General Reshetnikov: Return to the Empire (superbly controversial interview)

February 13, 2017General Reshetnikov: Return to the Empire (superbly controversial interview)

Foreword by the Saker:  Today I am posting a really interesting interview which will sound absolutely outlandish to a lot of you.  Get this: the person interviewed is a former KGB General who speaks about restoring the monarchy under the rule of Jesus-Christ!  And when I say “KGB General” I am being just as dishonest as the western media when it writes about Putin being a KGB officer.  Technically speaking, yes, both Putin and Reshetnikov were in the KGB and they had the little red id card which did say “KGB USSR”.  But in reality both were part of the KGB’s Foreign Intelligence Service, the First Chief Directorate (PGU) of the KGB, a completely separate branch of the KGB which even had its own, separate, headquarters in Yasenevo District in the southwest of Moscow.  The First Chief Directorate (in Russian PGU KGB SSSR) did not deal with dissent, crime, or all the other security functions of the rest of the KGB.  The PGU dealt with foreign intelligence exclusively (after the end of the Soviet Union the PGU was kept independent and renamed “SVR” or “Foreign Intelligence Service).  And it was beyond any doubt the elite, most capable, part of the KGB: only the very best were accepted there.  As for Reshetnikov, he was a top level officer responsible for an analytical Department (in Russian “Head of an informational-analytical Department”).  In other words, the guys is exceptionally intelligent and exceptionally well-educated.  One of the best analysts in Russia.  And yet he speaks of monarchy and putting Christ in power. And he lumps Communists and Liberal into one group.  How do you figure that one out?  You can dismiss him as senile, but if that is the case, his senility manifests itself in a curious way.  Besides, having seen his interviews, I can tell you that he is not senile one bit.  A clown trying to make statements to be noticed?  There are not many clowns in the PGU, even less with a rank of Lieutenant-General (that means a “three-star” general).  I won’t give you my explanation, I think that I much rather leave you with a question mark and let you ponder this weird phenomenon.  I will just say one thing: to me the views of Reshetnikov are yet another solid indicator that Russia is most definitely not part of Europe, at least not culturally.  I won’t say more 😛  Now meet our rather most interesting character!

General Reshetnikov: Return to the Empire

by Lieutenant-General Leonid Petrovich Reshetnikov

Source: http://politikus.ru/articles/90244-general-reshetnikov-vozvraschenie-k-imperii.html

Translated by Eugenia

Donbass these days is suffering under horrific artillery fire. The Ukrainian forces are maniacally firing at Donetsk, Yasinovataya, Makeevka and other cities from MLSR and howitzers. There are many wounded; civilians are being killed, houses, schools and hospitals destroyed. This bloody spectacle is organized by the Kiev junta, which ignores all calls to stop this war, instead purposefully committing genocide of the population of the Donetsk and Lugansk Republics.

When and how will this horror end? What is the meaning of this all? What are the prospects of LPR/DPR and/or Novorossiya? And, finally, is there a way to rebuild the Great Russian Empire? We addressed these questions to the former head of the Analytic Division of the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation, then the Director of the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies, a currently the President of the society “Two-Headed Eagle” – Leonid Petrovich Reshetnikov.

Q: Donetsk and other cities of Novorossiya are under fire as we speak; the Ukrainian military are attempting to breach the front at multiple points. Why now and what is the cause of this escalation of the conflict?

A: This is a planned operation. The goal of the Kiev regime is to complicate the relations between Russia and the US. Currently, the relationship between the leadership of Russia and the new leadership of the USA is generally favorable for us. Kiev is scared; it is afraid that Ukraine will no longer be of interest to the United States and personally to Trump. For that reason, everything was planned in a way that the official visit of Poroshenko to Germany had to be interrupted because of the situation in Donbass aggravated by the Ukrainian side. We cannot exclude that Merkel was a co-conspirator in this; possibly, she herself initiated that action to undermine the Russian-American negotiations. The fear of Europe is no less than the fear of Ukraine. If the relations between Russia and US improve – Europe would be left out in the cold. Thus, on the initiative of some European politicians the Kiev criminals are murdering the civilians in Donetsk and Lugansk Republics in order to attain their chimeric foreign policy goals. They are attempting by such means to save their regime, to prove their usefulness. However, they are unlikely to succeed in preventing the improvement in the relations between Russia and the US.

The Kiev scum – Poroshenko, Parubiy and others – have built such a reputations for themselves on the war against their own people that they will certainly come to a sticky end. The best option – to flee abroad, otherwise they will pay dearly. I believe the Kremlin understands perfectly that the Kiev authorities are not partners but criminals that usurped power, and no negotiations with them are possible. I want to emphasize: the Kiev regime is doomed, and no provocations, no amount of artillery fire at Donetsk and other cities, no attempts at offensives will accomplish anything for Poroshenko and Co, except yet another brand mark on the foreheads of these scoundrels.

Leonid Petrovich, you were for a long time the Head of the Russian Institute of Strategic Studies. The Institute essentially laid the theoretical groundwork for the “Project Novorossiya”, which today the authorities in Russia and Donbass republics prefer not to mention. At the same time, the ordinary Donbass people became convinced that Novorossiya will not happen, and they will end up with nothing but a territorial fragment like the two Donbass Republics. In such case – without reunification with Russia via referendum – our future looks bleak . . .

Novorossiya was not created as some theoretical project; it was born through an explosion of the Russian historic self-awareness; an explosion unexpected for all – including Moscow, the Kremlin, the Russian public. Something that is hidden in the sub-consciousness in all of us – the yearning for the recreation of the Orthodox Russian Empire. Many have not yet realized what is Novorossiya, why it created such an enthusiasm in the society and why so many people went to defend it even at the cost of their own lives. That is because the idea of the Russian unity has survived under the layer of the dead ideology of the last hundred years. Why, then, the “project Novorossiya” wound down? I believe the reason is not only that some high ranking officials disapprove of it and closed it down (although that happened, too), but the main reason is that such project cannot be based on the Red Star: then that would not be Novorossiya, the resurrection of Russia, but an imitation of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, many in the political leadership and expert community returned to the Soviet paradigms of 1970-1980s of the last century. Those paradigms have shown their ineffectiveness long ago, and attempts to reuse them now could lead to the collapse of everything. Old Soviet schemes aren’t viable but the new ones – not Soviet, but liberal – have not been taken on by the majority, so for now there is no ideological foundation for Novorossiya . . .

History is moving along a spiral; repeats are possible only on a new basis. So, at the present turn of the historic development, the spirit of Novorossiya that broke through the ideological layers had to retreat temporarily. The politicians as well as ordinary people had insufficient understanding of what NOVOROSSIYA is, where are its historical roots and what is its true spiritual meaning. I do not agree that the project is dead; it is alive and will yet return. But! Only on one condition: if we ourselves realize what path our country has travelled on for the past hundred years.

The return of LPR/DPR to Ukraine with the special status, isn’t it done for the purpose, as many suppose, to transform Ukraine from the inside, to convert it into a pro-Russian entity? What do you think the near future holds for the Republics? People that are surviving for the third years under the fire of the Ukrainian military are demanding a clear answer to this question . . .

There are different opinions in the Kremlin, but no definitive decision: to surrender Donbass to Ukraine. Yes, there are people that indeed think this way and want to do this. However, there are others that believe we should not leave people of Ukraine that have not accepted the Nazi regime to the mercy of Kiev. My personal impression: our President does not want to unconditionally surrender to Ukraine the people that lived through a war, privations and suffering, so that these people would be subjected to severe repressions, which is inevitable if Donbass is returned to Ukraine.

The problem is that Kiev shows no real changes in its treatment of Donbass or relations to the Russian Federation, and I do not see any prospects in the near future for any changes favorable to us. That regime, in spite of its rotten nature, will be persisting for some time, because there are still enough people that worked for decades to bring about such a regime; they are bound by blood; they took power and have no intentions of relinquishing it. The resistance to the regime is disorganized, lack the nationalistic Idea, not specifically Ukrainian but common for our entire huge country, our specific civilization. During the Soviet period the people were brainwashed in a special way. Everything was done to make people believe that Ukraine is an independent country.

I lived and studied in Kharkov and remember how it was. At the local level, all the time the Soviet authorities were instilling the idea: although we live in one country, but Moscow, the central Russia is somewhere far away, and we are separate, we have our own history and our own heroes. The people were taught that way – what do we expect now? It is natural that in Donbass, Odessa, Crimea and other regions Russian spirit still remains – during the 70 Soviet years and 25 years of independence the transformation has not entirely succeeded. The Russian historic self-awareness persisted, as did the feeling of belonging to the same civilization of all people that lived on the territory of the Russian Empire. All this is still there, particularly in the Eastern Ukraine. That is why the Ukrainian nationalists failed to fully accomplish their project.

Starting from 1921, forced Ukrainization of the Russian regions was taking place, specifically, of the territory of the Great Don Cossack Army and Slobozhanshchina, incorporated by the order of Lenin and Stalin into Ukraine. At some point, the town with the “romantic” name Mines (earlier Alersandrovsk-Grushevsky) and Taganrog were also given to Ukraine. Later, however, the common sense prevailed, and the towns were returned to Russia. I don’t even want to remind about Crimea gifted to Ukraine by our restless Nikita Khrushchev. Nobody really wants to remember that or think about it; everybody starts the count from 1991. My dear friends, come on! The groundwork for the breakdown of the Soviet Union was laid in 1917 and later in 1920-30s. During the Soviet time, governments, flags, hymns, national heroes were invented; monuments to open Russophobes were built. Hence the explosion. The 1991 was the result of the Soviet policies, remember that, comrades with the red stars on their cap that I have seen in LPR . . . Your ancestors, your leaders that you revere created the conditions for the breakdown of the united country. What kind of Novorossiya could you create if you do not learn lessons from history?

