One of the reasons why I initially started an anonymous blog was to focus on ideas, values, not personalities.  And now that my identity is widely known, I still think that this is a sound approach.  However, others feel differently and some feel the need to pen pieces denouncing me for reasons X Y or Z.  What I want to do here is to explain why I don’t have any interest in reacting to such pieces.

  1. First, they are mostly based on misrepresentations, strawman arguments, pseudo-psychoanalyses and even deliberate lies.  Most of it are total fabrications with no basis in facts or logic.  I simply don’t have the time to engage in “what they said I said is not what I really said” kind of arguments.  I aim my blog at smart readers – they can easily figure that our for themselves.To those of you who are new to this blog, let me make it simple for you.
    Here is a “kinda bio” of me: http://thesaker.is/submarines-in-the-desert-as-my-deepest-gratitude-to-you/
    Here are my values: http://thesaker.is/blogs-philosophy/
    Here is why I reside in the USA: http://thesaker.is/why-do-i-live-in-the-usa
  2. The truth is that all of these attacks come from people and groups who want a monopoly on what they see as “their” segment of the blogosphere.  To them everybody else is not an ally, but a competitor.  They think that by trashing others they will gain a bigger segment.  It’s really all about pleasing sponsors and their ideological agenda (I explain the first case in detail here and Ron Unz explained the second one here).  I am not interested in competition, ratings, ideologies and all the rest.  My only interest are honest, non-ideological, critical analyses.  Let the readers decide what they like.
  3. Then there are those who would like to get noticed but don’t.  For them to bark up a successful “competitor” is simply a crude way to market their own sadly unsuccessful websites.  What they don’t realize is that by calling somebody else names, they just display their own lack of talents, originality,  brains or, ironically, relevance.
  4. Finally, I find all that nastiness masquerading as some form of intellectual debate is rather nauseating and dishonorable.  This is why I wrote the following words when there was a fallout between Russia-Insider and The Duran: “I am saddened by the outright nastiness of some comments and the eager willingness of some people to join a virtual lynch mob against Charles Bausman. Even if he is truly guilty of all the accusation made against him, this is worthy of tears and not of vitriolic glee. The way some “smelled blood” and joined in this “virtual public stoning” is disgusting. I am also aware of ugly personal attacks against Peter Lavelle, whom I hold in the highest esteem, and I categorically condemn these attacks as dishonorable and unworthy of being acknowledged in any way“.  “Sharks in the water” come with the territory, especially if you are successful (just compare their Alexa rankings with ours!), but they don’t deserve to be treated with any respect or recognition.  We can’t stop them from doing what they are doing, but we don’t have engage in the same behavior:  as Jay Carter once wrote, “their biggest motivation is that they actually feel inferior to you, so they’ll slash you down to their level“.

Frankly, the Internet can be a nasty place and I don’t want our community to contribute to that.  In fact, I believe that with every ugly accusation something very beneficial happens: those who enjoy that kind of stuff will leave our community, and those who don’t will join it.  So, in a way, all that nastiness is beneficial to all of us, to our entire community (it is also a fantastic and surefire way to unmask the hypocrisy those who call themselves “Christians” yet engage in profoundly un-Christian behavior).  The bottom line is that I profoundly believe that participating in all that nastiness is both dishonorable and self-defeating.  We should therefore never oppose it when done by others and neither should we pay any attention to it.  All we need to do is stay out of it.

I want to conclude by asking you, my friends, not to worry about this.  Since I started this blog I have been called all sorts of things, including a racist, an anti-Semite, a Nazi, a Jew-lover, a Marxist, a Communist, a White Russian, a Muslim, a traitor to the White race, a CIA agent, a Putin apologist and a Putin hater.  I was also accused of being both anti-American and pro-American.  Fingers were pointed at me for living in Florida and for not understanding Europe.  Clearly some people can’t deal with complexity and nuance :-) they need a simple label to be able to cope with them.

I ask you all not to “defend” me or this blog, not to waste any of your time and energy in vain, and simply stay above it all.  Let them do what they are the best at and and let us do what we do best too.  But, if you really do feel the need to engage in these debates, then please don’t do that on this blog: don’t reply here to stuff said elsewhere in our comments section and don’t post links to it. I also ask you not to call out or criticize any website or individual by name.  Think of it as a form of mental hygiene: let’s not pollute our community with this nastiness.

Our real enemy is the Empire, imperialism, violence and wars, the loss of true values and spirituality, injustice, lies, deception, the full-spectrum crackdown on our freedoms and the persecution of the weak and innocent.  If we want to struggle against that enemy, against these phenomena, we first and foremost must strive towards being different ourselvesfor the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God” (1 Cor 3:19) and “such wisdom does not come from above, but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic” (James 3:15).  Let’s stay away from it :-)

Hugs and cheers,

The Saker

The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire
The Essential Saker: from the trenches of the emerging multipolar world