#novorussia | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

theculturedmarxist · 2 years

Text

How does a 61-year-old former pot dealer named “Texas” end up filming videos in front of Z-marked tanks on the Russian side of the frontline in Donbas?

Russell “Texas” Bentley has gone viral this week with a YouTube video in which he wears a black leather jacket and a revolutionary’s army-green cap. “This is Tejas on the frontline with the De-Nazifiers and the Liberators of Ukraine,” he twangs with all the camp of a Tarantino character. “These guys are tough. These guys are ready. And there’s plenty of ‘em,” Bentley boasts of the Russian soldiers behind him, adding: “We’re gettin’ ready to bring the hammer down. These guys are going to save and liberate all the good people of Ukraine. And the bad people? BOOM! Kick their ass.”

YouTube pulled the video for violating its community guidelines but it’s still available on Twitter.

Bentley writes that his aim — which also happens to be Vladimir Putin’s aim — is to bring “Ukraine back into the Slavic family where it belongs and has been for 1,000 years.” As for the “bad people” he hopes to see the hammer dropped on? They seem to include not only the rulers of Ukraine but the leaders of his former American homeland. On VK — the Russian alternative to Facebook — Bentley posted that he was “heading west with the Liberators of Ukraine. We may stop in Kiev, we may stop on the English Channel. We may liberate the USA.”

On Tuesday, Rolling Stone reached Bentley at a hotel in Donetsk for an hour-long phone interview. Bentley describes himself as an “information warrior” for the Russian side. He has lived in the separatist areas of Eastern Ukraine since 2014 and is now a citizen of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic as well as of Russia. “I don’t give a fuck what they think about me in the United States,” he insists. “The government — or most of the people.”

Bentley’s backstory is as wild as his present circumstance. He’s a former marijuana legalization activist who once mounted a third-party bid for the Senate in Minnesota — in the 1990 election that brought Paul Welstone to Washington — before landing in prison for felony marijuana trafficking.

He was born Russell Bonner Bentley III to a wealthy family in Texas in 1960. “I grew up in a very exclusive area of Dallas called Highland Park,” he says. “It’s basically the Beverly Hills of Dallas.” Bentley was the “black sheep” of the family as a teenager, he says, drawn to hard left causes. “I was reading Ho Chi Minh and Che Guevara” he says. “I understood the Vietnamese were right to defend their land against foreign invaders, and that the United States was wrong. I understood that Fidel and Che were right to overthrow the foreign masters that had turned Cuba into a casino and bordello.” Bentley insists: “I’m anti-racist. I’m anti-imperialist. I grew up supporting people’s rights to defend themselves.” (His commitment to democracy and self-determination was less developed.)

Bentley bills himself as an “auto-didact.” He dropped out of middle school, but later got his GED and spent some time in the U.S. Army. He then waited tables and partied for years on South Padre island, on the Texas coast, playing guitar in a group called the Asbestos Band. He says his preferred genre was “cow punk” — a mix of Johnny Cash and Johnny Rotten. But when that music failed to pack in the crowds, Bentley recalls, they started covering hits from hot MTV bands like ZZ Top, the Cure, and even Bryan Adams.

Known then as “Bongo” rather than “Texas,” Bentley followed a girlfriend to Minnesota, according to profile in Texas Monthly. There, Bentley got deep into the world of marijuana legalization, running for Senate in 1990 as a member of the pro-pot Grassroots Party, whose motto was “lower taxes, higher taxpayers.” He garnered nearly two percent of the statewide vote.

In the mid-1990s, Bentley made a radicalizing trip to Cuba where his socialist leanings hardened into communism. “I went with Pastors for Peace, with Medea Benjamin from Code Pink, and a bunch of those guys,” Bentley recalls. On the island, he met a captain in the Cuban army who told him that “a communist is someone that’s willing to fight for socialism.” He vowed then: “I’m going to quit being a pussy and calling myself a socialist; I am a communist.”

In his professional life, Bentley wasn’t just promoting pot, he was dealing it — importing substantial quantities of weed from Texas to Minnesota. And by 1996, Bentley got tripped up by the DEA. He was arrested for felony trafficking and sentenced to federal prison. But only months before he was scheduled to be released in 1999, according to court documents, Bentley broke out of the minimum security facility where he was being held. “I didn’t have to dig a tunnel or take anybody hostage,” he recalls. “But I did escape from prison.”

Bentley then lived on the lam, mostly in Washington state. He took part in the anti-globalization uprising against the World Trade Organization conference in Seattle in 1999, which he says “was the last time that I was really proud to be an American.” Bentley remained a fugitive for the better part of a decade before being recaptured in 2007. “They put me in a maximum security joint till the end of my sentence.” Bentley remained under supervised release — which included a ban on intoxicants and a mandated 12-step program — until 2012.

Over the years, Bentley’s distrust of American power had been metastasizing. Today, he rattles off a list of American foreign policy sins dating from Ronald Reagan’s invasion of the island nation of Grenada and what he denounces as Bill Clinton’s “horrendous war crimes against Yugoslavia.” Growing conspiratorial, he insists that 9/11 was — at least in part — an inside job, citing his expertise in the U.S. Army as a demolition expert: “You can say what you want about building one and two, but building seven? Anyone that doesn’t understand that that was a pre-planned, pre-placed controlled demolition is either an idiot or a liar,” he claims. (Government investigators found the tower collapsed from the heat of uncontrolled fires.)

Bentley’s disgust grew through the “bogus” wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but he insists the final straw was the 2011 Western military action that toppled Muammar Gadhafi in Libya. “He was one of the greatest,” Bentley says fondly of the larger-than-life dictator whom the International Criminal Court accused of war crimes. Bentley says that when “Gadhafi was brutally murdered on video, it really pissed me off.” Bentley worked out his anger by donning rock climbing gear to scale a Marines recruiting billboard in Austin, defacing it with the words “FUCK NATO” in six-foot letters.

By the time the Maidan Revolution broke out in 2014 in Ukraine — toppling the Putin-backed government in Kyiv — Bentley was primed to see the events through the looking glass. “I knew it was exactly the work of the State Department and the CIA and Soros, of course,” Bentley recalls, invoking another conspiracy theory that Hungarian billionaire George Soros pulls the strings of American foreign policy. When he saw the unrest spill over into violent clashes in Odessa, Bentley sympathized with wounded pro-Russian separatists.

Then Bentley came across video from the aftermath of an explosion in Luhansk, in eastern Ukraine, that local separatists blamed on a Ukrainian air strike. He recalls a video of a dying young woman with her legs blown off. “Her eyes looked into my soul,” he says, earnestly. “She was asking me, ‘What are you going to do about this? Are you going to go hold hands across America for peace, or sing Kumbaya?’ And I said, ‘No, I’m going to go kill some of the dudes that did this.’ And I have,” he insists.

Determined to head to the frontlines in Donbas, Bentley broke up with his yoga-instructor girlfriend, quit his job as an estimator for a tree-trimming company, and booked a flight for Rostov-on-Don, a Russian city on the Black Sea. Before he left Texas, he recorded a song about his belief that this was “armageddon” and he was choosing his side with “Novorussia.” He sang: “The U.S. is wrong, and I’ll do more to right it than just write this song.”

Bentley, then 54, was an unlikely foreign fighter. He didn’t speak Russian at the time, but made his way to the war-torn city of Donetsk where he hooked up with a fellow Russian-sympathist expat, a writer from Italy, who showed him around and helped Bentley hook up with the Vostok Battalion — a militia group linked to the Russian intelligence service.

“When I came here, I didn’t think I would live through the winter, bro,” says Bentley, who peppers his speech with surfer pronouns like dude and bro. “I didn’t hardly speak Russian. It was a major war with a full-on National Army against the people’s militia. And I was on the little guys’ side,” he says, adding he believed he was, “defending good people against abjectly evil people.”

