hague initiated by the ‘bloody’ Tsar), which created the conditions for the intended ‘regime change’ (to which, of course, internal traitors contributed a lot along with the treacherous ‘allies’).
Thank you for providing the bibliography. I will have to update my Russian knowledge for this but it definitely worth the effort. My question: in order to set things right, are there posibilities of consulting Russian libraries or archives as far as relations with east european countries are concerned?
I have another book written in English to add to the list, It was about to be thrown away a couple years ago at a yard sale, I have yet the time to read it but it seems to cover all the issues of those days and blending them into todays world, it was published in 1976 by Edward Crankshaw and is called The shadow of the winter place, “Russia’s” drift to revolution 1825-1917.
Someone has left a card in the book w/the names of Russias rulers since 1682 and some notes, it starts w/Peter the 1st and how he was 6 foot tall and built St Petersburg.
There was enough information there to keep busy for quite a while, but I dont have quite a while right now preparing for our grim future, seems the swamp is bigger than we all thought.
Error correction and backing up with a bibliography of resources is a very good proof of ones integrity and internal character. I have been asked when discussing various world topics how do I know what I am talking about. I read history and discern the best I can what is truth and what is propaganda to manufactured consent in people. I also read outside my own comfort arena reading other view points to see things clearer and even to know my enemy.
You write looking deeper into ones soul and causing the reader to make a choice and making the reader face the reasoning of why their choice was made.
This is sheer speculation, labeling, and its own kind of wokeism. American and Nazi are not synonyms.
Yes they can be the same. You need to ask why and who the Nazis were that were imported to the US after WW2. Look past the scientist and aircraft designers. Why did the US want to know about Nazis ideology and why it worked with the people. Americans can be Nazis.
In Germany, several authors like Hermann Ploppa and Eva C. Schweitzer have written books about the financiers and supporters of Hitler and his ilk.
Prescott Bush, Montague Norman, Henry Ford, Rockefeller, IBM and many more. Göbbels was a fan of Bernay. They knew what they were supporting!
Hitler’s role consisted of weakening Europe and especially Germany. It’s also no surprise that the Vatican and Hitler got along well. (Remember that Bismarck threw them and their Jesuits out of Imperial Germany for good reasons! Imperial Germany prospered!)
50 million dead natives, 15 million enslaved blacks, 300 years of violent wars in the name of American supremacy (a country where for 200 years less than half the population was considered human.)
“Freedom” is just branding.
It it’s not “Naziism,” it’s something at least as vile.
“American and Nazi are not synonyms.”
sounds about right for you. but let’s look at the things that the amerikans did after the or close to the end of ww2. they imported all the nazi/german scientists to make their nuclear bombs, jet engines, propaganda/making people to believe in something that’s a lie, etc…
also look at how the amerikans took in those jap scientists that experimented on chinese/russian civilians/soldiers (the infamous unit 731) from vivisection to chemical and biological experiments to the amerikan homeland to teach them how to do so. what’s worst, the so-called amerikans sent all those original papers and experiments back to japan in the 1990s/2000s, without requesting them to be saved. the jap’s destroyed them immediately.
let’s look at what we have now. the amerikans creating colour revolutions around the world, from eastern europe to asia, the russian taking over of biolabs within the ukronazi areas and slowly letting info out about the illegal experiments within the ukraine and its russian population (makes you wonder about the other issues out there that the amerikans blames others), this kinda adds up no?
if you still believe that the amerikans and nazism isn’t the same, please live in your dream world and please say the world are full of idiots who thinks that the authoritarianism of Putin in Russia and Xi in China are the problems of the world…
Prescott Bush and Henry Ford were big supporters of the Nazis. The Nazi Party held a big rally at Madison Square Garden In February 1939.At that time many considered thr Nazis favorably.
Nazism Is white supremasist but not necessarily the other way around The definitions depend on who states them.
So, in essence, you’re a Tsarist.
The bibliography speaks volumes.
So, what’s wrong with that?
What’s wrong with being a tsarist is that (1) as a feudal ideology it is mismatched for today by about two historical epochs, and (2) they were violent exploiters and oppressors of the working classes of the many nations of Russia; enemies of the masses of people that got what they deserved.
Luckily the workers and peasants of Russia made the wise decision in 1918 to whack them and thus gave impetus to the fall of feudalism world-wide, and established the basis for real democracy in Russia and the rest of the Soviet republics (and to some greater or lesser degree in most of the rest of the world) for the first time in history.
It is disquieting that people still study history after the ”History of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks), Short Course”.
Well, normal people call a change in society that ends with communism……. revolution and not something else.
A revolution took place in Russia from 12917 to 1923, and if the middle and higher classes thought that they could achieve participation in power, they were very bloody wrong.
Of course, “new circles” gained power with this….. but, intentionally or not, an extremely murderous regime came into being.
The death sentences signed by Lenin himself go to around 6,000.
Of course you can sugarcoat your own story… but that’s not a good thing.
And yes, educated people in Switzerland understand “national socialism” as left extremism, it had a lot in common with communism.
The Hitler Youth = Komsomolets.
The BDI, the NSKK, KDF, etc. Hitler looked around and adopted ideas that he liked.
But before I write books here…… that shows a lot in a nutshell.
WHY NATIONAL SOCIALISM WAS SOCIALISM AND WHY SOCIALISM IS TOTALITARIAN
By George Reisman Posted October 28, 2013 In News, Society, Columns, State, Economy, Timeless
October 28, 2013 – by George Reisman
[This paper is based on a lecture given at the conference “The Economics of Fascism, Supporters Summit 2005″ at the Ludwig von Mises Institute, Auburn, Alabama (USA). It appeared as a paper on the Mises Institute website on November 11, 2005, entitled: Why Nazism Was Socialism and Why Socialism Is Totalitarian]
No Socialism is not Naziism…
However totalitarianism exists all along the political spectrum. Not a left/right issue.
Mises? To cite someone like him [propaganda?] as a source, the same being an Austrian Catholic, Ukrainian from Lvov and father of the crudest liberalism [there is little more anti-Russian than a liberal], fascist and far-right anti-Russian and anti-communist movement that does not seem to me to be worthy of credibility or good faith. Take care!
hope your crude and ignorant ad hominem fallacy doesn’t turn reasonable people from learning about a guy who risked academic ostracism, nazi persecution and almost his life for standing up for freedom. Von Mises was a good jew btw.
