Print this post Print this post

Kevin Strom on Russia & Ukraine

prank4,311 words

Translations: Polish, Russian

Kevin Strom is one of White Nationalism’s best writers. I seldom disagree with his work, and even when I do, I find it highly valuable as a clear synthesis and statement of beliefs I oppose. A case in point is his August 16, 2014 American Dissident Voices podcast “Jewish Aggression,” Part 2, on the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.

Strom seeks to reduce the Ukraine crisis to a conflict between international Jewry and a Jew-wise Russia. To argue this thesis, Strom dismisses other actors and motives on the Ukrainian side and offers a false picture of the relationship between Russia and Jewry.

Strom begins, “In order to weaken Russia, and eventually install a pro-Jewish government there, the Jewish/US axis has engineered a coup d’etat in Ukraine.” This is wrong on three counts:

  1. The United States and Jewry did not “engineer” the Maidan protests that led to the fall of Viktor Yanukovych’s government. The initial small protests on the Maidan against Yanukovych’s policies attracted little attention. But when they were brutally dispersed by police, Ukrainians of all political convictions, from far Left to far Right, gathered to protest police brutality and generalized corruption, and the protests grew into a revolution. The Maidan protests were not initially or primarily pro-EU or anti-Russian. They were against Yanukovych’s corruption and lawlessness and for honest government.
  2. Once the Maidan protests were underway, the US government and other Jewish-dominated organizations tried to shape the outcome. But it is simply untrue to say that they “engineered” them.
  3. Beyond that, it is false to claim that Yanukovych was ousted by a coup d’etat.  In truth, as the death tolls mounted, he lost his nerve and fled the capital. Describing Yankovych’s fall as a “coup” and the interim government that followed him as a “junta” is just lying Russian propaganda that should not be used by discerning individuals.

Strom continues:

Russians have historically been among the most Jew-aware people on Earth. A century ago the Imperial Russian government set many restrictions on Jewish activity there to prevent the exploitation of its citizens.  When that government was overthrown and Russia was converted into the Soviet Union by the Jewish-dominated Bolsheviks in 1917, a period of overt Jewish rule took place in which millions of the best men and women in Russia were killed, imprisoned, and had their property stolen. Under Communism, “anti-Semitism” was a capital offense.

When a non-Jew, Stalin, evidently an even more vicious player of power politics than his Jewish “comrades,” took control, he distrusted the tribally-focused Jews and proceeded to systematically reduce their power, killing quite a few of them in the process. When faced with the German invasion in 1942, and realizing that more than a few Russians and Ukrainians (Ukraine was then a part of the Soviet Union) were welcoming the Germans as liberators, Stalin ditched much of the Communist party line and embraced Russian nationalism. As a result the post-war Soviet Union became less and less Jewish-controlled and more and more under the control of Russian nationalists. Despite still paying lip service to Marxism, by the 1960s Russian leaders were openly opposed to Zionism, and Jews, no longer favored, were queuing up by the thousands to leave the country. . . .

This is a very misleading picture which conceals the fact that Jews have always been a privileged people in Russia. They were privileged under the Tsars. They were privileged under Stalin and the post-Stalin Soviet regime. And they are privileged under Putin. One has to treat Jewish claims of Russian anti-Semitism very skeptically, since Jews are hardly scrupulous in throwing that epithet around.

According to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s Two Hundred Years Together — ably and extensively reviewed by F. Roger Devlin here and here — there were practically no Jews in Russia until the partitions of Poland in 1772, 1793, and 1795, which brought Russia vast territories overlapping today’s Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, and Belarus. The partitions took place during the reign of Catherine the Great, who set the foundations of subsequent imperial Jewish policies.

From the start, Jews were free subjects of an empire in which most whites were serfs. (Serfdom was only abolished in 1861.) In 1785, Jewish communities were granted self-government. In 1786, public offices were opened to Jews.

In 1790, merchants in Moscow petitioned the Empress for relief from Jewish competition, which was granted in Russia proper, laying the foundations of the Pale of Settlement, which encompassed the former Polish-Lithuanian territories, plus “New Russia,” i.e., Ukrainian territories conquered by Catherine the Great from the Turks.

Although Russians were protected from Jewish competition by the Pale, the relationship was reciprocal: Jews within the Pale were protected from Russian economic competition. In short, the Pale of Settlement was a vast area given to Jews for unlimited and ruthless economic exploitation of whites, leading to massive poverty and misery.

If Jews were a privileged people in Imperial Russia, whence the perennial kvetching about Russian anti-Semitism? Simple: Jews did not think they were privileged enough. They wanted to exploit the whole of the Russian Empire, which they duly seized during the Bolshevik revolution.

Given the overwhelmingly Jewish nature of Bolshevism, when Stalin purged the party, he of necessity purged many Jews who opposed him. After the foundation of Israel, Stalin purged Jews for Zionist tendencies. But Jews who did not oppose Stalin were not purged and indeed enjoyed positions of power and trust throughout his regime.

For example, the Ukrainian-born Jew Lazar Kaganovich, one of history’s great butchers, was the architect of the Ukrainian famine and the Gulag. He enjoyed Stalin’s confidence to the very end. He may have had a hand in Stalin’s death. It is even claimed that Stalin married a shadowy Kaganovich sister named Rosa. After Stalin’s death, Kaganovich remained on the Politburo until 1957, when he tried to engineer a party coup against Khrushchev. In 1961, he entered an evidently comfortable and secure retirement and died at the age of 97, just after the fall of Communism.

If Jews were a privileged people under Stalin, what is the basis of claims of Stalinist anti-Semitism? Again, Jews simply felt that they were not privileged enough. Also, Jews propagate the idea of Soviet anti-Semitism to obfuscate the overwhelming Jewish culpability in the crimes of communism. Finally, Stalin may not have hated Jews as such, but many Jews hated Stalin, and that is sufficient ground to be called an anti-Semite

After Stalin, Jews remained a privileged people as well. After all, what other group could emigrate en masse from Russia?

Under Putin today, Jews remain a privileged group. Yes, when Putin came to power, he redistributed some of the ill-gotten wealth of largely Jewish oligarchs, and some of the oligarchs have predictably squealed about anti-Semitism. But Putin’s policies were certainly not anti-Semitic per se, as a new crop of Jewish oligarchs has emerged under Putin’s tenure.

Russian President Vladimir Putin visits Israel

Even Strom admits that “Putin speaks highly of Jews and disparagingly of anti-Semitism, though he keeps some pet Jews (with no trace of real power) in his circles [Who are these Jews, and how does Strom know they have no real power? Does one appease people who have no “real power”?], and though he has outlawed ‘extremism’ as a versatile way of cementing his rule . . .” But Strom has convinced himself that Putin doesn’t really mean it. Because Putin acted against some Jews, Strom is convinced that he really opposes all Jews as Jews.

putinwailingwall

Strom claims that the aim of the “Jewish/US axis” is “to weaken Russia, and eventually install a pro-Jewish government there” and “the Jewish power structure is most anxious that Russia be surrounded, its government overthrown, and a new ‘democracy’ installed there.” But this does not hold water, since there is already a pro-Jewish government in Moscow. As far as Russian Jews are concerned, Putin is quite pro-Jewish. There are Jews on the American side, Jews on the Russian side, and Jews on the Ukrainian side of this conflict. No matter what the outcome, Jews are positioned to benefit. This is one meaning of Jewish hegemony. But it also means that the events in Ukraine cannot be reduced to a simple “Jews versus Russia” opposition.

Strom has also convinced himself that Putin’s foreign policy is based not on calculations of Russia’s national interests, but on a desire to combat international Jewry:

. . . in the last few years, every time the US/Israeli warmongers were attempting to start another war in the Middle East — first in Iran and then in Syria — Vladimir Putin checkmated them. For these things, the Jews cannot forgive him. They are very worried about a resurgent, nuclear-armed, and Jew-aware Russia — and any alliances she may build in an increasingly Jew-aware world.

Putin’s policies certainly irritate the Israelis. They irritate American neoconservatives. And they irritate the broader American Jewish community, which harbors extremely irrational anti-Russian hatreds going back to the 19th century. But Putin’s policies are not directed at Jews as such. Instead, Putin regards the United States as his primary adversary, Israel as a US client, and international Jewry as a divided community whose favors he ardently seeks to woo.

Strom has even convinced himself that Putin might not really mean it when he says he is fighting against “fascism” in Ukraine, or that by being a good nationalist, he is effectively a fascist, even if he denies it:

Vladimir Putin, whatever he may believe personally, is forced by political necessity to praise the “heroic Soviet soldiers” who “saved the Motherland from Hitler.” Russia has quite as many “my country is always right” patriots as does America, where the fighters in the “good war” (which wasn’t good at all) must be praised in Politically Correct terms by all politicians or those politicians will face political suicide. Putin therefore presents himself as (and may even believe himself to be) an “anti-Fascist” even while he pursues essentially nationalist policies, simply because those are the policies that are objectively good for Russia, even going so far as to decry the low White birthrate and implement laws designed to increase it.

Putin has adopted a range of sensible policies, but the fact that he is committed to maintaining Russia as a multiracial, multicultural empire means that all these sound policies actually work against the racial interests of Russian whites, who suffer from catastrophically low fertility and are being outbred by Muslims from the Caucasus and Orientals in the East. (Incentives to raise birthrates will not help if they are applied equally to more fertile non-Russians as well.)

Putin’s form of conservative, race-blind, Jew-friendly civic nationalism is actually the worst case scenario for whites, since it places an essentially anti-white system on firmer political and economic foundations, which will allow its anti-white, ethnocidal trends to proceed more efficiently until Russia’s white population is biologically beyond recall. But Putin doesn’t think this way, because he is not a “fascist,” i.e., a racial nationalist — not even an “implicit” one.