Bentley has lived in the contested separatist regions of Donbas ever since, surrounded by a war that’s killed an estimated 14,000, with allegations of abuses and needless civilian casualties on both sides. Bentley says he’s since served as a military policeman and an “information warrior” — an English language propagandist for the Russian side, hosting a podcast called “Radio Free Donbas” and filming YouTube videos of the struggle in the region. He emphasizes he’s a volunteer for the cause: “I don’t get paid by the Donetsk People’s Republic. I don’t get paid by the Russians. I don’t get paid by anybody.”

Bentley became a citizen of the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic in 2017, and became a citizen of Russia in 2020. Today, he grows belligerent when pressed on the contradictions of his decision to side with an authoritarian like Putin. ”What about Putin poisoning his political rivals?” I ask him, referring to Alexei Navalny, the opposition leader who blames the Kremlin for poisoning him with a powerful nerve agent.

Bentley shoots back: “Are you really that stupid or are you pretending to be that stupid?” He insists that it’s “a fucking question that only an idiot would fucking ask.” Bentley underscores that the alleged poisoning victims are still living. “Do you think that if Vladimir Putin, the head of the most powerful military in the world today, wanted to kill somebody that [he] would fail?” he asks. “That’s a really stupid question.”

Like Putin, Bentley decries the Ukranian military as the sum of all evil, blasting them as “genuine, mass-murdering Nazis.” Bentley embellishes that the Ukrainian ranks are also swelled by “thousands of ISIS cannibals.”

Invocations of Nazis are still politically potent in Russia, which suffered unfathomable losses at the hands of Hitler’s armies in World War II. But while Ukraine, like many nations, has extremist right-wing factions, there is no evidence its military is teeming with Nazis. To the contrary, Ukraine’s popularly elected president is Jewish, and several of his relatives were killed in the Holocaust. The United States Holocaust Memorial and Museum has denounced Putin for having “misrepresented and misappropriated Holocaust history” by “claiming falsely that democratic Ukraine needs to be ‘denazified.’” Shortly after I spoke to Bentley, news broke that Russian forces had shelled a Holocaust memorial in Kyiv.

I ask Bentley why he thinks anyone who calls themselves an “information warrior” should be trusted as an honest broker.

“In every information war, there’s two sides,” he says.

“And you see yourself as on the side of truth?” I ask.

“The evidence speaks for itself,” he insists.

In the current conflict, Bentley boasts that “Russia is liberating Ukraine from foreign occupation.” I ask why the world is not seeing Russian troops greeted as liberators, and Ukranians are instead hunkering down and with AK-47s and Molotov cocktails preparing to defend their cities. “How in the hell can you even think you’re qualified to have an opinion on that?” Bentley snaps. “I was, today, 50 kilometers inside what was, two days ago, under Ukrainian Nazi occupation and the dudes there, the women there, had tears in their eyes thanking us for coming to liberate them after eight years of terrorism and oppression. How do you dare to say that?”

With the conversation growing heated, I ask a more muted question: If Bentley knows why Russian tanks have been marked with a “Z.” He says he’s heard differing explanations, from the swashbuckling — “the mark of Zorro” — to the mundane, deriving from the Russian word for west, zapad, which indicates the direction they’re traveling. “But I have my own personal theory,” he adds, “and it is that the ‘Z’ stands for Zelensky’s zhopa. Zelensky, of course, is the puppet president of Ukraine,” he says. “And zhopa is the Russian word for ‘ass.’ So all those machines are going to Zelensky’s ass. That’s my theory.”

Carrying on a conversation with Bentley is challenging. Though we share a common language, he’s committed himself to an alternate reality. “With U.S. politicians and mainstream media, including Rolling Stone,” he tells me, “everything they say is a lie. It is 180 degrees — the opposite direction from what is true.”

What is Bentley’s version of the truth? “Believe me, bro, this is very clear cut,” he says. “This is the battle, not just of Ukraine. This is the battle between good-and-evil for the future of the world. And right now, it’s looking like the world might just have a chance because us and our friends are kicking some Nazi ass right now.”

In reality, the balky Russian blitz of Ukraine has brought terror and bloodshed to a prosperous European nation, whose only real offense has been to chart a course independent of the aims of an unstable strongman in Moscow, who yearns to recapture the glory of a Russian empire.

Before he hangs up, Bentley signs off with a chilling little prayer for the battles ahead:

“May God protect the innocent,” he says. “And may the rest of us get everything that we deserve.”

#donbass #ukraine #russia #rolling stone magazine #propaganda #zelensky #anti-nazis #novorussia

11 notes · View notes

paulonunesdossantos · 7 years

Photo

A statue of Vladimir Lenin can be seen reflecting in a puddle in Slavyansk main square, a small city taken under control by pro-Russia activists and militiamen.

#lenin #vladimir lenin #Vladimir Putin #putin #slavyansk #Donetsk #donbass #east Ukraine #ukraine #novorussia #Russia #war #Conflict #paulo nunes dos santos

1 note · View note

superhalfrussian · 5 years

Photo

6/18/17 - Russia and the “Chechen model” as a unique case in the Muslim world. Many observers have commented in awe at the miracle Putin and Ramzan Kadyrov pulled-off in Chechnia: after the region was absolutely devastated by two vicious and brutal wars and after being a “black hole” for assorted terrorists and common thugs, Chechnia turned into one of the most peaceful and safe parts of Russia (even while neighboring Dagestan is still suffering from violence and corruption). I won’t revisit it all and describe all the dramatic changes in Chechnia, but I will focus on a often ignored aspect of the “Chechen model”: Chechnia has become an extremely strict and traditional Sunni Muslim region. Not only that, but it is also one which has basically comprehensively defeated not only the Wahabis themselves but also their Wahabi ideology. In other words, Chechnia today is unique in that this is a Sunni Muslim culture which is strictly Islamic but with no risk whatsoever of being re-infected by the Wahabi virus. It is difficult to overstate the importance of this unique feature.

In the 1990s most of the Muslim world supported the Wahabi insurgency in Chechnia in a completely knee-jerk reaction I call “wrong or right – my Ummah”. This is largely the result of the very sophisticated AngloZionist propaganda aimed at the Muslim world which completely distorted the truth about the conflict taking place there (the same happened in Bosnia, by the way). Nowadays, however, the “Chechen example” is attracting a great deal of attention in the Muslim world and the personality of Ramzan Kadyrov is slowly becoming somewhat of a hero. Even the Saudis who financed a great deal of the Chechen insurgency and who threatened Russia with terrorist attack during the Sochi Olympics, now have to be very courteous and “brotherly” with Ramzan Kadyrov. The truth is that the Saudis are directly threatened by the “Chechen model” because it proves something the Saudis want to categorically deny: the traditional and strict Islam does NOT have to be Wahabi or, even less so, Takfiri.

Think of it: the biggest threat to the Saudis is, of course, Iran because it is a powerful, successful and dynamic Islamic Republic. But at least Iran is Shia and that, in the minds of some Sunnis, is a grievous heresy and almost a form of apostasy. But the Chechens are potentially much more dangerous to the Saudi ideology – they are anti-Wahabi (they call them “shaitans” or, literally, “devils”) and they are willing to fight anywhere in the Muslim world to counter the “good terrorists” supported by the CIA and the House of Saud. Time and time again, Ramzan Kadyrov, and many other Chechen leaders and commanders, have repeated that they are willing to fight for Russia “anywhere on the planet”. They have already been deployed in Georgia, Lebanon, Novorussia and now they are fighting in Syria. Each time with devastating effectiveness. They are true Muslim heroes, recognized as such even by the non-Muslim Russians, and they want absolutely nothing to do with the Wahabis whom they hate with a passion. As a result, more and more people in the Muslim world are expressing their admiration for the Chechen model.

The Chechen model also is noticed and hotly debated inside Russia. Russian liberals absolutely hate it and, just like their western curators, they accuse Kadyrov all sorts of unspeakable crimes. Their latest invention is that homosexuals are jailed and tortured by Chechen security service. This kind of stories might be taken seriously in San Francisco or Key West, but they get zero traction with the Russian public.

Chechnia is ideally located to influence not only the Caucasus but also other Muslim regions of Russia and even Central Asia. The large number of Chechens in the Russian special operation forces also makes them very visible in the Russian media. All this contributes to the high-visibility and popularity of a viable traditional Sunni model which is the exact opposite of what is happening the EU. Let’s compare the image of Muslims in the EU in Russia.

A couple of important caveats first. First, the picture was not always quite as rosy, especially not in the 1990s when Chechens were seen as thugs, brutes, crooks and vicious terrorists. Some Russians have neither forgotten nor forgiven (and, of course, some Chechens still hate Russians for what they did to Chechnia during the two wars). Second, this table compares what I call “ethnic Muslims” in Europe, meaning people coming from Muslim countries or families but who are not necessarily true, pious, Muslims at all. In fact, most of them are not. This is why I put “Muslims” in quotation marks. When I speak of Chechens, I refer to those conservative Chechens who support Kadyrov and his strict adherence to Islamic values. So, in a way, I will be comparing apples and oranges, but I do so because I want to show the greatest contrast possible and I believe that these apples and oranges play a crucial role in the development of the societies they live in now. https://thesaker.is/russia-and-islam-connecting-the-dots-and-discerning-the-future/

0 notes

newsnigeria · 5 years

Text

Check out New Post published on Ọmọ Oòduà

New Post has been published on http://ooduarere.com/news-from-nigeria/world-news/president-macrons-amazing-admission/

President Macron’s amazing admission

[this column was written for the Unz Review]

I don’t know whether the supposedly Chinese curse really comes from China, but whether it does or not, we most certainly are cursed with living in some truly interesting times: Iran won the first phase of the “tanker battle” against the AngloZionists, Putin offered to sell Russian hypersonic missiles to Trump (Putin has been trolling western leaders a lot lately) while Alexander Lukashenko took the extreme measure of completely shutting down the border between the Ukraine and Belarus due to the huge influx of weapons and nationalist extremists from the Ukraine. As he put it himself “if weapons fall into the hands of ordinary people and especially nationalist-minded people, wait for terrorism“. He is quite right, of course. Still, there is a sweet irony here, or call it karma if you prefer, but for the Ukronazis who promised their people a visa-free entrance into the EU (for tourism only, and if you have money to spend, but still…), and yet 5 years into that obscene experiment of creating a rabidly russophobic Ukraine and 100 days (or so) into Zelenskii’s presidency, we have the Ukraine’s closest and most supportive neighbor forced to totally shut down its border due to the truly phenomenal toxicity of the Ukrainian society! But, then again, the Ukraine is such a basket-case that we can count on “most interesting” things (in the sense of the Chinese curse, of course) happening there too.

[Sidebar: interestingly, one of the people the Ukrainians gave up in this exchange was Vladimir Tsemakh, a native of the Donbass who was kidnapped by the Ukie SBU in Novorussia (our noble “Europeans” did not object to such methods!) and declared the “star witness” against Russia in the MH-17 (pseudo-)investigation. Even more pathetic is that the Dutch apparently fully endorsed this load of crapola. Finally, and just for a good laugh, check out how the infamous’ Bellincat presented Tsemakh. And then, suddenly, everybody seem to “forget” that “star witness” and now the Ukies have sent him to Russia. Amazing how fast stuff gets lost in the collective western memory hole…]

Right now there seems to be a tug of war taking place between the more mentally sane elements of the Zelenskii administration and the various nationalist extremists in the SBU, deathsquads and even regular armed forces. Thus we see these apparently contradictory developments taking place: on on hand, the Ukraine finally agreed to a prisoner swap with Russia (a painful one for Russia as Russia mostly traded real criminals, including a least two bona fide Ukie terrorist, against what are mostly civilian hostages, but Putin decided – correctly I think – that freeing Russian nationalists from Ukie jails was more important in this case) while on the other hand, the Ukronazi armed forces increased their shelling, even with 152mm howitzers which fire 50kg high explosive fragmentation shells, against the Donbass. Whatever may be the case, this prisoner swap, no matter how one-sided and unfair, is a positive development which might mark the beginning of a pragmatic and less ideological attitude in Kiev.

Urkoterrorists Sentsov and Kol’chenko

Some very cautious beginnings of a little hint of optimism might be in order following that exchange, but the big stuff seems to be scheduled for the meeting of the Normandy Group (NG), probably in France. So far, the Russians have made it very clear that they will not meet just for the hell of meeting, and that the only circumstance in which the Russians will agree to a NG meeting would be if it has good chances of yielding meaningful results which, translated from Russian diplomatic language simply means “if/when Kiev stops stonewalling and sabotaging everything”. Specifically, the Russians are demanding that Zelenskii commit in writing to the so-called “Steinmeier formula” and that the Ukrainian forces withdraw from the line of contact. Will that happen? Maybe. We shall soon find out.

But the single most amazing event of the past couple of weeks was the absolutely astonishing speech French President Emmanuel Macron made in front of an assembly of ambassadors. I could not find the full speech translated into English (I may have missed it somewhere), so I will post the crucial excerpts in French and translate them myself. If I find a full, official, translation I will post it under this column ASAP. For the time being, this is the link to the full speech transcript in French:

https://www.elysee.fr/emmanuel-macron/2019/08/27/discours-du-president-de-la-republique-a-la-conference-des-ambassadeurs-1

Let’s immediately begin with some of the most incredible excerpts, emphasis added by me: (sorry for the long quote but, truly, each word counts!)

L’ordre international est bousculé de manière inédite mais surtout avec, si je puis dire, un grand bouleversement qui se fait sans doute pour la première fois dans notre histoire à peu près dans tous les domaines, avec une magnitude profondément historique. C’est d’abord une transformation, une recomposition géopolitique et stratégique. Nous sommes sans doute en train de vivre la fin de l’hégémonie occidentale sur le monde. Nous nous étions habitués à un ordre international qui depuis le 18ème siècle reposait sur une hégémonie occidentale, vraisemblablement française au 18ème siècle, par l’inspiration des Lumières ; sans doute britannique au 19ème grâce à la révolution industrielle et raisonnablement américaine au 20ème grâce aux 2 grands conflits et à la domination économique et politique de cette puissance. Les choses changent. Et elles sont profondément bousculées par les erreurs des Occidentaux dans certaines crises, par les choix aussi américains depuis plusieurs années et qui n’ont pas commencé avec cette administration mais qui conduisent à revisiter certaines implications dans des conflits au Proche et Moyen-Orient et ailleurs, et à repenser une stratégie profonde, diplomatique et militaire, et parfois des éléments de solidarité dont nous pensions qu’ils étaient des intangibles pour l’éternité même si nous avions constitué ensemble dans des moments géopolitiques qui pourtant aujourd’hui ont changé. Et puis c’est aussi l’émergence de nouvelles puissances dont nous avons sans doute longtemps sous-estimé l’impact. La Chine au premier rang mais également la stratégie russe menée, il faut bien le dire, depuis quelques années avec plus de succès. J’y reviendrai. L’Inde qui émerge, ces nouvelles économies qui deviennent aussi des puissances pas seulement économiques mais politiques et qui se pensent comme certains ont pu l’écrire, comme de véritables États civilisations et qui viennent non seulement bousculer notre ordre international, qui viennent peser dans l’ordre économique mais qui viennent aussi repenser l’ordre politique et l’imaginaire politique qui va avec, avec beaucoup de force et beaucoup plus d’inspiration que nous n’en avons. Regardons l’Inde, la Russie et la Chine. Elles ont une inspiration politique beaucoup plus forte que les Européens aujourd’hui. Elles pensent le monde avec une vraie logique, une vraie philosophie, un imaginaire que nous avons un peu perdu

Here is my informal translation of these words:

The international order is being shaken in an unprecedented manner, above all with, if I may say so, by the great upheaval that is undoubtedly taking place for the first time in our history, in almost every field and with a profoundly historic magnitude. The first thing we observe is a major transformation, a geopolitical and strategic re-composition. We are undoubtedly experiencing the end of Western hegemony over the world. We were accustomed to an international order which, since the 18th century, rested on a Western hegemony, mostly French in the 18th century, by the inspiration of the Enlightenment; then mostly British in the 19th century thanks to the Industrial Revolution and, finally, mostly American in the 20th century thanks to the 2 great conflicts and the economic and political domination of this power. Things change. And they are now deeply shaken by the mistakes of Westerners in certain crises, by the choices that have been made by Americans for several years which did not start with this administration, but which lead to revisiting certain implications in conflicts in the Middle East and elsewhere, and to rethinking a deep, diplomatic and military strategy, and sometimes elements of solidarity that we thought were intangible for eternity, even if we had constituted together in geopolitical moments that have changed. And then there is the emergence of new powers whose impact we have probably underestimated for a long time. China is at the forefront, but also the Russian strategy, which has, it must be said, been pursued more successfully in recent years. I will come back to that. India that is emerging, these new economies that are also becoming powers not only economic but political and that think themselves, as some have written, as real “civilizational states” which now come not only to shake up our international order but who also come to weigh in on the economic order and to rethink the political order and the political imagination that goes with it, with much dynamism and much more inspiration than we have. Look at India, Russia and China. They have a much stronger political inspiration than Europeans today. They think about our planet with a true logic, a true philosophy, an imagination that we’ve lost a little bit.

Now let’s unpack these key statements one by one:

1) “ great upheaval that is undoubtedly taking place for the first time in our history in almost every field and with a profoundly historic magnitude”

Here Macron sets the stage for some truly momentous observations: what will be discussed next is not only a major event, but one without precedent in history (whether French or European). Furthermore, what will be discussed next, affects “almost every field” and with huge historical implications.

2) “We are undoubtedly experiencing the end of Western hegemony over the world”

When I read that, my first and rather infantile reaction was to exclaim “really?! No kiddin’?! Who would have thought!?” After all, some of us have been saying that for a long, long while, but never-mind that. What is important is that even a Rothschild-puppet like Macron had to finally speak these words. Oh sure, he probably felt as happy as the Captain of the Titanic when he had to (finally!) order a general evacuation of this putatively unsinkable ship, but nonetheless – he did do it. From now on, the notion of the end of the western hegemony on the planet is no more relegated to what the leaders of the Empire and their propaganda machine like to call “fringe extremists” and has now fully entered the (supposedly) “respectable” and “mainstream” public discourse. This is a huge victory for all of us who have been saying the same things for years already.

3) “by the mistakes of Westerners in certain crises, by the choices that have been made by Americans for several years”

Here, again, I feel like engaging in some petty self-congratulation and want to say “I told you that too!”, but that would really be infantile, would it not? But yeah, while the internal contradictions of western materialism in general, and of AngloZionist Capitalism specifically, have been catching up with the Western World and while an eventual catastrophic crisis was inevitable, it also sure is true that western leaders mostly did it to themselves; at the very least, they dramatically accelerated these processes. In this context, I would single out the following politicians for a nomination to a medal for exceptional service in the destruction of the western hegemony over our long-suffering planet: Donald Trump and Barak Obama, of course, but also François Hollande and Emmanuel Macron (yes, he too even if he now changes his tune!), Angela Merkel, of course, and then last but not least, every single British Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher (maybe with special commendation for Teresa May). Who knows, maybe they were all KGB/GRU/SVR agents after all? (just kiddin’!)

4) “ the emergence of new powers whose impact we have probably underestimated for a long time. China is at the forefront, but also the Russian strategy, which has, it must be said, been pursued more successfully in recent years”

Next, it’s not only China. Russia too is a major competitor, and a very successful one at that, hence the admission that in spite of all the efforts of the AngloZionist elites not only did the Empire not succeed in breaking Russia, but Russia has been very successful in defeating the western efforts. To those interested, I highly recommend this article by Jon Hellevig on the true state of the Russian economy. Finally, in military terms, Russia has achieved more than parity. In fact, I would argue that at least in terms of quality the Russian armed forces are ahead in several crucial technologies (hypersonic missiles, air defenses, electronic warfare etc.) even while she still lags behind in other technologies (mostly truly obsolete things like aircraft carriers). But most crucial is the political victory of Russia: five years after the Euromaidan and the liberation of Crimea from the Nazi yoke, the USA is far more isolated than Russia. It’s comical, really!

5) “real “civilizational states” which now come not only to shake up our international order”

I have been speaking about a unique, and very distinct, “Russian civilizational realm” in many of my writings and I am quite happy to see Macron using almost the same words. Of course, Macron did not only mean Russia here, but also India and China. Still, and although the Russian nation is much younger than the one of China or, even more so India, 1000 years of Russian civilization does deserve to be listed next to these two other giants of world history. And what is absolutely certain is that China and India could never build the new international order they want without Russia, at least for the foreseeable future. In spite of all the very real progress made recently by the Chinese armed forces (and, to a lesser degree, also the Indian ones), Russia still remains a much stronger military power than China. What Russia, China and India are, is that they are all former empires which have given up on imperialism and who know only aspire to be powerful, but nevertheless “normal” nations. Just by their size and geography, these are “un-invadable” countries who all present a distinct model of development and who want a multi-polar international order which would allow them to safely achieve their goals. In other words, Macron understands that the future international order will be dictated by China, Russia and India and not by any combination of western powers. Quite an admission indeed!

6) “ Look at India, Russia and China. They have a much stronger political inspiration than Europeans today. They think about our planet with a true logic, a true philosophy, an imagination that we’ve lost a little bit.”

This is the “core BRICS” challenge to the Empire: China and Russia have already established what the Chinese call a “Comprehensive Strategic Partnership of Coordination for the New Era”. If they can now extend this kind of informal but extremely profound partnership (I think of it as “symbiotic”) to India next, then the BRICS will have a formidable future (especially after the Brazilian people give the boot to Bolsonaro and his US patrons). Should that fail and should India chose to remain outside this unique relationship, then the SCO will become the main game in town. And yes, Macron is spot on: China and, especially, Russia have a fundamentally different worldview and, unlike the western one, theirs does have “much stronger political” goals (Macron used the word “aspirations”), “a real philosophy and imagination” which the West has lost, and not just a “little bit” but, I would argue, completely. But one way or the other, and for the first time in 1000 years, the future of our planet will not be decided anywhere in the West, not in Europe (old or “new”), but in Asia, primarily by the Russian-Chinese alliance. As I explained here, the AngloZionist Empire is probably the last one in history, definitely the last western one.

Now we should not be naïve here, Macron did not suddenly find religion, grow a conscience or suddenly become an expert on international relations. There is, of course, a cynical reason why he is changing his tune. In fact, there are several such reasons. First, it appears that the on and off bromance between Macron and Trump is over. Second, all of Europe is in free fall socially, economically and, of course, politically. And with a total nutcase in power in London dealing with Brexit and with Angela Merkel’s apparently never-ending political agony, it is only logical for a French head of state to try to step in. Furthermore, while I have always said that Russia is not part of Europe culturally and spiritually, Russia is very much part of Europe geographically, economically and politically and there is simply no way for any imaginable alliance of European states to save Europe from its current predicament without Russian help. Like it or not, that is a fact, irrespective of whether politician or commentator X, Y or Z realizes this or not. Macron probably figured out that the so-called “East Europeans” are nothing but cheap prostitutes doing whatever Uncle Shmuel wants them to do, Germany is collapsing under the weight of Merkel’s “brilliant” emigration policy while the UK under BoJo is busy trying to self-destruct at least as fast as the USA under Trump. Macron is right. If united, Russia and France could build a much safer Europe than the one we see slowly and painfully dying before our eyes today. But he is also wrong if he thinks that Russia can be “re-invited” back into the AngloZionist sphere of influence. In that context, Putin’s reply to the question of whether Russia was willing to return to the G8 is very telling: first he said that if the G7 wants to come back to Russia, Putin would welcome that, but then he also added that the G7/8 is useless without, yes, you guessed it, China and India.

It will be interesting to see if the current G7 will ever agree to mutate into a new G10 which would make Russia, China and India the most powerful block (or voting group) of this new forum. I personally doubt it very much, but then they are becoming desperate and Macron’s words seem to be indicating that this option is at least being discussed behind closed doors. Frankly, considering how quickly the G7 is becoming utterly irrelevant, I expect it to be gradually phased out and replaced by the (objectively much more relevant) G20.

Finally, there are Trump’s efforts into getting Russia back into the G8 which are very transparently linked to the current trade war and geostrategic competition between the US and China. The offer is useless to Russia, just like the return to PACE, but Russia does not want to needlessly offend anybody and that is why Putin did not publicly rebuff Trump or directly refuse to come to Miami: instead, he approved of the general concept, but offered a better way to go about it. Typical Putin.

Conclusion: Macron reads the writing on the wall

Whatever his political motives to say what he said, Macron is no idiot and neither are his advisors. Neither is this a “one off” thing. The French meant every word Macron spoke and they are putting everybody on notice (including the Ukrainians, the US, the EU and the Russians, of course). In fact, Macron has already invited Putin to participate in a Normandy Format meeting in Paris in the very near future. If that meeting eventually does take place, this will mean that the organizers gave Putin guarantees that this will not just be the usual kaffeeklatsch and that some serious results will finally be obtained. That, in turn, means that somebody – probably the French – will have the unpleasant task of telling the Ukrainians that the party is over and that they now need to get their act together and start implementing the Minsk Agreements, something which Zelenskii might or might not try to do, but which the real gun-toting Ukronazis will never accept. Thus, if the West is really serious about forcing Kiev to abide by the Mink Agreements, then the West has to finally give-up its self-defeating russophobic hysteria and substantially change their tone about the Ukraine. To invite Putin to Paris just to tell him again that Russia (which is not even a party to the Minsk Agreements) “must do more” makes zero sense. Therefore, all the other parties will have to come to terms with reality before inviting Putin. Apparently, this might be happening in Paris. As for Trump, he just offered to mediate (if asked to do so) between Russia and the Ukraine.

It shall be extremely interesting to see if this Normandy Format meeting does actually take place and what role, if any, Trump and the USA will play behind the scenes. We shall then know if Macron’s epiphany was just a one-time fluke or not.

The Saker

PS: the latest rumor from the Ukraine: Zelenskii supporters are saying that Poroshenko is preparing a coup against Zelenskii and that he is preparing a special force of Ukronazi deathsquads to execute that coup. Dunno about a real coup, but they have already blocked the Rada. Never a dull moment indeed… 🙂

#France #russia #U.S.A

0 notes

queernuck · 7 years

Text

The Conceptual Culture

Often, critiques that posit the coloniality of gender and sex as demarcations of the body are in part owing to a sort of entry into the Lacanian mirror stage (as described by Deleuze and Guattari) and a creation of “lost origins” (as described by Spivak) in order to preserve a bourgeoisie artifice, in order to create bodies that are both cultural and colonial, that can travel through the process of a New Imperialism in order to reach the neocolonial reproduction of the state and the globalized post-state, the “earth” of capitalist discourses within postmodernity. Horvat’s discussion of “postmodern permissiveness” coupled with his contrast of the supposed-love that the West creates in itself and the sort of quasi-Occidental mirroring of Orientalist critiques necessary to create the hatred of fundamentalism (a hatred that is as much ideological construct as it is sense-process) such that one reaches a point of constructivism regarding the creation of a “culture” and one must turn toward the question of critiquing culture within itself, critiquing the very notion of culture as a nomadic structure tied to a colonial power of articulation.

The example that most commonly broaches this is gender, but it is tied to numerous other questions of nationalisms, national self-determination, and of affinity that exceeds conventional national standards. For a Maoist, supporting national liberation struggles in the Philippines, in Rojava (an important part of discussing Syria as a nexus of American ideological investment), in Palestine, even in Russia and Novorussia as part of dealing with the manner that bourgeoisie articulations of nation are often contrasted to communist articulations of strategic cultural revolution: national determination makes revolutionary organizing far more meaningfully possible, allows for the creation of a conceptual culture within which one may inspire that revolutionary spirit, within which one may speak of cultural revolution. Badiou’s Metapolitics serve as a specific point at which one can articulate the structuralist critique of postcolonial and postmodern discourses on meaning in a terminology that allows Maoist thought to flourish: one can in fact pose affinity with anarchists, even liberal causes, in order to create conditions for the defeat of bourgeoisie control. In effect, Maoist politics of opposition lead to a reversal, an articulatory act that is deconstructive in its implications (if not in its nature) and acts as a means of explicating the relations that make up the determined and resisted nations, such that one may in fact begin to articulate an artifice of culture.

The importance of this process in postcolonialism is the focus of Spivak’s Can The Subaltern Speak? in that she not only describes a status of subaltern for women in the “Third World” but moreover a positionality in the “shadow of the subaltern” such that even in postcolonial discourses, women are only viewed as a sort of surrogate object, are viewed as exceptional, as secondary or tertiary in terms of liberatory practice. In effect, women are only present in relief, in the shadow that is proscribed by subaltern as a status. Deleuze and Guattari describe the totalizing field of capitalism, that through its ephemerality and phantasmic quality it enters into a relationship such that the Oedipal may be present at any moment, that the arboreal is not unique to the European, and that the discovery of an apparent-arboreal is not the discovery of a sort of European origins or European ontology of Being, but rather is related through the violent structuring of capitalism such that it becomes-colonial, but moreover becomes-colonized, becomes-colonial subject. The focus of cultural education in the colonial is multifarious: it involves separating children from adults such that there is a means by which the two are disconnected even when engaged in “cultural” relations, a creation of a sense of affinity for the colonizer and the colonial culture (the Frenchness that was imbued within the subjectivities of the Négritude movement is an especially important example) and finally the articulation of one aspect of a larger hegemonic operation of ethnic cleansing such that education is required to become-subject, even in refusal of the full subjectivity.

The depth to which this colonial violence is imbued within a supposed-culture is shown when one enters a sort of Mirror Stage of articulation, a search for “lost origins” that Spivak derides, as it involves an articulatory process of the cultural and the affectations that structure it that is in fact owing to the colonial language, the colonial ontology of subject-formation, of the very subjectivity in question, such that the subaltern is by no means genuinely speaking. When one describes a precolonial concept of gender, such as how Daesh’s violence describes a woman against-the-West, in fact it is a mirror-West being created, one relies upon the same partial-objects of erotic desire to create a woman as an object without restoring subjectivity to her. When this is then critiqued in the West, it far too often relies on the “lost origins” that Spivak discusses. When one critiques how choices of clothing in the West have been structured by hegemonic articulations of gender, but then acts as if this is unique to the West, one in fact implies a sort of primality, a static non-culture as that which defines the formerly-colonized. Instead, this is a New Colonialism, a new structuring of the colony that involves neocolonial discourses of power.

The question, then, of gender, of affinity based upon nation, of how one conceives of culture, is brought into conflict with the Cultural Revolution as action: Mao’s thought not only articulates culture, but a backwardness to it such that the “lost origin” is precluded from discourses upon it. Rather, a continuation as possibility is denied, and instead one must question what best allows for the becoming-revolutionary that is emblematic of the Maoist spirit.

To question this is not to engage in a denial of culture akin to the original imperial impulse, nor to raise the “lost origins” of neocolonial discourses. Instead, one must question the tendency toward a somewhat mythic concept of “culture” used to defend reactionary rearticulations of colonial power, of Oedipal structures that have been articulated within the overwhelming and choking grasp of capitalism, and to provide a framework where their origin outside of the neocolonial does not situate them outside of it in the apparent plane of immanence required for critiquing colonial violence. The manner in which the indistinguishable hyperreality of the neocolonial globe at once pulls toward a mythic-modern hyperculture and demands ostentatious authenticity can make the critique of a “lost origins” confused, which is not a disadvantage for the structures in question. Rather, one must at once acknowledge the influence of this sort of anticultural revolution, and critique it such that one does not enter into either an embracing of its nihilism (except perhaps as a nihilism toward the West of the World) or of the reactionary violence in the name of opposing it.

1 note · View note

freedomaboveall · 1 year

Text

President Putin has approved the "Hero of Russia" award for exemplary warrior Timur Kurilkin, commander of the legendary Somali Battalion in Donbass. Colonel Kurilkin is well-known and respected on the Right and as a Slavic Native Faith (Rodnovery) pagan, showing the diversity of forces aligned to defend Novorussia against the globalists. Congratulations!!

2 notes · View notes

sarahc351 · 6 years

Link

Notre fondateur a été très sollicité ce week-end. Après avoir été interrogé par François Billot de Lochner, pour Liberté Politique, il a répondu aux questions du site russe Novorussia Today. Cette …

0 notes

johnnmanarelli · 6 years

Photo

0 notes

paulonunesdossantos · 7 years

Photo

A local resident sits in a bomb shelter in the basement of a destroyed hospital in Kievsky District in Donetsk. Kievsky is one of the areas most affected by the fierce fight between DNR rebels and the Ukrainian military over the control of the city airport. Throughout Donetsk, there are people living in very basic shelters and under constant shellfire for almost four months. Many of them without electricity, humanitarian aid or a chance to move to safer areas. Photo taken on assignment in October 2014.

#ukraine #east Ukraine #donbass #Donetsk #war #conflict #europe #novorussia #Russia #paulo nunes dos santos

0 notes

jgmail · 5 years

Text

El Imperio de nuestro mañana

por Alexander Dugin – En nuestro Sacro Estado Gran-Continental habrá tres tipos (con variaciones y subtipos, bien sûr):

Filósofos-sacerdotes (clero).

Guerreros héroes reales (aristocracia, nobleza).

Trabajadores-lugareños (pueblo).

Si usted no se reconoce entre estos tres tipos, no será incluido en este Estado.

Esta es la estructura clásica de la sociedad indoeuropea originaria, que siempre (y para siempre) ha sido la esencia misma de las ideas sociales y políticas de las culturas europeas e indoeuropeas de Eurasia. Surge en tiempos remotos, en la antigüedad, en la civilización mediterránea en la Edad Media, e incluso a través de la patología de los tiempos modernos (en forma ilegible).

Por qué tratar con parodias, necesitamos un Sacro Imperio.

A la cabeza, el Basileos sacro, el Gran Monarca.

Vea: hoy todo el mundo plantea proyectos completamente utópicos y no duda en hacerlo. Cualquier desfile gay universal con seres poshumanos poseídos por las divisas virtuales y la inmortalidad física (liberales). También el califato global (wahabitas).

Luego, aquel centro mesiánico mundial en Israel que alimenta la mano de hierro ger-toshav (sionista) [1]. Los “realistas” y los partidarios del statu quo (que dicen: no pasará nada y todo será como lo es ahora, como de costumbre, como si todo hubiera sido como ahora, sin sentido – todo fue siempre diferente, y eso depende de lo que somos como seres humanos libres, y de lo que queremos profundamente en nuestros corazones) refunfuñan un completo absurdo – no hay nada más utópico que el deseo de preservar todo lo que existe en este momento. En cualquier caso, somos guiados por grandes proyectos.

Por qué deberíamos escondernos, como tradicionalistas y esencialmente conservadores, tras la fachada de nuestros planes y proyectos basados en secos cálculos racionales (nadie nos cree de todos modos). Por lo tanto, es posible hablar abiertamente: nuestro objetivo es el Imperio Indoeuropeo – desde Vladivostok hasta Dublín. Bajo la bandera de Cristo y del Gran Monarca. El Imperio del Pueblo, gobernado por los sabios y los valientes. No existirán allí mercaderes y politecnólogos, oligarcas y usureros.

Todo aquel al que no le guste, puede irse o hundirse en las otras asquerosas, en mi opinión, utopías.

La Gran Ucrania es una tontería, irrealizable, rencorosa, mezquina, envidiosa, basada en el resentimiento como idea nacional. Pero la Gran Rusia no es una tontería. Fue y será. Nuestras tierras se estrechan, y luego, como un resorte, se expanden.

Como siempre. Así late el corazón de Rusia. En 1991 se nos apretó de nuevo. Con Osetia, Abjasia y especialmente la guerra de Crimea y la cuenta atrás de Novorussia, es tiempo de Imperio. Muchos de nosotros quieren detenernos, pero no tendrán éxito. Estamos construyendo una sociedad diferente en general, otro Estado que el que tenemos ahora. De este estado de transición no será dejada piedra sobre piedra, como no se dejó piedra del Imperio Ruso y después de la Unión Soviética. Y no vamos hacia atrás, sino que avanzamos.

La eternidad no está en el pasado, está también siempre en el presente, y lo más importante, en el futuro. Toda la eternidad está por delante. Esta es la verdadera vanguardia.

El Sacro Imerio Indoeuropeo del Fin, ese es nuestro verdadero futuro. El malentendido actual se disipará como el humo.

Rusia retorna a la historia y construirá una nueva Rusia. Imperial y absoluta. Novorussia.

(Tradución al inglés de Vladimer Ilin)

Observaciones de Vladimer Ilin:

Puedo esbozar algunas cosas en nuestro camino:

1. Espiritual. Protestantes y sectas americanas son el obstáculo primordial. Lo político siempre depende de lo espiritual, y no podemos ignorar su influencia destructiva en nuestra sociedad ortodoxa. Necesitamos una reforma conservadora en todas partes.

2. Política. Todos los traidores, cobardes e intrusos son el obstáculo primordial, aquellos que en Novorussia frenan el proceso de nacionalización de las industrias de la oligarquía y desobedecen al Comandante Igor Strelkov. Lidiar con ellos bajo la ley marcial.

3. Cultural. La imagen de un pueblo (Laos) es reemplazada hoy con los medios de difusión. La Cultura (sociedad del espectáculo) está formada por conceptos populares de manipuladores infernales y no a través de la casta superior, como realmente debería ser.

Nuestra vida política vivirá cuando la purifiquemos con el Fuego (Idea, eidos), separando la valioso de lo sin valor.

(Traducción Página Transversal)

Fuente: The Fourth Political Theory

[1] Ger-toshav (en hebreo: גר תושב – ger, “extranjero”, y toshav, “residente”) en el judaísmo es un término que designa a un gentil que vive en la Tierra de Israel.

#tradicionalismo #tradición #Imperio Britanico #Alexander Dugin

0 notes

diversetravel-blog · 6 years

Photo

#IndependenceMovementOfTheDay is Novorossiya 🇺🇦🇷🇺🇺🇦 suggested by @antlpzs 🇷🇺🇺🇦🇷🇺 [This article downstairs support nor doesn't support this independence and is unbiased] The Population/Area/Religion is not possible for this Movements as borders and size is heavily debatable Novorossiya, Novorussia or New Russia also referred to as the Union of People's Republics, is a proposed confederation of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and Luhansk People's Republic (LPR) in eastern Ukraine, both of which share a border with Russia. Ukraine has designated the confederation as lying within an Anti-Terrorist Operation Zone. At present, the two constituent republics of the confederation have no diplomatic recognition, and Ukraine has classified them as terrorist organizations.The creation of Novorossiya was declared on 22 May 2014, and one month later spokesmen of both republics declared their merger into a confederal "Union of People's Republics".Within a year, the project was suspended: on 1 January 2015, founding leadership announced the project has been put on hold, and on 20 May the constituent members announced the freezing of the political project. The term Novorossiya came into usage in 2014 among Antimaidan protesters following the Euromaidan Ukrainian Revolution. On 29 August 2014 President Putin issued a statement addressed to the "Militia of Novorossiya" calling upon it to show humanitarian compassion and allow surrounded Ukrainian soldiers to withdraw and reunite with their families. This was the last official statement by Putin. 🇷🇺🇺🇦🇷🇺 To suggest a country or movement follow and comment [Most major countries are suggested so please comment lesser know countries particularly island's] Over 100 day waiting list 🇷🇺🇺🇦🇷🇺 #novorossiysk #ukraine#Ukrainian#novorussia #russia#russian#russiangirl#russianblue#russianboy #moscow#kiev#kievgram#stpetersburg #donetsk#donetskcity#donetskrepublic#donetskgram#odessa #ussr#countries#countryoftheday (at Odessa, Ukraine)

0 notes

elcorreodetorreon · 7 years

Photo

La última gran noticia de Ucrania ¿Has escuchado cuál es la última gran noticia de Ucrania? ¿No? Hay un mini-Maidan en camino y los nacionalistas ucranianos parecen esperar que Poroshenko sea expulsado antes de que finalice la semana. ¿No sabías? Bueno, esa es la gran noticia, el hecho de que no se enteró de esto. A decir verdad, lo que está pasando es algo interesante. Permítanme resumirlo: el ex presidente de Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili (que fue despojado de su ciudadanía georgiana y de su ciudadanía ucraniana) recientemente cruzó la frontera (a través de Polonia, por supuesto) y procedió a viajar a Kiev para exigir la renuncia de Poroshenko. ¿Crees que estoy bromeando? Mira el artículo de Wikipedia sobre él , tiene todos los detalles. Se pone mejor. Existe un consenso entre los analistas de que Saakashvili está siendo utilizado como ariete por alguien mucho más influyente: Iulia Timoshenko, por supuesto. Pero lo realmente nuevo es que muchos analistas y comentaristas bien informados parecen pensar que EE. UU. Y la UE no son el principal motor de estos últimos desarrollos (aunque están involucrados, por supuesto). ¿Que esta pasando aqui? Bueno, como dije, la gran noticia es que no has oído hablar de eso. No se enteró porque fundamentalmente a nadie le importa, y menos aún a la administración Trump. Es cierto que la Administración Trump está tan ocupada autodestruyéndose que tampoco le importa realmente el Kurdistán y eso implica que ni siquiera se preocupa por el Santo de los Santos: Israel (¡lloro un río, Bibi!). Así que, sin importar la administración de Trump, incluso a los Ziomedia en general parece no importarles más lo que sucede en Ucrania (por supuesto, algunos de los más duros de la línea dura todavía siguen alucinando ). De ahí el silencio (relativo) sobre este tema. Lo que esto les dice a los políticos ucranianos es que están prácticamente solos. Y es por eso que están tomando el asunto en sus propias manos. No creo que valga la pena sumergirse en todas las personalidades y facciones que están actualmente involucradas en la lucha política.Puedo resumirlo diciendo que hay cuatro grupos principales actualmente identificables: malo, peor, incluso peor y la mayoría silenciosa. Comencemos por el último, la mayoría silenciosa. Según todos los relatos (y de todos mis contactos personales), es bastante obvio que la gran mayoría de aquellos que no pudieron abandonar Ucrania ahora están deprimidos, en silencio y en un "modo de supervivencia". Los ucranianos, como los rusos, son extremadamente buenos en este modo de supervivencia que les ha enseñado una historia muy dolorosa: podrían sobrevivir en condiciones en que todos los demás perecieran. Su historia también les ha enseñado que hay un tiempo en el que desea permanecer bajo, callarse y concentrarse en superar el día. También creo que la mayoría de los ucranianos se dan cuenta completamente de que no hay una facción / fuerza que represente su interés y eso significa que no tienen absolutamente ninguna razón para involucrarse. Esto no tiene nada que ver con la pasividad o la ignorancia política: eso es sentido común. Participar es lo que te mata. Agachándose hasta que pase la peor de las tormentas es la única técnica de supervivencia correcta en tiempos de luchas políticas muy desagradables. Luego hay cosas malas, peores y aún peores. Malo, eso es Poroshenko.Peor aún, esos son los locos à la Oleg Liashko. Peor aún: esos serían los ideólogos rabiosos como Tiagnibok o Farion. Podemos pensar que son los Crooks, los Payasos y los Nazis. Los ladrones, el payaso y los nazis: En este momento, los Crooks todavía están en el poder, pero están luchando. Peor aún, los ladrones están aterrados de los nazis, por lo que constantemente tienen que participar en una serie de concesiones para tratar de apaciguarlos, lo que, por supuesto, fracasa, y solo les anima a los nazis (suena exactamente como la corriente inagotable de concesiones de Trump a los Neocons, ¿no?). En cuanto a los Payasos, pueden ser comprados por ambos lados, a veces al mismo tiempo, y mantienen a la gente entretenida por sus travesuras. Los payasos son en realidad un subproducto de la ideología nacionalista ucraniana terminalmente lunática, pero en realidad no representan un electorado poderoso: los ladrones y los nazis son mucho más poderosos. Aún así, no descartes a los payasos demasiado pronto, porque podrían cambiar repentinamente a los ladrones o los nazis dependiendo de quién les ofrezca un mejor trato (o los atemorice más). Todo esto parecería bastante divertido si otro ataque de Urkonazi no fuera una posibilidad muy real. Aquí es cómo podría suceder esto. Los Crooks apenas se aferran al poder, y es posible que tengan que iniciar una guerra solo para desviar la creciente presión política en contra de ellos en otra dirección. Las guerras son buenas para rodear los carromatos y aplastar a la oposición. Los Payasos, debido a su ideología, tendrían que aprobar una nueva guerra. Simplemente no podían decir nada en contra de eso. Si se lanza una guerra, tendrían que darle una ovación de pie. Además, si intentaban cualquier forma de desacuerdo, serían fácilmente aplastados por los Crooks y los nazis. Entonces los Payasos siempre apoyarán lo que las otras dos facciones acuerden. En cuanto a los nazis, bueno, la guerra contra Rusia y cualquier cosa rusa es su razón de ser , el centro mismo de su identidad y el propósito de sus vidas. Los Ukronazis tienen una visión del mundo y una agenda profundamente revanchistas y si derrotar a Rusia no es una opción (aunque algunos de ellos ni siquiera lo aceptarán como un hecho de la vida) entonces matar o expulsar a todos los no-Ukronazis de Ucrania es un sustituto aceptable para ellos. Sí, incluso tienen algunas teorías de pureza racial intrincadas (Ukie Aryans versus Mongols rusos finno-ugrianos). Es cierto que los nazis genuinos son una minoría en Ucrania, pero lo compensan teniendo armas, muchas armas. Lo que ha impedido a Ukronazis atacar desde su último intento es el doloroso recuerdo de la aplastante derrota que sufrieron a manos de los novorussianos. Pero aquí también existe un riesgo muy real: las derrotas a menudo mejoran los ejércitos, las victorias a menudo los hacen complacientes. Cuando escucho a los novorussianos hablar de "la próxima vez que vayamos a Kiev", espero que su confianza esté justificada, pero me temo que podrían estar subestimando al oponente. ¿Están los lados realmente listos para una reanudación de la guerra? En verdad, es muy difícil evaluar las posibilidades de otro ataque Ukronazi. Por un lado, las fuerzas de Ukronazi han tenido dos años para reagruparse, lamer sus heridas, reorganizarse, rearmarse, entrenarse, etc. Lo más importante es que parece que han construido posiciones defensivas en profundidad, posiblemente incluyendo 2 o incluso 3 escalones defensivos. ¿Por qué importa la defensa? Porque si tus posiciones defensivas son fuertes, entonces el riesgo de contraataque de las fuerzas enemigas es mucho menor y eso, a su vez, significa que tu ofensiva es mucho menos probable que termine rodeada de un "caldero" (simplifico aquí, en realidad esto es un poco más complicado ya que depende de la profundidad de tu ataque, pero no importa eso). Un par de años es mucho tiempo para excavar en una preparación para la defensa y, sin acceso a datos clasificados, es difícil evaluar quiénes han sido efectivos estos esfuerzos. En términos de equipos nuevos (ya sean ucranianos o nuevos suministrados por el Imperio), no harán ninguna diferencia, eso es solo charla política. Mi consejo es que tan pronto como escuches o leas algo sobre la entrega de "armas letales" ignoras todo lo que viene después de eso. Lo mismo ocurre con el entrenamiento de expertos polacos o estadounidenses. Eso es solo propaganda. Lo que no es propaganda es el apoyo de inteligencia ofrecido por el Imperio abiertamente (satélites) o encubiertamente ("observadores" de la UE, etc.). Eso y el hecho de que los Ukronazis tienen una ventaja numérica de 2-2.5: 1 sobre los Novorussians. Gran parte de lo mismo podría decirse sobre los novorussianos: también han tenido 2 años para excavar, según todos los informes ahora han integrado sus fuerzas en un ejército regular capaz de contraofensivas de profundidad operativa, su moral y entrenamiento es probablemente mucho más alto que en el lado Ukronazi y pueden contar con el apoyo ruso (inteligencia, logística, entrenamiento, etc.). Además, tendrían la ventaja del terreno doméstico. Finalmente, y Putin dijo muy claramente que recientemente, Rusia no permitirá la reconquista militar de Novorussia, lo que significa que incluso si los Ukronazis de alguna manera logran atravesar las defensas novorussianas serán atacados por las fuerzas armadas rusas, principalmente por misiles / bombardeos ataca en qué punto la guerra se detendrá en menos de 24 horas. El gran error conceptual, sin embargo, sería suponer que los Ukronazi realmente quieren reconquistar Novorussia (o Crimea, para el caso). En realidad, todo el mundo sabe que estos territorios se han ido para siempre y que Kiev simplemente no tiene medios para controlarlos, incluso sin la ayuda de Rusia . Permítanme repetir esto: incluso si por algún efecto mágico los rusos permitieran que los ukronazis invadieran el Donbass, esto resultaría en una guerra de guerrillas fantásticamente desagradable por parte de los lugareños que los urkonazis no tendrían ninguna posibilidad de vencer. Sí, sería un baño de sangre, pero nunca terminaría con una pacificación viable del Donbass mis Ukronazis. Por lo tanto, diría que el papel de Rusia no es impedir que Kiev recupere el control del Donbass, sino evitar un baño de sangre en el Donbass. El objetivo real: no para ganar, sino para provocar una intervención rusa (el mismo viejo, el mismo viejo) Ahora, y he estado diciendo que durante años, el verdadero objetivo de la junta es forzar a Rusia a intervenir abiertamente en el Donbass. Tan pronto como los rusos se involucren abiertamente y maten los acuerdos de Minsk 1 y 2, se convertiría el desastre actual en la Ucrania ocupada por los nazis en una guerra de liberación nacional contra los odiados moskalos, la OTAN pondría fin de inmediato a todo lo reciente. la cozying-up de varios partidos políticos de la UE hacia Rusia y el sueño húmedo del Imperio anglosajón finalmente se haría realidad: una intervención rusa como esa marcaría el comienzo de una nueva Guerra fría, posiblemente incluso Tibia en Europa, dando así un significado a la OTAN (¡finalmente!) y aplastamiento cualquier tipo de sentimiento antiimperial en Europa. Los Balts y los polacos finalmente estarían seguros en su misión de "proteger a Europa de una Rusia resurgente" y los Neocons de EE. UU. Tendrían una gran fiesta de victoria. Es cierto que Rusia liberaría toda la región de Novorussia en 24 horas o menos y, sí, con la ayuda de Rusia, los novorussianos podrían empujar la línea de contacto (bueno, en este punto, la línea de frente) más o menos hacia el oeste como quisieran. Pero eso sería una pequeña victoria en el contexto de una catástrofe política global (junto con un feo baño de sangre). Esta es la razón por la cual los rusos han hecho un gran esfuerzo * no * para intervenir, incluso si eso les ha costado un montón de capital político (todavía hay quienes hablan de un "agotamiento" ruso del Donbass). A diferencia de su contraparte occidental, que todavía no comprende que el propósito de la guerra es lograr un objetivo político, los rusos se dan cuenta completamente de que una victoria militar (fácil) contra los Ukronazis tendría un costo de un inmenso desastre político.Lo último que quiere el Kremlin es copiar lo que hicieron los estadounidenses en Irak y Afganistán: comiencen por una victoria fácil, declaren la victoria y terminen con un desastre absoluto del que no puedan salir. En este sentido, Crimea fue un caso totalmente diferente y único: una tierra de vital importancia, que históricamente era rusa, poblada por personas que eran abrumadoramente pro-rusas (o, simplemente, rusas), con puntos de estrangulamiento fáciles de controlar que conectaban con la Ucrania ocupada por los Nazis y fantásticas perspectivas económicas. Y, sin embargo, incluso en estas condiciones ideales, la economía rusa está luchando por reconstruir este territorio relativamente pequeño. Está bastante claro que, al final del día, Rusia también tendrá que pagar la mayor parte de la reconstrucción del Donbass, por dura que sea. Pero en la medida de lo posible, Rusia preferiría hacer de la reconstrucción de Ucrania un problema internacional, una razón más para que trate de evitar cualquier intervención militar real y abierta. Porque una vez que Rusia ocupa cualquier territorio, ella lo posee y se hace responsable de él. La conclusión es la siguiente: no escuchamos mucho sobre Ucrania en este momento porque al menos los estadounidenses en los Estados Unidos parecen haber abandonado todo este proyecto y porque están ocupados con asuntos más importantes (autodestrucción, principalmente). Pero eso no significa que la situación en Ucrania no pueda volver a encenderse repentinamente con consecuencias internacionales muy serias. Entonces, cuando hablo de Crooks, Clowns y Nazis, no estoy tomando estos temas a la ligera. Sí, realmente son ladrones, payasos y nazis, pero también individuos muy peligrosos, especialmente colectivamente. ¿Un pequeño rayo de esperanza para "menos malo"? Corre el rumor de que las dos grandes figuras detrás de escena en Ucrania son Igor Kolomoiskii (que ahora tiene una venganza personal contra Poroshenko y Saakashvili) e Iulia Timoshenko. Honestamente, no tengo medios para evaluar estas afirmaciones, pero diré que si bien estas dos personas son verdaderamente malvadas y odiosas (Kolomoiskii probablemente estuvo profundamente involucrado en la falsa bandera MH-17), ninguna de ellas es estúpida. Además, son ladrones, no payasos o nazis, lo que significa que pueden negociarse con ellos, por desagradable que sea. Por último, pero no menos importante, ambos tienen una verdadera base de poder en Ucrania, dinero en el caso de Kolomoiskii, verdadera popularidad en el caso de Timoshenko. En esto veo un pequeño rayo de esperanza. Con los estadounidenses estadounidenses ocupados luchando entre sí internamente, y con los europeos despertando lentamente a la catástrofe total "su" (no es realmente "de ellos", pero no importa) la política ucraniana ha sido, tal vez, sólo tal vez, hay una Pequeñas posibilidades de, digamos, que algunos líderes de la UE se reúnan con, digamos, Timoshenko (Kolomoiskii nunca volverá a ser un funcionario público, va a tirar de los hilos por la espalda) para sentarse con los rusos y los novorussianos y finalmente negociar seriamente algún tipo de de fin a esta situación tan peligrosa. Recuerde, Poroshenko es un títere puro de los Estados Unidos, y él es débil. No hay forma de que pueda negociar * cualquier cosa * de sustancia más. Todo lo que tiene que hacer ahora es preparar su vuelo a los EE. UU., El Reino Unido o Israel.Pero Timoshenko sigue siendo "de verdad" y ella es mucho más capaz de lidiar con los nazis que Poroshenko, sus miles de millones, su fábrica de chocolate y su dependencia de Eltsin del alcohol. Por supuesto, existe el argumento del "diablo que conoces". Y en muchos sentidos, Poroshenko es el codicioso y débil cobarde empapado en alcohol que se ve como el mal menor. El problema es que está aterrorizado por los nazis y que lo están paralizando o haciendo que haga cosas estúpidas (como la reciente ley que hace que el único idioma utilizado en las escuelas sea el ucraniano). Y a pesar de todo el aliño desesperado, el hecho es que Ucrania ya es un estado fallido que está bajando por los aires con un impulso que nadie puede detener, al menos no con el estancamiento político actual en Kiev. Aún así, también deberíamos recordar que Eltsin también era un cobarde adicto a las bebidas alcohólicas, pero eso no evitó que desencadenara el baño de sangre de la Primera Guerra Chechena. Los cobardes codiciosos y débiles empapados en alcohol pueden ser extremadamente peligrosos.

0 notes