What would the ‘antifa’ people make of the very well known facts that Mussolini was ‘having an affair’ with Angelica Balabanoff/Anzhelika Blabanova (born in Cernihiv in Ukraine/Chernikhov in the Russian Empire!), the ”Jewish Russian-Italian communist and social democratic activist. She served as secretary of the Comintern from 1919 to 1920, and later became a political party leader in Italy” good friend with a certain Emma Goldman, if you ever heard of her). You may scorn the Wikipedia but check the photo of her encounter with Ben Gurion.
For the votaries of Nietzsche one should have a look in his relation with a ‘certain Russian (Jewish)’ woman Lou Salome.
What would they make of the dalliance of ‘echte Nazis’ and ‘echte Zionists’?
“And yes, educated people in Switzerland understand ‘national socialism’ as left extremism, it had a lot in common with communism.”
According to a German psychologist, “left” means having the mental stage of development of a two year old child. Many would prefer to go back to the breast while not caring about anything else. They crave for collectivism as they fear individuality and taking the responsibility for their lives and actions. It’s so comfortable to stay sheep-like.
They don’t want to do anything. “Someone else” should do it. They are emotional, hysterical and they fear change and consequences. They just want to feel good and getting praised by mommy media and daddy state.
Thank you for this, very informative.
It was Socrates or Aristotle who noted that many arguments waste time due to a difference in defintions.
Get those definitions agreed upon and the discussions can proceed nicely.
I have noticed the use of the term “Anglo-Saxon” used quite a bit and am perplexed by it. Here in America, there is a subset of us who see the behaviours that you attribute to “Anglo Saxons” we ascribe to “the jews”.
My working assumption is that the jews have been very good at infiltrating governments and institutions (see neo-con wars of last 20 years or more) and since it is the “anglo saxon” governments that are the agents of the neocons, you label it “anglo saxon”
Is my working assumption incorrect?
thank you for your time and work
When people refer to the Anglo-Saxons in the context of international relations I suppose they think of that mind-set of the British Colonial Empire when Britannia ruled the waves, which in my opinion is still present today in the US and the UK. This does not mean that all those with that mind-set are WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). Joe Biden is a Roman Catholic. It just means that the driving force and the ideology have that origin. It also does not mean that all WASPs have that imperial mind-set. It is more the system and the elites who congregate in Washington.
Thx, makes sense in context of the answer regarding nazis too.
If “the mutiny was organised, abetted and aided by foreign powers, above all by the British from their Embassy in the then capital in Saint Petersburg” then why did the British, French and US send troops in to fight it ?
Do you really believe that bolsheviks could have succeed against British, French and US troops in a real fight? Brits didn´t want to even save the lives of the imperial family, I could imagine that Nicholas II was too dangerous to them even in exile. Exactly the same script than in Libya, Iraq etc.
Russia has been always the enemy in the eyes of West and that´s not going to change until “de-nazification” is complete.
When Batiushka speaks about mutiny he means color revolution – color revolution instead of revolution. Bolsheviks were only tools, as nationalists are now in Ukraine.
There were two mutinies – or, revolutions, if you prefer; the first one was organized by the British, and I don’t know what they were thinking bringing about a regime change in an ally fighting alongside, right in the middle of a World War, but that is what they did, anyway.
But, unknown to the British, another revolution was organized – by Jacob Schiff & co., to overthrow the new government; it was headed by Lenin.
When the British found that the new government in Moscow was not exactly friendly, had signed an agreement with German Kaiser and gifted him large tracts, they decided to fight the second regime with some elements of the first regime. Hence the Reds vs Whites Russian Civil War. France and America, who could never resist the temptation to join any war as long as it is not on their land, jumped in happily.
One must keep in mind that the revolution in Russia was planned in many details by the German Command. One loses from sight the fact that the Schiffs, Warburgs, were American-German bankers working in concert with the Warburgs of Germany to bring Russia down and ‘liberate’ the Jews from Russia.
France and England intervened in Russia primarily because the war against Germany was still going on. After the end of the war their enthusiasm in fighting the Reds waned and they handed on the Admiral Kolchak to the Bolsheviks ending the Civil War, and quickly establishing lucrative relations with the Bolsheviks.
You say that 1917 was a revolt of the pro Western elite. That applies in the first place to the Kerensky government. Surely the French and the British interests would have preferred them to stay in power. They would have protected the European investments (railways, mines..). The bolchevik only dealt with a handful of Western capitalists.
You trace nazism back to the Middle Age. That is a bit far! It is rooted in social darwinism, which was the main offspring of eugeneticist “scientism” (to be distinguished from real science) in the 19th century. Of course that was related to colonialism as it developped from the 16th c.
I don’t think it’s too far to trace Nazism back to the Middle Ages. I trace it back to Sparta, who were the Nazis of the ancient world and a direct inspiration for 20th century Nazism.
According to the FKT, we have the following constellation:
Global predictor (22 hierophants) > wealthy and rich families > national “elites” > masses
The global predictor controlls most governments/media and has no problem letting them fight against each other. They also have no problem flooding Europe with people from low-IQ countries for resettlement purposes. They plan for decades to come.
Even Russia is filled with corrupt officials and oligarchs, usually of a certain religion. ;)
I found all this very enlightening and I thank you for this and the previous well-formulated article(s).
If anyone still questions the evil machinations of the Waddesdon Manor and the Windsors(Anglo-Zio) sphere through history I doubt that you´re capable of thinking for yourself.
Check the Lucis Trust out(what did they name it originally) and its strong UN connections for further revelations.
An often observed characteristic of Nazism is its never ending attraction for misanthropists,psychopaths and of course…total morons.
Many thanks for this crisp and clear summary of the main engine, in my view, that has driven geopolitics, and much of local events inside each country, over so many centuries.
I understand that Nazism for Russians mainly refers to the “master race” concept, which, apparently, is considered to be rooted in the West. Please allow me to have a different opinion.
For me, the idea of the master race is but a variant of the much older concept of the “chosen race” of the Bible, which has become a typical characteristic of all three Abrahamic religions. The illusion to belong to a superior brand of people, selected by that so-called “God” Yahweh or Allah himself, is the reason why all these worldviews are so arrogant, so fanatic, and so cruel towards fellow humans with different opinions. Examples abound. Just think of the genocide of Kanaan as described in the Bible (by the very people who committed it). Or think of the Inquisition in Europe, or the genocide in India perpetrated by the Muslims. Socialism, in its extreme National-Socialist and Communist versions, is but a child of the Abrahamic religions and, therefore, the idea of a superior “nation” or “class”, destined to rule, is still very much part and parcel of these two ideologies.