Thus when Putin claims that he is battling against fascism and anti-Semitism in Ukraine, he really means it. And, as a “fascist” and anti-Semite, Strom needs to take him at his word. Vladimir Putin is not our “secret friend.”

What does Strom have to say about the real “fascists” and anti-Semites in the Ukraine crisis, namely the political party Svoboda (Freedom) and its radical break-away group Right Sector?

Since late last year, the Jewish power structure, through its puppet, the United States, was trying to overthrow the legitimate elected government of Ukraine [This reads like Russian boilerplate. Since when does the National Alliance recognize elections as legitimating anything?], which had taken a position of moderate and positive engagement with Russia [a rather delicate description of Yanukovych selling his country’s alignment to the highest bidder]. Hundreds of millions of US taxpayer dollars were expended to recruit a group of supposedly “right wing fascist” mercenaries [Is Strom asserting that the US created and/or pays and/or controls Right Sector? What is the proof?], who were carefully watched at all times by Jewish and US intelligence operatives [Sounds like a likely deduction being passed off as fact], since they were not entirely trusted. These groups were politically and philosophically descended from the Ukrainians who joined the German forces in World War 2 to liberate their country from Communism. [And should thus have Strom’s default sympathy.] The understanding of the members of these groups ranged from full awareness that the Jews were responsible for the historical starvation and enslavement of Ukrainians — to jingoistic petty nationalists who blamed everything on “Russians.” Frustrated by political impotence [Svoboda has actual elected officials] and long-fooled by American anti-Communist rhetoric [or perhaps merely alarmed by Russia’s paeans to the glories of Stalininsm], they were ripe for exploitation. These mercenaries were provided with weapons and other military hardware. They provided much of the “muscle” for the overthrow of Ukraine’s president Viktor Yanukovych last February.

. . .

The naive nationalists in Ukraine were fooled. They were tricked into fighting the wrong enemy. They were fooled by promises of support from their real enemy — the regime in Washington. They were fooled because they were petty nationalists, not racial-nationalists. I pray that some of them are racial-nationalists now. They were fooled — not unlike the way their grandfathers were fooled into thinking that the Russian foot soldiers who enforced the Jews’ orders to starve Ukraine were the real enemy. They didn’t see the big picture.

Strom wishes to argue that Jews, not Russians, are responsible for all the evils of Communism, thus Ukrainians who dislike and distrust Russians are being “petty” and deluded.

  1. This is contradicted by Strom’s own claim that during World War II “Stalin ditched much of the Communist party line and embraced Russian nationalism” in order to beat the Axis and regain control over Ukraine. If there really was a point that the USSR ceased being a recognizably Jewish regime and became a Russian nationalist regime instead, then why is it not reasonable for Ukrainians to resent specifically Russian domination?
  2. Moreover, Russian domination over Ukraine goes back to the 18th century, and Ukrainians remember that it was the Russians who created the Pale of Settlement, confirming and expanding Jewish exploitation in Ukrainian lands.
  3. Finally, Ukrainians have every reason to dislike and distrust Russians for their actions today. It is Russians who seized control of Crimea (a real coup), sending in Russian troops operating as partisans (without uniforms), and legitimating it with a farcical referendum which only offered two choices — Crimean independence or being absorbed by Russia — and then probably rigging the whole thing, just to be sure. It is Russians who have incited unrest in Eastern Ukraine, providing troops and weapons to separatists (and lying about it all the while), leading to the needless deaths of thousands.

As for Svoboda and Right Sector, they are not perfect, but in terms of their ideological roots, principles, and goals, they are Jew-wise racial nationalists. Yet Strom is willing to make excuses for what he assures us are Putin’s merely strategic nods to Jewish power and Russian petty nationalism, but he is unwilling to accord Svoboda and Right Sector similar courtesies.

It means nothing to Strom that Putin puts a beanie on and prayerfully presses his hand to the Wailing Wall like every other white leader. “We can trust Vlad,” Strom whispers assuringly, “because he’s just lying to the Jews and the Russians.” But if the leader of Svoboda — an actual member of the interim government — meets with John McCain, or if the leader of Right Sector engages in some wink-wink, nudge-nudge to calm the local Jews, Strom intuits treason in their hearts.

Why the double standard? Why the indulgence for Putin and jaundice toward Ukrainian White Nationalists?

Even as Russia claims to be fighting against anti-Semitism in Ukraine, pro-Russian propagandists seem anxious to sway foreign anti-Semites to their side by making a great deal of the Jews involved in the Ukrainian interim government, the subsequently elected government, and the outside parties that have tried to shape the Ukrainian Revolution.

For instance, Volodymyr Groysman is a deputy prime minister, and Ihor Kolomoisky is governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region. Both of them are Jews. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of casual dishonesty among anti-Semites, which leads to many false accusations. For instance, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, President Petro Poroshenko, and Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko have all been called Jews, but no firm evidence has been offered for these claims. (If Klitschko is a Jew, it is rather odd he named one of his sons after Max Schmeling.) American Jewish neocon Victoria Nuland — whom anti-Semites tiresomely refer to by her family’s original German name Nudelman, as if it were somehow more “Jewish” than Nuland — was on the scene and certainly up to no good during the Maidan protests.

But what does this all mean? The Maidan Revolution was made by a wide coalition of groups, including Ukrainian White Nationalists, and the subsequent governments have reflected the different strands of this coalition. Yet pro-Russian/anti-Ukraine propaganda treats the involvement of Jews as revealing the essence of the Ukrainian regime. They refer to the government as “Jewish,” tout court, and shamelessly slander Ukrainian White Nationalists as Jewish puppets, stooges, and collaborators.

But the involvement of Jews in the Putin regime is treated as accidental and negligible. Strom assures us that they are mere “pets” with “no trace of real power.” It is hard to judge such claims, of course, because Strom does not name names. Using English, French, and German sources, it is actually quite difficult to discover the ethnicity of many of Putin’s ministers, which itself is suspicious. But two are explicitly identified as Jews even by Wikipedia: Igor Levitin (Transportation Minister, 2004–2012) and Mikhail Fradkov (Director of Foreign Intelligence from 2007 on). Director of Foreign Intelligence is certainly not a position with “no trace of real power.” You can be assured if Ukraine had a Jewish Director of Foreign Intelligence or Transportation Minister, we would never hear the end of it.

Again, why the double standard? If there are Jews on both sides of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, why does the presence of Jews in the Ukrainian government prove that is is “Jewish” while the presence of Jews in the Russian government apparently means nothing at all (lest it undermine the false narrative that Russia is “Jew-wise” and working to counter international Jewry)?

The fact-fudging rush to brand the Ukrainian government “Jewish” aims to obscure the true nature of the Ukrainian situation, namely, that Ukraine has a parliamentary system with a number of different parties, in which common aims and enemies can lead to unlikely coalitions. Most importantly, it seeks to obscure the fact that the Ukrainian Revolution is by no means over. The situation in Ukraine is fluid and developing. It is too soon to say that Ukraine will be sucked into NATO and the EU, that it will lose its independence to the West, that it will be flooded with non-white immigrants and asylum seekers, etc. Certainly not if Ukrainian nationalists have anything to say about it.

Unfortunately, ongoing Russian intervention has pushed Ukraine closer to the West, caused the various parties to set aside their differences to pose a united front, and disproportionately absorbed the energies of the nationalists. But when the insurgency in the East is over, then the nationalist struggle for an independent Ukrainian third way will resume. In the meantime, it is simply intellectually dishonest to pretend that one already knows the outcome.

But let’s grant, for the sake of argument, that in the end, the nationalists will lose and Ukraine will become absorbed by the West. Is it really the position of Strom and other Russia apologists that Svoboda and Right Sector should have never even tried? The Putin apologists claim that it is futile for Ukraine to ever seek national self-determination, that Ukraine is doomed either to be a Russian satellite or an American one. My question is: Do they think that nationalism is futile in all cases? Is it futile in France? Is it futile in Germany? In Denmark? In Sweden? Do they think that it is futile for Americans to try to build an alternative to the Democrat vs. Republican hegemony?

What kind of White Nationalists believe that White Nationalism is futile everywhere it is tried? Such people obviously are in no position to lead, so they should step down. Or, since they presumably believe that Russian nationalism, at least, is not futile, perhaps they should simply become full-time apologists for Russia. Unfortunately, some websites are already drifting in that direction.

Or do these White Nationalists believe that our cause is futile only in Ukraine? If so, why? The answer is obvious: because they are engaged in special-pleading for Russia. (Presumably they would say the same thing about Belarus, too, should that nation grow restive in Moscow’s shadow.)

So both options really reduce to the same shameful toadying for Russian petty imperialism under the delusional conviction that it is really a battle for all whites against America and international Jewry.

This delusion is the “big picture” that Strom thinks the Ukrainian nationalists have missed and that the whole world should see:

The big picture of Jewish power ranged against the freedom and self-determination of all peoples — and against the very survival of our race itself. That’s the reality of what’s happening in Ukraine — that’s the reality of what’s happening all around the world today, from Cleveland to Gaza to Stockholm to Vladivostok: the Jewish war against our freedom, against our future, and against our very existence. And showing our people that reality is our highest duty.

I agree fully with Strom’s general point that Jewish power is arrayed against the freedom and self-determination of all peoples, and this is the chief impediment to white survival. But that is not the battle in Ukraine today. Russia is not fighting against international Jewry. Putin is engaged in petty imperialist aggression against a former vassal state that wishes to assert its legitimate rights to freedom and self-determination.

Being an independent nation means being able to make decisions your neighbors dislike. Respecting the independence of other nations is easy when they only make decisions that please you. The hard part is accepting decisions that displease you. And Russia consistently fails this test with the former Soviet Republics and Warsaw Pact nations. Even though around a quarter century has passed since communism in Europe began its implosion, the Russians have not mentally adjusted to the fact that they cannot boss their neighbors around.