Leonid Petrovich, at present there two peoples in Ukraine: the first is completely anti-Russian, totally different from us in its mentality, and the second – Russian, even if the representatives of this group call themselves Ukrainians, due to upbringing and stereotypes. In reality, they are essentially deeply Russian people. The division is along the civilization-mentality lines, the same as between Serbs and Croats. Nevertheless, in the Kremlin as well as in the Moscow expert community the dominant view is that the majority of the Ukrainian population is just temporarily misled, brainwashed by the propaganda. That is to say, we will use political technologies to break the spell; they will again recall that they are Russians – and everything will be peaceful like it was before. But at least half of the Ukrainian population has long time ago turned into a different nation. What do we do with them, how do we reconcile irreconcilable differences?

As a former (until 1974) resident of Ukraine, I generally agree with you opinion. That division existed even then: when you cross Dnepr river, on the other bank not everyone, but the majority looked like a different nation. The wife of my elder brother from the Poltava region and speaking the Malorossian dialect (the Poltava region, a part of historic Malorossiya, is on the left bank of the Dnepr neighboring the Kharkov and Dneptopetrovsk regions; Malorossiya (Poltava, Chernigov, Kirovograd), or Small Russia, together with Novorossiya (Odessa, Nikolaev, Kherson, Donbass) or New Russia, and Sloboshanshchina (Kharkov region), are historic names for territories of the Eastern Ukraine; in the Soviet period, the Poltava dialect was taken as a foundation for the development of the standard Ukrainian language – translator’s note) used to say about the speech of the people from the trans-Dnepr region: ”I do not understand their nice language. . . “ She is saying the same thing now. I agree that the inhabitants of the Western Ukraine were strongly influenced mentally and religiously by the Uniate and Catholic religions. Apparently, the fact that genetically the Western Ukrainians are linked to the leftovers of the Khazar Khanate also plays a significant role. Their mentality has a complex origin, and indeed today they are largely a different nation, although among them there are still people close to us in spirit. After all, the Russianness is not determined by the blood but by the mindset. Possibly, in the future there will be two different territories, two different states for these two peoples.

At his time, the Foreign Minister of the Russian Empire Khvostov wrote to the Tzar that Galicia should not be included into the Empire, since it was a completely alien element. Thus, the awareness of the deep difference was present then, and that difference should be taken into account in the future. It seems, they are a different nation. Croats and Serbs come to mind: there is little difference between the Serbian and Croatian languages – 100-200 words and slightly different pronunciation of a few sounds, which means this is essentially the same language. However, the mental differences make them two different nations, as do the difference in religion – Catholics and Orthodox – and in the origin and development of these nations.

That is why it is important to realize that we will not be able to rid them from the illusions – they are a different nation. Although some do, I repeat, harbor delusions in that regard – Kremlin is large, there are people with diverse opinions there, but there are also people who understand perfectly that two distinct nations inhabit the present day Ukraine.

We have to understand that the problem cannot be solved in one or two-three years; this is a long-term problem. The opportunities for working with the population of the Western Ukraine, the southern regions of Malorossiya are extensive. I am convinced that the “project Novorossiya” will be revived – this is our historic, spiritual project. In order to prevent that project from developing further, an unexpected weapon is currently employed – an imitation of the Soviet project.

You mean the idea embraced by some political analysts that “we in the end will return the whole of Ukraine”?

No, I speak about Novorossya proper, the eight South-Eastern regions of the present day Ukraine. Whatever idea someone embraces – it’s his business. In the leadership of our country and in the government there are enough people who understand that realistically we could only think about the project Novorossiya. To return the entire Ukraine – this is a fairy tale. Such idea shows either a total lack of understanding of the real processes or a disinclination to work towards a realistic goal justifying the inaction by the assertion that some day we will accomplish a much grander task of getting back the whole of Ukraine.

People that have still failed to understand what was happening with us during 73 years should not feel offended. These are all the rudiments of the Soviet style of thinking when the national factor was neglected, and as a result we got outbreaks of nationalism/separatism all over the territory of our civilization. I remember two main Soviet postulates. In 1988, when I was a junior official, I was delivering a talk to the leadership of the Foreign Intelligence Service, and the Chief of the Service Vladimir Aleksandrovich Kryutchkov said to me: “The Baltic countries will never get away from us, because . . . “. And then he talked about the World Economic Forum, economic connections, sausage factories, fishing ports and such. But we, the young employees of the Service, captains and majors, were sitting there and wondering: “My God, where are we going? Doesn’t he realize that sausage factories or fishing ports do not matter now at all; completely different things are important that are beyond the material concept of history, beyond the Marxist-Leninist concept”. An Idea is what always wins, and if we do not offer an Idea but are offering just material values instead, we will only achieve temporary solutions that are essentially failures. The same is now: Ukraine will go nowhere, we are giving it money, selling gas; we’ll turn off the gas – and that will be it . . .

Forgive me for the comparison, but it is the same as if Hitler was saying: Leningrad will go nowhere; the army of the Wehrmacht will blockade it, and the city will fall within a month. And what happened? The people mobilized, resisted, and won. But we have to understand that an Idea can also mobilize an enemy.

Attempts at resolving the conflicts among the nations or the states using exclusively economic methods are doomed, that’s is why we are losing. Instead of proposing and the idea of the unification of the Russian world, of the resurrection of the Russian orthodox civilization that would ensure the development and prosperity of all nations included in it, we very often hear spiritual surrogates that oppose the 73 Soviet years to 1000 years of the Russian history. The Great Patriotic War? Yes, we won. But is that to say that we have never fought and won in patriotic wars before? Have we not once expelled the occupiers from Kremlin (a reference to the expulsion from Moscow of the Polish invaders by the People’s Militia led by Minin and Prince Pozharsky in 1612 during the Time of Troubles – translator’s note)? Similar distortions happen with other subjects.

As far as we can judge based on the statements of the Russian politicians, a decision has been made to keep Ukraine as is for the foreseeable future. Regardless whether the Donbass Republics receive “the special status” or remains frozen in the status of unrecognized states, we (the Donbass Republics – translator’s note) unwillingly act as a factor of consolidation and support for the Ukrainian society, sort of like a “graphite moderator” for the nuclear reactor that prevents the nuclear reaction from getting out of control. The claimed existence of “terrorists”, “separatists”, “Russian mercenaries” provides the Kiev regime with the enemy image and allows to structure the Ukrainian society in such a way, so that in less than a generation it could be transformed into totally anti-Russian. This way, we will lose forever the opportunity to retain it in our Russian civilization fold. If the Republics join the Russian Federation, this “graphite moderator” would be withdrawn from the reactor, which could trigger the processes of disintegration of Ukraine. This and not the economic pressure or the war would allow for the informational and diplomatic changes in our favor to take place and for the project Novorossiya to be realized. What do you think about the possibility of conducting a referendum in the Donbass Republics about joining Russia?

I as a Russia patriot consider such outcome the most desirable: a referendum and reunification with Russia not only of Donbass, but also of Transnistria. However, there is one big ‘but”. We do not exist in an isolation, and currently Russia – many have not a slightest idea about that – is living through a very hard period being under a powerful attack by the globalist forces. Savvy people likely noticed that there was a period in October-November of last year when we were a step away from a military conflict with the United States. The President of our country is acting based on the information we are not privy to, and thus, sees the situation differently from how it appears to us. When I served as a head of the Analytical Division of the Foreign Intelligence Service (FIS) – I knew what the President was reading, but I knew only the part that was the responsibility of the FIS. Believe me, the situation is very complex . . .

The reunification of Crimea with Russia – this, of course, is an achievement of our President and of all those actively involved in the operation. However, without the will of God that could have not have happened. As a religious person, I consider this a miracle. As far as LPR/DPR are concerned, from my own viewpoint it seems to me that it would be right to conduct a referendum of them joining the Russian Federation. However, people at the top have access to all the information, and, apparently, have reasons to doubt that such a decision would be wise at this time. Would Russians be able to cope?

We have nothing to lose as far as sanctions or diplomatic pressure on Russia are concerned – everything that could be done has been done. What do you think is the main reason that does not let Russia allow the Republics to join? What prevents this?

What prevented the DPR from taking Mariupol in 2014?

An agreement with the oligarchs . . .

I do not know – perhaps. There was, however, a firm position of the West. Are we truly independent financially? Obviously, we are not. It is risky for the US and globalists to hit us in that area – it could backfire, but they still could employ such ultimate measures. The results would be a lot more painful for us than for them. I want to emphasize the activity of Vladimir Putin: all these years he is slowly step by step restoring Russia’s true independence.