Conclusion: the “master race” concept is rooted in the Bible, not in the West.
Logically a spiritual absolute would be the essence of sentience, from which we rise, not an ideal of wisdom and judgement, from which we have fallen. The light shining through the film, than the images on it.
Ideals are not absolute and when you have an entire culture built on that assumption, it empowers the most obsessed.
Remember democracy and republicanism originated in pantheistic cultures and Rome only adopted and co-opted gnostic Christianity to validate the Empire and shed any reminders of the Republic.
A good book on understanding the roots of Western culture is; The Five Stages of Greek Religion, by Gilbert Murray; https://www.gutenberg.org/files/30250/30250-h/30250-h.htm
John: Do i read you right?
“Remember democracy and republicanism originated in pantheistic cultures and Rome only adopted and co-opted gnostic Christianity to validate the Empire and shed any reminders of the Republic.”
So the Emperors from Constantine onwards used Christianity (their version) as a political weapon against any cultural reminders of the Republic, which you say had its roots in pantheistic cultures?
In effect then in so doing Roman Christianity sets itself against the cosmic worldview of the pagan pantheistic cultures. That being the Gnostic mythos of Sophia the Earth Mother. So Christianity has given us what you might call an Apollonian ideal of wisdom and judgement, which casts itself high, in contradiction with “the essence of sentience” – Sophia she whose emanation is the living divine Earth. That is where your observation leads me. It makes for a very interesting history. Your thoughts?
Basically. Remember when government went back to being more public, it required the separation of church and state, culture and civics.
Though our social inertia means we will only patch problems as they arise, not step back and try to figure out the sources and causes.
I’m not a much of a writer and mostly spent my life raising and training horses, so I’ve lived that intersection between nature and culture and just putting up some of the lessons I’ve learned.
Also the conflict between Christianity and paganism is mirrored in today’s conflict between globalism and nationalism.
Not saying one or the other is fundamentally right, because reality is more the yin and yang of opposites, than it is the singular of God Almighty.
In culture, good and bad are a cosmic conflict between righteousness and evil, while in nature, it’s the basic biological binary of beneficial and detrimental, the 1/0 of sentience. What’s good for the fox, is bad for the chicken.
That’s because culture is about getting everyone to function as one larger, emergent social organism.
The problem is when we get too large for our environment. We’re reaching the edge of the Petri dish and the leadership has all the strategic aptitude of bacteria.
The turtle is still plodding along, long after the rabbit has died.
In the right Christian doctrine ‘Sophia’ is Αγία του Θεού Σοφία/The Holy Wisdom of God, the Logos, the Son of God, Christ. Nothing to do with ‘divine Earth’.
The idea that God selects the superior is just wrong. That wasn’t the way it was. It only became that as a result of man’s pride. We are children of the great Abraham so on and so forth. God’s promises were conditional with the grave seriousness of treason warned against everyone. The one matter that so many seem to be oblivious of is that in that old world everyone knew God existed. No one not even in the cities of Sodom and Gomarah would one find anyone who didn’t believe God existed. Darwin wouldn’t have stood a chance. Evolution would have been laughed and derided as religion is today unfortunately. When Sodom and gommarah were destroyed it was front page news to the entire world. People walked the ruins and saw the hand of God quite literally. Move that into todays world and then ask yourself an important question if people saw the work of God and didn’t care to either repent or obey God what do you think the penalty of that should be? The death penalty yes? My word if our own children disobeyed us to the degree that those civilzations did to their heavenly Father what would we do? Just say o well, and exact no discipline no punishment and leave them to continue in their sins more and more? We seem to be okay living with it but God doesn’t!!! This is why Jesus Himself pronounced woe to the cities of Chorazin and Capernaum. You can’t see God’s hand and ignore Him and then go farther with it by way of treason, blatant treason!!!
If a master race exists in the Bible it is because of the works of people like Abraham and Joseph. What would one want instead to be under a Hitler and/or Stalins of the world?
Lastly, if I didn’t have someone an academic who said to me that character isn’t something you learn rather it is something one is born with? Really I replied how do you factor in sin then into your worldview? Can it be that there are people who think they were born better than everyone else? I highly doubt Moses or Abraham or any other would have believed that! If so there would have been no reason for the forty years of testing in the wilderness. etc etc!!
The Ancients were pantheistic, because it wasn’t about “religion,” so much as simple explanation, aka, science. Plato’s ideal forms.
Monotheism was generally a political construct. One people, one rule, one god. The Egyptians of the time tended toward Ra, as the sun god, but the sun is up in the sky and the pharaoh was his messenger.
The Christian Trinity came from the seasonal gods, of the new god born in the spring, of the old sky god and the earth mother.
The book I linked, which is a download version, goes into the logic behind it much more extensively
One of the things that perturbs me the most about the Bible is that it doesn’t give us all or enough of the details. Sure they were Pantheistic and where did it lead? Full blown idolatry which the one true God tried to prevent and was furious about. The 14 years of climate change under Joseph and then the shocking events under Moses is proof enough of that. God the Creator never leaves mankind without a spokesmen on his behalf that is why we find St. Paul speaking about the Melchizedek priesthood to which Abraham had such great respect that he honored him with a tithe of everything he had. How is it that Abraham knew who God was and yet the world seemed to believe in whatever ones imagination came up with? Or conjured up which ultimately led to what? Human sacrifice!!! Egypt was a treasonous nation. Remember the words of Pharaoh “who is god that i should bow down and obey? etc etc. So God made an example out of him and his to the entire world!!!
Monotheism was a political construct? By who? Man? Israel was a theocracy instituted by God Himself and put into effect by way of climate change which guess what continues down to this very day and age though we are being lied to by our current patriarchy!!!!!
The Christian Trinity came from the seasonal gods. Ah, the Melchizedek priesthood was the forerunner of Christ who is seen as the first and last the Alpha and Omega.
Faith is not blind not now and certainly not during the days of old. Men therefore are without an excuse.
