The Great Russian Restoration VII: The Kremlin’s Post-Soviet State Ideology

Many pundits and analysts have pointed out that Russia doesn’t seem to have a visible political/economic/state ideology and they are correct to do so. That being said, the Kremlin civic platform has always been quite basic and straightforward. The Kremlin’s official civic platform is based on three pillars: sport, Orthodoxy and World War II. As a result of this formula, Russia committed state resources in the form of manpower, money and propaganda to these three areas. The West understood this, accepted the terms of battle and committed itself to undermining these three pillars of support. This isn’t all that different from the the policy of the USSR, or any other country’s civic platform really. If we just swap Orthodoxy for Communism, then we have the USSR platform and if we swap Orthodoxy for Laïcité, then we have the French platform. The point I’m making here is simple: all states have civic political platforms in one form or another and Russia’s isn’t particularly special.

In this context, the rationale for Russia’s systematic banning from all international sporting competitions becomes clearer. One could be forgiven for thinking that this was simply petty bear-baiting from a Russophobic predominantly Jewish ruling caste in the West, but, in actual fact, there was a strategic political goal behind this unsportsmanlike behavior. Russian athletes—and all athletes in fact—train for these international competitions where they win cash prizes, promotion deals, partnerships, gain international exposure, and so on. With the bannings, many of these athletes’ careers got nuke’d and so did the Kremlin promotion campaign based on these role-models and the soft power prestige that their performances brought to Russia. It’s hard to deny that the West has been rather successful in undermining the Kremlin’s plan on this front.

Now, Orthodoxy seems rather self-explanatory, but it’s still worth a few words of contextualization here. Hundreds of new churches are built in Russia every single year with state financing, to the point that the church struggles to staff them all with priests. The vast majority of the post-Soviet population, however, does not attend these churches religiously. That being said, most people are generally pro-Orthodox in the sense that they do not practice any kind of militant atheism or hold hostile views of the church. Most people simply aren’t in the habit of going to church and don’t really believe that they need to go to church to consider themselves Christians. The church, of course, begs to disagree and wants to boost its share of devoted, regular church-goers from the 10–15% of the population that the number hovers at now to something closer to a majority of the population. I had some modest suggestions to share with the Patriarch on how better to accomplish this, but he hasn’t returned my calls as of yet. Nonetheless, I will keep spamming his inbox and keep you guys posted about any developments that might occur on that front.

As for World War II, there’s some history here that few people in the West know. The USSR, in the first decades after the war, did not talk much about the Great Patriotic War. Sure, they had a parade after the victory in Moscow which has been continued ever since, but it wasn’t until the late 60s and 70s when the Kremlin began to lean into Victory Day and began treating it more seriously. I can only speculate on what may have been the reason for this reticence to incorporate that great victory into the Kremlin’s political platform. The simplest and obvious explanation is that they no doubt felt embarrassed by the war at the time and tried to move past it as quickly as they could. As we all know, the Soviet Union suffered humiliating losses in the first weeks and months of the war due to the sheer incompetence of the Bolshevik leadership, and the war had such a catastrophic effect on the lives of Soviet citizens that it was no doubt difficult to spin a narrative around glory and victory so soon after the mass-suffering and destruction. Furthermore, many war heroes had risen up through the ranks who could become potential political rivals of the Bolshevik party elite and the last thing that they wanted was another “Bonaparte” rising up to sweep them aside and become the new Emperor of the Red Empire. It is for this reason that many war heroes and officers spent their veteran years worried that they might be arrested and sent to the Gulags. In my family, my great-grandfather, for example, hid his medals and his uniform and rarely spoke about the war with his family until far later in his life. Many Russian historians believe that the great Red Army general Georgiy Zhukov was assassinated because the Bolsheviks were terrified of his near demigod-like popularity. Zhukov, remember, was rotting in a Siberian gulag at the start of the war and had to be pulled out by the desperate Reds who had successfully lost their entire forward army in Europe in a few short months of fighting against the Germans. Few in the West understand that the latter USSR was far less repressive and extreme as the earlier USSR was, mostly because many Jews fled the USSR following Stalin’s purges and the gradual “Russification” of the state security structures. The “old-timers” who vote for the Communists out of nostalgia mostly remember and grew up during this relatively normal period and don’t associate the Communists with mass murder, mass arrests, and terror because most of that happened before their time. Incidentally, I promised to talk about the Communist opposition and still plan to do so in the future.

