Book Title: The Essential Saker
Copyright 2015 ISBN-13: 978-1-60888-058-4
Author: The Saker
Publisher: Nimble Books LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, USA 48103
Web Page: http://www.NimbleBooks.com
E-mail: [email protected]
Reviewer: Tom Mysiewicz
Yahoo groups link: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/shamireaders/conversations/messages/4018
Unlike a woman who will not let you see her “without her face on,” The Essential Saker lets you see the Saker’s successful and unsuccessful analysis over time. It freely admits he’s changed his views on some things. He speaks in possibilities/probabilities. But even when wrong, these often demonstrate that he reached the same conclusions as those in power (the various tentacles of the leviathan he terms “AngloZionist”) who changed the game with clever countermeasures, 911-type false flags and information warfare.
One example that jumps to mind is Saker’s exploration of the curious union of left-right French philosopher Soral and Afro-French comedian Dieudonne. (Such a union is equivalent to the feared union of the “far right” and the “far left” in the U.S., which keeps the ADL, SPLC and “Neocons” awake at night.) He notes the persecution of the comedian was making him more rather than less popular and, in conjunction with France’s collapsing economy, more heavy-handed government tactics could lead to a popular uprising. Alas, Dieudonne was recently expelled from Hong Kong at the behest of the French and Israeli consulates and has been heavily suppressed and slapped with numerous legal sanctions. Using the excuse of a claimed ISIS attack in Paris and crumbling economy, French leader Hollande essentially declared martial law, obviating any such uprising.
However, most valuable and alone justifying reading this book is Saker’s “spot on” philosophical and religious analysis of Russia, Russian politics, Russian history, the Russian people and Russia’s relations with other peoples and religions (especially Islam.)
Saker deals with some of the “macro” events in recent Russia history straightforwardly, pointing out that the Russia of today has little in common with Imperial Russia or with the USSR. Putin’s Russia and his policy of “sovereignization” is a break with the Orwellian doublespeak of the West, in which “freedom” is really slavery. (Putin apparently learned this lesson during the looting of his country in the 1990s.)
In fact, Putin’s embrace of a policy of realism and truthfulness, as described in this book, stands out in stark contrast to the obvious lies put forward by what he terms his “foreign partners.” For instance, Russia is goaded to invade Ukraine after a “partner’s” proxy color revolution and, when it does not do so, is accused of invading and is sanctioned as if it had done so. Or Russia conducts a perfectly legal intervention in Syria to counter an illegal proxy war against the legitimate government. It is accused of “harming the prospects of peace.” (This performance brings to mind a 1999 Canadian movie “eXistenZ”. In this VR (virtual-reality) movie, “realist” forces battle the forces of “distorted reality.” At the end, real people have died and some gamers do not know if they are still in VR or not!)
Certainly, Saker’s book views the Bolshevik revolution as a similar distortion of Russia’s organic history (and perhaps a reason for Putin’s realism): it was alien, non-Russian and the infamous “Trotsky” (Lev Bronstein) was a mass murderer of Russians. In addition to creating major problems for Russia because of the Trotskyite Communist-expansionist doctrine (which led to a stinging defeat by Poland in 1919-1921 and helped Hitler to rise to power) Saker points out that the choice of a federalized system of republics to form the USSR directly led to the fragmentation into separate countries of hitherto organic parts of Russia in the 1990s. We in the West call this “the breakup of the Soviet Union.”
Stalin’s counter-revolution against the “Trots,” Saker’s book asserts, pivoted on the nationalistic sentiments of ethnic Russians, even though he was a Georgian who could not pronounce Russian words properly. The jailing and execution of numerous “Trots” led to charges of Stalinist anti-Jewish pogroms. These charges go on even today–I was just reading in the Forward a critique of Presidential-candidate Bernie Sanders for working on a “Stalinist” Israeli kibbutz.
According to Saker, many Jews were in leadership positions in the Trotskyite faction, hence their liquidation. Jews willing to work with Stalin were unharmed. (I concur: Jews such as Frenkel, Solts, Berman and Yagoda designed and even ran the infamous gulag system for Stalin. And Jewish propagandists such as Ehrenberg helped create much of the Soviet wartime propaganda in WWII. Stalin even created an autonomous homeland—Birobidzhan–for Jews in the USSR.)