Absolutely right. The Bible doesn’t talk of a ‘master race’, but of a ‘chosen people’. A people chosen freely by God to perform a certain task, to be servants of peoples in other words, not appointed their masters. It was a conditional election: non performance entails rejection and punishment.
”Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, ‘The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes?’ 43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. 44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder. 45 And when the chief priests and Pharisees had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them” (Matthew 21:42-45).
And the Scriptures talked about the Christ:
”Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. 40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life” (John 5:39-40).
”Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: 26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:25-27).
“And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem” (Luke 24:44-47).
The “master race concept” is not “rooted in the Bible”. Abraham did not receive any of the land promised him before his death (the Nile to the Euphrates Gen 12 & 15). He died in faith not having received the promises (Heb 11:8-16), which he will receive at the resurrection of his body. When the priests and Pharisees claimed to be the children of Abraham, Jesus Christ replied that, if they were children of Abraham, they would do the works of Abraham, which included not grabbing by violent force and trickery the land promised to Abraham’s faithful seed. Christians are spiritual descendants of Abraham and heirs according to the promises, which they will not inherit until their resurrection at the second coming. (Gal 3:26-29).
Jesus said “the meek shall inherit the earth” after resurrection when he returns, which does not sound like a “master race”, but is open to humble, loving, faithful men and women of all nationalities. Jesus’s death ratified the New Covenant, which includes faithful Gentiles as well as faithful physical Israelites, all who are baptised by immersion into Christ after accepting the gospel message of the coming kingdom of God. Matt 4:23; Matt 26:26-27; Jer 31:31-33; Isaiah 42:6-7
Those who think they are a “master race” manifest pride, arrogance, greed and violence in attempting to attain their objectives in this life. This is not meekness. Crusaders, Inquisitionists, Conquistadors etc have corrupted the true teachings of the Bible.
“Thus, we can call also the Normans Nazis, the Crusaders Nazis, the Conquistadors Nazis, British merchants in India – Nazis. The largely British genocide of Native Americans was a Nazi act, as was the Belgian genocide of the Congolese, as was the Japanese genocide in Chinese Nanking, as was the Hitlerian holocaust of the Slavs (30 million), as was the US genocide of the Vietnamese. Today the USA and its UK/EU/Canadian/Australian etc vassals, ‘the Collective West’, are the Fourth Reich.”
Very well explained. Nazism is not limited to a small part of Europe at a particular time of history. It is much broader than that and the current holders of this ideology would very much like it that we thought of Nazismin limited terms rather that the pervasive ideology that it is.
I think the problems run much deeper in Western culture, than just its attitudes toward everyone else.
For one thing, Eastern and Western culture view time differently. We in the West see the future in front of us and the past behind, because we see ourselves as objects moving through space. While the Eastern and Native American view is the past is in front and the future behind, because the past is known and what is in front are seen, while the future is unknown and what is behind is unseen. Which accords with the fact we see events after they occur, then the energy moves onto other events/observers.
We have this atomized, individualized, quantized, monetized, reductionist concept of everything, but it prevents us from being able to see the larger reality. We have become linear, goal oriented creatures in a cyclical, circular, feedback generated reality and the blowback is getting ever larger. We are nodes without a network.
I cannot read russian yet and even being very fond of history I really do not find necessary to know it to know what side to take. I am in favor of the human being, the homo sapiens sapiens, whatever skin colour, language spoken, wealth. I am also in favour of the nature. That is enough for me. So I am against starving people, disrespecting people, exploring people, exterminating people, animals, forests, etc. That does not need so much reading, but, of course, reading is good and we shall not cancel culture.
Very useful information, thank you. “The ideology of The Master Race” sums up Nazism. “The Great Liberation … We have been waiting for this moment all our lives” is absolutely true for me in the US and for people of conscience throughout the world! The Russians’ courage is laudable.
What existed before Nazism is White Supremacy (System) of which Nazism is one of the expressions. You can put Nazism into White Supremacy not otherwise, White Supremacy cannot be summed up as the ideology and political movement Nazism, White Supremacy encompasses Nazism.
“I am the Russian Orthodox rector of a very large parish in Europe. I have served in many countries in Western Europe and have lived in Russia and the Ukraine. I have also worked as a lecturer in Russian and European history and politics. Enough said.” Vital information.
“Anyway, we are often saying of scientific knowledge that it is personality – or personality trait – and that it is argument. Of these two judgments, the first, that knowledge is personality, or personality trait, seems acceptable to us in relation to any cultural reality. All knowledge would be a component of the way of acting, the unique condition of its existence and the unique condition of the existence of every culture. That is why we believe that no one learns or unlearns without altering personality traits, without altering, therefore, their individual set and hence their way of acting. Knowledges would not be neutral archives that would be displayed by rational skills or by appeals to memory whenever necessary. To say that knowledge is a personality or a personality trait means to say that we are also what we know.
However, many times we are still what we have already forgotten. If, as Roland Barthes said, forgetting is the force of all living life (Barthes, 1978, 47), we are challenged to add that the values of personalities formed by forgotten knowledge can remain unconscious. Thus, the issue goes far beyond the simple change of paradigms. Our greatest difficulties in accepting new ideas seem to be that they require letting go of old ideas, they require letting go of personality traits, ways in which the values of ideas can exist even when forgotten. It is not enough, therefore, to forget. Still following Roland Barthes, in order to transform us, another experience is needed, that of unlearning, of letting work the unpredictable rearrangement that forgetting imposes on the sedimentation of knowledge, cultures, beliefs that we go through (Barthes, 1978, 47). And this unlearning would not be necessary if, after forgetting, our habits and intellectual expectations, at least, the social values of knowledge, its scientific unconscious, did not persist in our habits and expectations.
(Valter Duarte Ferreira Filho from the book Economy: Epistemological Obstacle – Study of the Political and Religious Roots of the Liberal Imaginary)
Nazism, a Jamaican understanding.
It is really weird to write Karl der Grosse, Charlemagne or Charles the Hammer of Aachen, Aix-le-Chapelle was a Nazi.
This is a real give-away. Charlemagne’s enemy was Venice, their terrorists the Vikings, run by Venice, known as the Second Rome.
The USSR’s Church entertained the notion of the Third Rome during the most dangerous period of the Cold War, a continuation of Venice.
Charlemagne opened the way for national armies instead of tribes, who later combined in the League of Cambrai to destroy Venice, betrayed by the Pope with huge bribe. Venice had no choice then – moved to London via Amsterdam. See the Venetian, Babylonian winged lions there at the City of London Corporation.