Regardless, it’s hardly a secret that the Kremlin talks a lot and I mean A LOT about World War II. This is also why they are so prickly about historical revisionism aimed at reexamining the causes of the war. As a part of its civic platform, the Kremlin has thrown its weight and support behind the May 9th Victory Parades and the Immortal Brigade marches in particular. This only really took off following the annexation of Crimea when literally hundreds of thousands of Russians used the Victory Day parade as a proxy venue for expressing their latent Russian patriotism in an acceptable civic manifestation. Despite their attempts to disguise and justify their pro-Russia patriotism behind the morally unassailable status of World War II and the defeat of Nazism, the liberal media was particularly vicious in its attacks on people who began to attend these Victory Day parades, labeling them paid agents of the Kremlin and, naturally, Fascists hiding behind the black and orange victory banner. Bizarrely, the Orthodox Church also expressed anti-Victory Day sentiment, alleging that it was not Orthodox to march with banners of slain family members and that it verged on shamanism or animism or ancestor worship, which the Christian faith does not allow. This is easily explained by the fact that the Orthodox clergy doesn’t want a civic religion to emerge and split the loyalty of the Russian population, which they believe rightfully belongs to them. Unsurprisingly, they’ve had to tone down this rhetoric in recent years.

In any case, the Western media has, in recent years, taken to pointing out historically inconvenient facts about, for example, Stalin’s pact with Hitler over the partition of Poland. Or that the Soviet Union trained German pilots and provided Germany with fuel and grain and other raw materials as part of their alliance right up into the start of the invasion. The point of this isn’t to rehabilitate Hitler or because of a new-found commitment to WWII objectivism on the part of the Western media. It’s an attack on the Kremlin’s platform by arguing that Stalin and the USSR were just as evil as Hitler and that Russia is a continuation of the USSR and seeks to take back Poland and invade Europe—as in  Biden’s speech yesterday in Warsaw, linking present day Russian actions in Ukraine to “Hungary, 1956. Poland, 1956, and then again, 1981. Czechoslovakia,1968. Soviet tanks crushed democratic uprisings.” Many nationalists in the West know that there is far more to WWII than the standard narrative, be it Western or Eastern, that is allowed to be mentioned in the public sphere and polite society. They should perhaps ask themselves why the Western media is allowing historical revisionism back into the public sphere in the run-up to a conflict with Russia when it was an absolute taboo topic for so many years.

Now, none of these “pillars” are ideological per se although they are promoted and defended as stolidly as any political or religious creed. This is because Russia is a post-Ideological nation and Putin has often stressed his commitment to this course of development. In other words, when Putin talks about Russia being a “normal country” in his video addresses to the West, he means a country that isn’t committed to one messianic political/economic theory or another like, say, the U.S., which is committed to crusading for its religion of Liberal Human Rights-Democracy-Freedom around the world. “Normal” just means a country that acts in the interests of itself and its people first and foremost and tries to get along with other countries as well. One could even call this “nationalism” if one were so inclined, but Russian civil society has an aversion to this word, preferring to brand their enemies with it instead. Again, the preferred term is “normal” and that means that you will often hear phrases like “Russia is not a nationalistic country, Russia is a normal country” because that’s the official state line. Me, personally, I like the term ‘nationalism’ and have no qualms about using it. Consider: are the Russian soldiers fighting to save the Russians in Donbass and to defend Russia’s interests not literally “Russian Nationalists”? At the risk of sounding like some French deconstructionist philosopher, I’d like to point out that terms do not seem to have any inherent meaning to them (although they should) separate from the meaning that we choose to ascribe to them. I guess I don’t really mind calling myself a “normalist” going forward, but I think it lacks a certain artistic je ne sais quoi, don’t you?