Let us consider recent history. Industrialization, which the Stalinists are so proud of, was accomplished with enormous – material, technological, financial, and credit support of the US. Thanks to that support, Dnepr Hydroelectric Station, Magnitka (Magnitogorsk Metal Producing Plant, built in 1932, one of the largest in the USSR, the largest in Russia – translator’s note), Gorky Automotive Plant and thousands of other enterprises were built. When the Great Patriotic was nearing its end, Joseph Stalin was counting on $6 billions promised by Roosevelt and was prepared to comply with the demands of the USA: to keep the eastern European countries democratic, retain the multi-party system or monarchies (where they existed), refrain from strict collectivization, and to leave the church alone. Only after the Fulton speech and the establishment of the “Iron Curtain”, the Soviet Union has altered its foreign policy. However, the dependence remained, since the whole world existed inside the financial-economic system dominated by the US, and we were being incorporated into it more and more, as the socialist system created by us was not working.

I can make a statement surprising for some and outrageous for others: after 1917 we were never completely independent. It was not for nothing that the West invested so much energy and resources in order to use the “Red project” (the division of the Empire into 15 national republics) for the destruction of the Eastern-Slavic civilization.

I remember how in 1984 or 1985 I read the telegram of the Russian ambassador in FRG Yuliy Krivitsky about his conversation with the Vise-Chancellor of the Western Germany, leader of the Bavarian party Christian-Democratic Union, Joseph Straus. The latter said directly, even at that time: “You country, Mister Ambassador, is facing difficult times. You placed a bomb under it: 15 Republics – 15 governments, Parliaments, hymns, flags. All this will blow up, and the Soviet Union will break down . . . “ Krivitsky objected saying that FRG also had various lands – Saxony, Bavaria, Bremen, Hesse, etc., local governments, to which the Vise-Chancellor responded: “Our states are based on the territories, but yours – on the nations”. The West understood very well, as opposed to our leadership, the main problem of the Soviet Union and purposefully aggravated it. As a result, the Western Ukrainians, Georgians, Armenians, and other nations remembered their national roots, whereas only the Russian and, partially, Belorussians were transformed into the “Soviet people” having taken to heart the myth about internationalism and lost their historic memory.

Remember Serbs and Croats – we have the same problem in Russia. As Joseph Broz Tito cut down the Serbian – that of the state-defining nation – territories, the same way Joseph Stalin and his co-conspirators cut down the Russian territories. In particular, the Russian Novorossiya was given to the artificially created Ukraine, Ossetia – to Georgia, the Northern and Eastern Kazakhstan populated by Russians – to Kazakhstan. It that sense, all us Russians are somewhat circumcised, if you pardon the expression . . .

That is why the current efforts of our President, his heroic deeds will not be fully appreciated any time soon. His mission – to extricate the country every year millimeter by millimeter from the national, financial, economical and other types of traps we got caught in since 1917. Any sudden movement, such as a referendum about incorporation of LPR/DPR could have unintended consequences.

This is a complex and very painful questions for all Russians. Russia is by definition a Eurasian state; it is multinational. So, how do we ensure that the defense of the interests of ethnic Russians would not become the instrument of the destruction of the country under the slogans like “Stop feeding the Caucasus!”, “Siberia – is not Moscow” and so forth. How do we find the optimal formula, when the imperial component does not oppress but stimulates the development of the Russian nation? It is worth remembering that the Declaration of Independence of the Russian Federation was issued on June 12th, 1991, which predetermined the Belovezhsk conspiracy on December 8th, 1991, and the breakup of the USSR . . . How do we manage not to repeat our historic mistakes?

The country could not have avoided the breakdown, since we have divided it into the national republics. Recently we have had a conversation with the Dagestanis-Muslims, and I recalled another conversations with a Chechen – Major-General of the FSB and his words: “You know, Leonid Petrovich, if they had been a White Tzar above us and Allah – we would have all united. We love Russia, but fighting for it we do not fight for the territories as such but for the White Tzar . . . “ This is the main factor uniting all nations. The Dagestanis also agreed; they are also in favor of the Empire; they understand the value of the vertical of power. There is no difference in this issue between the Orthodoxy and Islam, and if the Empire happens, Islam will work for it. Remember that during the Civil War the Chechen, Ingushs, and other Caucasus people fought in the White Army.

An Empire is impossible without the absolute monarchy . . .

Yes. However, it is too early to propose the restoration of monarchy now. It would be a premature move. It is necessary to clear up our minds, our memory of myths. The history of our Motherland in the Soviet period was studied starting from 1935 – why was that? Because it was necessary to re-write it completely, but before that new faculty had to be trained. Then the guys from the Institute of the Red Professors invented our history for us out of nothing under the title “The short history course of the All Russia Communist Party of Bolsheviks” of Joseph Vissarionovich (Stalin – translator’s note).

Let us summarize. In order for the Russian nation to prosper and maintain good relations with other nations, we need to restore our independent state that could only be the Russian Eurasian Empire. The Empire could only be restored as a monarchy, but to accomplish that we need to change our mentality and to free ourselves from the Soviet stereotypes. But here is the problem: most Russian citizens still see in the Soviet epoch the Great Project, the Idea of Justice, the Joy of unprecedented Victories . . . How do we alter the people’s mentality without alienating that majority, how do we merge the best achievements of the Soviet time with the achievements of the Tzarist period?

Middle-aged people or older cannot be changed; we need to work with the youth. This is hard. Let me give you an example: my eldest grand-daughter once said to me: “Grandpa, our teacher in class asked us why Michael Romanov was elected as a Tzar (Michael Romanov, the first Tzar of the Romanov dynasty, was elected in 1613 after the Time of Troubles, which started following the death of the son of Ivan the Terrible, the last representative of the Rurik dynasty, in 1598; during that period, many events took place including the appearance of Pseudo-Dmitri claiming to be the youngest son of Ivan the Terrible, Dmitri supposedly was killed in childhood, his ascension to the throne in Moscow, the intervention of the Polish Army, and the final defeat of the Poles – translator’s note), and I replied that, first, all estates voted for him, because all wanted to have a Tzar in the country after a horrible period of the Time of Troubles. Second, the Russian Orthodox Church supported him, and the church had a strong influence. And third, since he was very young, he was not involved in any of the treasons of the Time of Troubles when the nobles switched sides in support of the Poles or Pseudo-Dmitri”. I praised her answer but my granddaughter said that the teacher considered her response incorrect. The response should have been as written in the textbook, which only had one sentence about this stating that the nobles wanted to have a young Tzar so that they could control him. That is how contempt towards the Russian history is imprinted onto the mind of our children. When children grow up, they will have hard time letting go of the false concepts and accept the idea of the monarchy. Many will be torn between the two projects imposed on us by the West – liberal and Communist.

Recall how communists and liberals (they are of the same stock) go into hysterics when someone mentions the Third way – a special historic role of Russia. If you simply mention, without any epithets, the name of the last Emperor Nikolas the Second – immediately atheists, liberals, homosexuals and other trash unite and start yelling that he was a weak Tzar, that he “sold and destroyed Russia”. What does that say? That we are on the right track. We do not intend to change the regime; out job is to help people understand the lessons of the past, and when that happens, then the desire to restore the Empire and Monarchy will become natural to them. The new Constitution will be adopted, and the real revival of Russia will begin. But for those who consider themselves monarchists, for all orthodox Russian people, a Tzar has always existed, exists and will exist, and his name is – Jesus Christ.

Leonid Petrovich Reshetnikov (b. February 6, 1947, Potsdam, Germany) — Soviet and Russian historian, Director of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies (29 April 2009 to 4 January 2017), the General-the Lieutenant of the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) of the Russian Federation.  Candidate of Historical Sciences.  Former chief of the information-analytical staff of the SVR in the rank of Lieutenant General.

Putin Befuddles the West: A Lesson From Scripture

 

putin3r-jptBy Richard Edmondson

What is it exactly with the leaders of the West and Vladimir Putin? Clearly they view Russia and its president as a threat, but why?

We have heard endless stories of “Russian hacking” and “Russian aggression,” while Putin has been called a “thug,” a “dictator,” and Russian forces have been accused of bombing hospitals in Aleppo–in fact Russia, it seems, bombed the “last hospital” and killed the “last doctor” in Aleppo on at least five different occasions in 2016: on November 18, July 30, July 23, April 27, and sometime either in the last week of January or early February (see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here ).

So What accounts for all this hysteria? Is it simply because Russia has thwarted US regime-change plans in Syria? Or is there something else behind it? Perhaps the Gospel of John can give us an answer.

In John chapter three, Jesus gets a visit from a Pharisee named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin, or ruling council. Christians will recall, of course, that Jesus had numerous problems with the Pharisees. They attacked him, despised him, and were at odds with him more so than any other group. However, Nicodemus seems to be one of the few Pharisees with an open mind, and who is at least somewhat willing to listen to reason. Moreover, the gospel tells us that Nicodemus “came to Jesus at night,” which has led scholars over the years to speculate that the Jewish leader was afraid to be seen talking to Jesus.

I should also mention here, that John chapter three is a favorite passage of evangelical Christians, for it is in this conversation with Nicodemus that Jesus uses the phrase “born again,” and of course it is also here he utters the famous words that make up the oft-quoted John 3:16. My focus here is not so much on either of these two lines, however.

Instead, the part of the dialog between Jesus and Nicodemus I find most interesting, and most germane to our commentary on Putin, is a curious comment Jesus makes about “Spirit” and “wind.” This comes after Nicodemus admits to being perplexed regarding Jesus’ admonition that “no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.”

“How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus responds quizzically. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born.”

It is at this point that Jesus attempts to clarify the matter, and in doing so ties in the concepts of spirit, wind, and rebirth–all into one. He says:

Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.