What is clouding analysis is the Great Christian Schism of 1054AD, often mentioned here.
I wonder what the Author thinks of the Vatican’s Cardinal Nicolas de Cusa, from Germany’s Bernkastel, organizing the Council of Florence to repair the Schism, with the key central idea of the Filioque – The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and The Son, not from the Father alone? That is the difference between Christ-like and God-like (God being totally other, unknowable).
Are we dealing here with Prince Philip’s World Council of Churches, Geneva?
Lyndon LaRouche had many valuable ideas. His ideas about the Filioque are not.
The propaganda against everything of Russian origin in Music, Literature and Culture is nothing new, but something spawned and strewn all over the North Atlantis mindset for more than two hundred years by now. In the Napoleonic wars, my fatherland (in the Norwegian part of what was then The kingdom of Denmark) and Iceland as well as the Faroy isles also — was starved by the genocidal Brits who stopped delivery of cereals and corn from Continental Denmark. In the North of Norway, the fisheries were bad, and people there only survived due to the grain deliveries from Arkhangelsk — ordered by the Tzar himself!
This hatred against Russia started many centuries ago.
This hatred has lately been spawned from the seeds of Jewish Neo-conservatives in the US of North A and proponents of Western Christianity alike.
Now they are throwing works by Gogol(!) out of libraries in several Western European Satrapies since they believe it is Russian literature(!). Next will probably be “Quiet Flows the Don” (Sholocow) nd “The Cavalry Army” by a Jew from the Donbass also!
This oversimplification , nazi = carolingians = prussians etc isn’t going to help explain anything. Just because the nazis thought their movement had it’s roots thousands of years ago doesn’t mean it’s anything more than fantasy.
The affirmation that the russian revolution was a “coup” fomented by capitalists in London is just another anti-communist legend…
‘Russian’ Revolution was a ‘coup’ fomented by capitalists in London, New York, Berlin, Vienna.
What I find striking are some evident parallels between the Third and the “Fourth” Reichs. There is of course the racism, the “master race” ideology (today’s exceptionalism of the Anglo-Saxon people) as well as the drive to subject all other peoples (Project for a new American Century PNAC). Considering America’s wars and regime changes over the years, war-mongering is common to both. There is also a deep-seated antipathy, known as Russophobia and Sinophobia. In Nazi Germany there was a hatred of the Jews and the Slavs.
Then there is this climate of hysteria. A book by Thomas Aich, Massenmensch und Massenwahn, 1947, suggests that a mass psychosis grasped the German population, and some authors refered to the character of Adolf Hitler as having been characterized by hysterical traits. The newly invented radio, bringing Hitler’s voice into German living rooms, contributed to this phenomenon or made it possible. Today’s social media undoubtedly have an analogous effect.
So what is hysteria? It is in layman’s terms a tendency to theatrics and excessive expression of emotions. Does that remind you some EU politicians, German Greens, US Congressmen and talkshow guests, US presidential candidates or perhaps the Ukrainian leader? There is also a tendency to deceive oneself.
“3.- …Russia’s primary task, indeed mission, and many of us knew this from the very outset and indeed have believed in it all our lives, is to free Europe of ‘Nazism’, to ‘denazify’ Europe.”
Is this an intuition? Is this a religious interpretation? Please cite relevant evidence of this from Putin or from Lavrov.
On the revolution. It sounds like it was a color revolution before the nam’e, The US has sponsored many of those afterwaed in South America and elsewhere.
Thanks so much for the many references.
So “Nazi” means anyone holding their people to be a “master race” (a phrase never used by Hitler or the historical Nazis, only their British critics). It’s interesting then that you choose that as your “chosen” term for it, rather than “Prussian” or “Carolingian” or “Zionist,” etc. if, as you say, they are all the same. It’s also interesting that you fail to push back further in history. Where did the Westerners get the idea of a “master race”? Perhaps from those calling themselves the “Chosen People”? Perhaps the real, historical Nazis had some good ideas after all, such as removing the root cause of “Nazism”?
Perhaps one reason you chose not to connect these dots is that someone might ask how your analysis might apply to those promoting Russia as the “Third Rome”.
On their face, to me at least, these replies point to a long human struggle that maybe just has to continue. Perhaps NATO squaring off with Russia is just the next chapter.
Thank you Batiuska,
You might find of interest Whatdoesitmean.com. Another Orthodox voice I have read and subscribed to, for years!!
Here is one I read from them. What has happened to that volcano in a Pacific Atoll where USA used to test “the wrong kind of nukes?” “All is calm in the Southwestern Pacific Front” hmmm interesting. LOL what does it mean?
They also alerted me to nicotine being a good Covid preventer! Being older I have kick myself for not following my doctor’s advice on vacs.
Sir, thank you for your precise and concise words, absolutely amazing writing.
The superficial comments on the Russian Revolution, condemned by the author of the article as being “abetted and aided by foreign powers, above all by the British from their Embassy in the then capital in Saint Petersburg”, needs no detailed refutation. One can guess how true or false this is by the fact that a number of imperialist countries sent troops to crush the revolution, i.e., “to strangle the (Bolshevik) baby in its cradle” to paraphrase Winston Churchill. Likewise the proposition that traces Nazism back to events which occurred more than a thousand years ago in Europe. The author has forgotten that Nazism arose in a specific political economic context in a capitalist country. The courageous Bulgarian communist Georgi Dmitroff, who challenged and won against the Nazis in their own court, defined fascism (of which German Nazism is an example) as follows:
“Fascism is a most ferocious attack by capital on the mass of the working people;
Fascism is unbridled chauvinism and annexationist war;
Fascism is rabid reaction and counter-revolution;
Fascism is the most vicious enemy of the working class and of all working people!” (in “The United Front – The Struggle Against Fascism and War” by Georgi Dimitroff, International Publishers, New York, 1938).
The structural characteristics of fascism is described in great detail in the following scholarly work: “Radical Perspectives on the Rise of Fascism in Germany, 1919-1945”, eds. M. N. Dobkowski and I. Wallimann, Monthly Review Press, New York, 1989.
Finally, I request the moderators not to block or censor this post (as my two earlier ones were).
Thanks for your post !
I said the same , in much less detail, in a previous post.