Even more alarmingly, the Russians continue to identify themselves with the Soviet Union—even the regime of Stalin, one of the evilest men in human history—and this identification has been growing stronger, not weaker, with time. For instance, Russia angrily protests—and local Russians have actually rioted—whenever its former imperial subjects move, destroy, or deface Soviet-era monuments to the Red Army that brought slavery, torture, deportations, and death to their countrymen—or when they try to honor their countrymen who joined the Axis crusade against communism. Thus it is somewhat beside the point to blame Jews for the crimes of communism when today’s Russians are happy to claim them. In truth, all the efforts of George Soros and the US government pale by comparison to Russia’s ongoing NATO recruitment drive.

Thus I completely sympathize with the desire of Russia’s neighbors to enter NATO. They would be fools not to. Every nation must worry about securing its basic sovereignty before it can turn its attention to remoter dangers and larger civilizational issues, and Russia’s former dominions are right to see her as the primary threat.

If Russia did not want NATO extended to her borders, she should have been a better neighbor. But it is never too late to start.

Moreover, NATO expansion is not a threat to Russia’s sovereignty and legitimate interests. It is arrant nonsense for Strom to claim — and here he is just following standard Russian propaganda — that the purpose of the “coup” in Ukraine is “to encircle and conquer Russia.” Russia has the second largest nuclear arsenal on the planet, which is enough to deter any conquest. The claim that Russia is in danger of conquest is no more credible than the Jewish claim that “another holocaust” is around the corner if Jews do not get their way – as if Israel’s mountain of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons were not a sufficient deterrent either.

It would be wonderful if a powerful nation like Russia really were fighting international Jewry and its minions in the name of the self-determination of all peoples. But that is not the case. Strom’s account of the Ukraine-Russia crisis is a tissue of delusions and distortions. But I do not wish to pick on Kevin Strom, who is merely expressing views that are widely held in the White Nationalist community due to intense Russian propaganda efforts. (We should be flattered, I guess, that they think us worthy of deceiving.) I have chosen to respond to Strom in particular simply because of the virtues of his argument: as always, he states his views clearly and compellingly. But in this case, he fails to convince.

Further Reading on Counter-Currents

My Writings:

Greg Johnson, “The Ukraine Crisis” (Translations: CzechSpanish)

Greg Johnson, “The Ukraine Crisis: Taking Our Own Side

Greg Johnson, “What We Don’t Know About Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 . . .” (Czech translation here)

Other Authors:

Kerry Bolton, “Geopolitics and Oligarchy in the Ukraine Crisis” (Czech translation here)

Émile Durand, “White Nationalist Delusions about Russia” (German translation here)

Émile Durand, “The Crimea Annexation: Putin Profits from Stalin’s Crimes

Émile Durand, “Look to Ukraine

Émile Durand, “On Russia, Ukraine, and Honor

Guillaume Faye, “Ukraine: Understanding the Russian Position

Guillaume Faye, “On the Russian Annexation of Crimea” (Czech translation here)

Fria Tider, “Swede Patrols Ukraine’s Streets with Right-Wing Militia

Andrew Hamilton, “Russia, Ukraine, and White Nationalism

Collin Liddell, “Vladimir Putin and the Sane Man Theory” (Czech translation here)

Collin Liddell, “False Flags and Dull Facts

Leo Yankevich, “A Hundred Since the First

 

If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

59 Comments

  1. Bronislav Lokotsky
    Posted September 19, 2015 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    I am really a clueless newbie about this website and, in particular, the written and unwritten rules about comments. I don’t know what your policies concerning outside links are. I also am aware that this is a “dated” article by now, and the last comment is September 5, 2014. Apologies if I am doing something awkward or bad. By the way, I don’t think “Preview” here is too robust :). I tried it in Torbrowser, Firefox (Linux), and then Firefox with completely pristine new profile without any extensions or non-standard settings. It kept displaying “TEST” below this input box (where, I suppose, preview is supposed to appear). I smell some buggy code.

    Anyway, I’ve created a text on somewhat the same topic (or close) and posted it here: Jews in the Ukraine-Russia conflict. A recap and “connecting the dots”. (- Stormfront.org) In a way, it can be seen as an “extended comment” on what is discussed in the article here. Kudos to the author for being one of the rare Western authors asking these “inconvenient questions”. My text above is a recap on what may have become, by now, sort of “boring” and “old” topic for many. And, its general gist and conclusion surely aren’t anything groundbreaking, in regard to what the author of this article has already figured out. But, I hope it might contain some input on the topic and some facts that are not mentioned in, for example, this text. So, with hope that it might be at least of some use in further research (into Russia / Ukraine / Jewish Question), and, maybe, to some future texts from Greg Johnson, I leave it here. I surely did enjoy reading this article and several other related texts on this website.

  2. Fynn
    Posted September 5, 2014 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    Why do some WNs want to cut Russia some slack? Part of the reason probably revolves around the belief that Russia can be an independent actor, because of its nukes and missiles. Independent of the Jew World Order in the west, that is. Political entities without satellites and satellites guided missiles which have fundamental political differences with the U.S. political establishment are likely to attract satellite guided missiles. So the possibility of a Big Brother dystopia in the west is ameliorated by other potential sources of power in the world – be it Russia or China – although as of now most WNs in the west would prefer to live under the devil they know.

    Considering their shared history, no doubt Ukraine has legitimate grievances against Russia. But since the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine has had a go at multiparty democracy and the people who have risen to power have hardly been Ukraine’s finest sons. Or daughters in the case of the woman with the braided hair whose statements leave her at odds with reality. So part of the problem is Ukrainian “democracy” which has not put the country on a footing towards freedom and prosperity. Then there is the urge to look for a scapegoat (Russia) and a savior (NATO). If in 10 years, in spite of Nuland’s billions, things aren’t much better, Russia may become the saviour and NATO the scapegoat.

    But the neocon’s animosity towards Putin truly demonstrates an impatience and paranoia with anybody who is not in their orbit. Once Putin is gone, considering the system he has set up, Russia is likely to gravitate towards the west’s orbit, but the neocons can’t wait.

  3. Greg Johnson
    Posted September 5, 2014 at 2:00 am | Permalink

    I have added about 900 words to the article above. So you don’t have to re-read the whole thing, I am posting them here:

    Even as Russia claims to be fighting against anti-Semitism in Ukraine, pro-Russian propagandists seem anxious to sway foreign anti-Semites to their side by making a great deal of the Jews involved in the Ukrainian interim government, the subsequently elected government, and the outside parties that have tried to shape the Ukrainian Revolution.

    For instance, Volodymyr Groysman is a deputy prime minister, and Ihor Kolomoisky is governor of the Dnipropetrovsk region. Both of them are Jews. Unfortunately, there is a great deal of casual dishonesty among anti-Semites, which leads to many false accusations. For instance, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, President Petro Poroshenko, and Kiev Mayor Vitaly Klitschko have all been called Jews, but no firm evidence has been offered for these claims. (If Klitschko is a Jew, it is rather odd he named one of his sons after Max Schmeling.) American Jewish neocon Victoria Nuland — whom anti-Semites tiresomely refer to by her family’s original German name Nudelman, as if it were somehow more “Jewish” than Nuland — was on the scene and certainly up to no good during the Maidan protests.

    But what does this all mean? The Maidan Revolution was made by a wide coalition of groups, including Ukrainian White Nationalists, and the subsequent governments have reflected the different strands of this coalition. Yet pro-Russian/anti-Ukraine propaganda treats the involvement of Jews as revealing the essence of the Ukrainian regime. They refer to the government as “Jewish,” tout court, and shamelessly slander Ukrainian White Nationalists as Jewish puppets, stooges, and collaborators.

    But the involvement of Jews in the Putin regime is treated as accidental and negligible. Strom assures us that they are mere “pets” with “no trace of real power.” It is hard to judge such claims, of course, because Strom does not name names. Using English, French, and German sources, it is actually quite difficult to discover the ethnicity of many of Putin’s ministers, which itself is suspicious. But two are explicitly identified as Jews even by Wikipedia: Igor Levitin (Transportation Minister, 2004–2012) and Mikhail Fradkov (Director of Foreign Intelligence from 2007 on). Director of Foreign Intelligence is certainly not a position with “no trace of real power.” You can be assured if Ukraine had a Jewish Director of Foreign Intelligence or Transportation Minister, we would never hear the end of it.

    Again, why the double standard? If there are Jews on both sides of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, why does the presence of Jews in the Ukrainian government prove that is is “Jewish” while the presence of Jews in the Russian government apparently means nothing at all (lest it undermine the false narrative that Russia is “Jew-wise” and working to counter international Jewry)?

    The fact-fudging rush to brand the Ukrainian government “Jewish” aims to obscure the true nature of the Ukrainian situation, namely, that Ukraine has a parliamentary system with a number of different parties, in which common aims and enemies can lead to unlikely coalitions. Most importantly, it seeks to obscure the fact that the Ukrainian Revolution is by no means over. The situation in Ukraine is fluid and developing. It is too soon to say that Ukraine will be sucked into NATO and the EU, that it will lose its independence to the West, that it will be flooded with non-white immigrants and asylum seekers, etc. Certainly not if Ukrainian nationalists have anything to say about it.

    Unfortunately, ongoing Russian intervention has pushed Ukraine closer to the West, caused the various parties to set aside their differences to pose a united front, and disproportionately absorbed the energies of the nationalists. But when the insurgency in the East is over, then the nationalist struggle for an independent Ukrainian third way will resume. In the meantime, it is simply intellectually dishonest to pretend that one already knows the outcome.

    But let’s grant, for the sake of argument, that in the end, the nationalists will lose and Ukraine will become absorbed by the West. Is it really the position of Strom and other Russia apologists that Svoboda and Right Sector should have never even tried? The Putin apologists claim that it is futile for Ukraine to ever seek national self-determination, that Ukraine is doomed either to be a Russian satellite or an American one. My question is: Do they think that nationalism is futile in all cases? Is it futile in France? Is it futile in Germany? In Denmark? In Sweden? Do they think that it is futile for Americans to try to build an alternative to the Democrat vs. Republican hegemony?

    What kind of White Nationalists believe that White Nationalism is futile everywhere it is tried? Such people obviously are in no position to lead, so they should step down. Or, since they presumably believe that Russian nationalism, at least, is not futile, perhaps they should simply become full-time apologists for Russia. Unfortunately, some websites are already drifting in that direction.

    Or do these White Nationalists believe that our cause is futile only in Ukraine? If so, why? The answer is obvious: because they are engaged in special-pleading for Russia. (Presumably they would say the same thing about Belarus, too, should that nation grow restive in Moscow’s shadow.)

    So both options really reduce to the same shameful toadying for Russian petty imperialism under the delusional conviction that it is really a battle for all whites against America and international Jewry.

    • Alexander
      Posted September 5, 2014 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

      The fight for an independent nationalist Ukraine might not be futile in the long run, but I do not think that is what is being said (or meant) here. However, to believe that an independent nationalist Ukraine is possible *today* is a delusion.

      Just like white nationalism isn’t (can’t be) futile in the west today, staging a coup to set up a pro-white regime in the US or Sweden is definitely only a fantasy. One must always work towards one’s goals, but that doesn’t mean that it is right or good to make hasty actions that can only result in something equal or worse.

      Do the right thing, at the right moment.

  4. Lorenz Kraus
    Posted September 4, 2014 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

    “Even more alarmingly, the Russians continue to identify themselves with the Soviet Union—even the regime of Stalin, one of the evilest men in human history—and this identification has been growing stronger, not weaker, with time.”

    That always bothered me about Russia. What’s the deal with that? To worship your murderer can’t be more insane.

  5. Ruuben
    Posted September 4, 2014 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    Thank you for this article, mr Johnson! As an Estonian nationalist, it is always painful to read Western nationalists – who I consider my ideological allies – support for Russian attempts to intervene in other countries’ internal affairs. They often seem to be tuned on that wave simply because of Western media’s hostility towards Putin. However the same Western media is just as hostile towards Estonian nationalists, when we honor the memory of our ancestors who tried to defend Estonia and whole Europe against communist invasion. At least my nation is used to being between two fires from East and from West, as has been the case during most of our recorded history.

    • Bruce
      Posted September 4, 2014 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

      It is amazing how you Eastern Europeans are so afraid of Russia meddling in your internal affairs but are perfectly happy to let the EU and America interfere in far more nefarious ways than Russia would. Ukraine is a perfect example, with the pro-EU government now getting ready to implement a brutal program of austerity whereas Russia demanded no such thing for its support.

      The Russian minorities foisted on you by the USSR are certainly a problem, but just wait until you get some Africans, Pakistanis, Turks, and other Muslim groups for whom mass rape of white children is a favored pastime. Rest assured you will have them soon. You will have all of your young productive people forced to immigrate to the Western countries for work, while austerity, gay marriage and multiculturalism wreck what is left of your homeland. All courtesy of the EU and USA. The sad fact being that the one geopolitical force that may have protected you from this was horrible, barbarous, Russia.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted September 4, 2014 at 10:22 pm | Permalink

        When you deal with problems, which ones do you deal with first? The immediate and urgent and real problems, or the possible and remote ones? Things that are problems now, or things that have not happened yet?

      • Ruuben
        Posted September 6, 2014 at 7:06 pm | Permalink

        We aren’t happy to let EU and America interfere in our country either, as far as nationalists are concerned. But multiculturalism and gay marriage can be fended off when we will have a nationalist government. If a country actually decides to stand up for its rights inside Europe, Brussels is powerless (see Danish immigration policy, Hungarian new constitution, Lithuanian laws against gay propaganda). The same cannot be said about Russia, a country that is willing to eventually use military force if another country resists Russian demands to give Soviet-time immigrants special privileges.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 5, 2014 at 3:50 am | Permalink

      Thanks. I have made many friends in Eastern and Central Europe in recent months by questioning Western delusions about Russia and Putin.

  6. W.F. Mueller
    Posted September 3, 2014 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    The points addressed by Mr. Johnson are highly relevant and often overlooked by White Nationalists taken in by Putin’s image. Just because Putin angers the Western plutocracy does not make him an automatic ally.

    1) Whether Ukraine is a ‘fabricated’ country is not relevant. Our very nature seeks to overturn and reshape boundaries.

    2) Whether Svoboda/Right Sector find themselves in the middle of a situation the United States is trying to take advantage of is also completely irrelevant. Even if the revolt was fueled with Western money, we would expect nationalists to try and take over the situation. They offered a good example to us when they crushed the opposition and domination Maidan.

    3) Whether one thinks Russia will win in the end is also irrelevant.

    What *is* relevant is Ukraine is one of only two other European countries, those being Greece and Hungary, that have self-avowed ethnic nationalists in government positions. Only in Ukraine they have tremendously more influence and, like Golden Dawn, they are National Socialists in everything but name. Thus we should wish them well against multi-ethnic empire, be it Russian or American.

    Regarding Stalin’s anti-Jewish program, one good clue is included in the link below. This shows the decline of Jewish influence in the NKVD during the Great Purge and these open positions filled with Russians and Ukranians. The biggest clue that this is Stalin’s hand at work is the dramatic rise of Georgians. (Kaganovich was an exception to the rule)
    http://codoh.com/library/document/1722/

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 3, 2014 at 1:36 pm | Permalink

      Thanks for this comment.

      The arguments that Ukraine is somehow not a real country remind me of the Israeli claims that Palestinians aren’t a real people. I don’t believe in the social construction of reality, but I do believe in the social construction of society. And if a people think they are a people, they are a people.

      That said, from the beginning, I have held that Ukraine could benefit from altering its borders and population toward greater homogeneity. That is a very hard thing to contemplate for most countries, and I think that the Russian seizure of Crimea and support/encouragement for separatists in the East now makes that politically impossible.

      I hope that the separatists are defeated as soon as possible, the border is secured, and the nationalists can turn their attention toward Kiev. But as long as the Russians are operating in the East, Ukraine is not going to be able to turn its energies toward fundamental reforms.

    • Alexander
      Posted September 3, 2014 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

      “What *is* relevant is Ukraine is one of only two other European countries, those being Greece and Hungary, that have self-avowed ethnic nationalists in government positions. Only in Ukraine they have tremendously more influence and, like Golden Dawn, they are National Socialists in everything but name. Thus we should wish them well against multi-ethnic empire, be it Russian or American.”

      This is simply not true. First of all, Svoboda is not an ethnic (racial) nationalist party. They are cultural and linguistic nationalists. It is misleading to compare them to racial nationalists like Golden Dawn.

      Second, their influence is not all that great. They had an impressive presence during the protests, but this did not show when the presidential election came around.

  7. eyeslevel
    Posted September 3, 2014 at 10:28 am | Permalink

    Putin is a Russian imperialist, not a Russian nationalist. He uses and abuses ethnic Russians to whatever extent he has to to maintain and expand the empire. He appears to have the same attitude toward Jews. He thinks he can use them. Stalin probably felt that way until they poisoned him.
    Jews are good at subversion and many groups think they can use Jews in their Byzantine power schemes.

  8. Matthew
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 11:01 pm | Permalink

    ” the Russians have not mentally adjusted to the fact that they cannot boss their neighbors around.”

    The reason Russians have not made this adjustment yet is because it’s neighbors do not possess the strength to bloody Russia’s nose yet.

    These are Tartar/Asiatics we’re talking about, they have much less respect for abstract liberal principles of self-determination than even we White people feign.

    But I hope these little Eastern European nations gain some strength back, for example the Finns and Lithuanians, they were fierce fighters against the USSR during WWII. Or the most recent and unfortunate case of the Serbians, bombed by their ignorant American brethren!

    These people once set a very inspiring example. It’s the Europeans on the Easternmost border whom I have the most respect for, time and again they fought the bloodiest battles against our Asiatic enemies pouring in from the East. While the Western Europeans had it comparatively easier, freeing them up to build empires and discover Newtonian physics.

    Of course during WWII Germany demonstrated an altruistic devotion to do its part in the heavy lifting by fighting the USSR. Sieg Heil.

  9. Cortesar
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    It is hard to believe that there are some who do not (or do not want) to see the obvious, namely that the whole Ukrainian uprising and the consequent war is entirely of NeoCon-Jewish making
    – There is Noland bragging about for investing 5 billions
    into destabilizing Ukraine
    (Just consider the timing of the uprising during, Sochi Olympic games when the Putin hands were tied)
    – There is another hacked phone conversation in which she annointed “Yac” as a future prime minister of “new independent” Ukrainian government before anyone outside Ukraine even knew who he was
    All key positions in the new Ukrainian government are held by Jews including the presidential one
    – Extremely well synchronized and aggressive propaganda against Putin and Russia in American Jewish controlled media

    What is the end game?
    To me it seems obvious: to weaken Russia and in the best of scenarios get rid of Putin
    Two years from know when new American President is sworn we will see a major new effort
    from Zionist ne0-cons designed to push America into the war with Iran and possibly with Syria
    By that time they want see Russia, isolated, weakened and unable to do anything to prevent this scenario (unlike the most recent one when Putin practically stopped the attack on Syria)
    The ultimate goal is off course to take power in Russia as they did in USA (and in Russia during Yeltsin years and after 1917 revolution)
    Jewish neo-cons will not stop until the whole middle east is in flames and destroyed
    Plan was set in motion I believe in 1998 and it has been executed ever since
    Americans with their blood and money need to destroy any country in the middle east which would represent any serious threat to Israel

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

      This is just a less articulate restatement of the views I reject above. You’ll have to do better than this.

  10. Ted Sallis
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 10:04 pm | Permalink

    From Ted Sallis’ EGI Notes:

    Time for Some Plain Speaking on Trad Vlad and Other Things

    Things that need to be said.

    As someone who recently criticized Strom’s pro-Putin broadcast, and has been an opponent of the “movement’s” pathetic blushing schoolgirl crush on bare-chested macho man Trad Vlad, I’ve noted the recent dust-up at Counter Currents over Greg Johnson’s more comprehensive critique of Strom and comments on the whole Russia/Ukraine mess.

    I side with Johnson in this instance (*). The whole thing is becoming ludicrous, a pathological form of unrequited love. The pro-Putin arguments are easily dismissed. We are told that Russia has always been multiracial, and that a “White supremacist” (sic) policy would destroy Russia. Can’t the same be said about America? With Amerindians and Negroes around since the very beginning, is America then to be identified with multiculturalism? Are American WNs delusional? If errors were made in the past, does this mean error must continue in the future? Does past multiracialism doom a nation and its majority population to ever-growing diversity and racial displacement? White Americans have the right to demand an ethnostate, regardless of whether this would destroy multiracial America; White Russians have that same right. Preservation of race trumps preservation of state. This also ignores the fact that Putin’s Eurasianist policies are making the problem worse – his ideals are actively working in favor of the Asianization of Russia. Putin is therefore no different from any aracial “conservative Republican” in the USA, who could justify mass immigration by citing America’s multiracial history. Of course, the ethnoracial core of America has always been European, with an Anglo-Saxon founding stock. Russia has always had a Slavic-Russian core, and that core is demographically endangered by Putin’s racial policies.

    Then we have the argument that Johnson is unfairly critiquing Putin because Trad Vlad is not “ideologically pure” – suggesting that the bare-chested macho man is practically pro-White, it’s just that he deviates from “ideological purity” from time to time. That’s nonsense – Putin is a dedicated anti-racist and anti-fascist (using fascism in its real historical sense, not merely as a modern-day expletive), he is an aracial conservative, a “civic nationalist” who doesn’t believe Russian ethnicity is a prerequisite for Russian nationalism. It’s not the case that he is merely a practical-minded ethnic nationalist – his regime actively persecutes real Russian ethnic nationalists. Putin is not on the other side of America. He’s part of the same multicultural global system. The US vs. Russia disagreement is NOT a fundamental disagreement over differing worldviews – it is instead more like the Democrat vs. Republican squabbling here in America: two entities that share the same basic worldview and similar overarching goals, but who are merely competing for the spoils, for power and prestige. It’s the “in-your-face” Western degenerate multiculturalism vs. the more restrained and implicit Russian multiculturalism. It’s arguable which is worse – possibly, the Russian form is more dangerous since it is more subtle and a less obvious enemy – to the point that WNs fall for the charade.

    Then we have the argument that Ukraine will never be independent, that Ukraine is a historical fiction, that we have to make a choice between an American/Jewish-dominated Ukraine and a Russian-dominated one. I’ll let the Ukrainians themselves defend their historical legitimacy as a people; however, I will note that this technique of delegitimizing a people’s identity is an approach often used by anti-racist globalists and multiculturalists. As regards realpolitik, it is true that the Ukrainian revolution, such as it is, has been compromised. I’ve previously said that WNs really don’t have a dog in this fight (as usual). Russians vs. Ukrainians fighting among themselves for two sets of multicultural masters is a tragedy. But – unlike the schoolgirls professing their love for Trad Vlad – I’m not singing paeans of praise for the Ukrainian government, and neither is Johnson. The issue goes beyond the immediate Russia vs. Ukraine issue – it gets to the heart of the stupidity and naivete of the “Old Movement” – the constant fixation on “the man on the white horse” (Nixon, Reagan, Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, Putin, etc.) who will “save us,” the constant delusions of seeing support where none exists, the poor judgment of embracing enemies as friends, and turning real friends into enemies. The schoolgirl crush on Putin is symptomatic of deeper problems within the “movement.”

    Then we have the “he’s against the Jews” argument. I’m not even going to debate the extent to which Putin is anti-Jewish. My point is that a singular fixation on Jews is not healthy. The “enemy of my enemies” is not necessarily my friend, it can simply be just another enemy. This reminds me of the time, some years ago, when Pierce tried to convince me that the Soviet-apologist, post-USSR Russian communist party leader Gennady Zyuganov was a great guy worthy of support, since he was more “critical of the Jews” than the “puppet” Yeltsin. I remember thinking, “this guy Pierce is so blinded by his single-minded fixation on Jews, he can’t see the forest for the trees.” Yes, Yeltsin was no good, but so was (and is) Zyuganov and all the rest (***). Real Russian nationalists are worthy of our support, not apologists for Stalin’s anti-Slav genocide. To say that “there is no chance” for the real nationalists, just like “there is no chance Ukraine will ever be independent,” is similar to saying that, well, the White American ethnostate is just a silly dream and we all need to be practical and vote Rubio-Paul in 2016. The “lesser of two evils” delusion has been a yoke on “movement” progress since the very beginning.

    I say: No. Sometimes, practicality and compromise are just fancy euphemisms for rank surrender. One has to draw a line somewhere. Yes, the Ukrainians are heading in the wrong direction – NATO and the EU are anti-White horrors. But Putin’s Eurasian Union is another anti-White horror. Yeltsin may have been a stooge, but the crimes of communism are such that any decent person should recoil from any association with that lunatic creed – to support a warmed-over Soviet because he may have said some odd comment about the Jews is stupid and juvenile. This obsession with the anti-racist, anti-fascist, multicultural authoritarian Putin is also stupid and juvenile. Let’s face reality: there is, currently, NO leader, anywhere in the world, that supports racial nationalism for any European people, or for Europeans as a whole. There is NO nation that is a “bulwark for Whites.” The USA and Russia are two sides of the same coin, and both rotten. A principled view is to say “a pox on both their houses” and not waste any precious time,energy, and resources in some sort of fit of unrequited love.

    Plain talk: given what we currently know, given the facts before us, a pro-Putin attitude is indicative of immaturity, piss-poor judgment, and certainly not in accordance with what we stand for. There’s no point to it. Putin doesn’t need or want WN support, is is inconsequential to what is happening, and the support has not been, and likely will never be, reciprocated. WN support for Putin does nothing but compromise the moral, intellectual, and ideological integrity of racial nationalism. It makes us look foolish. It makes us look pathologically fixated on Jews. It makes us look desperate, that we latch onto whatever world figure or celebrity that we deceive ourselves is “secretly one of us.”

    This Putin crush is another manifestation of the sickness, the rot, eating away at the pitiful and pathetic travesty known as the “movement” – that morass of defectives that has accomplished nothing for endless decades (don’t forget Revilo Oliver castigating the “movement” for 50 years of failure – nearly 50 years ago).

    The Old Movement needs to be uprooted, discarded, eliminated, so a more sane and rational New Movement can take its place. No more delusions and false hopes. It’s time to see reality as it truly is, and work our way from there.

    Crush the infamy!

    Source: http://eginotes.blogspot.com/2014/09/time-for-some-plain-speaking-on-trad.html

    • Jaego
      Posted September 3, 2014 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

      Well said! Once we choose life, we can chart a future. And once we choose a future, we can choose a past. Of course America was full of Blacks and Indians. We don’t have to care about that anymore than we care about the Spanish or the French explorers, colonists, and missionaries who were in many parts before us. They were ignored in our history books for the most part. Now we are. When we write the books again, we’ll ignore both them and the Non-Whites except as they show our heroism. Poplar history of course. More serious students will be given more knowledge and objectivity – without being encouraged to become traitors.

    • Van Phauc
      Posted September 7, 2014 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

      At minimum, Putin is simply useful, because he often stymies the goals of the main enemy of the White race, USG / ZOG. He stymied them in Syria, he stymied them in Ukraine and it looks like he intends to continue to stymy them in the future. In addition to making things more difficult for them in these areas he is actively working to undermine the dollar and with it, USG’s hegemony.

      Putin may be bad for Russian and Ukrainian whites, but he is good for the rest of the white race, currently living under USG’s occupation.

      Putin should be favored not as a closet WN or someone who cares about saving the white race, but for the same reason that all of USG’s (mostly non-white) enemies should be favored, only 10x more so, because his actions are far more capable of effecting the situation in our countries.

      USG seems to be in a somewhat precarious situation, but nothing is guaranteed. USG wants to continue current trends. If USG keeps current trends going for long enough, the white race will die. If USG cannot sustain current trends for any reason, there is a good chance that the white race will survive. What’ll happen? It’s an open question. Events could tip the balance one way or another.

      Ethno-nationalism is dangerous. It is an ideological construct and whites have clearly demonstrated that they don’t do well at balancing ideological constructs with practical concerns. Let the simple survival values of the 14 words be your guide instead.

      In light of the 14 words, we Western European descended people must clearly favor Russia over USG. An imperialist, multi-cultural, prison of nations Russia powerful enough to oppose USG and maybe give it the push that is needed to stop current trends from continuing does more to secure a future for the Western part of the white race than a hypothetical balkanized patchwork of Russian ethno-states under USG’s economic and cultural hegemony.

      And in the event of a defeat for Russia, it seems unlikely that the map would be neatly divided along ethnic nationalist lines. Wishing for a different map in Russia won’t make it so; any Russia we’re likely to see on terms dictated by USG is likely to be one that is even less useful than the Russia that exists today. Still multi-racial, now too weak to give USG any pushes.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted September 8, 2014 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

        This has been said a thousand times before. You are counseling that we abandon trying to create an alternative (ethnonationalism) to the existing hegemony an instead root for the “lesser of two evils.” It is no less pointless and ignoble because you invoke the 14 Words. Surely you will be back here telling is that, because of the 14 Words, we should support the Rand Paul/Marco Rubio ticket in 2016.

  11. 98052
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

    There is very little accurate or significant writing in English on recent Eastern European history. Those interested in some of the basics should read the relevant chapters in Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn’s ‘The Intelligent American’s Guide to Europe’.

  12. Stronza
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

    All the parties here seem to be doing what they want you to do: be unable to accept that things are in a chaotic state, i.e., no clear right or wrong from our angle. I’d never take sides here, at the present time, not in any material way or merely in my own mind. It doesn’t matter who or what you think you are supporting in the Ukr-Russian business, it will not work out on our behalf. For years now, it is only intellectual jousting.

    Greg, I’d give you points for your debating skill, except that I haven’t seen any serious explanation from your chair as to what that $5 billion could possibly have been about (other than what the proRussian side says it is).

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

      Following money trails has limited probative value. The US loves to throw around money to influence other countries. It does not mean that they actually get their money’s worth or end up calling the shots.

  13. John M.
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Interesting discussions here. Today’s Russia is hard to put into a “white” focus. Same as the Ukraine. 70 years of Communism has almost completely wiped out the Germanic aristocratic element that once ruled that area. It has also ruined people morally, spiritually, and racially. Russia (through internal corrosion) was the first great white imperial power to be defeated by a non-white nation (I refer here to the Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05 in which the entire Russian fleet was sunk in Tsushima and which led to the fateful 1905 revolution led by the soviets of Trotsky). This revolution of 1905 further led Russia to the awful disintegration of 1917. Of course the white Russians always hated Jews – where did the “Protocols of Zion” originate? How about all those pogroms? Many of those Jewish Bolsheviks came from the pale of settlement (Trotsky was one of those) and found their liberation in Marxist doctrines. Jews hated Imperial Russia and set out to destroy it but it was only a stepping stone on their way to world power.
    Bottom line in all this is you have one gang of Jews fighting another gang of Jews like Hyenas at a kill. I found a very interesting quote by a jew attendee at the paris peace conference and league of nations who had this to say about how Jews operate in the world…apart from any “conspiracy” the quote is very relevant to Jewish thinking and comes from the book “Geneva Versus Peace” by French Count Saint-Aulierre:
    “You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism which is equally sacred to us. It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be it’s axis. These two contraries, like bolshevism and ourselves find their identity in the international. These opposites which are antipodes to society meet again in the remaking of the world through control of riches from above and revolution from below”. Prior to this statement, the jew financier talked about how salt is sacred to the Jewish faith : “Too much salt corrodes meat, and too little lets it rot” This principle of justice can be applied both to the human mind and to the peoples of the earth. .. “We Jews apply it wisely as it should be applied, salt being the emblem of wisdom. We mingle it discreetly with the bread that men consume. We administer it in corrosive doses only in exceptional cases when it is necessary to get rid of the debris of an immoral past, as in the case of Tsarist Russia. That is why bolshevism finds favor in our eyes…it is an admirable salting tub in which to corrode and destroy and not preserve”. Jews in Wall Street supported Bolshevik Jews in Moscow yet they also fought for the spoils of robbed gentiles. Bolshevism was the means by which not only to destroy the old order in Russia through mass murder of the intelligentsia but also to ruthlessly modernize the country to “bring it up to date” materially with the industrial nations for future world government and control. It’s not a matter of Jews conspiring as a group…it’s the instinctual mentality of Jews who control the levers of power. Strom is not looking deep enough..he’s using the old right-wing “Bolshevism is Jewish” argument. He doesn’t see that jews play both sides of the fence whether it’s Marxism, capitalism, Fascism, or as we have all over the world today : terrorism and anti-terrorism.

    • Peltast
      Posted September 3, 2014 at 5:06 am | Permalink

      “You say that Marxism is the very antithesis of capitalism which is equally sacred to us. It is precisely for this reason that they are direct opposites to one another that they put into our hands the two poles of this planet and allow us to be it’s axis. These two contraries, like bolshevism and ourselves find their identity in the international. These opposites which are antipodes to society meet again in the remaking of the world through control of riches from above and revolution from below”.

      Most Whites think in very simple terms of “Left vs Right”, jews easily manouver this axis because they control the media, finance and the radical movements.

  14. Hank
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    I believe the truth lies somewhere in between Kevin and Greg’s viewpoints. A lot of White Nationalists went all out on the Putin train, which originally oriented myself more towards Greg’s point of view, but over time the shrieking of the Jewish, homo, and neoconservative power elites over Russia and her leader gives weight that there is far more going on here than simple “irrational anti-Russian hatreds going back to the 19th century.”

    If I’m recalling properly Greg, wasn’t it you that used post-Stalin Soviet Union as an example of the effectiveness of non-violent anti-Semitism? That is, by simply making a nation an uncomfortable environment for Jewish people, hell, even holding them by the same rules as the rest of the citizenry, they will probably just pack up and leave? That’s basically been the story of the Soviet Jewish diaspora, most of who fled to Israel and the United States the second the Soviets wouldn’t offer them disproportionate privilege.

    As for Svboda and Right Sektor, I haven’t been given much reason to root for them as a distant Far-Right spectator besides the fact that they “have our views,” though their actions evidence a much more ambiguous set of goals. From what little info I’ve absorbed, Right Sektor doesn’t come across as highly concerned by the immense neoconservative and U.S. involvement in their new government, and have settled for being the most anti-Russian and aggressive militias for the new government run by most likely Jewish Yatsenyuk and the oligarch Poreshenko.

    So, I think the verdict is still undecided, and not enough evidence can really be garnered by us White Nationalists thousands of miles away and shut out of the conversations that take place in the halls of the Kremlin.

    In Marshall Goldman’s (he’s Jewish) book The Piratization of Russia, there’s an interesting story written that shows an episode of Putin’s wheeling and dealing in order take down the very Jewish Guzinsky who once owned the large media company NVT in Russia.

    Does it show Putin as a philosemite trying to curry the favor powerful Jews and their money, or a Jew-wise leader maneuvering and playing a long game against Jewish power, both international and Russian? Honestly, I could see either interpretation. (I think it is too long and beyond my technical expertise to post it here, but my example is here: http://www.e-reading.me/bookreader.php/135022/The_Piratization_of_Russia.pdf starting on page 125 with the paragraph: Despite many questionable transactions Gusinsky was not an easy target for Putin. By casting himself as the last defender of an independent media in Russia, Gusinsky had to be handled with extreme care. In addition, part of his international support derived from Gusinsky’s establishment in 1996 of the Russian Jewish Congress, an umbrella group of Jewish religious, social welfare, and communal groups.)

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 4:04 pm | Permalink

      Just because Jews claim so-and-so is anti-Semitic does not make it so. We have to keep that firmly in mind. If one listens to Jews, Imperial Russia was one of the most anti-Semitic societies in human history, whereas in truth, Jews were a privileged elite there.

      After Stalin, Jewish overrepresentation was curtailed in elite institutions. Instead of being overrepresented by a factor of 20, they may have been overrepresented by a factor of 10. Obvious anti-Semitism! Jews weren’t privileged enough, claimed the Jews. And yes, this did lead to Jewish disaffection with the regime and the desire to emigrate. But even Jewish emigration is a sign of their privilege. East Germans were shot trying to emigrate to the West. Jews merely had to fill out paperwork. So yes, it may be the case that in the US, if we can create a sufficient cultural consensus just to scale back Jewish privilege a smidge, Jewish neurosis and hypersensitivity will exercise a multiplier effect and send them scuttling for Israel.

  15. Bruce
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Counter-Currents is probably my favorite White Nationalist website, but I’m sorry to say I really don’t like the position you are taking on the Ukraine situation. Granted, it is pretty ridiculous to think Putin is somehow secretly fighting against the Jews, but Putin has definitely frustrated the oligarchs in Russia, and they certainly hate him for it. If the Jews in Russia support Putin it is probably because they know he is holding back the tidal wave of Russian nationalism, which has strong NS tendencies.

    The thing that really bothers me about this article is that you are actually blaming Russia and the Eastern Ukrainian separatists for the as of now over 10,000 White slavs butchered Israeli-style by the disgusting Jewish coup government. Your tone appears to me to be totally callous regarding these brutally murdered people.

    Also, I also don’t see how you can downplay the fact of the supposed hardcore “neo-Nazi” leader of Right Sector meeting cordially with the Israeli ambassador. No less than Abe Foxman himself wrote an article about this in Huffington Post.

    I have yet to see a White Nationalist who will take a critical view of both sides, as they are both doing very bad things from our point of view. So far everyone is just cheerleading for one side or the other.

    This situation is very worrying to me, as it seems pretty clear now that the ONLY way to avoid a war with Russia is to allow the Eastern Ukrainians to secede. Russia is not going to abandon these people and if the West doesn’t stop supporting the Jew-Ukrainian government’s ethnic classing program, I think we will see the beginning of world war three, which would probably be the end of the White race.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 3, 2014 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

      Yes, I am blaming the Russians for what is happening in Eastern Ukraine. They are providing weapons and soldiers and provocation. None of this bloodshed may have happened without Russian intervention. And please be serious about casualties: the Russians/separatists are killing people too.

      I am on record from the start that Ukraine could benefit from border revisions and/or ethnic cleansing in the direction of greater homogeneity. That is a tough proposition to sell in any country, and Putin’s seizure of Crimea makes it politically impossible. Ironically, nationalists of the racial variety are far more willing to lose territory, whereas even an average liberal is far less likely to be receptive to that. Now that blood has been shed, even the nationalists are unwilling to countenance peaceful partitions and population transfers, much less try to sell it to far more skeptical people toward the center of the political spectrum. Putin has made a peaceful solution impossible until both sides get sick of bloodshed.

      War with Russia has already started. Russian soldiers, operating as partisans, are fighting on Ukrainian territory right now. But I doubt that Putin is willing to engage in all-out war. He does not care about Russians in East Ukraine. He does not need any more rusted factories. He seized Crimea because of its military assets. I think he is content to inflict a bleeding wound on Ukraine to punish them for thinking of themselves as an independent nation.

      • 1RW
        Posted September 4, 2014 at 3:58 am | Permalink

        Greg, there was a referendum in Donetsk and Lugansk sans Russian troops and secession was the outcome. Putin actually urged them to postpone the referendum, but they went ahead. This is an important point. If Ukraine has a right to assert independence from Russia, then parts of Ukraine have a right to assert independence from Ukraine. If Ukraine has a right to smash would be separatists, then Russia has a right to smash Ukraine. You’re not a Jew, so you’re not allowed to play both sides here

        Actually, any nation that embraces a strong anti-neighbor stance risks belligerent actions from said neighbor. This isn’t the model UN, strong nations violate the sovereignty of weak nations when it suits them, and unfortunately its suicidal to follow the rules when your opponent always brings a tank to a fistfight. As Bismark said, all treaties are null and void as soon as they conflict with a nation’s struggle for existence.

        I also don’t see how NATO is not a threat to Russian sovereignty. NATO is by definition an anti-Russian alliance. There is no rationale for the existence of NATO than to keep Russia in check. Russian leaders rightly(for them) seek to limit NATO’s influence and strategic options. Russia has a long history of being invaded by European coalitions (Napoleon, Anglo-French-Turkish forces in Crimea, Germany et al in WWI, Germany et al in WWII). There is absolutely no way that NATO will be perceived as anything other than a threat by a sane, patriotic Kremlin (which is what we have right now).

        The reason so many WNs let Putin’s anti-fascist comments slide is because they understand that 70+ years ago National Socialists and Fascists came close to ending the existence of Russia and her people. They lost the war but not before killing millions and causing utter devastation. There are still veterans of WWII in Russia. Monuments are everywhere. Calling oneself a Fascist or a National Socialist is therefore a non-starter there. It does not however, preclude policies that are compatible with those ideologies.

        Finally, there is a Western Liberal multiculturalism, which is actually monoculturalism that likes to accessorize, and there is Russian Imperial multiculturalism, which accomodates and protects different cultures while maintaining the supremacy of Russian culture over all. One is compatible with White survival, the other wants to blend everyone into a mass of interchangeable atomized consumers.

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted September 5, 2014 at 3:51 am | Permalink

          I think NATO became largely irrelevant when Stalin exploded the first Russian atomic bomb.

          • 1RW
            Posted September 5, 2014 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

            NATO is a US sock puppet, therefore it is every bit as relevant as the US.
            Nuclear weapons have forced conflict away from direct conventional warfare to proxy wars, propoganda, sanctions, etc…

            But conflict is eternal, only methods change. Both sides have embraced 4th generation warfare where proxy non-state actors substitute tank divisions. Ukraine is the first 4gw battleground between two belligerent superpowers, one regional one global.

            The threat to Russian sovereignty and existence is no less real than in 1941, it is just less direct.

          • Greg Johnson
            Posted September 5, 2014 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

            No nuclear power has been invaded yet. Sadly, though, the Ukrainians bargained away the third largest nuclear arsenal on the planet in exchange for territorial integrity guarantees from Russia and the US. Better to depend on nuclear deterrence than the honor of other nations. Now that Putin has Crimea, maybe Ukraine should get its nukes back.

  16. Ea
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    I dont like Strom one bit. Specially after the child pornography possesion affair. And I dont care about his lame excuses. Very nice article.

    • April
      Posted September 5, 2014 at 3:13 am | Permalink

      While I have good reason to believe that much of what was conjured up against Kevin Strom was manufactured by his ex wife Elisha, I do still have criticism of the man.

      Kevin knew well in advance that she was not only capable of evil deeds, but she had already trashed irreplaceable Revilo Oliver materials.

      A man who allows a sick twisted woman to control him is not fit for leadership. And so then it makes me question pretty much any of his conclusions or observations as well.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted September 5, 2014 at 3:48 am | Permalink

        I agree that the case against Strom was largely fabricated. But to say he should have known better about his wife is naive and unfair. Love blinds, people conceal aspects of themselves, relationships change, marriages fail. It happens to a lot of people.

        • Stronza
          Posted September 6, 2014 at 8:50 pm | Permalink

          It is true what you say, Greg, about people marrying the wrong person in good faith, or the relationship just going bad. However, while I can’t speak for April, maybe what she means is that some people do see serious flaws in the person they are going to marry, but some inner force compels them to go ahead anyway. That force might be a dangerously weak character or borderline mental illness. In some cases they don’t want to cancel the wedding or break the engagement as it could cause them some public humiliation, for example – at least in their own eyes.

  17. Verlis
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    (Incentives to raise birthrates will not help if they are applied equally to more fertile non-Russians as well.)

    It’s a bit more complicated than that. To borrow two terms from economics, what matters is the ‘elasticity’ of fertility and the ‘utility’ of an additional child. In economics, elasticity refers to the responsiveness of demand or supply to a change in price. When demand or supply is elastic, a small change in price causes a large change in demand or supply; when demand or supply is inelastic, even very large changes in price produce only insignificant changes in demand or supply.

    Utility refers to the benefit an individual derives from consuming some good, and marginal utility refers to the benefit derived from the last unit consumed. Central to economic theory is that utility declines with the consumption of each additional unit – if you eat ice-cream every day, your first will taste much nicer than your fifth (and if you keep eating at some point you’ll stop getting any benefit and start feeling sick, you’ll derive ‘negative benefit’). The responsiveness (‘elasticity’) of the quantity demanded of a good to a change in that good’s price depends in part on where along the marginal utility curve consumption currently lies; nearer the first units consumed demand is more responsive; nearer the last units consumed, demand is less responsive.

    Analysed coldly economically, the ‘utility’ of each subsequent child to a parent is less than that of the previous child. A first child is a true bundle of joy to every parent, but while every parent may not wish to admit it, the arrival of the tenth child is a somewhat less joyous occasion. Some may counter that it’s only economic constraints that prevent some parents having as many children as they are naturally capable of having, but many parents who very well could afford an additional child nevertheless forgo it.

    Applying this analysis to fertility incentives it should be fairly clear that less of an incentive is required to have a second child than to have a third; and less incentive to have a third compared to having a fourth, and so on. Russia’s (and all white countries’) fertility rates are so low relative to other groups’ that financial incentives to have children would have a proportionately much bigger impact on ethnic Russians’ fertility (and whites’ in other countries) than on non-Russians’. Therefore, even if other groups do experience greater fertility as a result of incentives, the fertility differential will nevertheless have been narrowed. (In the long-term – assuming eviction or territorial separation do not occur or are not pursued – the key to racial survival is ensure the fertility differential works in one’s race’s favor.)

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 12:50 pm | Permalink

      Well I hope your’re right. By the way, has Putin actually done anything to raise Russian birthrates, or is it just in the talk stage? Even talking about the issue is important, of course.

      • Verlis
        Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

        News reports claim that cash bonuses are being paid for having a second child, with Putin having committed billions of dollars to the program. Public perceptions regarding fertility are, as you say, important as well, and to this end a ‘national conception day’ has been inaugurated, offering prizes to women who happen to give birth on this day.

        Russia isn’t unique in this regard. Even Australia of all countries (given how lefty loony the government otherwise is) has offered a ‘baby bonus’ for over a decade now – $5,000 until this year, when it was slashed to $1,000 in the recent budget.

        The worst thing about these schemes is that they are decidedly dysgenic (especially in Australia’s case, where $5,000 matters a lot to the poor and to immigrants). Of course, you need to have people just to remain in the game, regardless of where they fall along the bell curve, but in the long-run mindless natalism is a game everyone loses. Targeted policies would be much more effective – for example cash bonuses for eugenically selected IVF, justified in the name of ‘demographic management,’ say – but public acceptance remains a long way off.

        Still, just as talk by prominent officials is important for injecting the ideas into public circulation, it’s also worth running some simple projections to highlight how worthwhile long-term planning can be. Consider South Africa, a byword for racial demographic catastrophe in our circles. If S. Africa instituted policies whose result was that the black population declined one percent annually and the white population rose one percent annually, in one hundred years – the generation of great-grandchildren of many of those living today – the black and white populations would be near parity; in two hundred years whites would be some ninety percent of the population. Remember, this is S. Africa, and all of it achieved merely by creating a favorable – and completely plausible – fertility differential. (Okay, I’m assuming the black and white populations don’t mix, which is not realistic and would definitely skew the calculations, but the example serves as a good illustration of the principle.)

    • mark
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 11:33 pm | Permalink

      You’re assuming that financial incentives will have any real effect all.

      In reality, non-whites will continue to have a lot of children, whether or not there are financial incentives. And whites will continue to have few children, whether or not there are financial incentives. Look at Western countries who have already tried this route, eg. Australia.

      The reason whites have stopped having children is metaphysical/spiritual. We have had our souls crushed from day one, and our people have become extremely selfish, bitter, and life-denying. Money, or materialism in general, is not the solution to this problem. A new meaning to life, a new purpose, will bring us the natural, life-affirming worldview we desperately need.

  18. Greg Johnson
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 12:03 pm | Permalink

    Do you think it is futile for all nations to seek an independent course, or is it only futile in the case of Ukraine?

    • Verlis
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 1:22 pm | Permalink

      This reminds of me old Serbian chauvinist claims that Kosovo and Bosnia could not possibly exist outside Serbia. Events, of course, have proved that it was more than possible; it’s now a reality.

      I admit I am encouraged by Greg’s resolute stance on this issue. While he has tended to focus more on the morality of the various actors and the reasonableness of each side’s claims, there is another, more thorny, factor that should also be taken into account: Russian identity itself, which, much like Serbian, is comically chauvinistic and disturbingly jingoistic, so much so that I question whether it can ever be a true friend to white nationalism.

      When I first got on the internet in the mid-90s the conflict in the former Yugoslavia dominated my thoughts. Trawling usenet for juicy debates I stumbled across what I thought was the strangest thing: people billing themselves as ‘American nationalists’ skeptical of their government’s actions and seeming to side with the Serbs.

      Some Serbs were taking part in these discussions and, although at the time I fervently supported the Serbian side, it amazed me how willing to be led around by the nose these people were, particularly when I considered that, their government’s actions aside, it was not their fight. Claims that the Srebrenica massacre never occurred were swallowed uncritically particularly astonished me. (Though I still think the claim is true, after ‘the holocaust’ nothing is certain.)

      I now see the very same thing occurring with respect to Russia: White Americans, disgusted by their government, despairing at their racial fate, willing to commit wholeheartedly and unquestioningly to a party opposed by their own ruling elite while demanding little or nothing for themselves. The Russsians, for their part, are very keen to recruit this element to their aid, to bend it to their own needs, while barely paying so much as lip-service to any reciprocal commitment of their own.

      Perhaps no other phenomenon makes clearer the true nature of the Russian bear than the willingness to exonerate Stalin in the name of national greatness. One must assume that Russians’ real problem with German nazism is not that making an enemy out of a potential racial ally is wrong of itself (or at least folly), it’s that a competing jingoism came within a hair’s breadth of making mince of them. That Russia survived must go some way to explaining today’s racial state of affairs. Had Hitler a tombstone his epitaph would surely read, “May you all live in times of great diversity.”

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

        Durand’s discussion of Russian identity in his “White Nationalist Delusions About Russia” are very useful. http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/03/white-nationalist-delusions-about-russia/ In terms of its problematic nature, I don’t think that Russian identity is all that different from American identity, in that both are continental empires ruling over multi-racial and mixed-racial populations and a deep streak of messianic universalism and imperialism that can only be destructive of racial differences and more organic, less notional national identities. White Russians, like white Americans, are prisoners of forms of national self-consciousness that ultimately undermine their racial identity and interests, as well as those of their victims.

        • Verlis
          Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

          I’ve already talked too much on this thread, but I will make one last post because it’s important.

          White Russians, like white Americans, are prisoners of forms of national self-consciousness that ultimately undermine their racial identity and interests, as well as those of their victims.

          This is your rational analysis of their predicament, and it’s quite accurate. But I do not believe it’s how they see themselves. As you know (and for reasons I do need to go into here), I am not an ideal candidate for Australian racialists to recruit to their cause. Nonetheless, I have coaxed the true racial feelings out of more than a few Anglo-Saxons. Nothing in their demeanor alerts me to any significant differences between them and their more racially circumspect or aracial compatriots. (I have not encountered anybody like Jim Saleam, though an uncle of mine, a dabbler if there was ever one, over a decade ago got involved with a ‘revolutionary’ outfit like Saleam’s before deciding he had no place in it.) What a difference between them and the Serbian nationalists I have known! As profoundly as I disagree with the latter I am free to move in their circles (naturally I judiciously keep my true views to myself) and am very familiar with the type. Perhaps I am wrong to rely so heavily on my intuitions but everything I hear from the Russian camp reminds me of these people: narrow-minded, self-interested, and sclerotic. Of course, such attitudes are not set in stone. There is good reason to believe they can change. But for the present one must take things as they are, not force them to fit a pre-determined mould. This you have not done, but there are many urging you in that direction. I hope you remain resolute.

      • Verlis
        Posted September 2, 2014 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

        (Though I still think the claim is true, after ‘the holocaust’ nothing is certain.)

        If Greg will permit me to be pedantic for a moment, I would like to clarify what this sentence was intended to say.

        As it stands it could be interpreted as saying I believe the claim that the Srebrenica massacre never happened is true, but that after the slaughter of the holocaust I am open to the possibility that it is true (because massacres happen); my use of scare quotes around holocaust could be taken as a jab at the holocaust industry.

        What I intended to say was the opposite of this interpretation. I believe that the Srebrenica massacre happened largely as claimed, but that after the monumental exaggerations and fabrications of ‘the holocaust’ I am open to the possibility that it is as fictitious as Serbian chauvinists claim.

      • Lorenz Kraus
        Posted September 4, 2014 at 4:42 pm | Permalink

        “Russian identity itself, which, much like Serbian, is comically chauvinistic and disturbingly jingoistic, so much so that I question whether it can ever be a true friend to white nationalism.”

        In a way, there is no Russia, just a multi-nation-state. If Russians asserted their nationalism, the rest of the empire would crack-up. So, the Moscow-state must be multi-national, multi-cultural, and always has been. If that is the case, it is suicidal for the Moscow state to befriend white preservation. Caspian Report is pretty good on this:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HE6rSljTwdU&list=PL696E8BE063C9BF33&index=17

  19. Greg Johnson
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 11:47 am | Permalink

    This proves nothing. Does Jonathan Pollard’s continued imprisonment prove that the US has a foreign policy independent of Israel and the US Jewish community?

  20. Daniel
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    I’m having real difficulty with the new smaller font.
    I have some eyesight problems and I’m finding it much harder to read than the old one.
    I found the old one to be very good.

    (I know you can ‘zoom’ but doing so distorts the proportions of the page. The text block becomes too wide, making it difficult to scan from line to line as you’re reading down the page. Which makes reading comprehension harder.
    And reducing the size of the browser window doesn’t help because doing so doesn’t reduce the width of the text).

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

      There’s no new smaller font. Something is up with your browser.

      • Greg Johnson
        Posted September 4, 2014 at 10:28 am | Permalink

        Thanks, I will add this to the list of repairs.

      • kurt
        Posted September 7, 2014 at 11:11 pm | Permalink

        Tucker says:

        “when I surf to this website using Firefox, reach the home page and click on an article, in the upper left hand corner of my browser, just above the Back and Forward buttons – I see a endless circle spinning to the left of the words ‘Connecting…..’.”

        I also use Firefox, on an Apple mac computer, and I’ve been getting the same endless spinning circle, on the tab, with the same “Connecting…”, for any and all pages at this website, and it started sometime last year 2013, as I recall. Also, this is the only website that I’ve had this “endless spinning circle” at, so the cause appears to be something specific with this website.

        It is annoying, but not enough for me to use the Safari web-browser (which doesn’t have this problem) instead of Firefox.

        After writing the above I decided to google the problem, and quickly got this page: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/websites-show-spinning-wheel-never-finish-load

        It suggests disabling Javascript, which I did, and lo and behold when I went back to counter-currents and tested with Javascript disabled, for each page I looked at, the pages simply loaded with no spinning circle “Connecting…” on the tab. So, about this the above mozilla page says:

        “In rare cases, a web page may be using an external JavaScript file which is in the wrong format. Try disabling JavaScript [I did this] – see JavaScript settings and preferences for interactive web pages. If the page now finishes loading [it does] the bad Javascript file may be coming from:

        1) a proxy filter that is incorrectly filtering that website’s files. If you are running a proxy filter such as Privoxy, try disabling it [I’m not using any proxy filter, as far as I know].
        OR
        2) the server. Contact the site administrator for that website [that would be you, Greg].”

        • Greg Johnson
          Posted September 8, 2014 at 12:25 am | Permalink

          Thanks for this.

        • kurt
          Posted September 8, 2014 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

          Just some additional followup by me regarding this problem on Firefox: this morning it occurred to me that the “proxy filter that is incorrectly filtering that website’s files” that the mozilla page I linked to above mentioned, could be the adblock add-on I have on Firefox, because adblock does, in effect, filter a website’s files. So, to test this I put the Javascript back on and then tested the counter-currents website with adblock disabled and adblock enabled.

          The result is that with adblock disabled I didn’t get the endless spinning circle “Connecting…” on the tab, but with adblock enabled I did get it. So, adblock on Firefox appears to be the culprit, although as I said before, this endless spinning circle “Connecting…” only happens to me here at counter-currents, and not at other websites I visit, so there is something unusual about the counter-currents website that allows this problem to trigger.

    • Sandy
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

      Dan, I’m sitting here looking at both my laptop screen and my PC screen. The font on the larger PC screen is larger, so perhaps if you bought yourself a larger screen you would find it easier to read Counter-Currents?

  21. coinherence
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    I have a great deal of respect for the work of Greg Johnson, particularly for his attempts to mine the philosophical tradition for insights valuable for our cause. But I have little regard for his political judgement. On this issue, I think Strom is much closer to the truth.

    • Greg Johnson
      Posted September 2, 2014 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

      You’ll come around.

  22. K.K.
    Posted September 2, 2014 at 5:30 am | Permalink

    I agree that he’s a great writer.

    Certainly read his account of his ‘criminal conviction’ on his website which is very eyeopening and I have no doubt 100% accurate.

One Trackback

    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4

    Reuben

    The Node

    Axe

    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes

    Demon

    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance

    Standardbearers

    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy

    Archeofuturism

    The Path of Cinnabar

    Tyr

    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace

    Defiance

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above