The frenzied minds of the West’s corrupt leaders contemplate the sound of Russia’s wind blowing, but they “cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going.” Imagine having an enemy like that and how bonkers it would drive you.

As I have pointed out in a number of posts, Russia has experienced an almost phenomenal spiritual rebirth since the fall of communism. You can go here, for instance, to see a post I did in 2013 that includes a fascinating video documentary on the Valaam Monastery. Located north and east of St. Petersburg, the monastery is considered one of the holiest sites of the Russian Orthodox Church.

“Those who’ve been here more than once,” the narrator remarks at one point in the documentary, “say you have to put the time into Valaam to understand it fully, that living and working here is the only way to really tap into its energy. The job is tough and repetitive, but none of the volunteers complain. Everyone is confident of a spiritual reward and happy that they’re working to reestablish a faith that was so persecuted during the Soviet Union.”

Monastic life also figured prominently in Putin’s visit to Greece last summer, for his state visit to that country included an excursion to perhaps one of the most unique places in the world. As I commented in a post on June 1:

Mount Athos is an autonomous monastic state located on a peninsula jutting into the Aegean Sea from the northern part of Greece. It is the home of a number of monasteries and is inhabited almost entirely by monks. With a political status kind of unique in the world, the 130 square-mile region is governed by a “Holy Community,” consisting of representatives from each of the monasteries, yet there is also a Civil Governor appointed by Greece’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, whose main job is to keep the infrastructure in tip-top shape.

The post also includes a video of the Russian leader being received warmly by the monks, as well as commentary by Russian writer Pavel Shipilin, who discusses what he thinks Putin’s leadership means to a majority of the Russian people:

I think, first of all, it is hope:

  • A person who aims at eternal values, not immediate ones, rules the country.
  • He supports peace, not war.
  • Russia for him is the last outpost of Orthodoxy (NS maybe Christianity in general). That’s why he is going to protect it.
  • That the office of the President for him is, first of all, for service, not a source of gain.

It is very important that Putin never emphasizes his Orthodoxy. He speaks and acts, as the President, not as a monk. It would be difficult to suspect him of ostentatious godliness. He visits remote churches all over Russia during major Christian holidays instead of going to the Cathedral of Christ the Savior as would be expected.

At the same time, we understand that Christian values are above so-called universal human values, which are imposed on us instead of centuries-old traditions. Postmodernism is just a beautiful cover; its essence is the decomposition and atomization of society. If we don’t resist it, it will end badly.

What is so attractive about Putin? It’s the fact that he calls things by their name. Same-sex marriage is a sin. The introduction of military forces into sovereign states without being requested by the legitimate government violates the rules established after World War II. It is also a sin. As is the behavior of one nation that decides its power gives it the right to rebuild the world in its own image.

Today Russia is the only country saying “No” to the US. It’s the only country whose “No” Washington clearly hears and cannot do anything about. And the main thing is that this firm “No” is heard by those who appreciate our common roots and traditions, who still hope that this crazy world will recover its soul.

Yes, Washington hears Russia’s “No” clearly–just as it hears the wind blowing without knowing what direction it’s coming from or where it’s going.

Shipilin’s comment about Putin spending Christian holidays visiting remote churches in rural areas of Russia, rather than attending services at the main cathedral in Moscow, is also interesting. The Russian Orthodox faith celebrated Christmas this year on January 7, and a huge and elaborate Christmas Eve liturgy took place at Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Savior. In fact I put up a post on it on January 6, here, which included a link to a two-hour video filled with scenes from the service. Most of the video was of the service in Moscow, but at a couple of different points the camera cut away to a small church in the province of Novgorod where Putin is observed attending a service with the locals. At one point he leans over and can be seen helping a small girl light a candle.

putinchristmas2

putinchristmas1

putinchristmas3

Think back to the last time you saw film footage of an American president attending a worship service at a church–any church. I don’t recall ever seeing anything of the sort, although maybe there were a few such incidents during the Carter administration.

So now we have Russia…fighting terrorists in Syria that America has supported…blocking Monsanto and banning GMO foods…taking steps to protect endangered species…while serving as snare and pitfall to a US-installed puppet government in Ukraine–and all the while, through its actions for good, counterchecking and abrogating the western media’s efforts to paint it as the villain.

“So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”

By “Spirit” Jesus is of course referring to the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is mentioned in all four gospels, but it is in the Gospel of John that it takes a front-and-center place in Jesus’s teachings. In addition to the passage in chapter three, we have these words in chapter four spoken by Jesus to the Samaritan woman at the well:

A time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks.

to his disciples in chapter six:

The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you—they are full of the Spirit and life.

and in chapter fourteen (here most of all):

If you love me, keep my commands. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever—the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you. I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you…

All this I have spoken while still with you. But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

This is what Nicodemus was trying to understand, but couldn’t quite grasp; and it is also what Western leaders have found so maddening.

“How can this be?” asks Nicodemus.

Jesus’ answer to him is instructive.

“You are Israel’s teacher,” he replies, “and do you not understand these things?Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?”

For the past six years US leaders have been trying to instigate a coup in Syria, and as we know, bringing down governments is something they have accomplished with ease countless times in countless countries around the world–but for six years now and counting they have failed to achieve this objective in Syria.

“How can this be?” they must be asking themselves.

I suspect if Jesus were here he would give them the same answer he gave Nicodemus.

Significantly the Holy Spirit also plays an important role in the birth narratives provided in the gospels of Luke and Matthew. In Luke, chapter one, the angel Gabriel visits the Virgin Mary to inform her she is to give birth.

“The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God,” he tells her.

The birth of Christ occurred at a time when a corrupt empire had expanded to the stage where it had come to tyrannize and prevail over much of the rest of the world. Christ’s coming into the world was in a sense a “rebirth” for humanity, and the empire at that time, as we know, eventually collapsed.

Now we see a present-day empire that has become grotesquely corrupt, prevailing over practically the entire world, this coming simultaneous to a rather amazing spiritual rebirth that we see occurring in one country–a country which, it so happens, is “the only country saying ‘No’ to the US,” as Shipilin rather aptly puts it. The parallels are there if you wish to see them.

Meanwhile, a rather befuddled Obama seems able to do little other than listen to the sound of the wind while wondering…where it’s coming from and where it’s going…as he prepares to leave office on the 20th.

Merry Christmas Russia!

orthodoxchrist1

January 7 is celebrated as Christmas day by millions of Orthodox Christians around the world. A midnight liturgy is scheduled for tonight at Moscow’s Cathedral of Christ the Savior.  You can watch the service here. Merry Christmas to all!

Related

 

‘Western Laws Now Clash with Moral Nature of Man,’ says Russian Religious Leader

“In the countries that declare their commitment to freedom of speech, you can get punished for expressing your opinion…”

[ Ed. note – A fascinating interview with Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill. You will likely find interesting his thoughts about how Western laws, in some cases, run against the internal “moral nature” of human beings, this with regard to normalizing things like transgenderism and gay marriage. But what I especially found intriguing are his comments about the persecution of Christians in Russia during the Soviet era, and of how that compares with attacks upon Christianity and the Christian faith in a number of Western countries today. What he perhaps hints at, though falls short of explicitly saying, is that there are a number of similarities, particularly in terms of who, or what group of people, have been behind it. As he puts it:

It seems as if political correctness is meant to limit Christians’ freedom to practice their faith. For example, why should we use ‘X-mas’ instead of ‘Christmas’? The answer we got to this question is that we shouldn’t hurt the feelings of non-Christians. So we asked Muslims if they were offended by the word ‘Christmas’, and they said “no.” We asked if they were offended by decorated Christmas trees in the streets, and they said “no.” So if Muslims are okay with that, whose feelings are we hurting here?

Yesterday was Patriarch Kirill’s 70th birthday. He is a Christian leader of enormous stature. Sadly, we don’t have anyone in the West who comes even close.]

RT

In an exclusive interview with RT, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, shared his ideas on the difficult situations of Christians in the Middle East, the US presidential election, and European multiculturalism.

RT: Your Holiness, first of all, let me congratulate you on your upcoming birthday. Thank you for taking the time to discuss these important –even global ­–issues with us. Let us talk about Christian affairs outside of Russia – specifically, about the Middle East and Northern Africa. As everyone knows, the dramatic events associated with the armed conflicts raging in the Middle East, especially in Syria, pose a threat not only to government leaders, individuals, secular regimes, etc., but to the Christian faith itself.Several months ago, you had a historic meeting with Pope Francis, during which you called upon the international community to stop the extermination and expulsion of Christians from these regions. Do you believe that enough is being done to stop this? Have you noticed any improvement since the time you made that statement? Or do you believe the situation has deteriorated?

Patriarch Kirill: I have on many occasions been forced to raise my voice – on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church – in defense of those whom I would call the persecuted Christians of the Middle East. Of all the minorities in the region, it is Christians who have been suffering the most. The statistics show an appalling dynamic: there used to be 1.5 million Christians in Iraq – now there is less than 150,000. There used to be half-a-million Christians in Syria, and now they have vanished without a trace, whether they were killed or fled the country. But the Middle East is the birthplace of Christianity, and of Christian culture. Which is why killing Christians or driving them out of the region isn’t just a crime against religion and against human rights and freedoms: it is a civilizational disaster. Because once Christian communities vanish from those countries, life there will change in every respect. Prior to the current crisis, the governments in those countries, including secular governments, had to reckon with the presence of Christians and devise their policies in a way that would ensure some kind of sectarian balance. Now there’s no need to maintain a balance. And who knows what may happen to the remaining Christian population in those countries.