Dear “Captain Nemo.”
the definition of Georgi Dmitroff is too superficial. The term “fascism” comes from the Latin language and means “to bend and to exclude”.
The yes-sayers are bundled and the non-yes-sayers are excluded up to the annihilation. This process is part of every elitist rule.
The author comments about Russian Revolution need no refutation at all, because they are historically irrefutable. One can no longer learn Russian history from the Bolshevik propaganda tracts pretending that it is objective history.
Rector, you go too far in more than one direction. I think you can see yourself at least some of these.
The nations must thank Russia for shattering the spearhead of Euro-American atheists’ criminal, fascist enterprise to dominate the world, delegitimize the nations, and cause an 80% human die-off.
Russia is Russian. The United States is American. India is Indian. France is French. Brazil is Brazilian. China is Chinese. Canada is Canadian. Japan is Japanese. Vietnam is Vietnamese. Greece is Greek. Egypt is Egyptian. Argentina is Argentine. Etc. These are realities. So they shall remain and probably even more so. Only God is real.
I recently visited Venice and was shocked by the amount of stolen Byzantine art they have. I was also horrified to stumble upon Helen’s sarcophagus in a small side chapel of a church. These barbarians even stole the dead.
I thank Batiushka very much for this text. He follows here, especially in his 3rd chapter, Nazism, the great lines of history.
First of all, what is the energy that drives history? It is the contradiction of egoism versus communism. The individual against the community.
We need to understand the dialectic of individual and community. Strong and stable individuals can only emerge in strong and stable communities. But strong and stable communities are sustained by strong and stable individuals.
So, what comes first? The chicken or the egg? The one conditions the existence of the other. This is the basic principle of dialectics.
As soon as in human communities the possibility arises that the organized egoism can develop, it will enforce its dominance. The reason for this is simple: to be able to live a luxurious life without having to do anything for it.
We see this very clearly today, that all parasitic areas are expanding extremely. In Germany today 2/3 of the population live in a parasitic form of existence. And, as Karl Marx informed us, being determines consciousness. A parasitic form of existence leads necessarily to a parasitic thinking.
Every human community is supported by 3 groups: Agriculture, handicraft and technology. Then we have a 4th group, the engineers. These are people who combine a deep theoretical insight into the laws of nature with a deep insight into the practical requirements, the materialization and application of the laws of nature. Very good examples are Gottfried Leibniz, Joseph Fourier and Pierre Bézier. They existed and exist in all linguistic spaces.
The negation of the conditions of stable human communities is the essence of the Western European culture. For more than 2000 years it has concentrated on robbery and for this purpose it has created its ideology: Catholic Christianity. The essential for its creation was the Catholic Inquisition: the destruction of science and history. It started already in 360 with the burning of books in Rome. The burning of the Alexandria library 25 years later was the necessary consequence.
We see the same with the House of Knowledge, which was built in Damascus in 725. It had to be moved to Baghdad when the Christian robbers, also called Crusaders, arrived.
I am talking about Christianity here, although I know that Orthodox, Eastern Christianity had a different history on different principles. Only, all the many details are unknown to me.
When in human communities the demand increases extremely, the own economy can’t carry it anymore. The consequence is the externalization, the robbery in the outside. And in the last 2000 years we see this in Western Europe. The Western European colonialism is the clearest expression of it. The condition for it was that the grown cultures had to be destroyed. The main tool for this was the local elites. Batiushka has pointed out this condition very clearly.
We still live in the state of completely useless parasitic political superstructures. Ukraine is again a good example of this madness and mental delusion. Russophobia is only a tool. 90 years ago in Germany a projection was created on people who were called Jews. There were few Jews, because Jews are people who submit to the rules of the Jewish religion according to the Torah. If they are not Jewish believers, they are not Jews. If we are not Christian believers, we are not Christians. Even in occupied Western Palestine, now called Israel, there are very few Jews. And they are mostly found in the hospitals or prisons.
There is a very old sentence, which is also known in the Jewish culture: Behave towards your neighbor as you would like him to behave towards you. Immanuel Kant based his categorical imperative on this: Behave in such a way that your behavior could be elevated to a general legal norm. The subjunctive is important here.
Strictly speaking, we do not need the legal principles if we take the general requirements for a “good life for all” seriously. We need them only if we assume that in our midst there are people acting only according to their selfish interests.
If now the preached culture rests on the organized egoism, then also no legal bases help us any more. Socrates and Kant already knew that. And if we see today, how the legal bases are subjected arbitrarily to the individual interests of the few, thus those, which created these legal bases themselves, then only one conclusion remains:
We must finally begin to create our own legal foundations on the basis of the equality of all.
Immanuel kant has pointed out to us that our free spirit has no reference. So we have to give a reference to our “free spirit” and he suggested to use reason, rationality and logic.
We are living in an epochal change, which is characterized by the fact that the populations of the many regions on our planet will determine their own way of life and their way of living.
with kind regards, willi
¿Que la Revolución de Octubre no fue Revolución? Acabo de terminar de leer un texto bastante completo de Serguei Glaziev que se titula LA ULTIMA GUERRA MUNDIAL. EEUU EMPIEZA Y PIERDE. Esta en pdf. Te sugiero que lo leas. Creo después de su lectura cambiarias de opinion sobre éste tema en particular.
Y continuo …quieres decir que el zarismo era el paraiso en la tierra? Entonces los personajes, escenas e historias descritas por Chejov en sus maravillosos cuentos, la extraordinarias novelas de Dostoievski, Tolstoi, Maxim Gorky, Sholojov …son puras fantasias inventadas en el paraiso zarista?
That the October Revolution was not Revolution? I have just finished reading a fairly complete text by Sergei Glaziev entitled THE LAST WORLD WAR. AMERICA STARTS AND LOSES. It is in pdf. I suggest you read it. I believe after reading you will change my opinion on this particular subject. And continuous… do you mean that tsarism was paradise on earth? Then the characters, scenes and stories described by Chekhov in his wonderful tales, the extraordinary novels of Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Maxim Gorky, Sholokhov… are they pure fantasies invented in Tsarist paradise?
There will be no paradise on earth, never. This is the massive blind spot of social justice warriors.
Did Russia change for better after the coup? Has there been any revolution that brought the paradise on earth?
Sure, there´ve been some progress in some societies, but the big picture will never change: unbalance, corruption and chaos in developing countries will not disappear because of the evilness that rules this world.