As no good deed goes unpunished, Saker suggests that (after the Stalinist killing of Trotsky in Mexico) renegade Trots infected the American political system with the doctrines we today associate with the Neoconservative movement—especially techniques of subversion (color revolutions) and almost-messianic expansionism (“export of democracy” equivalent to the “spread of Communism” or “the inevitability of Communism.”) And these red, white and blue Trotskyites have preserved their animus toward Stalin as today’s hostility toward Russia and anything Russian. If Russia is weak, as during Yeltzin’s reign, they are happy. If Russia is strong, as under Putin, “something must be done about it!”
As we are head toward a possible world war over Russia’s apparent strengthening, Saker seems to be saying, it could be related to the Neocon forces feeding off their own and popular misconceptions about Russia and Russians:
*That Russia seeks to reconstitute the former Soviet “empire”;
*That Russia is a majority nation of icon-worshipers packing Russian Orthodox churches every week;
*That Russia never has and would never join with non-Christians to overcome even a (nominally) Christian foe;
*That most historical Russian rulers in the past 350 years protected the Orthodox church;
*That Muslims are not accepted by Russians or are persecuted for being Muslim; and,
*That there were pogroms in Russia proper or that Jews were persecuted for religion by a “Russian” named Stalin and by subsequent Soviet rulers.
Failure to properly understand Russia, Saker intimates, has also seemingly led the U.S. to invest a great deal of effort and money to create a Russian fifth column of NGOs and “liberals” hoping these will destabilize Russia and topple Putin. Will it work? Will we see a “color revolution” in Russia? Saker sees this drive as futile and part of a general strategy to create chaos around the world in order for the AngloZionists to retain power. At best, he says, after the plunder of Russia by oligarchs and financiers under Yeltzin, only 1-2% of Russians support liberals whom they view as “a small degenerate group of U.S. worshipers, intellectuals who hate Russia.”
By way of illustration, Saker relates a Russian joke about a teacher who asks a student what he’d be if his grandparents, relatives and parents were Stalinists. The child answers: “A Stalinist.” Then the teacher asks what he’d be if his relatives were unsavory things, his mother was a prostitute and his father a drug addict and criminal. To which the kid answers: “A liberal!”
According to Saker there is only one significant Russian party (as all the pro-U.S. parties could not secure even one seat in the Duma) the United Russia Party of Putin and Medvedev. Secondarily, he notes, Putin’s “All Russia People’s Front” could become a significant party in the event of a power struggle he predicts between Putin (representing the Eurasian Sovereignist faction) and Medvedev (representing the pro-U.S. Atlantic Integrationist faction.)
Does this then mean that Putin is an all-powerful dictator and that the Russian government is a monolithic force? The Essential Saker will disillusion you in this regard.
Putin, says Saker, came to power as a non-threatening apparatchik successor to Yeltzin acceptable to the post-Communist Western occupiers. By the time they realized their mistake, Putin had dug himself in, eventually adopting Medvedev to placate them. Putin expelled some of the Jewish oligarchs and expropriated and jailed some. Others saw the handwriting on the wall and were allowed to keep their gains in return for going along with Putin’s concept of Russian sovereignty, i.e., acting independently of the AngloZionist financiers in London and the muscle of Washington.
While Putin averted a complete disintegration of Russia (of the type now taking place in Greece) Saker points out that he’s acting under a considerable handicap that explains seeming half-hearted behavior at times: “The people were changed, the system remained fundamentally the same,” states The Essential Saker.
What about Russian Orthodoxy—surely that is a massive and monolithic force in Russia that trumps just about everything? Not exactly. Says Saker: of the 40% of Russians who consider themselves “Orthodox” only a small percentage could be considered religious. Part of this dates back to the Communist era, when the official Orthodox Church adopted the heretical practice of “collaborating with evil in order to accomplish good.” (In his Gulag Archipelago, Alexander Solzhenitsyn related the story of an Orthodox cleric visiting a prisoner in a cell, looking nervous and—instead of being strengthened by his faith—scurried away out of fear he too might be locked up.)
Saker also explains that there are really 4 different Orthodox churches, only one of which is “official.” Separate, yes, but they recognize one another. Orthodoxy for many Russians represents patriotism, history and organic Russian culture, he concludes, rather than fanatical religious belief.
As historical background, Saker’s book examines the gulf existing between Orthodoxy and the “Western church” (Roman Catholicism)—noting that the refusal of Orthodoxy to accept the Pope as supreme ruler and “vicar of Christ on Earth” is and has been a major factor in geopolitical events. And it turns out to be a very timely subject! Possibly to head off a world war in the wake of an impending Syro-Russian victory, a historic meeting is now to take place in Cuba between Catholic Pope Francis and Orthodox Patriarch Kirill I.
I must say that, being raised as a Catholic, I had never heard of what Saker describes as an often violent Papal reaction to Russia’s refusal to bow to Rome–what a Catholic theologian terms “Russian narcissist self satisfaction.” In addition to dealing with the various proxies of Rome through history, Saker recounts how much of the Russian nobility was of German extraction, heavily Freemasonic, and like the Jesuits, always trying to “turn Russia into Poland.”
As for the historic, once-in-a-millenium meeting between Pope and Patriarch: will Kirill be directly representing the Kremlin in this matter? Saker points out that there is much suspicion going back to the Bolshevik Era, when the Moscow Patriarchy or official Orthodox Church was considered a puppet of the state by believers: “…there is some pretty good evidence that Kirill I might be a secret papist cardinal, something called a “cardinal in pectore” which, if true, is probably used against him by the Russian security services to make sure that he does whatever the Kremlin says.”
What about Russian-Islamic relations—both in Russia and in the Mid East, where Russia is now militarily involved? Saker observes that “…the Wahhabi and ‘al Qaeda’ types are the foot soldiers of…(a) new U.S. imperial policy.” Yet he also observes that, while some in the Russian government are suspicious of Muslims, major players such as the security services and even the foreign policy organs see them as potential allies in creating a stable multipolar world order.
Due to internal power struggles in Washington between “old guard” forces and the Neocon/Zionist “boots on the ground” imperialists, he apparently sees current limits to such alliances because some Islamic sects are being manipulated to cause chaos as a proxy weapon of imperial control—and not only in the Mid East.
Saker sees the Bolshevik persecution of religion (another destructive legacy of Trotsky) as one cause of perceived animosity toward Islam. However, he explains that, prior to the revolution, Muslims were an accepted part of Russia and freely allowed to practice their religion. According to the Saker, Russia was and is multinational and, today, all the various peoples in the Federation are considered “Rossiianin” and the ethnic-Russians (Russki) are just one part of this mix. While relatively few ethnic Russians are Muslims, many Rossiianin have played a role in Russian history, including: “…the (mostly Muslim) Mongols who helped Saint Alexander Nevsky defeat the Teutonic Knights of the Papist Northern Crusaders, to the two Chechen special forces battalions who spearheaded the Russian counter-offensive against the Georgian Army in the 08.08.08 war…”Rossiiskii Islam” is an phenomenon present throughout the 1000+ years of Russian history and an integral part of Russia’s identity.”
Of course, to whatever extent it exists, most of the (unnecessary) conflict with Islam dates back to the Afghan intervention by the USSR on behalf of the Kabul government, when U.S. and Saudi funded and armed Wahhabist “mujaheddin” savaged Soviet troops. After the withdrawal and the collapse of the USSR, these Wahhabis waged a proxy war for the U.S./AngloZionists against Russia in Chechnya.
In closing, Saker’s hopes are that Muslims will rise to defeat the Daesh extremist proxies and that inclusive organizations like Hezbollah and Shiite clerics like Imran Hosein may lead the way to better Russian-Islamic cooperation.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existenz ↑
- http://forward.com/news/333020/bernie-sanders-stint-at-stalinist-kibbutz-draws-red-baiting-from-right/ ↑
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birobidzhan ↑
- http://abyssum.org/2014/01/08/francis-and-bartholomew-vs-kirill-only-christ-can-overcome-russian-narcissist-self-satisfaction/ ↑