So you could say our meeting with the Pope was centered on our shared concerns regarding the situation in the Middle East. We were genuinely concerned, and we were both convinced that decisive action must be taken to save the Christians in those countries. Not only Christians, of course – it is important to end bloodshed as such, and I want to make it clear that we care for all those who are suffering. But while Islamic communities are not about to go extinct in those countries, Christians actually are.

So our joint declaration included a statement to this effect. Unfortunately, the subsequent developments have not brought about a political solution for this issue, although we now coordinate our Middle East efforts more extensively with the Pope. We know that the expulsion of Christians continues in those countries, among other things, and that civilians in general suffer because of what’s going on in Syria and Iraq.

It is perfectly clear that, if the nations currently engaged in the interventions in Syria and Iraq are truly committed to eradicating terrorism, and if that stated objective is their only true goal and there’s no hidden agenda, then it shouldn’t be a problem for us to join efforts and work together. After all, what is ISIS [Islamic State, formerly ISIL]? We once defeated the Nazi powers through collective efforts, and they had half of Europe enslaved. So it seems to me it should be fairly easy to do away with ISIS, and thereby resolve the refugee crisis and all the other disasters and tragedies that are rooted in this conflict. But we are not seeing that happen. So all that is left to us as Christians is to pray and, of course, work together with everyone, so that all the nations involved realize that collaboration is instrumental. We keep hearing that the coalition has its own approach, and Russia has a different stance. Well, now is the time when we can’t have two conflicting positions any longer; we need to align ourselves with each other.

That’s why I was glad to hear what US President-elect Mr. Trump said in this regard. He clearly underlined the necessity to tackle Islamist radicalism and terrorism. Hopefully that’s the objective we will move towards, in terms of Russia-US relations as well. Terrorism poses a real threat for the entire world, including Russia, the Middle East, Western Europe, and the US, which was hit hard in the early 21st century. It’s high time we pool ideas, join forces and co-operate to solve this problem that many countries and peoples are facing.

RT: We’ll get back to Western politicians in a minute, but let’s talk about Donald Trump. You said you hoped that his administration would be able to make progress with this problem. However, quite a few people believe Donald Trump is a bigot. He’s a controversial figure in the US and the world, let’s put it that way. So do you believe that once he assumes office that US-Russia relations will get better and we’ll be able move forward and resolve the situation in the Middle East, like you said? 

PK: Based on what Mr. Trump said in the course of the election campaign, we can see that he does have the intention to establish a dialogue with Russia, including first and foremost when it comes to combating terrorism. That’s good; it opens up new opportunities for cooperation, which is what I hope we’re going to have in Russia-US relations in order to tackle this. I can’t really say anything about Mr. Trump beyond that. I don’t know him personally, and I don’t know much about his life, so I can only judge based on his statements, which were in stark contrast to other politicians’ stances. There was no hope in what others were saying, while Mr. Trump’s words give us hope. It’s very important for leaders of key global powers to instill hope for a better future with their policies.

RT: About that contrast between Trump’s statements and other Western leaders’ statements. Many say that Trump doesn’t hesitate to openly speak his mind and call a spade a spade. You’ve spoken on many occasions about the persecution of Christians in this region, but Western politicians shy away from the subject. The reason could be that they don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings, or maybe it’s because of the Muslim communities in their countries or political correctness in general. Why do you think it’s not a widely discussed issue in the West? There is political correctness in Russia, too – take the legislation concerning insulting religious feelings – but to what extent do you think it prevents Western politicians from speaking about this freely?

PK: Of course, it’s in the way. It seems as if political correctness is meant to limit Christians’ freedom to practice their faith. For example, why should we use ‘X-mas’ instead of ‘Christmas’? The answer we got to this question is that we shouldn’t hurt the feelings of non-Christians. So we asked Muslims if they were offended by the word ‘Christmas’, and they said “no.” We asked if they were offended by decorated Christmas trees in the streets, and they said “no.” So if Muslims are okay with that, whose feelings are we hurting here? It’s likely it’s no one’s. In fact. Europe is a continent whose culture and even political culture is rooted in the tenets of Christianity. We are told that Europe was also influenced by Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, and that’s true, but, in terms of scale, this influence can in no way compare to the importance that Christian moral values, and the laws based on them, held for many centuries. So if Europe is now cutting itself off from its roots, it raises the question of whether this is motivated by political correctness or something else. That’s the question we, the people who lived through religious persecution in the USSR, ask. Back then it was also supposedly done in the name of human rights and liberties and a better tomorrow. But it was only the believers who the state had pressured up until perestroika. The capitalists, the bourgeoisie, the rich land owners – Soviet leaders stopped fighting them all and even the Soviet economy half-resembled a market economy, not to mention the New Economic Policy of the 1920s, but they fought the Church to the very end. There is no understanding why that was. So we’re very wary when, under the guise of political correctness and universal rights and liberties, we glimpse signs of discrimination against the people who want to be open about their Christian convictions.

RT: Why is it so hard to achieve peace and harmony between Christians and Muslims in Western Europe? Some say the reason behind this is what we call a clash of civilizations. Considering the recent migrant crisis and the problem of terrorism, do you think these cultures can co-exist peacefully, in the long term? Or should we face the truth and admit – like many politicians such as Marine Le Pen and Nigel Farage do – that the policy of multiculturalism has failed?

PK: Multiculturalism has no future, because it implies different cultures mixing, different cultures and religions poured together and shaken vigorously to create a kind of cocktail. That would be impossible because of deep-rooted traditions. If multiculturalism implies weakening people’s connection to their religion and traditions, it automatically makes them victims of discrimination and forces them to be defensive; so this very approach contains a dangerous source of division, and I mean the fundamental division of the brother-against-brother kind.

There are other ways. Russia is a multiethnic country, but the idea of multiculturalism has never been promoted, not even back in the USSR. It was declared that we would have a new national identity as Soviet people, but everyone knew that Turkmens would stay Turkmens, Tajiks would stay Tajiks, Uzbeks would stay Uzbeks, Russians would stay Russians, and Jews would stay Jews.

This approach, which allows people to express their ethnic and religious identity freely, has especially flourished recently, in modern Russia. We’re not talking about any mixture or cocktail – we say that every person should stay who they are. But we all live in the same country, so all of us must observe the law and be nice to each other. And policies regarding this have to be aimed, not at erasing the lines between cultures and religions and making one cocktail out of it, but at ensuring support, rights and liberties are given to all – to each their own – so that a person of any faith can feel at home in their country, not among strangers. Implementing this model in the West could have paved the way for peaceful co-existence, but I fear that it might be too late now. It should have been done before Europe had to deal with this huge influx of migrants who represent different cultural and religious views, and who are opposed to the culture of the countries they’ve ended up in. A great deal of people have this internal resistance to Western values, and one of the reasons is this radical – I would even say aggressive – secularization. A religious person feels deeply uncomfortable living in an aggressively-secular society, same as we in the USSR felt uncomfortable living in an aggressively-atheistic society. When the aggression disappears, people start feeling affinity towards the society and country they’re living in.

RT: I’d like to hear your opinion on the current state of social institutions that the Church has traditionally upheld, such as marriage and family. Today, many of the historically Christian countries in the West are legalizing same-sex marriage. Some of them have even appointed special envoys for LGBT rights. Many in the West see it as progress and liken it to the situation with interracial marriages in the US, which used to be frowned upon and now are a part of life. So, many believe this is a step forward. What do you think of this trend?

PK: I’m deeply wary of it. What’s happening in the Western countries is that, for the first time in human history, legislation is at odds with the moral nature of human beings. What’s good and evil? Sin and righteousness? These could be defined in both religious terms and non-religious terms. If you take a good character from English, American, or Russian fiction, you will see that all of them possess the same qualities. Why? We have different cultures and different political systems, but for all of us good is good, and evil is evil, and everyone understands who the good guys are, and who the bad guys are. So how do we distinguish? With our heart, with our moral nature. This moral nature, created by God, served as a foundation for the legislation which is designed. Laws defined moral values in legal terms, telling us what’s good and what’s bad. We know that stealing is bad and helping people is good, and laws define what stealing is and what the suitable punishment for it is.

Now, for the first time in human history, the law allows something that doesn’t correspond to our moral nature. The law contradicts it. It’s not the same thing, of course, but we could compare this to an extent to the apartheid in Africa or Nazi laws – when the law went against inherent moral values, people rebelled. They knew it wasn’t right; it was artificial; it was part of some ideology and not in sync with their moral nature. So the Church can never approve of this. We say that the Church can never redefine good and evil, sin and righteousness, but we don’t condemn people who have different sexual preferences. It’s on their conscience and it’s their business, but they shouldn’t be discriminated against or punished, as used to be common practice in some states. However, under no circumstances should this be accepted as a social norm no different from the social norm that stems from our moral nature, meaning marriage between a man and wife who create a family and have children. That’s why we believe this new trend poses a significant threat for the existence of the human race. The Church has to address this and say it’s a bad thing, but we’ve seen that authorities in some countries have been trying to silence clergymen. One Protestant pastor went to jail for calling same-sex marriage a sin in his sermon. Again, this is very reminiscent of what was happening under Soviet totalitarianism. In the countries that declare their commitment to freedom of speech, you can get punished for expressing your opinion. That’s a dangerous trend, and I hope it will peter out and the natural order of things will prevail. I don’t even want to think about what might happen to us otherwise. Our prayers and our work are so that humanity lives on and follows the principles dictated by our moral nature.