Core problem is spiritual, not political, ideological or lack of equality. In any case, we all are different and are responsible for our actions in this rotten world. True freedom is always individual freedom, “free your mind … and your ass will follow” – as one legendary American musician put it.
If we assume that the world as a whole is changing better after “de-nazification” and evil rulers will be destroyed, your actions still define your life. Does better world make your life better if you misuse alcohol and drugs or suffer from serious illness? No, it makes your life even bitter than before.
In a nut shell: you have only one responsibility, your soul.
You didn´t mention Gogol in your list of Russian literature classics. He described everyday life in imperial Russia possibly better than any other. In his masterpiece, Dead Souls, there´s a subconscious idea that dead souls are like cattle for the rulers, and cattle doesn´t dictate the terms. So, if you want to change your life, don´t destroy your soul.
Tsarism was no paradise on earth. Nobody ever said that. But definitely it was not the hell on earth that the Western-Jewish liberalo-bolshevist fake history claimed.
The Russian Revolution ?. Look no further than at the Large “Russian” Land mass ; endowed with enormous Natural Resources ; with a relatively small population that appears to be easy pickings for the “thieving” leaders of neighboring Nations. It is just that simple. Thou shall not covet thy neighbors goods ; says it all.
I recommend having a look at Halford Mackinders heartland theory. ;)
I am just another guy who tries to educate himself on some topics. Been doing that for some 20 add years or so.
Subsequently I am able to connect things which are not always out in the open.
The “revolution” is one of those topics I still discover more and more things (facts?) about.
The Rothchild’s discord about their petroleum holdings in Russia being “nationalized” by the czar may be one of the sparks which ignited things.
However to get a good understanding of the wholething one needs also to learn a bit more about the background of communism.
Please read “Red Symphony” ,by J. Landowsky, who didn’t actualy “write” it.
The “,story” is actually a record of an ex Rusian government official, (embassedor to France), post torture “interview,” by one of Stalin’s secret police head honchos.
It will show some surprising facts.
Can be fownloaded for free in epub or pdf or rtf from archive com.
The whole world was and stoll is, fooled by some slick shisters who still dictate theai narrative.
Sorry for the typos, doing this on my effing phone.
The Rothchild’s discord about their petroleum holdings in Russia being “nationalized” by the czar may be one of the sparks which ignited things.
You touched a cord with me with this for a number of reasons the most significant revolving around Genesis 15:18 ‘To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates.’
Thats an enormous amount of oil and power yes? I’d imagine it would be a very difficult thing to wake up to the realization that what was once yours no longer is?
and what now? Yinon Plan?
“Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber.” John 10:1
This will probably not be popular, but here goes:
From my study, the root cause of Nazism is Patriarchy.
Nazism is the ultimate cultural expression, and neoliberalism(fascism) is the ultimate economic expression, if Patriarchy itself.
Nazism is identified by race-supremacism(racism/Eugenics) and expansionism(empire-building).
Neoliberalism is identified by the commodification of all things that can be named(alienation).
The most important paradox of all this is that Patriarchy is an EMERGENT social mode in human groups(and most hominids). But it is not the ONLY social modality – there are other stable modes that we observe mostly in baboons and other hominid species. One is termed “Matriarchy” but has little to do with female domination (As observed by Sapolsky).
These social modalities are emergent, not contrived. So we humans have little control over which modality emerges. Whichever modality emerges seems to be as a response to the circumstance presented to the tribal unit by the local ecology. Once a modality emerges it becomes “latched” and will not change until significant changes occur in the environmental circumstance.
On the bright side, I think we now have significant environmental signals to overcome the latched-down Patriarchy and allow a new modality to emerge.
My apologies to those who embrace the deep hierarchies of Patriarchy in the traditional Churches. I know many of you will be aware of how different congregations will exhibit such emergences in their locality, but for full emergence to happen in a deeply networked globe, we will have to abandon the idea of Patriarchy to a large extent.
Those who examine the real god worshiped in most churches will have to admit that their god more closely resembles Satan. If you have noticed this and had cognitive dissonance – Here is a reason why.
On the dark side – Humans have no control of any of this – and it becomes an exercise in the defeat of hubris.
Hope this helps!
Mitch: Nicely argued. You are quite right about Patriarchy being at the definitive core of what people are seeking to define as the essence of Nazism here.
The entire situation can well be cast in the cosmology of the Mayan Elders, an outlook shared by numerous other wisdom traditions. According to this calendar system Patriarchy began to rise to a commanding social formation around BC 4,500. A commonly agreed approximate date. So patriarchy has a 5,000 year life cycle.
The point being that cycle terminated in 2012AD. To be replaced by the emergence of organic unity from the collective unconscious. This is the Mayan cosmology of now. Its so called Fifth Sun. Consequently the 5,000 year long political power drive of the massed patriarchal ego is facing its final sunset. ( as world unity begins to emerge, via the Russia – China embrace)
Nazism is but one signature brand of the ego-power pathology in patriarchy now fighting violently against its extinction. So dying reactionary Patriarchy runs a mass cancel culture (of patriarchal denial) aimed at keeping our minds disconnected from its emerging historic “grave- digger.” In the process also effecting religion.
“Z is the Great Liberation. We have been waiting for this moment all our lives, whether we realised it or not.”
Absolutely. I felt 30 years younger and a weight lifted of my shoulder when the operation started.
Thanks for the reading list, and thanks for your writing.
An interesting book on doing business in Russia, based on the experience of a english businessman.
… and this one about the development of aviation in Russia. It seems to confirm the early advancement and technical priorities of the Russian aerospace industry, including the famous zeppelin, designed by Kostovitch in late 1880ies in Russia :). Very cool.
The author seems a bit misleading to me. He states that the Russian Revolution was not a revolution of the people but a “mutiny of the ruling class”. Anyone familiar with “revolutions” knows that revolutions are always supported and planned by a contingent of the elite. His implied definition of revolution destroys the very concept of the term. Revolutions are uprisings of the people – necessarily planned, funded and otherwise supported by elites – often both domestic and foreign – in which the people are aroused to overthrow the current government. This is the crucial issue – the people are aroused to overthrow the current government. Otherwise, the “mutiny” becomes a “coup”. And the Russian Revolution was not a coup by any definition.
Secondly, the author broadens the definition of the term “Nazism” to an almost absurd point virtually encompassing all of the more negative aspects of human nature. What the author terms “nazism” going back centuries, and possibly even millennia, is probably more accurately termed “tribalism” – our tribe is superior to all others – we deserve power and wealth – our enemies are subhuman deserving little more than to serve us. If one wishes to term tribalism as nazism, that is certainly a choice – but in my opinion a poor one.
To offer up a list of sources is commendable, but to imply that those sources support the views of the author is somewhat misleading. The author seems to imply that upon reading these sources, one is bound to be led to the same conclusions as to the author. This is simply not true.
Indeed! Most revolutions and revolts were planned by a minority of smart and wealthy people. According to Lincoln, Jefferson, Morse, Lafayette and many more, the Jesuits were behind many assassinations and revolts (which is not surprising if you know that the Vatican truly is).
Then kindly stop talking about “NAZI” as in “National Socialism (German Style)”. As THAT is what that word means.
You cannot just make up your own definition of words and piggy-back on defined definitions like that.
Or, well, you can. But the moment you did that, you lost any intellectual argument. You just wetted your produce in the swamp of “strategic communications”. No matter how sensible and quality it is inside, it now stinks so far no one self-respecting will touch it with a pole.
Instead, call it what it is – Superiority Politics – “Superiorism” ?
Do not be afraid to “invent” words. A century later you may be cited for them.
Recently I translated Gaius Baltus’ “World War 3 for dummies” to post it on a German site. As an answer to comments, I wrote that “Lenin was send to Russia with a warchest of the British Empire to overthrow the Tzar, what I think as terrific as the annihilation of Germany by a regime change from Weimar to Adolf, also thanks to an anglo-american warchest”. First I got immediately trolled by one of the sites’ top dogs, and when I mocked him, they kicked my ability to furthermore comment or contribute to the site’s content.
Please Russia, cancel and annihilate these dumb German f***s. They truely deserve what’s to come on them. They are such arrogant dumb f***s, they literally watch their elected government cancel them and their children’s future! But as I have been in school with them for a long time (14ys), long time ago (baccalauréat 1985), I assure you: most of them are literally Nazis, and they are proud of it! Go ahead, let them starve themselves to death! Let this war criminals build themselves back better! You have my kind support. Good luck.
While I agree that there are lots of idiots in Germany (climate secterians, voters of the children-loving Green party, warmongers), they are not really Nazis.
They are reeducated, emotionally unstable and childish people who want to feel good by doing what the government says and getting praised for being good “democrats”.
Realizing that they have been lied to will most likely harm them, so they rather prefer to stuck in their comfy bubble.
Besides, there is a growing alternative media scene with Apolut, NuoFlix, Anti-Spiegel (Thomas Röper, the author of Inside Corona, lives in St. Petersburg and understands Russian) and many more.
I can clearly see that many of you have been confused.
The fact is that in Russia in 1917 two “revolutions” took place in succession:
1st – in February 1917, “Bourgeois Revolution”,
2nd – in October 1917, “Socialist Revolution”.
These events are different in terms of their driving forces and organizations.
Batiushka writes about the 1st “revolution”, while the Western countries sent troops against the 2nd “revolution”.
Some of the commentators, not distinguishing between these two “revolutions”, dispute Batiushka’s statements and the result is a pointless dispute, that is, their arguments do not apply to Batiushka’s article.
“2. Why did the Russian Revolution happen, if everything was going so well before 1917?”
According to Russian sources (I don’t know if it was Pyakin from the FKT, Starikov or Fjodorow), Imperial Russia was corrupt and scientifically behind the West. Besides, several high-ranking Russian miliitary officers received the information that two world wars involving Russia were planned. Therefore, these military officials supported the Bolschewiki to overthrow the Tsar and modernise Russia.
Stalin too tried to modernise Russia, but the West was not interested in Russian gold. They forced Russia to sell grain for Western technologies and machines -> Holodomor. Stalin had two choices: bow down before the technologically superior West (controlled by the global predictor) or deliver the grain.
Russia was not *scientifically* behind the “West”.
They were behind socially and, consequently, industrially. But not in the science fields. They were at the absolute top at the time. Including, and especially, the military sciences.
This is why they could recover so fast after WW1 and why they routed the invasion forces in their Civil war. They KNEW precisely what needed to be done even before WW1. They just could not do it all – for one reason or other.
Some of them subjective, some, however, objective – e.g. the resources needed just to build the Trans-Siberian railroad were immense. But they were essential at the same time.
Western scholars often ignore the objective aspects – wast resource allocations required for the wastness of Russian Empire – and attribute all “backwardness” to the “uncultured Russians” while the absolute opposite was the case.
It was the CULTURED Russians who had the high ground to sacrifice comfort only to bring /basic/ civilisation to the remote parts of the empire. The West, who only even invested for profit, could never comprehend this so misunderstood it all as “mismanagement”. Then only to be stunned by the rapid industrialization during WW2 when priorities forced it.
I think there is confusion about the “Russian Revolution”. There were actually 2 revolutions in Russia. The first one in 1916 which brought down the Tsar’s government was as the author writes mostly an elite revolt. Aided secretly by Russia’s supposed “allies”. But while some leaders of the 2nd and final revolution in 1917 may have had elite family roots. They and the others were in no way members of the current elite in Russia at that time. And most of them came from petty bourgeoise and even a few from working class roots. Some of their funding also came from foreign sources. But how much was gained from that,as opposed to how much gained from other sources. Including large amounts gained from robberies of banks is not really known. But both they and their foreign donors/helpers both viewed their relationship with each other as an “enemy of my enemy is my friend’ situation. Let’s not confuse the two in our thinking, they were very different.
Also, I think we need to have a new term for “nazi” when speaking of the past. The term nazi is purely connected with the 1920’s and on until today. It would be valid to see some of the same type of thinking in the past that spawned the modern nazi phenomenon. But the term nazi would have been totally alien to them in those past times. Calling that thinking supremist, racialist,imperialist, etc,would be much more valid in describing those types of people in the past pre-modern eras.
Why would the nobles support a revolution that will eradicate the nobles as a class and confiscate their riches? It makes no sence. It’s true though that there where a lot of foreign agents among the revolutionaires but they was not there to support the revolution but to control it for other means. Trotsky was one of those foreign agents but his fellow conspirators was arrested and a lot of them where put to death.