As I’ve written about before, Russia has been accelerating its process of internal “normalization” with the shutdown of the Liberals and their beloved ideological institutions. “Ukraine is rightful Russian land with Russians living on it,” is a statement that was considered extreme a few weeks ago, but is now rather mainstream and one that the average Russian can hear from the pundit class on the state channels. These same pundits then turn around and condemn “nationalism.” A head-scratcher, for sure. But most people’s heads go unscratched because they’re agreeing with every word that is being said, even the parts that seem to contradict one another. I suppose results speak louder than any words or tweets or at least the Russian government seems to think so. This would no doubt explain why there are so few videos coming out from the Russian side and the pro-Russian propaganda channels rely on official statements from the Ministry of Defense or Kadyrov’s Chechen brigades, who seem to be flouting any rules regarding social media posting and instead seem to relish the social media propaganda game. All of this begs the question: is the Kremlin’s inability to produce quality propaganda for its side part of a clever plan to not release important military details or a catastrophic oversight by its Boomer tech-luddite leadership? I really wish I could answer this question, but I’m afraid I’ll have to cop out and just say “we will see” and “the results will speak for themselves” in time.

But does Russia even need a state ideology? Should Russia recommit herself and her resources to making the world safe for Communism/Orthodoxy/Borsht or something of the kind? I share the same opinion as the Kremlin and think that allowing oneself to slide into one ideology or another is a dangerous gambit that more often than not leads a country or even the individual that adopts it to making catastrophic mistakes because of their commitment to a separate, higher Truth  that often runs contrary to the actual truth and the reality that we find ourselves in. Ideology can indeed unite and motivate people to great heights of fanaticism that can be harnessed by the state or a group of clever people to achieve world-changing goals. But ideology is a double-edged sword that cuts the hand that wields it the moment that its holder begins to actually commit himself to uncritically believing in it. Putin clearly doesn’t want a new messianic world-changing ideology for Russia because Putin probably saw what happened with the USSR and sees what is happening to the USSA right now and has drawn some conclusions. He will, however, have to come up with a new civic platform for the Kremlin to promote eventually. Interest in World War II is virtually nonexistent among the youth, Orthodoxy will take a while to “take” again, and the sanctions on Russian athletes won’t end anytime soon. The current wave of enthusiasm for the military operation in Ukraine is enough for now, but eventually, a new popular platform will be needed .

President Putin, my man, you know where to reach me. Let’s boil some coffee, order some takeout and start throwing some ideas up on the whiteboard. We can discuss my fee at a later date, but I promise to be reasonable about it. The ball is in your court, big guy.

26 replies
  1. Karl Haemers
    Karl Haemers says:

    I appreciate the humor. We are alert to “hyperbole” and “polemics” on TOO, but it is worth the few good laughs we get from such clever phraseology.

    “I guess I don’t really mind calling myself a “normalist” going forward, but I think it lacks a certain artistic je ne said quoi, don’t you?”

  2. Alan Donelson
    Alan Donelson says:

    Mr. Slavski, one of no doubt many more, I continue to revel in your writings on Russia. Thank you again. I look forward to your next installment, with great appreciation for Kevin MacDonald’s providing you this forum for publication and dissemination.

    Knowing you have a vast subject with more facets than the Hope diamond, I submit once more — just a reminder — a request for your views of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s work entitled “Two Hundred Years Together”, a full text with footnotes in English yet UNPUBLISHED, at least to my knowledge. I understand versions in German and French were published and, I presume, the original in the Russian language exists as well.

    Even a brief discourse by yourself will bring this work and its perspective to the attention of many who would benefit from that historical account of experience, given that America and other Western countries currently repeat such history.

  3. Emicho
    Emicho says:

    -If the Scottish nationalists had the foresight to invest in the national soccer team for a few years, they would have won their separatist referendum by a mile. Even I as a kid could see how dumb they were not to do this, and I say this not to show myself intelligent, but to show them as fools. They are fools.
    -The orthodox Church is very awake to not allow a kind of mixed Christian/patriotic religion to take hold, as this is basically exactly what killed Christianity in Britain after WWI.
    -Fascinating also that Rolo doesn’t hold to the ‘Icebreaker’ theory of why Germany invaded the USSR when it did.

  4. Poupon Marx
    Poupon Marx says:

    Why don’t more governments look around for successful models that bring prosperity and happiness to people? My prime example, from direct experience and research is Singapore. The main influences are Chinese-Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, and other overlays of Classical Chinese culture. They don’t care what anybody else thinks. “Chinese people very practical”, was once said to me by hotel manager. True words.

    I think Russian should just forget about “forms”, especially Western ones, philosophically, Aristotelian, and just balance the sensate world with the Other World, which is just as real. IOW, tradition, family, spiritualism, doing the right thing and thinking right thoughts will work. The best guide of principles and precepts that will guide a successful society are the following:

    The Eightfold Path

    The path to liberation from these miserable states of being, as taught by the Buddha, has eight points and is known as the eightfold path. The first point is called right view — the right way to view the world. Wrong view occurs when we impose our expectations onto things; expectations about how we hope things will be, or about how we are afraid things might be. Right view occurs when we see things simply, as they are. It is an open and accommodating attitude. We abandon hope and fear and take joy in a simple straight-forward approach to life.

    The second point of the path is called right intention. It proceeds from right view. If we are able to abandon our expectations, our hopes and fears, we no longer need to be manipulative. We don’t have to try to con situations into our preconceived notions of how they should be. We work with what is. Our intentions are pure.

    The third aspect of the path is right speech. Once our intentions are pure, we no longer have to be embarrassed about our speech. Since we aren’t trying to manipulate people, we don’t have to be hesitant about what we say, nor do we need to try bluff our way through a conversation with any sort of phoney confidence. We say what needs to be said, very simply in a genuine way.

    The fourth point on the path, right discipline, involves a kind of renunciation. We need to give up our tendency to complicate issues. We practice simplicity. We have a simple straight-forward relationship with our dinner, our job, our house and our family. We give up all the unnecessary and frivolous complications that we usually try to cloud our relationships with.

    Right livelihood is the fifth step on the path. It is only natural and right that we should earn our living. Often, many of us don’t particularly enjoy our jobs. We can’t wait to get home from work and begrudge the amount of time that our job takes away from our enjoyment of the good life. Perhaps, we might wish we had a more glamorous job. We don’t feel that our job in a factory or office is in keeping with the image we want to project. The truth is, that we should be glad of our job, whatever it is. We should form a simple relationship with it. We need to perform it properly, with attention to detail.

    The sixth aspect of the path is right effort. Wrong effort is struggle. We often approach a spiritual discipline as though we need to conquer our evil side and promote our good side. We are locked in combat with ourselves and try to obliterate the tiniest negative tendency. Right effort doesn’t involve struggle at all. When we see things as they are, we can work with them, gently and without any kind of aggression whatsoever.

    Right mindfulness, the seventh step, involves precision and clarity. We are mindful of the tiniest details of our experience. We are mindful of the way we talk, the way we perform our jobs, our posture, our attitude toward our friends and family, every detail.

    Right concentration, or absorption is the eighth point of the path. Usually we are absorbed in absentmindedness. Our minds are completely captivated by all sorts of entertainment and speculations. Right absorption means that we are completely absorbed in nowness, in things as they are. This can only happen if we have some sort of discipline, such as sitting meditation. We might even say that without the discipline of sitting meditation, we can’t walk the eightfold path at all. Sitting meditation cuts through our absentmindedness. It provides a space or gap in our preoccupation with ourselves.

    The Goal

    Most people have heard of nirvana. It has become equated with a sort of eastern version of heaven. Actually, nirvana simply means cessation. It is the cessation of passion, aggression and ignorance; the cessation of the struggle to prove our existence to the world, to survive. We don’t have to struggle to survive after all. We have already survived. We survive now; the struggle was just an extra complication that we added to our lives because we had lost our confidence in the way things are. We no longer need to manipulate things as they are into things as we would like them to be.

    Is anything written somewhere that is more comprehensive and anchored in common sense, reason, universal truth? Buddhist teachings are like “the new magic whitener, gets out stains of useless ideas, clutter, nonsense, socio and psychopathy. The future of the West-if it has one-is to be found in Eastern thought. I’ve thought and lived it. Like the sports and comic pages, I found not interest for me. As a practical person-if it doesn’t work I am not interested-are faded and dank.

    • Captainchaos
      Captainchaos says:


      Those who will not engage in the struggle for existence will cease to exist. “Nirvana” is to stagger through life in a dream-state of anesthetized nihilism.

      • Poupon Marx
        Poupon Marx says:

        I read and listen to comment regarding Buddhism from people that are unfamiliar with Buddhism. And it amazes me how stupefyingly little or nothing they know. They espouse what is not germane or found in Buddhism.

        I have, similarly, heard from people that cats do not have any emotion for anybody, just hang out for food and shelter. The last such conversation was with a colleague who insisted he knew what he was talking about. Being a lifelong cat owner, I asked him the following question (among a group of colleages at “coffee time” on a shop): “Have you ever owned a cat or been around one?” After a short silence, he said, “Well, er uh, no”. Everybody laughed. I’m laughing inaudibly now.

    • A. Nonymous
      A. Nonymous says:

      The effects of Chinese practicality can be seen in their perennial mass cheating scandals, and in the practice of Chinese companies hiring Westerners as spokesmodels, in the hopes of creating the impression that their product has some level of quality, as opposed to being made to the lowest possible standard.

      • Poupon Marx
        Poupon Marx says:

        Of course you are correct. Especially in China and Singapore, where human virtue is on mass display. Both societies advance from zero to enormous prosperity in three decades. All due to cheating and lying.

        Similarly, Apple computers, which are made entirely in China, are known to be grossly inferior, poorly engineered, and have that negative, “Made in China” aura and reputation. Lowest possible standard.

    • Lucius Vanini
      Lucius Vanini says:

      I find it interesting that the religions regularly recommended in what I’ve viewed as a White-Advocacy site are invariably Judeo-Christanity and, by P.M., Buddhism—two religions which don’t stress race and are in all other respects inharmonious with White racial self-assertion.

      Strangely, except the time I mentioned them, nothing seems to be said of White-originated religions which do stress race, which are categorically “White Racialist.” I allude to the Cosmotheism of William Luther Pierce and the Creativity of Ben Klassen. Presumably there should be no doubt among White Nationalists as to which creeds are consistent with their politics.

      Not that I’d recommend them, but among the “major” religions Judaism and Islam are certainly more compatible with worldly self-assertion than are Judeo-Christianity and Buddhism. Judaism consists with in-group preference, with collective egoism, and instead of associating rectitude with being a doormat it encourages retaliation. Islam too has no doctrinal hangup about violent solutions and is fine with your knocking the hell out of those who do you wrong, and is thus a creed with which warriors can identify and be self-consistent.

      I’d never adopt either because, among other things, they’re anthropomorphic and connected with fables and other mental junk. Far more congenial to my mind are the explicit pantheism of Pierce’s creed and the implied pantheism of Creativity. Moreover, these again are flat-out White-Racialist creeds.

      Judeo-Christianity and Buddhism, besides prescribing passivity in the face of aggression and non-injury of foes, also depict life in this world as problematic, indeed as something we should be glad to be rid of. The one holds that this world has gone awry like a failed experiment–that owing to the first man’s disobedience and the machinations of an Evil Spirit, this world is wicked and it deservedly shall be soon scrapped: Judeo-Christians look forward to its end! While quite different metaphysically, Buddhism too portrays life and the world as unacceptably troublesome and sorrowful. It teaches that we are caught in a cycle of birth and death, suffering one lifetime after another; and it’s concerned with enabling us to free ourselves from such suffering by escaping the cycle and avoiding rebirth.

      It’s clear that such negative valuation clashes with “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children” and “….the beauty of the White Aryan woman must not perish from the Earth.” But Cosmotheism and Creativity are a different story. Approving the world and “this life” (and thus approximating the Paganism of our fierce ancestors, who were capable of an unqualified YES to existence), Cosmotheism and Creativity again appear to be natural choices for those desiring a White future without foreseeable end.

      Captainchaos: I second your disdain for and rejection of decadence religion. Yes, those who won’t struggle will become history–IF anyone chooses to remember them.

      But of course that’s exactly what actual Buddhists and decadent Hindus want to do—get out of life, out of an existence from which THEY naturally suffer. When life no longer seems worth its trouble, people look for a way out. Hence it’s in milieus wherein fortitude and mettle have declined that attemptedly therapeutic creeds emerge.

      Consider the Aryans of India in the Vedic era. They didn’t bother themselves about escaping physical existence via Nirvana or moksha. They were the mighty conquerors of India. But later, their descendants who’d lost the ancient hardness, developing overrefined sensibilities and great susceptibility to pain, felt increasingly that life was no great asset, until even a KSHATRIYA, a member of the warrior caste, could be so disturbed by even the sight of suffering that he had to renounce his social role and devote himself to seeking a way out of Samsara, the cycle of birth and death and suffering.

      This was Gautama the Buddha. And he was no equal of his early Aryan ancestors who enjoyed battle. His religion reflects a much different milieu! It’s a therapy, a remedy—and for a therapy or remedy to have an appeal there must be afflicted people, nicht wahr?

      By the way, I mustn’t be thought to believe in things like Samsara. I only mention it in discussing the Buddhist and Hindu creeds. My belief is that the strange concept arose from a need or desire to explain why physical life was such trouble and something to remedy, as it imputes suffering to karmic legacy from previous incarnations. It’s a post-Vedic notion, a product not of the strong, early Aryan milieu but of softer, psychophysically frail milieus which developed in centuries thereafter.

  5. jimmie moglia
    jimmie moglia says:

    “President Putin, my man, you know where to reach me…” I had a corresponding idea in America but not concerning the current US president. Whose most memorable legacy will likely be the long fart propelled while chatting with the consort of the future king of England.
    I refer, rather, to whoever is an equivalent character in the citadel of US academia, where anyone who even mildly deviates from mainstream academic orthodoxy, style, hypnotic rites or stringent unwritten rules, is considered but a “rude mechanical who works for bread upon the Athenian walls” (Midsummer Night’s Dream). And this irrespective of his/her education or actual titles, experience, record, research, written works or achievements in other fields, etc.
    As for Russia, I think that by adopting Orthodoxy, Russia manifested her desire to stand apart from the West; it was her way of defining herself, from the start. And… as a Westerner, I am very glad that she did so.

  6. AntiYuppie14
    AntiYuppie14 says:

    Good article, but a correction needs to be made.
    “Many Russian historians believe that the great Red Army general Georgiy Zhukov was assassinated because the Bolsheviks were terrified of his near demigod-like popularity. Zhukov, remember, was rotting in a Siberian gulag at the start of the war and had to be pulled out by the desperate Reds…”.
    Zhukov was never thrown in a Gulag and died when he was 78 in 1974 (i.e. lived way beyond typical male life expectancy in the USSR). It is difficult to believe that he was assassinated so late in the game. It is true that he was transferred to semi-retirement as the commander of the Odessa military district after WW2. He was reactivated after Stalin’s death and took active part in the anti-Beria plot in 1953 which brought to power Kruschev… later even served as Minister of defense for some time. You may have mistaken Zhukov with another general – Konstantin Rokossovsky who actually was thrown to the Gulag in 1937 and tortured but was released and reactivated at the start of WW2 in 1941… however – Rokossovsky died in 1968, aged 71, so he also probably died of old age and was not assassinated. The Americans – on the other hand – quite possibly – assassinated their celebrity general George Patton (died in a mysterious “car accident” in 1945) after he expressed views sympathetic to the German NS government and later his intention to enter politics as a presidential candidate.

    • bruno
      bruno says:

      You’re correct, of course. Roto seems, at times, to be picking at straws. Maybe he’s a young guy. Anyways, Marshall Rokossowski (spelled different ways), was picked up during Stalin’s insanity of 1937-’38, when an uncountable number of thousands were killed. The KGB knocked all his teeth out and he was later required to wear steel false teeth. You’re also correct about Marshal Zhukov. Of course, you know that after Eurocide II he became so popular that Uncle Joe demoted him. Most, in the West don’t even know that it was his Siberian troops that stalled Hitler during the battle for Moscow. Nice to see that TOO hx buffs have their info correct. Keep hitting those factual home runs.

  7. Christopher Caudill
    Christopher Caudill says:

    At the risk of triggering people by mentioning Alexander Dugin, his “Putin vs. Putin – Vladimir Putin Viewed From the Right” (Arktos 2015) also puts this question forward – namely, what is the fundamental ideological basis of the Russian Federation, and what is the inner essence of Russian nationalism, statehood, culture and spirituality? The Tsarist Empire, and the Soviet Union, each had their solid ideological basis. Although Putin put Russia back together, and it is now the leader of a “multipolar world” project opposed to the shenanigans of the Globohomo West, this fundamental question remains to be answered. One day Putin won’t be there anymore….what then? Orthodox “symphonia” with the government is an idea with an ancient pedigree, but is it enough by itself? Who and what will succeed him, and does Russia in fact have a world-historical mission critical to humanity’s survival?

    • Big Doreen
      Big Doreen says:

      You ask “does Russia in fact have a world-historical mission critical to humanity’s survival?” Yes, World Wide “de-nazification” is the mission (suggested by Andrei R. – The Saker). Start with “denazifying” the Azov types then move to eliminate Nazi’s-with-the-rainbow-antifa-BLM flag (Biden & crew) and especially the troublesome Zionist Nazis. If Putin and Xi want to be “normal guys” with “normal countries” then Russia and China together would do the World a great service and dismantle “The Great Reset”, the Population Reduction/Vaccine Cartel, the Social Media Censorship cartel and any other Nazi (or Bolshevik) oligarchic power centers. Sounds like a plan critical to humanity’s survival.

  8. peter mcloughlin
    peter mcloughlin says:

    To take up on one particular point in this challenging article: “…historically inconvenient facts about…. Stalin’s pact with Hitler over the partition of Poland. ”

    History is clear: states unite with their enemies because it serves their interest – power.

  9. Peter
    Peter says:

    I have a two ideas on why the Soviets may not have wanted to celebrate their victory in WW II until the 1960’s and 70’s. Any honest discussion of the war would not cover up that (but it has), in the words of the Norwegian academic Johannes Due Enstad, “Many Russians [in addition to Ukrainians, Byelorussians, Estonians and Lavians] hoped that Hitler would free them from Stalin” and these people were not traitors of their motherland but victims of it and what the Germans called “Judeo-Bolshevism”. Mr. Slavski’s mentioning the preponderance and harshness of the Jews in the pre-1945 Soviet Union helps explain why so many people across the USSR and eastern Europe considered Jews their enemies, not just the Germans. Because they were often in charge and they were the torturers and murderers and this has been covered up so the Jews can turn things around and accuse others of war crimes against them.

    “To put it briefly: Ethnic Russians were much less loyal to the Soviet regime in their encounters with the German occupiers than historians have believed up to now.”

    President Putin stated in a speech to a Jewish group a few years ago that 80 to 85% of the first Soviet government was Jewish. This fact is completely at odds with the Jewish claims of complete innocence and that they were the victims of the Germans and other Europeans. And this continued after the war.

    Historian David Irving explains that the 1956 Hungarian uprising was against the Jews, the Hungarian’s torturers that dominated their government.

    This is only an idea but perhaps the Jews making the so called holocaust the central pillar of WW II starting in the early 1970’s may have also played a role in the USSR playing up WW II. In Churchill’s, de Gaulle’s and Eisenhower’s massive memoirs of WW II written in the 1950’s you won’t find anything about the holocaust (another fact on revisionist’s side) but by the mid 1970’s it was in full swing in the west and soon after it became the reason many people were told and believed that there was a WW II – to save the Jews. As the biggest contributor to the defeat of Germany, why wouldn’t the USSR start playing up their role.

    • Emicho
      Emicho says:

      Could be the Holocaust. Maybe it was just something about Stalin personally. Maybe the ‘Icebreaker’ thesis has something to do with it. Maybe, considering the carnage inflicted on Russian peoples, their natural reference point was the aftermath of WWI, no one afterwards thought that something to glorify.
      I’d always read the Russians only really started to pump this stuff once the ruling elite pretty much realised their entire system was based on lies, and was obviously eventually heading off the cliff.
      But that’s the Western mainstream version. The biggest surprises these days are when the West tells the truth.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      My uncle Gerhardt, from Dessau [ Junkers + Bauhaus ] gained his rank as 2nd. Lt. while defending the U – Boot bunkers at La Rochelle, in France.

      Later he was reassigned to the Ostfront, where he was taken prisoner. He and five other officers escaped, of course heading westward to rejoin their lines, some 250 km distant. On their first leg, they lost one member swimming across a river.

      They only moved at night and commandeered a small farmstead one morning. They were lucky, since that family led them during the following evening, after dark, and passed them off to another family. Additional families, obviously deemed safe by those handing them off, finally returned them to German lines.

      Ironically, the most dangerous situation arose while trying to re-enter the German lines without getting shot in the dark. Their main body was guarded by two concentric rings of alert guards, who asked for a lot of information only known to German soldiers.

      The outer guard instructed them to embed a certain brief German word in their shouted reply, which would disclose that they were trying to gain entry while held at gunpoint by Red Army soldiers.

      In addition to being anecdotal, my comment demonstrates, that these rural Russian groups knew of each other some distance away, and their preparedness to help, while harboring no illusions about the results if caught.

      It’s also reasonable to infer, that these groups existed at a full 360 degrees.

      Being so well versed, you will know the history of the Brandenburger Division, entirely composed of German fluent Russian speakers, dressed in Red Army uniforms, causing havoc well behind Soviet lines. Similar to those German units dressed in US uniforms during the belated Ardennes Offensive.

      • Peter
        Peter says:

        Thanks for your comment Charles. Actually, I didn’t know about the Brandenburger Division. I like anecdotal stories because they help confirm that something I read was true. I suspect many Soviets paid with their lives during and after the war for helping German soldiers. I think the Russians you describe in your comment knew they were doing something very dangerous. I probably would not know of La Rochelle either except that it is in the popular U-Boat movie “Das Boot” which is supposed to be truthful movie.

  10. Jeffdebruges
    Jeffdebruges says:

    France: A poll was released this week on mainstream media (you should have seen the face of the anchor) , 52% of French people support Russia, despite the censorhip, removal of Russian media and the non-stop hate propaganda against Russia. The French are less stupid than others it seems,… Also anti NATO protests took place in Marseille last week.

    Presidential elections will take place on 10th of April. Of course, rothschild puppet macron will try to rig the vote like biden did in the USA, but he has serious troubles including an alleged murder ordered by him and his “wife” (a transsexual) against an investigator who was about to spill the beans on the fact that “Brigitte” Macron is in fact a dude, called Jean-Michel Trogneux.

    Check this on Twitter and you’ll get the picture: #IsabelleFerreira (murdered) –
    #BrigitteGate – #JeanMichelTrogneux

    It’s not the only scandal. Check that: #McKinseyGate (tax evasion, fraud, bribes, macron is heavily involved)

    And that: #RothschildGate (much more serious for him as it involves fiscal evasion, millions ofn offshore accounts, bribes, and fraud)

    And that: #AlstomGate (again fraud)

    There is no way that the most hated president of all times, that the french want to sack since 5 years can be reelected without cheating the vote…

    If he loses and people like Lepen or Zemmour win, then Russia will have a new ally.

    • charles frey
      charles frey says:

      Thanks. A most valuable comment/contribution to fill in one’s panorama.

      Decades ago I read, that the heads of the French government were given a plain sheet of paper, merely with a number of names listed. No originator, no date, no addressee.

      A mere checkmark behind a listed name would assure that individual’s assassination.

      What I read may have been involved with the attempt on de Gaulle.

Comments are closed.