RT: Speaking of Protestants… During your meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury, you expressed your concerns over the Church of England’s recent liberalization, namely its decision to ordain women and its rather modernist stance on marriage and morality. But how can you make Christian values appeal to modern-day youth that keeps turning away from the Church, especially in the West. How can we bring them back?

PK: I don’t think that the tendency of young people rejecting Christian values is a natural process. It is the result of their minds being influenced in a certain way, and we are not talking just about youth here. Just look at what’s out there – movies, television, literature. There is a clear ideological paradigm aimed at dismantling religious and moral values. And it is not always a direct confrontation. They just paint this happy, full life – without God and without the moral obligation to weigh your actions listening to the voice of conscience. It means that God is being purposefully forced out of a person’s life. It is not just some accidental trend. But it’s actually turning out this way. We know that history can unfold in different directions. When evil in this world reaches a certain point, it begins to prevail. In those cases good appears to lose. Today Christians are a minority. The values we preach are either dismissed or ignored. Why? Because we encourage people to move upwards, walk uphill, while popular culture asks people to go in the opposite direction, move down. If a person is guided by his instincts, if civilization is built on this foundation, then of course the majority will follow this road, because it is so much easier, it doesn’t require effort or work. People want this easy life. But the Bible says that “narrow is the way that leads to life.” And this narrow way to salvation requires bravery. But if this way disappears, humanity will fall into a pit. Jesus did not convince everybody with His preaching. In fact, His earthly life ended on the Cross where He was crucified. Of course, He then rose from the dead… But some might see Him as a failure. If you don’t believe in Christ’s resurrection, then the end of His life doesn’t seem very impressive – he was executed. The same with all the apostles, except for St. John. They were all executed. So basically they seemed like a bunch of losers, they lost everything. But the message of Christ and His apostles has survived for 2,000 years – it keeps inspiring people. It has often inspired artists and writers who created their works despite this external pressure. But what’s more important is that Christ enters the hearts of many people. We see how people in Russia are starting to believe, this phenomenon is truly historic. The Church is being restored, young people are being converted. When people choose this narrow way, it will most definitely lead them to the stars. It is the road to heaven, to the very top. It is always difficult but it is the way of salvation.

RT: Your Holiness, thank you very much!

Russia has Built More Churches Over the Past 28 Years Than Any Other Country

 photo valaamnativiaty_zpse81f3b75.jpg

[ Ed. note – One very important question Americans should ask themselves when trying to assess relations between the US and Russia, and to figure out why certain things are the way they are, is…of the two countries, Russia and America, which currently is moving toward a greaterembrace of religious faith? And which is experiencing a lessening of spirituality and moving away from religious beliefs?

The answer, of course, is that the number of those in America who hold religious beliefs, most especially Christians, is dropping. This was the finding in a Pew Research poll released last year. The poll found that between 2007 and 2014 the number of Americans identifying as Christians declined from 78.4% to 70.6%. That’s still a pretty high portion of the population, but it does make for a 7.8% drop.

Over the same time period, those identifying as either atheist, agnostic, or no religion in particular rose from 16.1% to 22.8%–making for 6.7% rise. Interestingly, the number Jews rose as well, but only slightly, from 1.7% of the population to 1.9%. (One wonders if the overall decline in spirituality might be a factor in such problems as crime and political corruption.) It would appear, then, that religion has little importance in the lives of increasing numbers of Americans.

Russia seems to be going in the opposite direction, however. The Russian Orthodox Church has experienced phenomenal growth since the fall of communism. The Christ the Savior Cathedral, dynamited at the order of Joseph Stalin in 1931, was rebuilt in the 1990s and reconsecrated in August of 2000. But as you’ll see from the article below, it wasn’t the only church constructed in the newly-revived Mother Russia–not by a long shot.

The problems with political corruption in America are certainly not new, but they have been particularly underscored by the current presidential campaign. At the same time, Russia’s Vladimir Putin has become one of the most respected leaders in the world today. This is not only the opinion of writers like Paul Craig Roberts, but was even grudgingly admitted to by a retired US general. Russia is clearly in the ascendant. The US empire, on the other hand, is in decline. Again, one cannot help pondering the question: how much of a role has spiritual faith, or lack thereof, played in these dynamics? My guess is that it has been a very big factor. ]

***

Russia Built 3 Churches Per Day, 1000 Per Year, for 28 Years–a World Record

Russia Insider

Religious faith in Russia never grew more intensively than in the past three decades, believes Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk.

The head of the Department of External Church Relations (DECR) spoke about religious faith in Russia, and its history and revival in recent decades at a meeting with a group of professors and 250 students from Italy on October 11, 2016, reports the DECR’s website.

“The epoch which we call ‘the second Baptism of Russia’ begun in our Church in 1988. The mass baptism of our population started in Russia in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s,” Metropolitan Hilarion said while relating the history of Orthodoxy in Russia to the Italian guests.

“Today we have 35,000 churches. That means that we have opened 29,000 churches over twenty-eight years, opening more than 1,000 churches per year or three per day… Earlier we had three theological seminaries or academies, and today there are over fifty,” the metropolitan stressed.

In Metropolitan Hilarion’s view, Russian history has “never witnessed such growth in religious faith as we have seen in the past twenty-eight years.”

“More than that, I know no other precedent of this kind anywhere throughout the history of mankind. We are aware that the epoch of St. Constantine the Great in the fourth century was a time when churches were built everywhere and mass baptisms took place. But there is no statistics for that period, while we do have statistics for the epoch we live in,” he added.

Noting that today many say that modern society lives in the post-Christian era, the representative of the Russian Orthodox Church said that it is not felt in Russia.

“With our own eyes we have seen the power of Christianity which enables us to open three churches per day today. We have witnessed how Christianity transforms human lives, to what extent Christ and His teaching are still important nowadays,” Metropolitan Hilarion said in conclusion.

Professors and students of schools under the Jesuit Order in Rome, Milan, Naples, Turin and Palermo took part in the meeting with the Chairman of the Department for External Church Relations.

Syrian Christian leader tells West: ‘Stop arming terror groups who are massacring our people’

Pope Francis (R) talks with Ignatius Aphrem II, Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, during a meeting at the Vatican, on June 19, 2015.

Pope Francis (R) talks with Ignatius Aphrem II, Syriac Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch, during a meeting at the Vatican, on June 19, 2015.

by Ruth Gledhill

The world leader of Syria’s besieged Christians has issued a heartfelt plea to the West to “stop arming and supporting terrorist groups that are destroying our countries and massacring our people.”

The Patriarch of Antioch, Moran Mor Ignatius Aphrem II, said he was not asking the West for military intervention to defend Christians.

If the West wants to do something about the present crisis, the most effective thing would be to support local governments, which need sufficient armies and forces to maintain security and defend respective populations against attacks.

“State institutions need to be strengthened and stabilised. Instead, what we see is their forced dismemberment being fuelled from the outside,” he told Vatican Insider.

Patriarch Aphrem, head of the Syrian Orthodox Church, said the most blasphemous thing a person can do is to call suicide bombers “martyrs”.

“Throughout its journey through history the Church has also been a suffering Church,” he added. Speaking in the days after meeting the Pope in Rome, he had just returned from Qamishli, his home town, where he met thousands of new Christian refugees who fled after Islamic State jihadists attacked Hassake, in Jazira province.

Islamic State terrorists who die while carrying out their atrocities regard such deaths as martyrdom. They believe it secures them passage to paradise.

The Patriarch contradicted this view. He said: “Martyrdom is not a sacrifice offered to God, like those sacrifices which are offered to pagan gods. Christian martyrs do not seek martyrdom to demonstrate their faith. And they do not wilfully shed their blood in order to obtain God’s favour or some other prize, like Paradise.”

Along with bishops of his church he recently had talks with President Assad of Syria. “President Assad urged us to do everything in our hands to prevent Christians from leaving Syria. ‘I know you are suffering,’ he said, ‘but please don’t leave this land, which has been your home for thousands of years, even before Islam came.’ He said that Christians will also be needed when the time comes to rebuild this devastated country.”

He said the majority of Syrian citizens support Assad’s government and have always supported it.

“We recognise legitimate rulers and pray for them, as the New Testament teaches us. We also see that on the other side there is no democratic opposition, only extremist groups. Above all, we see that in the past few years, these groups have been basing their actions on an ideology that comes from the outside, brought here by preachers of hatred who have come from and are backed by Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Egypt. These groups receive arms through Turkey too, as the media have shown us.”

He said Islamic State was not the Islam that Syrians have learned about andlived alongside for hundreds of years. “There are forces that fuel it with arms and money because it is useful in what Pope Francis calls the ‘war fought piecemeal’. But all this also draws on a perverse religious ideology that claims to be inspired by the Koran.”

source

Take The Red Pill Or Fight World War 3. – Interview With The Saker

September 18, 2016

by Katherine Frisk for the International Reporter

Only those with their head in the sand are not aware that NATO, the western allies and the Wall Street bankers are determined to follow a course that will lead to World War 3. With Russia in particular and any other country that stands in their way. In a recent interview Vladimir Putin chided western journalists for the false narratives that are being published in the Main Stream Media press. He said: 

Putin-13940929000870_PhotoI

“We know year by year what’s going to happen, and they know that we know. It’s only you that they tell tall tales to, and you buy it, and spread it to the citizens of your countries. You people in turn do not feel a sense of the impending danger – this is what worries me. How do you not understand that the world is being pulled in an irreversible direction? While they pretend that nothing is going on. I don’t know how to get through to you anymore.” 

 

oliver-stone-oliver_stone_by_gage_skidmore

More recently the highly respected film director Oliver Stone said:

We’re going to war — either hybrid in nature to break the Russian state back to its 1990s subordination, or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don’t because our media is dumbed down in its “Pravda”-like support for our “respectable,” highly aggressive government.” 

What I would like to do in this interview is focus on cycles of time, repetitive narratives from one century to the next that replay over and over again like the film Groundhog Day. This is in a sense, a Matrix with the myth, the story line passed on from one generation to the next, and each generation in turn performs the same stage show. As Shakespeare said, ‘each has their entrances and their exists.”

On the 9th of May 2015, Russia celebrated the Victory over Nazi Germany in World War 2. Saker wrote the most touching and deeply moving article Something truly amazing happened today and I quote:

“Defense Minister Shoigu made the sign of the Cross before the beginning of the celebrations:

russia-123

This is an absolutely momentous moment for Russia.  Never in the past history had any Russian Minister of Defense done anything like it.  True, the old tradition was to make the sign of the Cross when passing under the Kremlin’s Savior Tower, if only because there is an icon of the Savior right over the gate.  However, everybody in Russia immediately understood that there was much more to this gesture than an external compliance to an ancient tradition.


The Russian journalist Victor Baranets puts it very well 
when he wrote:”At that moment I felt that with his simple gesture Shoigu brought all of Russia to his feet.  There was so much kindness, so much hope, so much of our Russian sense of the sacred [in this gesture]“.  He is absolutely correct.  To see this Tuvan Buddhist make the sign of the Cross in the Orthodox manner sent anelectric shock through the Russian blogosphere: everybody felt that something amazing had happened.”

Saker  also pointed out :

“For centuries Russian soldiers have knelt and asked for God’s blessing, before going into battle and this is, I believe, what Shoigu did today.  He knows that 2015 will be the year of the big war between Russia and the Empire (even if, due to the presence of nuclear weapons on both sides, this war will remain 80% informational, 15% economic and 5% military)”

So let’s go back to World War 2. Almost 30 million Russians died during that war. That is almost half of the total number of people killed on both sides, military and civilian from 1939 to 1945. A horrific figure that is not often quoted in western media or history books.

Question to Saker: What parallels do you see between Russia in 2016 and over 70 years ago?

Saker: 

The most disturbing and frightening parallel which I see between, say, 1938 and 2016 is the total arrogance and sense of superiority of the leaders of the Western world.  I know that this will sound crazy to many because Russians and Europeans are supposed to be of the same “race”, but my entire life experience has brought me to the conclusion that many, maybe most, westerners are deeply racist towards Russians, even if it is at an unconscious level.

Most westerners are deeply convinced that western civilization is the pinnacle of mankind and that while others have their good and even interesting features, westerners are still the most sophisticated, developed, evolved, refined, skilled, etc. and that those who do not belong to that so-called “western civilization” are inherently inferior, even if exotic or even charming.
Now think of Russia which was born from a rejection of the West (rejection of the Papacy in favor the the traditional Christianity of the early Church) and which then beat back wave after wave after wave of western invaders, be it military, or cultural or political.  This adds to the element of fear and the already existing racism and results in a deep seated phobia of everything truly Russian.

There is only one type of Russia which the West likes: a weak, subjugated, bleeding, disorganized and poor Russia to which the western Herrenvolk  can send humanitarian aid, advisors and other “bearers of civilization” (just like Hitler’s Kulturträgers)  to the eastern masses of Untermenschen.

You think that I am exaggerating?  Look at the way the American leaders are trying to treat Russia: like some kind of bad boy who did wrong and who must now face the consequences of his bad behavior.  The fact that all that grandstanding and lecturing has zero effect on the Kremlin or the Russian people does not seem to dissuade the Empire’s rulers who now sound like a broken record.  But this goes far beyond just leaders. There is a cultural, moral and even technological assumption of Russian inferiority which permeates the entire political discourse in the West.  This is why when a US built Boeing or a European built Airbus crashes the media speaks of a Boeing or Airbus crash. But when a Russian aircraft crashes, it is always a Russian built Antonov or Russian built Ilyushin which crashes, as if that explained anything.

This is one of the reasons why the folks in the West simply cannot wrap their minds around the current day reality that the Russian armed forces are substantially superior and generally more capable than their western counterparts.  Right now, not only does Russia have better submarines, better tanks, better aircraft, better air defense system, better electronic warfare, better artillery, better tactical missiles, etc but also a far better infantryman. True, the Russians are behind in other fields (surface ships, communications, satellite technology, etc.) and the superior Russian systems are only being introduced now and are still few in numbers, but they are more than enough to make it impossible for the US/NATO/EU to militarily “defeat” Russia in any conceivable conflict.

So what I see is this:

the West is on a collision course with Russia and yet nobody seems to discuss this and when they do, they express all the confident optimism of a drunken idiot who wants to take on a Grizzly bear in a fist fight: the bear might not show any reaction until the drunken idiot jumps over the fence, but once he enters the bear’s territory his life expectancy will be measured in seconds.

An infinite arrogance which completely blinds the western leaders to the immense risks of their policies is what I see in common between 1938 and 2016.  And I find that very, very frightening.

There is also a major difference:

in 1938 Russia was not ready for war and the regime in power did not enjoy anywhere near the 80%+ Putin enjoys today.  But today Russia is ready for war, it seems that at least 80% of the talkshows are about the confrontation with the West and the risks of war, while the military is almost constantly involved in very large scale strategic exercises preparing for major war.

On all levels, the Russian society is being prepared for war while in the West, nobody seems to be payingany attention to this (other than absolutely imbecile talks about a Russian invasion of Latvia or Estonia…).  There is also a consensus in Russia that if Hillary gets into the White House the chance of a real war will sharply go up.  I agree with that assessment.

_______________________________________

Katherine: 2017 will be the 100 the anniversary of the Russian Revolution. What most people are unaware of, is that the same Wall Street bankers who funded the 2014 Ukrainian coup and funded Hitler in World War 2, even though the USA was supposedly on the side of the Allies, were the same group of people who funded Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolsheviks. To quote from The Creature From Jekyell Island:

marx_dee-lighted

the cartoon “..portrays Karl Marx with a book entitled Socialism under his arm, standing amid a cheering crowd on Wall Street. Gathered around and greeting him with enthusiastic handshakes are characters in silk hats identified as John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City Bank, Morgan partner George W. Perkins and Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.

What emerges from this sampling of events is a clear pattern of strong support for Bolshevism coming from the highest financial and political power centers in the United States; from men, who supposedly were “capitalists” and who according to conventional wisdom should have been the mortal enemies of socialism and communism.”

I have heard from other sources that somewhere around 100 million people died under the Bolsheviks between 1917 and 1939, or is that an exaggeration?

Question: Why did the USA, a country that supposedly believes in freedom and democracy, support communism in Russia?  Their anti-communist stance was after all, the raison d’être for funding wars, coups and revolutions to overthrow communist inclined governments in South America, Africa, Europe and other countries around the world through overt and covert CIA and Operation Gladio involvement for the next 100 years, and replace them with fascist military dictatorships. (A few examples Brazil – Branco; Chile- Pinochett; Argentina- Videla; Indonesia- Suharto; Congo- Sese Seko; Greece’s – “reign of the colonels”; Zimbabwe-Mugabe;) What political and economic parallels do you see from 100 years ago that are applicable today?

Saker: 

First, the issue of the real number of victims of the Communist regime in Russia is an extremelycontentious one.  Those interested could look at this article where I touched upon this issue.  I think that the 100 million people figure is absolutely ridiculous, that is for sure.  The real figures are much much less than that, but they are still horrible and should not be dismissed either.  Frankly, this is an issue for historians to decide and I don’t find it helpful to insist on a specific figure.  What we can say for sure is that the victims of the Bolshevik regime were counted in the millions, that is for sure.  This “in the millions” is both safe enough and vague enough to be useful for discussion purposes, especially when covering the entire period from 1917 to 1991.

Second, US Jewish bankers did finance and support Trotsky just as the British supported Lenin.  The former did that as an act of revenge against and hatred for Russia due to what they perceived as the anti-Jewish policies of the Russian Czars.  The latter wanted to subvert Russia from the inside to weaken her on the outside.  This is pretty straightforward.

The concepts of “Freedom and Democracy” versus “Communism” were always just facades, a facade to make the US imperialism look noble and a facade to justify interventions worldwide.

What is taking place today is not very different: we do have an imperial financial system which seeks to subvert Russia from the inside to make her weak on the international stage.  We also have US Jews, now rebranded as “Neocons”, pursuing a hate-based racist crusade against Russia as an act of revenge for what they perceive was the anti-Jewish policies of the Soviet Union, especially under Stalin.  Those interested can read about this here.

So just as we had an AngloZionist conspiracy against Russia 100 years ago we have a different variant of the same AngloZionist conspiracy today.  What changed most over the past century is the rest of the planet, especially the emergence of China and the general collapse of the EU

__________________________________

Russian Grenadiers Patriotic War

Katherine: Now let’s go back to over 200 years ago.The  Patriotic War of 1812 when Napoleon invaded Russia. He had as allies the Duchy of Warsaw, Kingdom of Italy, Naples, Confederation of the Rhine, Baden, Bavaria, Berg, Saxony, Westphalia, Austria, Prussia, Swiss Confederation, Napoleonic Spain, Denmark–Norway.

That was a formidable united front against one country. The line up looks very similar to the current European Union and the NATO allies today.

Question: Who funded this army and why? And what parallels do you see 100 years later with World War 1 ,the Bolshevik Revolution, World War 2 and the current tinder box that Russia and Europe find themselves in 2016?

Saker: 

You are right, this all looks very similar doesn’t it?  I would just toss in the Crimea war, which I like to call the “Grand Ecumenist War” against Russia in which you had secular Freemasons, Papists, Protestants and Ottoman Muslims all united against Orthodox Russia.

The main reason for the regular re-emergence of anti-Russian coalition is the mistaken belief in the West that there is safety in numbers.  The Russians know the exact opposite: in military terms, coalitions suck.  Badly.  The western leaders are fundamentally cowards who rule over people who have long lost the warrior-culture which is so central to any society which can stand up and defend itself, even against a superior enemy. The people in the West have come to believe that high-tech wins wars and they have forgotten that what wins wars is not high tech, but willpower and the help of God.  Those interested in this topic can read this article.

The main advantage the US had over, for example, the Iraqis was the fact that they succeeded in convincing Iraqi of the futility of resisting the almighty USA.  But with nations and cultures like Russia, Iran, Hezbollah or even Vietnam, the USA is faced with an enemy who is not at all convinced of the US superiority and who is willing, sincerely and truly willing, to die for his country and people.  That is something which the US military has never learned how to cope with.

And then, consider this: during WWI Russia imploded due to the combined effects of the February and October revolutions.  During WWII, the Soviet regime was largely unpopular and much of the ruling elites were themselves russophobic (this would change during the course of the war).

But today Russia is united.  And ready in military and civilians terms.  Even Russian banks have recently completed a series of exercises on how to continue to function in case of war.  Will the West try again, one last time or will cool heads prevail in the West?  I don’t know.

____________________________________

Katherine: Now let’s go back to almost 1,000 years ago. I first interviewed Saker in July 2015. Orthodox Christianity is by and large not understood in the West, least of all by me at the time, though I am learning. Saker enlightened both my readers and myself in  An Insight Into Orthodox Christianity.

Another very informative article that he wrote was : Another Crusade? : Ukrainian nationalism – its roots and nature in February 2014 during the coup in Kiev and the beginnings of the outbreak in the civil war between western Ukraine and eastern Ukraine. In that article he went back to 1204, Pope Innocent III, the fourth crusade and the sacking of Constantinople by mercenaries who were funded by the Jewish Del Banco bankers in Venice. He said:

HaggiaSophiaserveimage

“Most people mistakenly believe that the Crusades only happened in the Middle-East and that they were only directed at Islam.  This is false.  In fact, while the official excuse for western imperialism at that time was to free the city of Jerusalem from the “Muslim infidels” the crusades also were aimed at either exterminating or converting the “Greek schismatics” i.e. the Orthodox Christians.  The most notorious episode of this anti-Orthodox crusade is the sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders in 1204, during the 4th Crusade, in which the city was subjected to three days of absolutely grotesque pillaging, looting and massacres by the western “Christians” who even looted and burned down Orthodox churches, monasteries and convents, raped nuns on church altars and even placed a prostitute on the Patriarchal throne.  This outpouring of genocidal hatred was hardly a fluke, but it was one of the earliest manifestation of something which would become a central feature of the mindset and ideology of the Latin Church.

1242 – The Northern Crusades of Pope Gregory IX:

 Unlike his predecessor who directed his soldiers towards the Holy Land, Pope Gregory IX had a very different idea: he wanted to convert the “pagans” of the North and East of Europe to the “true faith”.  In his mind, Orthodox Russia was part of these “pagan lands” and Orthodox Christians were pagans too.  His order to the Teutonic Knights (the spiritual successors of the Franks who had pillaged and destroyed Rome) was to either convert or kill all the pagans they would meet (this genocidal order was very similar to the one given by Ante Pavelic to his own forces against the Serbs during WWII: convert, kill or expel).  In most history books Pope Gregory IX has earned himself a name by instituting the Papal Inquisition (which has never been abolished, by the way), so it is of no surprise that this gentleman was in no mood to show any mercy to the “Greek schismatics”.  This time, however, the Pope’s hordes were met by a formidable defender: Prince Alexander Nevsky.”

Today what was the Byzantine Empire and Orthodox Christian Russia is currently under attack by Daesh, or commonly known as ISIS. Syria has some of the oldest Orthodox Christian communities in the world going back to the 1st century A.D. who still speak Aramaic, the language of Jesus. Russia in turn, since September 2015, has given President Assad full military support in fighting these terrorists.

Question: What parallels do you see almost 1000 years ago, including the vast tapestry of The Patriot War of 1812, World War 1 ,the Bolshevik Revolution, World War 2 and the current situation that could very well lead the whole world into World War 3?

Saker: 

The West has always been more than happy to try to use Islam against Russia, there is nothing new here.  This is the old divide and rule technique – the Russians and the Muslims fight each other down to the last Russian and Muslim and then we, the western 1%er will finally get to rule the world unopposed.

In a way, Islam and Russia present a very similar type of threat not only to the West’s international and financial order, but also to the western social, political and moral order too.  Both Russia and Islam present an alternative civilizational model, one which is based on values fundamentally different to the ones truly underlying the western political order.

I would argue that China and Latin America also have this potential, that they are developing it right now, but that they have not yet reached the “political escape velocity” to openly dare reject the West with it’s so-called ‘values’.

This is why pitting Muslims against Russia and vice-versa is so important for the Empire.  I would say that to some degree, this has been an effective policy with the Srebrenica pseudo-genocide as a cornerstone, but this policy is now hitting a number of walls.

The first one is that the Muslim world is extremely diverse and hard to unite.  Next to Wahabi liver-eaters you will find a myriad of other non-Wahabi Sunnis, Shia, Sufis who all reject the Wahabi model and for whom the Wahabi model is, in fact, no less a mortal threat than for non-Muslims.

Second, people like Vladimir Putin, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Nursultan Nazarbaev, Ramzan Kadyrov, Hassan Nasrallah, Bashar Assad and many others are seeing through the Empire’s ploy and are refusing to be baited by it.

Historically, the Ottomans have always been a rabid and even genocidal enemy of Orthodoxy, and the modern Saudi-inspired Wahabis are no better, but the rest of the Islamic world is objectively an ally of Russia just as Russia is an objective ally of the Islamic world.

Both sides here need to “clean house”: the Russians need to free themselves from the toxic influence of the pro-US Atlantic Integrationists inside the Kremlin and “liberal” supporters in Russia (less than 5% of the population) and the Sunni Muslims need to sever their often too cozy ties with both the Wahabis and the Ottomans.

This process has already begun in Russia and I have high hopes that it will also take place inside the Muslim world.

____________________________________________

Katherine: Last question. Do you think Europe and Russia will ever reach the stage where they abandon the script, take the red pill, escape the matrix and walk away from this repetitive groundhog day narrative that has been so destructive to so many people for over 1,000 years?

Saker: 

Orthodox_Church_Kremlin_2015-05-09t092719z76856793lr2eb590q98rwrtrmadp3ww2-anniversary-russiaYes, of course this is possible, even likely, but only in the future.  For that to happen the Europeans need to liberate themselves from the ideological claws of the AngloZionists and their propaganda machine.

Second, the Europeans need to give up their artificial European identify and see themselves for what they really are: north Europeans, Central Europeans, Eastern Europeans and Mediterranean Europeans. The Mediterranean one, is one which is especially dear to me and it immensely saddens me that it is now diluted into this ridiculous and faceless “EU European” pseudo-identity.

Furthermore, a new European identify, far more diverse and religious than today, will eventually have to emerge from the chaos following the collapse of the EU.  At this point in time, the Europeans might possibly re-embrace their racist and imperialist worldview, but I doubt it.  I find it much more likely that Europe will give up its dreams of grandeur and embrace a much more low-key but human worldview which will accept diversity and pluralism without feeling threatened.

Last, but most definitely not least, the entire capitalist economic model and ideology will have to be replaced with a sustainable and socially civilized economic model.  This will take time, a lot of time, but I don’t see Europe, or the US, for that matter, sustaining their current delusional policies forever and ever.

Eventually reality, in the form of a Russian missile or simply of massive economic collapse, does catch up to everybody, no matter how deep their delusions. 

In truth, in its 1000 years long history (yes, modern Europe was born in the Middle-Ages, not from the Roman or Greek civilizations) the Western civilization has shown itself to be both magnificent and abhorrent.  It is sometimes hard to believe that J.S. Bach and Adolf Hitler were born of the same civilization, but it is true.

The peoples of Europe will have to find their way, a new way, from these contradictions and this will be hard, but the good news is that if they give up their messianic delusions they will have the rest of mankind as an ally and a friend.

%d bloggers like this: