The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!

Friday, October 21, AD 2016

 

The Democrats are attempting to divert attention from the interesting WikiLeaks revelations by claiming this is all Russian interference in our election, and that Russian hackers are behind this.  Let us assume for the sake of this post that this is all true.  I don’t like an unfriendly power attempting to interfere in our electoral process.  However, there is an aspect of this situation that most people aren’t getting.  Security is so lousy in the Obama administration and the Democrat party that Russian hackers have had a field day.  I assume that they aren’t showing us the juiciest stuff, or the most damaging to our security, because they don’t want to reveal their methods. Stumbling into this happy hunting ground for enemy hackers, the candidate for the Democrat party, Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State, insisted upon using unsecure civilian e-mail servers in order to protect her ongoing business of selling influence and access for cash through the Clinton Foundation and her speech giving “hubbie”.  According to the FBI she was using these servers on the soil of unfriendly powers.  The stupidity and obliviousness is shocking.  That alone makes her unfit to be President, WikiLeaks revelations be hanged.

Continue reading...

17 Responses to The Russians Are Coming! The Russians Are Coming!

  • But there’s a bigger comedy to this that hasn’t really been pointed out yet. For 99 years we have heard from the Democrat Party that we have nothing to fear from Russia. That includes a spectacularly overplayed moment in the 2012 presidential debates. Now, with the Soviet Union gone, the Russian economy mostly in shambles, the Russian people disintegrating as a population, the threat according to the entire establishment has never been greater. I’m exhausted just from whiplash.

  • Interesting clip from a good movie. Makes you glad that the Anti-Federals insisted upon the Second Amendment among others. This scene could be played out sooner than we think. And maybe not with Russian soldiers but American?

  • A segment from Fox news with Judge N. mentioned that HC’s mishandling of her communique’s have jeopardised the CIA, via names of operatives.

    How he would know this, or weather this is just speculation is anyone’s guess, but if she was privy to that information and sloppily disclosed it without proper safeguards, I wouldn’t doubt her former intelligence agents might want her to loose the election more than any Ruskie, including Vlad.

    She is hazardous waste!

  • Bullies be damned. Senator Harrison Williams went to federal prison for two years for influence peddling in ABSCAM. Hillary Clinton gets to be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States with Christopher Stevens, murdered in Benghazi after Hillary Clinton betrayed his whereabouts, as one of her constituents. Hillary has promised to eradicate the First and Second Amendments and later the Ninth.
    The Democratic platform refuses to acknowledge God, our “Creator”. Can unalienable rights endowed by our “Creator” to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness be far behind?

  • Focusing on the Russians as the alleged source of the leaks reminds me of a kid yelling at her parents for “spying on her” when she gets caught doing something wrong. Clearly an admission that she has done something wrong, only regretting she has been exposed. When Clinton demanded Trump denounce the Russians for hacking her emails and interfering in our election, I would have told her “Lady, if exposing your corruption, cheating and lies is interfering in our election, I would not denounce them; I’d award them the Presidential Medal of Freedom.”

  • Revealing that Russia is the source of the hacking is inexcusable from an intelligence standpoint. It is like “Special Intelligence.” The very fact that we know is a highly guarded secret. We should have played dumb. Then we could have fed the Russians disinformation, and protected our real secrets. To confirm Russian intelligence just lets Russians say, “Okay. That avenue has been compromised. Time to go to plan B.” Also Trump seems to have an instinctive understanding that perceptions among world leaders matter. Hillary seems wonkish and – I worry – liable to make a misstep out of a perception that she needs to be “tough.”

  • The Russians didn’t do this (at least not the government), it’s more likely the Clinton campaign using proxies to draw attention away from Wikileaks’ validity.

  • With regard to Russian interference in our electoral process, I don’t think Wikileaks is the biggest threat. The biggest threats IMO are: 1) potential or actual hacking that could interfere with tabulation of election results, or expose the personal information of registered voters, and 2) the “troll army” that floods the internet, particularly Twitter, with fake/sockpuppet identities spewing propaganda, threats, and false or distorted information.

    The threat of hacking serves to call electoral results into question and, if voter databases become subject to hacking, could discourage people from registering to vote; the “troll army”, meanwhile, aims to discourage real discussion of issues by more or less shouting down everyone who disagrees or intimidating them into silence. In both cases the ultimate aim is to exacerbate the divisions among the American people and thereby weaken the nation.

  • In normal times I’d agree, Bear, but they’re being “80s movie villain” level obvious– Russian intel is going to be trying to figure out if she actually knows it’s Russia (not being official and all) or if she’s guess guessing from them being so dang obvious, or if she’s trying to scare his supporters, or if she’s playing into the archetype (it’s in bleeping TV commercials, All Hackers Are Russian) ….
    ***************
    I’m with Elaine in being more worried about actual interference, rather than attempts to influence.
    Our system is…well, there are areas that give the appearance of being designed to make it easy to commit voter fraud. Says the woman whos area keeps having boxes of ballots appear every time there’s a close election, and they always favor the same side.

  • Funny thing is, I think that Russia actually does not want Trump to win. For all that Trump seems to have a man-crush on Putin, I think he only admires the similarities. That won’t be as useful for Putin as having a woman who actively hates the military and alienates those working for her.

  • Those pesky Russkies – are they back under the bed?
    Where’s McCarthy when you need him?

  • FWIW, here’s Garry Kasparov, former world chess champ turned pro-democracy advocate, explaining why he believes Putin wants to mess with the U.S. election:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/21/kasparov_trump_flip_flops_on_everything_but_he_consistently_defends_putin.html

    “Putin wants… global chaos. He needs it, because as a dictator who wants to use foreign policy, his aggressive foreign policy, as a staple for domestic propaganda, he needs to weaken the European Union, NATO, and of course, you know, the biggest prize of all is the United States.

    “If Putin can demonstrate to Russians and the rest of the world that elections in America are rigged, (that) there will be riots, even violence… that will justify everything he did against democratic institutions in Russia. And Trump is a perfect agent of of the chaos…”

    And speaking of the troll army:

    “I’m reading (the) Russian press. You know, Putin-controlled press. I’m attacked by Russian trolls, those in English and Russian on Facebook, and I can see these unanimity of the arguments. Proving that American election is rigged, and America will be swamped with this civil unrest. That’s the biggest prize for Vladimir Putin.”

  • And let’s not forget this blast from the past:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2008/12/29/russian-professor-predicts-breakup-of-us-in-2010/

    The consensus at the time seemed to be that this “expert” who predicted a breakup of the U.S. into at least 6 separate nations that would fall under the influence of, or be absorbed by, other countries (with Alaska, of course, returning to Mother Russia) was projecting his experience of the dissolution of the Soviet Union onto American politics. Of course this didn’t happen, but there are probably a lot of people in Putin’s inner circle who think it’s still possible and are doing everything they can to foment it.

  • Let’s not forget that Snowden has been and is in Russia. There seems to have been a run on traitors these past couple of years, unfortunately. Then there’s Herself providing classified emails. I’m with the Bruin, some things are better, safer left unsaid.

  • If Russia is such a problem, why did Hiklary sell them 20% of our American uranium?

  • Thanks Elaine.

    Extremely interesting synopsis of Putin possibilities. It is interesting in that the climate is perfect for full scale infiltration; civil unrest is already near boiling point, unsatisfactory presidential candidate’s, E-mail debacle, Military weak…to a certain degree…
    most incredible paradigm.

Arise Ye Russian People!

Sunday, May 10, AD 2015

The Russians are celebrating the defeat of Nazi Germany this weekend.  It is fair to say that in that defeat the Soviet Union did the lion’s share of the fighting, the Soviets suffering more than twenty million war dead.  For all their heroism and suffering , the Soviets were still enslaved to a tyranny just as bad as the Third Reich, with that system now extended throughout Eastern Europe.  This cold fact is why Churchill entitled the final volume in his World War II history:  Triumph and Tragedy.

The clip from the  film Alexander Nevsky at the beginning of this post underlines the tragedy for the Russian people of World War II.   A true work of genius by Sergei Eisenstein, who somehow pulled off the feat of making a film about an Orthodox Saint, an aristocratic Prince and pillar of the Church, and ladling it with Communist and anti-religious propaganda, and yet having the final result not be laughably absurd.  The film was among the first efforts of Stalin to rally traditional Russian patriotism against the looming threat of Nazi Germany.  Poor Eisenstein found himself in the doghouse soon after the release of the film due to the Nazi-Soviet pact.  After the onset of Operation Barbarossa, the film was once again released and played to packed houses throughout the war.  The Russian rallying song in the film was composed by Sergei Prokofiev.  The lyrics roughly translated are :

Arise, ye Russian people,
to glorious battle, to a battle to the death:
arise, ye free people,
to defend our beloved country!
All honour to the warriors who live,
and eternal glory to those slain!
For our native home, our Russian land,
arise, ye Russian people!

Continue reading...

8 Responses to Arise Ye Russian People!

  • The Russian people endured tremendous hardship to defeat nazism, and are
    right to be proud of their sacrifices and their accomplishment. They will never
    forget.

    What about here in America? At the national VE 70th anniversary celebrations
    held in DC yesterday, our president declined to attend, instead choosing to fund
    raise on the west coast and visit Nike headquarters. Vice-president Biden was
    also conspicuous in his absence. The administration did send a national
    security advisor as its representative, so I suppose we can’t say VE Day was
    completely blown off…

  • I could write a thesis about this subject if I wanted to. To sum it up, the Russian people have, for many centuries,suffered greatly under the oppressive yoke of whoever was or is in charge in the Kremlin. Often overlooked is that the USSR instigated World War II in Europe as the ally of Nazi Germany. Stalin, not satisfied at having starved millions of Ukrainians to death in the Holodomor, jumped at the opportunity to exact revenge upon the Polish nation who humiliated him in the Polish Soviet War of 1920-21. Stalin supplied Hitler with raw materials and the USSR shared intelligence with the Nazis.

    Great Britain warned the Kremlin of a German invasion, advice ignored by Stalin-that almost cost the USSR its existence. Had Germany had capable leadership instead of the madman Hitler,the Germans would have finished the job instead of being beaten at Stalingrad.

    The Red Army and the Russian people did the most bleeding and dying in World War II because it was fine with Stalin that millions of Russians die so that Hitler would be destroyed AND so that Stalin could expand the Soviet empire. Let’s not forget that the USSR took the Baltic states in the Molotov-von Rippentrop Treaty and took Polish territory east of the Curzon Line (the Kresy) which Poland never got back. Poland did get some formerly German territory. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Romania, eastern Germany and Bulgaria became captive nations for 44 years.

    I won’t start about Katyn now.

    So, for all of their sacrifice and suffering, the Russian people got more of Stalin, then Khruschev, etc. and now Putin, who fashions himself as another Peter the Great.

    The real reason for victory in WWII was the United States of America. Russian troops fought Germany between Stalingrad and Berlin. American troops fought Germans in North Africa and Italy, led the invasion at Normandy on D-Day, hunted U-boats in the North Atlantic, rebuilt its Navy and fought in the Pacific as well as the China-Burma-India theater against a crazed Japanese military all at the same time. American factories and American workers built most of the war materiel used to win the war. Tanks, planes, Jeeps, bombs, ammunition and the Manhattan Project, which kept the USSR out of Japan. Great Britain fought longer and was almost bled white by WWII and its troops fought valiantly but the UK wasn’t going to beat Japan and Germany by itself.

    I did not know but I am unsurprised that King Putt didn’t bother to show up at any ceremony celebrating VE Day, I can deal with Barack Obama only by completely ignoring what he says and does.

  • I have no sympathy at all for the Russians. As a person of Finnish descent on my mom’s side, and a student of Finnish history, I learned these people and their various governments can never be trusted. My Finnish grandfather always told my mother and her siblings never to trust the Russians. Apparently, Grandfather had some very bad experiences with the Rus. When he was filling out his alien registration form at the post office, somebody hear his surname, and asked him if he was Russian. Grandpa said “No, I hate the G**D*** Russians!” My grandsire was a very devout Lutheran, so what happened to him in Finland must have been terrible for him to swear like that!
    BTW, the major thing that bugs me about the Russians is their attitude toward the Non-Russians they used to lord it over. When they pulled out of the Baltic states, the Russians who moved into to those countries during the Soviet years became outraged at a demand the governments of those newly freed countries were making on them. To be a citizen of those countries, they had to learn the native tongue! Horrible!

  • There was a facinating programs about the 10 most game-changing weapons of WWII on the History Channel. One of the weapons was the Studebaker Truck, made in South Bend, IN. The US shipped hundreds of thousands of them to the USSR, and because they made the Soviet army more mobile, enabling troops, supplies, and artillery to reach danger points in the line quickly, the Soviets were able for the first time to stop the blitzkrieg. This was what made Soviet victory possible, especially at Kursk and Stalingrad.
    I don’t remember who said it, but I agree with the statement: “Too bad they couldn’t both lose”.

  • Two items in lend lease were most valuable for the Soviets: the trucks you mention and endless tins of spam that kept the Soviet troops fed. Also the Anglo-American bombing campaign caused the Germans after 43 to cede air superiority to the Soviets by drawing huge numbers of German fighters from the Eastern front to air defense duty in Germany.

  • BPS, the quote “it’s a pity they both can’t lose” is from a comment Kissinger made
    regarding the Iran-Iraq war. And he was right.

  • At the national VE 70th anniversary celebrations
    held in DC yesterday, our president declined to attend, instead choosing to fund
    raise on the west coast and visit Nike headquarters.

    ==
    I wouldn’t mind if he just doesn’t do ceremonial. The fundraiser is retch-inducing (and his signature). He and Biden remind you of our achievement of the classless society: no one has any class at all.

  • “If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances. Neither of them thinks anything of their pledged word.”

    Harry Truman, June 24, 1941

End of Summer, Feed Is Working Again, and The French Revolution

Monday, September 1, AD 2014

It’s the unofficial end of Summer and it’s my annual gratuitous post of myself day.  The pic below was taken in mid-July, but I waited to fix the feed to The American Catholic in order celebrate the Summer.  Needless to say, it’s fixed and the Summer is almost over.

During the Summer I asked my fellow blogger Don for some book recommendations for the French Revolution.  Of the few he did mentioned, I picked up Simon Schama’s ‘Citizen’.  The reading is in-depth, interesting, and balanced.  I’m a bit over halfway finished of the 948 pages and am so far impressed.  Considering that we are in the post-Cold War era, I wanted to know a bit more on the French Revolution since their errors have already engulfed Europe and has almost metastasizing here in the United States.  The book is good and if there is any criticism of Simon Schama’s work it’s that he views Christianity, in particular the Catholic Church, through a materialistic lens.

My opinion on the subject is that the French Revolution is the confluence of anti-Christian ideas emanating from the so-called era of enlightenment.  These very same ideas unleashed the short-term devastation of the rape of nuns, the execution of priests, and the degradation of houses of worship.  The long-term affects have furthered the cause of eliminating God from all aspects of life blossoming further in the Communist Revolution in Russia and continued to bear the fruit of death in World Wars I & II.  From this compost grew what we now call modern liberalism & democratic socialism.

End of Summer Tito Edwards Simon Schama Citizens 500x625Happy Labor Day!

 

Continue reading...

36 Responses to End of Summer, Feed Is Working Again, and The French Revolution

  • The best histories of the French Revolution probably remains those of two Catholic historians, Hilaire Belloc and Lord Acton.
    Belloc brings out the central rôle of Carnot, the War Minister and effective head of the Committee of Public Safety and gives full credit to the “generation of genius,” Kléber, Moreau, Reynier, Marceau, and Ney commanding the army of Sambre et Meuse, Hoche, Desaix, and St. Cyr on the Rhine and, above all, Bonaparte and Masséna in the Appenine campaign.
    Acton rightly divined the underlying political motive. “The hatred of royalty was less than the hatred of aristocracy; privileges were more detested than tyranny; and the king perished because of the origin of his authority rather than because of its abuse. Monarchy unconnected with aristocracy became popular in France, even when most uncontrolled; whilst the attempt to reconstitute the throne, and to limit and fence it with its peers, broke down, because the old Teutonic elements on which it relied – hereditary nobility, primogeniture, and privilege — were no longer tolerated. The substance of the ideas of 1789 is not the limitation of the sovereign power, but the abrogation of intermediate powers.”
    The love of equality, the hatred of nobility and the tolerance of despotism naturally go together, for, If the central power is weak, the secondary powers will run riot and oppress The Empire was the consummation of the Revolution, not its reversal and Napoléon’s armies gave a code of laws and the principle of equal citizenship to a continent.

  • Thanks Michael!

    Those recommendations are going on my Reading List for next Summer, awesome!

  • Simon Schama’s ‘Citizens’ was published for the bicentenary of the French Revolution. It is regarded as the best work on the subject in the 20th century. The French hated it, calling it ‘Thatcherite history’. Its main thesis, that the violence of the Revolution was inherent, particularly upset them.

    In particular, Schama makes the point that pre-Revolutionary France was not an ossified feudal society but one that was obsessed with modernity. He also stresses that when the revolutionaries destroyed the Church they destroyed the social welfare system with drastic results in the 1790s.

    People tend to mythologize their revolutions. Englishmen did so regarding 1688; Americans still do over theirs (even though many of the mythologizers are well-educated) and the French are no exception.

  • Odd that Michael Peterson-Seymour (who sounds as if his ancestors fought at Waterloo) should be an unreconstructed Bonapartist. All the more so since one assumes that he is a Catholic.

  • I find a 948 page book to be daunting.

    I am eagerly awaiting the shortest book in history: subject what Obama did right.

  • I want to clarify that the criticism of Simon Schama’s book, Citizen, is my own. He refers to nuns and monks and unfulfilled citizens, it, not meeting any of their potential because they are cloistered. I am not sure if he was be sarcastic, which would be fine, or serious, which would explain my criticism.

  • Pingback: Why Secular Humanists Can't Cope With Islam - BigPulpit.com
  • My complete recommendations to Tito:

    “In regard to the French Revolution a good starting point is Citizens by Simon Schama:

    http://www.amazon.com/Citizens-A-Chronicle-French-Revolution/dp/0679726101

    Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France still cannot be beat as an analysis of the early Revolution and is eerily prophetic. Carlyle’s History of the French Revolution is quite dated, and written in his usual odd style, but has valuable insights overlooked by many modern commenters.

    The late Henri Lefebvre, although a Marxist, did valuable work on both the French Revolution and Napoleon and I recommend his tomes. His style is dry as dust, but his research is impeccable.”

  • Um, what beach was that?

  • Tito Edwards: I expected you would look more like Padre Pio. You look happy.

  • Tamsin,

    An undisclosed location on the gulf coast of Florida.

    Mary De Voe,

    LOL. Very happy, my wife was there with me, but she had to take the picture. 🙂

  • My brother Mike lives on the Gulf Coast of Florida. Say “Hi” to him for me.

  • Thank you for fixing the feed!

  • Tito, I share your view of the French Revolution. It lives on in the Social Radicalism that permeates so much of our politics. Social Radicalism is a phenomenon that bears close scrutiny. It transcends the individual with a mindset all its own. If not scrutinized and moderated the mindset morphs into moral chaos. This can happen in slow creeping fashion or with the rapidity of revolution. The French Revolution is a signal example. It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage. Carlyle describes it thus: “On a sudden, the Earth yawns asunder, and amid Tartarean smoke, and glare of fierce brightness, rises SANSCULOTTISM, many-headed, fire-breathing, and asks; What think ye of me?” Do I engage in hyperbole when I compare the presentable, well-clothed and well-intended modern social radical with the maddened mob of Paris? Yes but to make a point. I cross a Robespierre and risk the guillotine, the loss of my life. The modern well-dressed social-radical only asks that I risk my soul. Who does me less violence?

  • John Nolan wrote, “Odd that Michael Peterson-Seymour (who sounds as if his ancestors fought at Waterloo) should be an unreconstructed Bonapartist. All the more so since one assumes that he is a Catholic.”
    Another Catholic, G K Chesterton described the tragedy of England:
    “A war that we understood not came over the world and woke
    Americans, Frenchmen, Irish; but we knew not the things they spoke.
    They talked about rights and nature and peace and the people’s reign:
    And the squires, our masters, bade us fight; and scorned us never again.
    Weak if we be for ever, could none condemn us then;
    Men called us serfs and drudges; men knew that we were men.
    In foam and flame at Trafalgar, on Albuera plains,
    We did and died like lions, to keep ourselves in chains,
    We lay in living ruins; firing and fearing not
    The strange fierce face of the Frenchmen who knew for what they fought,
    And the man who seemed to be more than a man we strained against and broke;
    And we broke our own rights with him. And still we never spoke.”
    Hilaire Belloc, too, another Catholic, whose grandfather served in the armies of Napoléon, declared, “Those who ask how it was that a group of men sustaining all the weight of civil conflict within and of universal war without, yet made time enough in twenty years to frame the codes which govern modern Europe, to lay down the foundations of universal education, of a strictly impersonal scheme of administration, and even in detail to remodel the material face of society—in a word, to make modern Europe—must be content for their reply to learn that the Republican Energy had for its flame and excitant this vision: a sense almost physical of the equality of man.”

  • William P Walsh wrote, “It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage.”
    Certainly, it did start with a bankrupt government, but here is the curiosity: this bankrupt nation found itself able to sustain twenty years of war against the whole of Europe and to raise and maintain an army to fight it. For most of that period it had 700,000 men in the field. As for “open rebellion,” it crushed it wherever it showed itself, in Brittany, in Lyons, in the Vendée. It takes something rather more than “uncontrollable rage” to do that.

  • “It takes something rather more than “uncontrollable rage” to do that.”

    1. Mass murder against opponents.
    2. Mass repudiation of the debts of the Old Regime.
    3. The military genius of Napoleon and some of the other generals and marshals that rose to the fore as a result of the Revolution.
    4. Total War-no longer was war the sport of kings but rather the preocupation of peoples.

  • Donald R McClarey

    “3. The military genius of Napoleon and some of the other generals and marshals”

    I would certainly agree with that. There is a sense in which Napoléon, Dumoriez (despite his later defection), Kellerman, Hoche and Kléber were the French Revolution – It is their legacy.

    “4. Total War-no longer was war the sport of kings but rather the preoccupation of peoples.”

    The levée en masse and all that it entailed was the achievement of Carnot, but we sometimes forget what an astonishing achievement it was. The army was increased from 645,000 in mid-1793 to 1,500,000 in September 1794. The unbroken succession of victories, from Fleurus in June 1794 to Marengo in June 1800 were all, in a sense, his. He was ably seconded by Lindet, in effect, minister of food, munitions and manufacture.

    The political will and administrative skills needed to raise, equip, train, discipline and provision armies on that scale was enormous and quite without precedent. Much of the credit must go to the Committee of Public Safety, which was, in effect, the War Cabinet and to the brilliant innovation of seconding the “Deputies on Mission” from the National Assembly, as political commissioners to the armies.

  • Michael points out my inattention to the economic situation in France. I admit to a lack of formal study of that dismal science. I have yet in mind the diabolical ingredient of revolution. The first revolution starts with Lucifer’s “Non Serviam” and every revolution carries that sentiment in its bloodstream. The laws of economics are swept away when everything can be stolen from rightful owners. The State can be most efficient when it can murder the opposition. “If God does not exist, all things are permitted”. The Social Radical who looks so benign in his well-tailored clothing can do great injustice with a pen-stroke. If the end justifies the employment of any means, we are living in a state of moral chaos. We are then lunatics pulling down our house upon us. But I sing to the choir, as I sort out my thoughts.

  • I can assure Tito that Schama when referring to cloistered religious is not giving us his own opinion, but that of the revolutionaries whose construct of what constitutes a ‘citizen’ is an important theme of the book.

    I am an admirer of Belloc but he was fundamentally wrong on two counts – all his life he believed a) that the French Revolution was a ‘good thing’ and b) Dreyfus was guilty.

  • John Nolan
    I think both Belloc (and Chesterton, too) wrote a great deal in reaction to the way the Revolution and Napoléon were portrayed in England.

    There is a print, which can still be seen in the bar parlours of some country inns, of the handshake of Wellington and Blucher after Waterloo. They must have been produced by the million

    http://tinyurl.com/m42zlof

    Chesterton summed up the whole business pretty well.

    “Our middle classes did well to adorn their parlours with the picture of the “Meeting of Wellington and Blucher.” They should have hung up a companion piece of Pilate and Herod shaking hands. Then, after that meeting amid the ashes of Hougomont, where they dreamed they had trodden out the embers of all democracy, the Prussians rode on before, doing after their kind. After them went that ironical aristocrat out of embittered Ireland, with what thoughts we know; and Blucher, with what thoughts we care not; and his soldiers entered Paris, and stole the sword of Joan of Arc.”

    To both Belloc and Chesterton, the fall of Paris to the Allies could only be compared to the sack of Rome by the Goths.

  • An interesting summary of an enormous matter,re. the French Revolution: “It started with the whole nation seeking to justly address a financial crisis but rapidly resolved into open rebellion and uncontrollable rage.” – William P. Walsh
    However, from whence came the bitterly murderous hatred of the Catholic Faith and its individual servants, only the abyss could cough up that demon.

  • Michael Paterson-Seymour

    Chesterton wrote ‘The Crimes of England’ in 1916. It’s a polemic, brilliant in parts, but it ain’t history. The author’s unreasoning ‘Teutonophobia’, his withering scorn for Pitt, Castlereagh and Peel (in contrast with his hero-worship of Charles James Fox) and his take on the French Revolution and Bonaparte simply parade his prejudices. Comparing the Allied occupation of Paris in 1814 with the sack of Rome by the Goths takes hyperbole to new heights, especially since French armies had looted and plundered their way across Europe for the previous twenty years. Historical method requires conclusions to be based on evidence. Both Belloc and Chesterton were counter-historical, if not positively anti-historical. They rightly challenged the consensus of the Whig historians, but what they put in its place was too intuitive and subjective. Since it did not rely on evidence it could be sometimes right, but more often wrong.

    Simon Schama’s book is revisionist, not least in that he uses the narrative approach which was unfashionable in 1989 (Orlando Figes does the same in his study of the Russian Revolution ‘A People’s Tragedy’). But both men are historians; Belloc and Chesterton, for all their brilliance, were not.

  • The errors of the french revolution came from somewhere!
    The protestant reformation shaped Europe and the world in ways we are still discerning. That “reformation” preceded the Enlightenment, which came to the “spirit” of revoltion of the 18 and 19 centuries everything from the very un- “reason”able reign of terror to marx to the culture kampf– and what follows in russia and mexico and china and on and on and on

  • John Nolan wrote, “Comparing the Allied occupation of Paris in 1814 with the sack of Rome by the Goths takes hyperbole to new heights…”
    Hardly. In both cases, the capital of civilisation fell to the barbarians from beyond the Rhine.
    Belloc’s evaluation of the Revolution is not all that different from the great French historian of the Revolution, Louis Blanc. Blanc, one recalls, during his exile in London (he had fought on the barricades during les journées de juin 1848), had access to Croker’s unrivalled collection of manuscripts and pamphlets.
    Acton summarises Blanc’s principle: ”He desires government to be so constituted that it may do everything for the people, not so restricted that it can do no injury to minorities. The masses have more to suffer from abuse of wealth than from abuse of power, and need protection by the State, not against it. Power, in the proper hands, acting for the whole, must not be restrained in the interest of a part.” That was also the view of the great Dominican, Lacordaire, “Between the weak and the strong, between the rich and the poor, between the master and the servant, it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free.”
    This was a principle Belloc and Chesterton would have heartily endorsed. It is the negation of Liberalism and its doctrine of laissez-faire.

  • “In both cases, the capital of civilisation fell to the barbarians from beyond the Rhine.”

    Please. Even as hyperbole that is over the circus top. The French Revolution was a complex historical event, but by the time Napoleon fell it had devolved into one of the first military dictatorships in modern times, one with delusions of grandeur. It was a very good thing for the peace of Europe that Napoleon fell in 1814 and that he was soundly thrashed in 1815 at Waterloo which brought an end to his “Golden Oldies” attempt at a Bonaparte revival.

  • Donald R McClarey wrote, “[B]y the time Napoleon fell it had devolved into one of the first military dictatorships in modern times.”
    That is to misunderstand the nature, both of the Republic and the Empire. Napoléon was no more a military dictator than Augustus or Charlemagne. As Chesterton said, “French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.”
    Elizabeth Barrett Browning (Swinburn’s “Sea-Eagle of English feather”) understood:
    “And kings crept out again to feel the sun.
    The kings crept out — the peoples sat at home.
    And finding the long-invocated peace
    (A pall embroidered with worn images
    Of rights divine) too scant to cover doom
    Such as they suffered, cursed the corn that grew
    Rankly, to bitter bread, on Waterloo.”

    Those “carrion kings, unsheeted and unmasked,” described by Michelet, the great historian of the Revolution.

  • “That is to misunderstand the nature, both of the Republic and the Empire. Napoléon was no more a military dictator than Augustus or Charlemagne”

    Augustus was a military dictator, the last man standing of the ambitious warlords/politicians who murdered the dying Republic. Charlemagne was not a military dictator but the scion of a family that had been running the chief of the Frankish states for some time. Napoleon owed his position to his military brilliance and his willingness to use military force against civilian rule and nothing more.

    “French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.”

    That quote always had my vote for the dumbest thing written by Chesterton.

  • M P-S, the ‘barbarians from beyond the Rhine’ produced Lessing, Schiller, Goethe, Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, to name but a few. I’m sure those German citizens, living in their peaceful towns and villages, often in the shadow of old-established monasteries on which the local economy depended and which were soon to be destroyed, were overjoyed at the arrival of Revolutionary French armies with their portable guillotines. Germany in the eighteenth century was civilized in the real sense that the local ‘civitas’ enforced its own laws for the benefit of the citizens. It is telling that the incidence of capital punishment in the German states was far lower than in France or England.

    Michael, get off your hobby-horse and face facts. Bonaparte has a good record when it comes to establishing (or more correctly re-establishing, since the Revolution had destroyed much) institutions in France; but he also erected a police state. His hubristic lust for conquest led (as in the case of Hitler, with whom he has much in common) to eventual nemesis. And France only recovered its 1789 levels of foreign trade in the 1830s by which time Britain had far outstripped it.

  • “I can assure Tito that Schama when referring to cloistered religious is not giving us his own opinion, but that of the revolutionaries whose construct of what constitutes a ‘citizen’ is an important theme of the book.”
    .
    The sovereign personhood of the newly begotten human being (His body and his soul) constitutes the nation from the very first moment of existence. His absolute moral and legal innocence are the standard of Justice and the compelling interest of the state in its duty to deliver Justice and in protecting the newly begotten human being. Francisco Suarez says that: “Human existence is the criterion for the objective ordering of human rights.”
    .
    The newly begotten human being who constitutes the state from the very first moment of his existence and through his sovereign personhood endowed by “their Creator” is the citizen. At birth the new citizen is given documents to prove his citizenship and a tax bill.
    .
    The French Revolution must have been dealing with the loss and denial of citizenship by the state as in “persona non grata”. Religious persons, priests and nuns, do not forfeit or surrender their God-given sovereign personhood and/or citizenship by answering their vocation. A higher calling, in fact, purifies their citizenship and brings “the Blessings of Liberty”.
    .
    It is nothing less than communism, oppression, for another individual or the state to tell a person who is a citizen that he is not a citizen without indictment for a capital offense, treason. It appears that being a religious person in France during the French Revolution was treason, the absolute reversal of the truth.
    .
    This same separation of citizenship and soul is happening here in America, where having a soul has become treason, treason in the land of atheism.

  • Donald R McCleary wrote, “’ French democracy became more democratic, not less, when it turned all France into one constituency which elected one member.’ – That quote always had my vote for the dumbest thing written by Chesterton.”

    And yet it was, in effect, endorsed by Walter Bagehot, a man politically poles apart from Chesterton. Writing of the nephew, that shrewd cynic observed, “The nature of a constitution, the action of an assembly, the play of parties, the unseen formation of a guiding opinion, are complex facts, difficult to know and easy to mistake. But the action of a single will, the fiat of a single mind, are easy ideas: anybody can make them out, and no one can ever forget them. When you put before the mass of mankind the question, ‘Will you be governed by a king, or will you be governed by a constitution?’ the inquiry comes out thus—’Will you be governed in a way you understand, or will you be governed in a way you do not understand?’ The issue was put to the French people; they were asked, ‘Will you be governed by Louis Napoleon, or will you be governed by an assembly?’ The French people said, ‘We will be governed by the one man we can imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.'”

  • “The French people said, ‘We will be governed by the one man we can imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.’”

    Preposterous. The plebiscite of 1851 was instituted only after wannabe Napoleon had instituted repression. It had as much validity as one of Stalin’s show trials in the thirties. Like his much greater uncle, wannabe Napoleon owed his imitation imperial title, eventually granted him officially through another plebiscite with an unimaginative 97% yes vote, to the bayonets he controlled rather than the ballots he manufactured in pretend plebiscites.

  • Donald R McClarey
    Louis Napoléon may not have been supported by a numerical majority of the nation, that’s as may be; but there is no doubt that he had the support of a determinant current of opinion—determinant in intensity and in weight, that is, as well as in numbers. That was true of his uncle also and it needed no plebiscite to establish this obvious truth.

  • “but there is no doubt that he had the support of a determinant current of opinion”

    Nope, like his uncle he had control of the military and crushed all opposition. Speculations about his “true” popularity among the people or the elite are meaningless when he made certain that his opposition had no voice.

  • Mary De Voe’s, “It is nothing less than communism, oppression, for another individual or the state to tell a person who is a citizen that he is not a citizen without indictment for a capital offense, treason. It appears that being a religious person in France during the French Revolution was treason, the absolute reversal of the truth. . This same separation of citizenship and soul is happening here in America, where having a soul has become treason, treason in the land of atheism.”, nails it.
    In America today, the newly begotten human being is no longer protected, the person who is religious, a veteran, a supporter of Constitutional rights is a potential domestic terrorist. Remember Andrew Cuomo’s saying that a supporter of the Second Amendment has no place in New York State. If he becomes President, that may apply to the whole country.

  • I started to watch Simon Schamas tv program about judiasm since i enjoyed his shows about England. I caught an episode in the middle and what amazed me was that the program seemed more of a rant against the injustices perpetrated upon the Jews by Christians than a true unbiased history of Judaism.
    I was a bit shocked but it may explain this “book is good and if there is any criticism of Simon Schama’s work it’s that he views Christianity, in particular the Catholic Church, through a materialistic lens “

Impotence as Foreign Policy

Saturday, April 26, AD 2014

Foreign Policy as Bad Joke

Since 2008 I have often suspected that the Obama administration is one huge, unfunny, practical joke.  That is certainly the only rational explanation for the reaction of the Obama administration to the ongoing slicing and dicing of Ukraine by Mother Russia under the leadership of Vladimir “Fearless Leader” Putin.  James Taranto at The Wall Street Journal gives us the details:

 

Here’s a case in point. On March 13, a week or so after that interview was published, Samantha Power, America’s ambassador to the United Nations, tweeted about Moscow’s intervention in Crimea: “I missed the day at law school where self-determination was defined as #Russia-determination. Russia must halt its military action.” Two days later, she added: “Russia can veto a Security Council resolution, but it can’t veto the truth.”

It would appear the State Department is seeking to maintain the balance of power through a strategy of mutually assured derision.

One problem with using sarcasm as a weapon is that its proliferation is uncontrollable and widespread. Even the Canadians have it. In a column for the Toronto Sun, Ezra Levant mocked “the ironically named Ambassador Power.”

Another problem, as Levant suggested, is that the Russians appear to be better at mockery than their American counterparts. After a phone conversation between Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin, Levant wrote, “the Kremlin release[d] this note: ‘Mr. Obama congratulated Mr. Putin on the success of the Paralympic Games and asked Mr. Putin to pass on his greetings to the athletes.’ . . . At least Samantha Power stomped her feet and wrote a mean Twitter tweet. But Obama personally congratulated Putin, during a phone call about a war?”

Wait, it gets worse. Some of Foggy Bottom’s tweeters are deadly earnest, making them totally defenseless against post-Soviet sarcasm. On March 26 Jen Psaki, State’s top spokesman, tweeted this: “To echo @BarackObama today-proud to stand #UnitedForUkraine World should stand together with one voice.” In an accompanying photo, a smiling Psaki gave a left-handed thumbs-up while holding up in her right hand a sign with the #UnitedForUkraine hashtag and her Twitter handle, @statedeptspox.

Yesterday, National Review Online’s Patrick Brennan reports, the Russian Foreign Ministry’s official Twitter account started including the hashtag in its tweets on the subject. Example: “[Foreign Minister Sergey] #Lavrov: Our US counterparts must compel the acting officials in Kiev to bear responsibility for the current situation #UnitedForUkraine.”

Barack Obama’s political operation frequently sees its Twitter hashtags “hijacked” by conservative antagonists. Remember #WHYouth? But in domestic politics, mutually assured derision is just good clean fun. Partisan politics thrives on antagonism. If the purpose of the domestic hashtags is to motivate Democratic base voters, conservative mockery is a help rather than a hindrance.

At Foggy Bottom, however, they seem utterly clueless as to what the Russians are up to. Brennan notes that Macon Phillips, who runs the department’s Bureau of International Information Programs, tweeted in response: “Welcome to the #UnitedForUkraine hashtag @mfa_russia! 2 steps to join in: First watch an intro video [titled ‘Sanctions: How Did We Get Here?’], then RT!”

Continue reading...

16 Responses to Impotence as Foreign Policy

  • Is this diplomacy today? Who put these mouthy immature no- knowledge or respect-for-history-or- civilization people in charge!?

  • A majority of the American people who voted in the last two presidential elections unfortunately.

  • I can see the power of social media for organizing grass roots, regular folks who don’t have a state department and the largest most powerful military on the planet at their immediate command. However one would hope that this administration would have a foreign policy based on more than aggressive tweeting.

  • Yes I know what you are saying – that the president gets to appoint and does so out of his own framework
    I know we didn’t vote for John Foster Dulles or Dag Hammarskjold. Maybe Presidents then had a better pool to draw from. There seemed to be a higher and deeper level of education then.
    Are these the best and brightest in the liberal camp. Surely there could be statesmen.

  • “Are these the best and brightest in the liberal camp.”

    The port side of our politics long ago lost liberals with even a passing familiarity as to how real world, as opposed to cloud kookoo land, foreign policy should be conducted. The idiot male gold digger John F. Kerry as Secretary of State symbolizes what fools, and worse, currently are charting our course with the rest of the world.

  • I watched TV with a terrible contortion on my face when Powers and Hegel were being approved in the Senate. By the time of Kerry the muscles in my grimace had gone slack
    Shod be a hue and cry over some of the business as usual..
    Yes I wish there was more depth than tweeting. Apparently shallow president and correspondingly shallow administration.

  • No foreign leader with a modicum of competency respects the narcissist President more interested in golfing and Beyonce than in the safety of the Republic. He is a baby murdering, sexual filth promoting godless man of sin and depravity intent on vacationing with Moochelle Jezebel while Rome burns. I despise, loathe, detest and abhor liberal progressivism.

  • One difficulty you have with these situations is that the President’s mouth is invariably running ahead of whatever tools he has on hand to enforce compliance or impose costs. His subordinates take their cues from him.

    You notice he has twice put working politicians with next to no experience as line administrators in charge of the diplomatic corps and has put the military and its auxilliaries under the command of a man with some military and business background but no history of superintending organizations with more than a two digit census of personnel; he also appears to suffer from intellectual deficits. Before entering politics full time, John Kerry was a perfectly common-and-garden rank and file attorney working in Boston; Hillary Clinton was a skeezy small-city corporate and commercial lawyer who had been sanctioned by superiors for unethical conduct before the ink was dry on the notice of her bar exam results. That’s who these guys are, yet in the minds of many journalists and partisan Democrats, the dimensions of these two expand (like a gas) to fill the space of whatever office they have occupied.

    Say what you want about Ronald Reagan, the man built the finest apparat of any occupant of the office in the last fifty-odd years, one which accomplished (within the limits set by Congress) what he wanted accomplished with only light intervention from him. The current incumbent hires people who share his defects.

  • Paul. Don’t mix words…..how do you honestly feel? 🙂

    I’m with you Mr. Primavera! 100%

  • It is definitely amateur hour. As with everything else that the Democrats do. Except pandering to voters and rigging elections.

  • I am pleased that an adult such as Mr. McClarey wrote this piece and I agree with his viewpoints. Obumbler never had any foreign policy interests, other than appeasing Muslims. Obumbler could not care less if Putin gobbles up all of Ukraine – what’s it to Obumbler? Nothing. The small Ukrainian diaspora and descendants of Ukranian immigrants from long ago aren’t nearly numerous enough to make Obumbler notice.

    Putin knows weakness and will prey on it. I think that Russian Eastern Ukraine is next on his hit list, followed by some sort of union with Belarus. Putin won’t likely go farther West because Poland will fight to the last man – and Poland has started fracking to get their own natural gas supplies.

  • “Paul. Don’t mix words…..how do you honestly feel? 🙂
    I’m with you Mr. Primavera! 100%”
    .
    Add my name to your list, Paul.

  • I will add to the title, Impotence as Foreign Policy, the following:

    Impotence as Energy Policy – San Onofre 2 and 3 shut down, Vermont Yankee shut down, Crystal River shut down, Kewanee shut down.

    Impotence as Health Care Policy: Obamacare, infanticide of the unborn, state sponsored euthanasia of the useless

    Impotence as Education Policy: common core, liberal Academia.

    Impotence as Military Policy: homosexuality among the troops, a green Navy instead of a Nuclear Navy.

    The list of impotencies is endless.

  • PS thank you Philip and Mary

  • Perhaps, the President should look for someone from the divinity schools.

    Talleyrand had been notable as a student of divinity, both at Sâint-Sulpice and the Sorbonne and he was fond of saying that it was to theology that he owed “that instinctive sagacity, that measure in thought and expression [cette sagacité instinctive, cette mesure d’esprit et d’expression] that had been remarked on in his handling of great affairs. Richelieu, Mazarin and the Abbé Sieyès (whom Lord Acton called the only statesman of the Revolution) are other names that spring to mind.
    In modern times, we have Père Louis de la Trinité (Georges Thierry d’Argenlieu), who rose to the rank of Admiral in the Free French Forces and became one of General de Gaulle’s most trusted diplomats

  • Pingback: Impotence as Foreign Policy: Part II | The American Catholic

Religious Cleansing in the Crimea

Sunday, March 30, AD 2014

4 Responses to Religious Cleansing in the Crimea

  • To be fair, there was one Russian czar who allowed the Jesuits to stay in his realm when, under the urging of certain French and Spanish royalty, the Society of Jesus was being suppressed.

    The Russian government, whoever runs it, hates the Catholic Church because –
    The Orthodox Church in Russia has almost always been under government control;
    The Catholic Church is something from the feared and hated West (e.g., Poland).

    I read a few news stories about the supposed decline of the Catholic Church in Poland. An unbelievably stupid 20-something was quoted as saying that she wanted Muslims to come to Poland to add to the cultural diversity and that she was an atheist who thought the Church has too much influence in Poland. This appears to be a much too common belief in Poland among those born after the fall of Communism.

    If nothing else, Putin has sounded a wake up call. The young people that thought they had nothing to gear from Russia will have to learn the hard way…and it wasn’t atheism or Muslims who kept Poland alive during the Partition or during Communism.

  • Pingback: Turkey & the new Jihad on Christian Armenians - Byzantine Edition
  • The Orthodox see Eastern Catholics not as Catholics, but as Orthodox quislings. The Russian Orthodox see the creation of the Eastern Catholic Churches as a illegitimate union forced on Orthodox Christians by Catholic Poland and/or Austria as these nations expanded eastward in history. The most Catholic part of Ukraine in the West was part of Austria until WWI and part of Poland between the wars. Continued loyalty to the Catholic Church after the “Great Orthodox Nation” has driven these “foreigners” out is thought of not as a religious choice, but as loyalty to the foreign powers. Furthermore, WWII is still a sore spot as many Ukrainians sided with Hitler against Stalin. Let’s just say it is a very nasty history all around.

  • “The Orthodox see Eastern Catholics not as Catholics, but as Orthodox quislings.”

    Russian Orthodox have often been Russian first and Orthodox a very poor second, and it is traditional for the rulers of Russia to use the Russian Orthodox Church as an organ of state power, especially since “Russia” has always contained large minority groups not pleased at all to be ruled from Moscow or Saint Petersburg.

Rand Paul: Frontrunner

Monday, March 17, AD 2014

After winning two CPAC polls and a spat with Ted Cruz in recent days, it is arguable that Rand Paul is the current GOP front-runner for the 2016 presidential election. Of course it is absurdly early to really make the call, but many of us have been expecting this trajectory since Paul was elected to the Senate in 2010. Some of us, myself included, have welcomed it.

On the non-negotiable issues for Catholics who even bother to vote in accordance with the natural moral law, Rand Paul is solid. He is 100% pro-life, supports the 10th amendment right of states to determine their own marriage laws, and has declared school choice “the civil rights issue of our day.” (Remember, the right of parents to educate their children as they see fit is a non-negotiable.)

On economics, he has proposed the establishment of free-enterprise zones for cities such as Detroit that have been devastated by decades of bureaucratic mismanagement, union thuggery and bloated government. The “social justice” crowd will never accept human freedom as a means by which the common good can be served, but the rest of us are under no obligation to ignore empirical reality. It is the creation of wealth that lifts masses of people out of poverty, and it is the unleashing of creative human potential from the pretensions of would-be social engineers and demagogues that allows the most wealth to be created and shared.

My only problem with Rand Paul is foreign policy. I imagine that some of my respected co-bloggers also have this problem, though for a much different reason than myself; they may see him as too much like his father, while I am disappointed that he is not overtly enough like him. Yes, I am a Ron Paul non-interventionist (I can’t stop you from calling me an “isolationist” in spite of my preference for free trade, the free flow of information and cultural exchange, but you should know that I’ll think you a moron if you do).

I was proud of Paul, and for the first time, much of the GOP, when it rejected Obama’s ambition to attack the Syrian government and send aid to Al-Qaeda (to switch our enemy from Eastasia to Eurasia). Since the Ukrainan crisis, Paul has been doing his best to straddle the fence and appease the interventionist hardliners as well as the loyal support base his father built up and which he needs to win his campaign for him. I am encouraged, however, that in spite of the obligatory denunciations of Putin that all US  politicians must offer, Paul has spoken of the dire need to protect the world’s persecuted Christians. As Putin has also often spoken of this need, perhaps this could form the basis of peace and cooperation between our nations. Nothing in my view is more dangerous, tragic, stupid and unnecessary than the antagonism currently brewing between the West and Russia over Ukraine – a situation that was deliberately inflamed by Western support and encouragement for the Ukrainian opposition.  Rand Paul will only have my support if he can prove himself to be above this irrational nonsense.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to Rand Paul: Frontrunner

  • The younger Dr. Paul will have by 2017 one term as a legislator under his belt after twenty-odd years as a small practice professional. That is not adequate preparation for an executive position as demanding as the Presidency. Same problem with Sen. Cruz, the latest belle of the ball. Goes double for Sen. Rubio, whose not as sharp as Cruz or Paul and lies brazenly.

  • I like Paul. His biggest campaign liability will be that he appears to have very thin skin.

  • Bonchamps,

    Blaming the West for the Ukrainian opposition to Yanukovich is ridiculous. Yanukovich was a criminal and a crook and Putin’s semi-puppet.

    I know something about this part of the world and Russia is not a nation to be trusted. Lest you think that I advocate sending the US Army into Ukraine to drive out Russia, I don’t. The nearly senile McCain can keep that view to himself.

    Russia has been a bully to its neighbors to the West – the Baltic States, Belarus, Ukraine and Poland, to name a few – for centuries. Putin has taken the measure of Obumbler and like Brezhnev found Carter, Putin has found a weakling and an idiot who will do nothing to stop Putin’s plans for empire.

    Oh, sure, it has nothing to do with us in the US. Right. Soviet assistance propped up Castro and he is still in power. Wait until Putin threatens Western Ukraine and tries to merge Belarus into Russia proper. Then the Bear sits at the doorstep of Poland once again. Poland has been a good ally to the US, but to isolationists, it’s the same old story. F’em, right? Not our problem, right?

    Ron Paul, from what I read of him, often blamed the Middle East problems on Israel. Israel isn’t blameless, but I blame Muslims for Middle East problems.

  • Speaking of Rand Paul….this nation elected an imbecile who can’t speak without a teleprompter. It’s all about packaging. The fire hydrant across the street from my house would be an improvement as President over the current occupant of the White House.

  • PF,
    .
    A few points.
    .
    1. I did not blame the West for the existence of an opposition in Ukraine. I blamed it for supporting that opposition in order to deliberately antagonize Russia.
    .
    2. I do not care if “Russia has been a bully.” All large nations, including our own, have spheres of influence. America has the Monroe Doctrine; only the worst, most despicable sort of hypocrite could defend that while denouncing Russia’s interaction with her neighbors. It isn’t our problem.
    .
    3. The USSR aided Castro because both were communist, and because the US had missiles pointed at it in Turkey. Again, disgusting, obscene hypocrisy to say its ok for us to have missile bases a few miles away from Russia but the end of the world if they want to have some near us. These days, as a traditional Catholic and natural law moralist, Putin and I have far, far more in common than John McCain and I, or the godless tyrants who embrace homosexualism and radical feminism in our government and in the EU. The ideological board has changed. Putin is publicly proclaiming and defending traditional natural law morality and speaking up on behalf of persecuted Christians – our leaders in the West are destroying traditional morality, ignoring the persecution of Christians by communists and Muslims, and actually engaging in low-level persecution themselves. Solidarity with persecuted Christians and defense of natural law morality is a thousand times more important to me than defending a bunch of jacked-up neo-fascists on Russia’s border.

  • That he has a considered opinion on foreign policy at all puts him shoulders above the present inhabitant of the White House.

  • only the worst, most despicable sort of hypocrite could defend that while denouncing Russia’s interaction with her neighbors. It isn’t our problem

    Thanks for sharing.

  • I do not care if “Russia has been a bully.” All large nations, including our own, have spheres of influence. America has the Monroe Doctrine; only the worst, most despicable sort of hypocrite could defend that while denouncing Russia’s interaction with her neighbors. It isn’t our problem.

    So our problem doesn’t start at either the Donitz or the Dniester. Where then does it start? At the Vistula? The Oder? the Elbe? the Rhine?

  • Nice moral equivalency, by the way.

    The USSR aided Castro because both were communist, and because the US had missiles pointed at it in Turkey. Again, disgusting, obscene hypocrisy to say its ok for us to have missile bases a few miles away from Russia but the end of the world if they want to have some near us.

    As if the missles in Turkey and the missles in Cuba represented the same thing.

  • “It is the creation of wealth that lifts masses of people out of poverty, and it is the unleashing of creative human potential from the pretensions of would-be social engineers and demagogues that allows the most wealth to be created and shared.” Well said.

  • So, what happened to all the comments?

  • Changeover to Disqus. I’m not sure if the old comments will be transported here or not.

  • Disqus then not disqus . . . is it a part of Obamacare?

  • I don’t think it’s accurate to see Putin as at all interested in protecting Christians from persecution except when it suits his purposes. The Ukrainian Catholics I know (as opposed to the Orthodox) are deeply worried about what Russian domination of Crimea and Ukraine could mean, and it would seem with good reason:

    http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/03/15/ukrainian_greek_catholic_priest_abducted_in_crimea/en1-781855

  • “So, what happened to all the comments?”
    .
    The comments are in your e-mail.

  • A reasonable foreign policy would prioritize our national interests and seek to secure those in a just manner. Unfortunately, we have become a nation having a split-personality, one part sane and one part insane. The current President and his party do not appear to prioritize our best interests. They seem to fancy themselves internationalists, rather than patriots. Putin and Russia, at the least seem to have Russia’s interests in mind, whether they seek the same justly is another matter and remains to be seen. Now finally to Rand Paul. I would vote for him in a primary held today.

  • Pingback: Guinness & HeinekenNow Political Statements - God & Caesar
  • As if the missles in Turkey and the missles in Cuba represented the same thing.

    They did. For cryin’ out loud, grow up. The American and NATO strategic planning was built around nuclear annihilation, and the suggestion to commit genocide without provocation came up on multiple occasions. Thanks be to God that never happened, but it was planned for, it was prepared for, it was seriously considered, and note that the US has always refused to rule out a first strike option.

    Don’t bother telling me I’m “unpatriotic” for saying this, either — all that would prove is that you have no idea what the word “patriotic” means.

  • They did. For cryin’ out loud, grow up.

    For crying out loud, stop being an obtuse and condescending ass.

    American policy-makers did not, in a world of nuclear weapons, get to choose the matrix in which they lived and worked.

  • Howard: “and note that the US has always refused to rule out a first strike option”. If I carry a pistol for self-defense, I do not put a notice on the holster saying, “Don’t worry, I’ll never shoot first”. Patriotism is the love that leads one to defend, love, and support one’s country. A self-declared “citizen of the world”, such as Obama, would not appear to be so inclined. Someone said, it is impossible to be simultaneously an internationalist and a patriot, and that is what I have in mind. Let us remain cordial. This is a venue, primarily of the household of the faith. “Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men, but especially to those who are of the household of the faith”.

  • For myself, I would argue that our nuclear missles, and even our refusal to rule out nuclear first-strike, were inteneded to thwart Soviet expansion, hence defensive in nature. Their missles were intended to enable it, hence offensive in nature. To my mind, not the same thing at all.

    On the subject of Rand Paul, Senator’s make lousy candidates, and worse Presidents.

    There’s a reason why we only elect one about every other generation.

  • To suggest that the fact that US and USSR were both prepared to use nuclear weapons somehow made them the same is like arguing that since both sides in World War II bombed cities, they were morally the same.

    The USSR was using its nuclear weapons to protect the existence of its totalitarian police state and the satellite nations it kept in line only via their own police states and the constant threat of military invasion if they didn’t toe the party line.

    Anyone who thinks the US was a totalitarian police state is, quite bluntly, an idiot. And not even a useful one.

  • I liked Ron Paul’s views on things economic and hated them on foreign policy.
    Putin is attempting to resurrect the tsarist Russian Empire in some form and knows that Obumbler is as weak as Carter and much more disinterested.

    Putin claims to want to defend Christians. Well, certain Russian Orthodox consider themselves and themsevles alone to be Christians and others are heretics. Don’t believe me…ask a Ukrainian Catholic who knows what happened in 1946. The NKVD – predecessor to the KGB – arrested Ukrainian Catholic clergy and sent them off to rot in the gulags. The NKVD took their churches and gave them to the ROC – or destroyed them. The official Soviet position was that the UGCC never existed.

    On a Catholic view alone…anyone who supports turning a blind eye to Putin is nuts.

Mother Russia on the March

Monday, March 17, AD 2014

Fearless Leader

 

Well, Fearless Leader has won the referendum in Crimea with 95% of the vote, so back to the USSR Russia Crimea goes.  One can determine the trustworthiness of that vote by recalling that 36% of the population of Crimea is ethnic Ukranian or Crimean Tatar, neither group having much love for the Rodina.

If Putin were going to stop with Crimea that would not disturb me much.  Sevastopol has always been the main naval base of the Russian Black Sea fleet.  With 58% of the population of the Crimea being ethnic Russian, the Russians clearly made a major mistake in allowing it to become part of the Ukraine and Russia was never going to allow a hostile Ukraine to keep it.

The problem is that Putin is unlikely to stop there.  In Obama he realizes he is confronting the weakest, and most feckless, President the United States has had since James Buchanan.  He views this as an opportune time for him to recreate the old Soviet Union as much as he can.  Next up is likely to be Eastern Ukraine. 

Continue reading...

21 Responses to Mother Russia on the March

  • Fichte famously said that frontiers should depend, not on dynasties and treaties, but on language and nationality. Likewise Mazzini, “They speak the same language, they bear about them the impress of consanguinity, they kneel beside the same tombs, they glory in the same tradition; and they demand to associate freely, without obstacles, without foreign domination…”

    During WWI, Mr Asquith declared, “the Allies seek to defend public right, to find and to keep “room for the independent existence and free development of the smaller nationalities, each with a corporate consciousness of its own . . . and, perhaps, by a slow and gradual process, the substitution for force, for the clash of competing ambitions, for groupings and alliances and a precarious equipoise, of a real European partnership, based on equal right and enforced by a common will.”
    The UN Charter declares the purpose of the UN is “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.” Perhaps, this is an echo of Woodrow Wilson: “National aspirations must be respected; people may now be dominated and governed only by their own consent. Self determination is not a mere phrase; it is an imperative principle of action. . . . “

  • If I understand correctly, the Tatar and Ukrainian populations largely abstained.

    The position of the Crimea in the Ukraine was anomalous, so retroceding it to Russia should not be much of a problem. The question at hand is how much of the rest of the country is he going to attempt to detach. There are a fair number of ethnic Russians around Donetsk and in the borderlands.

  • The UN Charter declares the purpose of the UN is “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace.”
    .
    Thank you Michael Paterson-Seymour

  • Am I the only one to see the connection the comparison between Obama and Neville Chamberlain?

  • So, Eastern Ukraine is a kind of “Russian Sudetenland” that needs to be reunited with its ethnic Homeland.

    All Putin needs is a funny moustache.

  • The Sudetenland was populated by ethnic Germans linquistically distinct from the Czech and Slovak populations. The distinction between Ukrainian and Great Russian and between Great Russian and White Russian appears to be more of a fuzzy spectrum. There are soi-disant Great Russians in the Ukraine and then there are Ukrainians with varying degrees of inclination toward the Russian language and varying degrees of Russophilia. The Crimea is unusual in that its indigenous population was deported in 1944 (though some have returned) and it has been colonized by Russians since the conquest of the territory in the 18th century. It was only added to the Ukraine in 1954 and it is separated from Russia proper by only a narrow strait which could be traversed with a suspension bridge.

  • Given that Russia had to sweat to hold on to Chechenya (population 1.27 million), I suspect they will be cautious about conquering the Russophile swatches of the Ukraine (which have a population of 21 million excluding the Crimea). The affinities of the local populations in eastern Ukraine might be up for grabs if they were facing a military occupation.

  • When the old Soviet Union collapsed, plenty of ethnic Russians were left in newly independent states. Putin views these as an excuse to expand the current Russian borders. Welcome to Cold War II[.]

    The experience of the 1930s suggests, to borrow from Admiral Painter, that this business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky if the war stays cold.

  • Just to point out, quite a mass of ethnic Russians in the near abroad packed their valises and went home after 1991. The Russian share of Central Asia’s population is a good deal smaller than it was 35 years ago. That’s true to a lesser degree even of the affluent Baltic states.

    I do not recall anything getting out of control in the 1930s. The German government executed a step-by-step plan to re-arm and acquire territory. Things began to go south for them in 1942. You might regard the beginnings of World War I as a tragedy of errors.

  • So, does this action by Russia, and the overt mocking of America by Putin, not to mention the aggression shown by Russia (and unfortunate possible continued expansion of Russia and her errors)
    suggest that the Consecration of Russia by Bl. John Paul II was NOT done?
    Just askin’ ……

  • A longtime coworker of mine is of Ukrainian descent – I believe his parents were born there and he attends the Ukrainian Catholic parish in his town. He once told me that Eastern Ukrainians are virtually Russians. Many of them speak Russian primarily or only.

    Western Ukraine has always been the heart of the Free Ukraine movement, be it against Polish occupation (centuries ago) or Russian or Soviet occupation more recently.

    I do not know anything of Russia’s military might, except that it isn’t what they had in the days of the USSR. Putin will bully and grab and take what he thinks he can get away with. Eastern Ukraine and Belarus may be next and Poland will find the Bear on her doorstep.

    I am of Polish descent. I know enough of the history of this part of the world to know that any Russian government cannot be trusted. Russians end up being ruled by dictators and spilled Russian blood (and that of her neighbors) sustains them. Poland was carved up by Prussia, Russia and the Habsburg Empire (who Poland saved from the Muslims) in the 1790s and didn’t exist on the map until 1918, when, of all people, Woodrow Wilson supported the reestablishment of Poland. Is Putin going to declare that Warsaw belongs to Russia too?

  • The referendum proves the following quote from MPS, especially after the recent upheaval, posturing and visitation by the not-so-objective acronyms to the west on the global map combined with what they have seen in the Near and Middle East.

    Likewise Mazzini, “They speak the same language, they bear about them the impress of consanguinity, they kneel beside the same tombs, they glory in the same tradition; and they demand to associate freely, without obstacles, without foreign domination…”

    Referendums are interesting – it would be a great way to change laws or not.

  • Putin will bully and grab and take what he thinks he can get away with. Eastern Ukraine and Belarus may be next and Poland will find the Bear on her doorstep.

    I realize the terrain is different (and that may be salient), but I will repeat: the Russian military had the dangdest time subjugating Chechenya, which has a population smaller than metropolitan Kharkhiv. Somehow, I suspect the dispositions of eastern Ukraine’s population are not straightforward. Remarks from the directorate of Mr. Yanukovich’s political party can be seen here:

    http://partyofregions.ua/en/news/5309dfd9f620d2f70b000031

    Eastern Ukraine has a population 1/7th that of Russia. Imagine the United States attempting to occupy and subjugate on a permanent basis a neighboring territory with a population of 40 million. Not done lightly.

  • Pingback: Guinness & HeinekenNow Political Statements - God & Caesar
  • Art Deco wrote, “You might regard the beginnings of World War I as a tragedy of errors.”

    One similarity may be the rôle of demographics. In 1914, with its stagnant population and Germany’s growing one, France knew that she could not afford to wait another generation, if she were to have any hope of recovering the lost provinces of Alsace and Lorraine. With Russia’s disastrous fertility rate, Putin might well calculate that he needs to reassert control over the “near abroad,” whilst he has the manpower of military age to do so and before his economy falters under the weight of dependent elderly.

    You also wrote, “The affinities of the local populations in eastern Ukraine might be up for grabs if they were facing a military occupation.”

    Of course. Even the German-speaking population of the lost provinces resented the ham-fisted nature of Germany rule in Alsace and Lorraine. A Saverne incident (or even something like the march of the Strasbourg students past Kléber’s statue and the reaction to it) could have disastrous consequences for the occupiers.

    Perhaps, we shall see an exchange of populations, similar to that between Greece and Turkey, after the collapse of the Ottoman power.

    Thank you for your excellent contributions to the discussion.

  • Putin has just upstaged Obama.

    I have a pin and I have a phone
    If congress does not act I will do it alone. Obama

    I have a phone and I have an army
    If you don’t like what I am doing, try to stop me. Putin

  • I liken this situation, in part, to Puerto Rico choosing to become part of Cuba. How much would fight to avoid this???

  • In order for the analogy to work it would occur after Cuban troops had landed and occupied Puerto Rico, with one-third of Puerto Ricans desperate not to be ruled by Cuba. Cuba would also be threatening to take other areas with a heavy Puerto Rican, who are of course American citizens, population, New York City for example, under their control. I would fight under those circumstances, just as I suspect the Ukrainians and the Russians will ultimately come to blows.

  • With Russia’s disastrous fertility rate, Putin might well calculate that he needs to reassert control over the “near abroad,” whilst he has the manpower of military age to do so and before his economy falters under the weight of dependent elderly.

    Russia has seen considerable improvement in its fertility rate in the last dozen years. Were this sustained, it would intersect with European means in another dozen years or so. As we speak, Russia’s fertility is higher than Germany’s (which has seen little improvement over a generation) and higher than Italy’s (which has seen only mild improvement since its nadir in 1995).

  • Of course. Even the German-speaking population of the lost provinces resented the ham-fisted nature of Germany rule in Alsace and Lorraine.

    The Germanophone population in those provinces did not have much if any affinity for the other German states. They were loyal to France from the get go.

And Down Goes Lenin!

Sunday, February 23, AD 2014

10 Responses to And Down Goes Lenin!

  • Lenin was a liar and a monster. Lenin did not practice what he preached. He considered himself above the law to which he set other people to submit, making of himself an hypocrite, tyrant and demon. Stalin, less than an evil genius, ham-handed, tried to measure up to Lenin’s monstrosity, but he could not, even with starving 30 million people in the Ukraine. When the statues of Lenin fell, I thought: “pig”, but the pigs ran headlong into the sea and drowned themselves.

  • The population of Western Ukraine has always been very mixed, with the old Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria, with its capital at Lviv being three-quarters Polish. It also includes Ruthenia.

  • Ukraine’s history is complex, to say the least, which is why there is so much turmoil today. Putin one told then President Bush that “Ukraine is not a country”. Eastern and Southern Ukraine is basically populated by Russians. It is in the western half of Ukraine that Ukrainian language, culture, the desire for freedom from Russia – and Poland – and the Ukrainian Catholic Church is strongest.

    Kiev – Kyiv in Ukrainian – is seen as the birthplace of the Rus – Russia. Kyiv is the historical home of the Church brought to the Eastern Slavs by Sts. Cyril and Methodius. It was from Kyiv to Moscow that the See of the Church of the Rus – the Russian Orthodox Church was moved. The Russian Orthodox Church sees all of Ukraine as its territory and every so often the Russian Orthodox hierarchy reminds Rome of this whenever a meeting is suggested between the Russian Patriarch and the Pope.

    Modern day Western Ukraine was long a part of the old Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth. Lviv – Lvov in Polish – was long an important Polish city. Stalin moved around people in the 40s after WWII – the people he didn’t kill before or during the war – and established the modern borders.

    Putin has a puppet who runs Belarus and he wanted the same in Ukraine. Ukranians – both Orthodox and Catholic – really don’t want anything to do with Putin.

    Poland passed laws after the fall of the Commies in 1989 mandating the removal of street names and monuments honoring Communists. The Ukranians have not forgotten their history and this is a sign of hope.

  • On Wednesday supreme knight Karl Anderson ( Knights of Columbus ) in solidarity with Pope Francis, has asked all knights around the world to pray the prayer of St. Francis for the Ukrainian peoples.
    I ask you to join in as well if you wish.
    Thanks in advance.
    http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/knights-urge-prayers-to-st-Francis-for-peace-in-ukraine/

  • Pingback: SUNDAY EDITION | God & Caesar
  • Couldn’t happen to a nicer………………………………………..statue. 😉

  • “Reports from RT

    Sunday 23 February 11:23 GMT:
    Nearly 3,000 people have gathered in Kharkov, a city in north-eastern Ukraine, to take part in a rally aiming to defend the local statue of Lenin. Participants of the event booed opposition television stations correspondents, asking them to leave the site immediately. Police officers are currently patrolling the area.

    Saturday 22 February 23:40 GMT:
    Meanwhile in Kharkov, a few thousand opposition supporters – both locals and from other parts of the country – are trying to demolish Lenin’s statue, the head of the Russian parliamentary commission on foreign affairs, Aleksey Pushkov, wrote on Twitter.”

    It stands in Freedom Square (formerly Dzerzhinsky Square, named after Felix Dzerzhinsky, founder of the Checka) where the victorious Red Army raised the workers’ banner, on 23 August 1943, after the Fourth Battle of Kharkov and the final expulsion of fascist forces from the city.

  • I am glad that you, Michael Paterson-Seymour and Penguins Fan, all of you, know all this.

  • Why were the statues still even standing? Most other post-Soviet countries de-Leninized almost immediately after the occupiers departed.

  • Iowahawk quoted at Instapundit, ” . . . if you wonder who the good guys in Ukraine are, they’re the ones pulling down the statues of Lenin. Always a useful metric. . . .’

Link Roundup

Tuesday, August 13, AD 2013

Because when you go three weeks between blogposts, things sort of build up in the queue.

The Enemy of My Enemy Is Still My Enemy

Typically brilliant insight from Simcha Fisher about the sudden conservative and Christian appreciation for Mother Russia – you know, the authoritarian state run by the corrupt,  narcissistic, kleptomaniac.

Who Knew? The welfare state may not be such a great thing after all.

Fascinating documentary in Great Britain where welfare recipients are forced to live on 1949 allotments. If your primary concern is making sure those on welfare have every last need and want met, then the modern system is the way to go. On the other hand, if you’re into old fashioned concepts such as human dignity, maybe things were better once upon a time.

Voter ID Laws = Jim Crow

Leave it to a mediocre pop artist to really get to the heart of the issue. John Legend has decreed that the newly passed voter ID law in North Carolina is the new Jim Crow. Because having to show a picture of yourself before voting is totally the same as segregated schools.

The Cowardice of the Stupid Party

Republican Congressman would totally love to hold town hall meetings during the summer recess to discuss the immigration bill, but they like got that thing that they gotta do. You know. That thing. Right Vinny?

The Fourth Branch

The usual cheerful article from Kevin Williamson. President Obama has essentially handed over the management of government to bureaucratic functionaries. If anything Williamson undersells the painful reality of life in Washington. Our government is in the hands of well-meaning, well-credentialed, but power-hungry managerial type so perfectly depicted in CS Lewis’s masterpiece, That Hideous Strength. Basically it’s the N.I.C.E. minus the scary head thing. What’s worse is that President Obama is using these agencies to bypass that pesky little thing known as Congress. As Williamson puts it:

IPAB is the most dramatic example of President Obama’s approach to government by expert decree, but much of the rest of his domestic program, from the Dodd-Frank financial-reform law to his economic agenda, is substantially similar. In total, it amounts to that fundamental transformation of American society that President Obama promised as a candidate: but instead of the new birth of hope and change, it is the transformation of a constitutional republic operating under laws passed by democratically accountable legislators into a servile nation under the management of an unaccountable administrative state. The real import of Barack Obama’s political career will be felt long after he leaves office, in the form of a permanently expanded state that is more assertive of its own interests and more ruthless in punishing its enemies. At times, he has advanced this project abetted by congressional Democrats, as with the health-care law’s investiture of extraordinary powers in the executive bureaucracy, but he also has advanced it without legislative assistance — and, more troubling still, in plain violation of the law. President Obama and his admirers choose to call this “pragmatism,” but what it is is a mild expression of totalitarianism, under which the interests of the country are conflated with those of the president’s administration and his party. Barack Obama is the first president of the democracy that John Adams warned us about.

The Worst Decision Ever Made in the Harry Potter Universe

And on a lighter note, a look back at a rather questionable hiring decision.

 

 

Continue reading...

Russia Defends Traditional Values

Monday, October 8, AD 2012

Mother Russia has done it again: this time, it pushed through a UN resolution affirming the link between traditional values and human rights. It did so against the protests of European and American delegations, who were primarily concerned about the implications that such an affirmation would have for gay rights.

The European and U.S. delegations repeatedly complained that “traditional values” is a vague concept used to justify violence and discrimination against women and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transsexual (LGBT) persons.

Homosexual activists are not happy:

Support for traditional values is deeply troublesome to LGBT groups, as the Gay Star News reports. They are worried it will be used to defend the natural family, and fear they will be unable to de-criminalize homosexuality worldwide.

I am thrilled to see that there is a relatively powerful nation on this planet that isn’t an Islamic theocracy willing to defend traditional values before the entire world. I am elated to see Russia brushing aside as the anti-social insanity that it is the complaints of LGTB activists and their UN proxies.

Continue reading...

24 Responses to Russia Defends Traditional Values

  • Mixed feelings… Russia’s Resolution is full of nice words but it is proposed by a dictatorial regime which supports many of the world’s greatest evils. I have a hard time celebrating Putin’s Russia.

    Make no mistake, history will excoriate the West for its handling of Russia and her former satellites from about 1995 on. We effectively drove Russia to embrace its latest Tsar. Perhaps she can only be ruled by force but I like to hink that attentiveness would have changed the outcome.

    As it stands though, nothing Putin’s government does can be taken at face value.

  • Considering the source, I’m waiting for the barb in the phrasing.

    Not that I doubt the US delegation really was freaking because homosexuality isn’t traditional, I just don’t think Russia does anything like this out of the goodness of her heart. (Russia is a her, right? Same way the US is Uncle Sam?)

    Off the top of my head, I can see slavery, the nastier parts of Islam/Sharia, a lot of what China has been doing for ages, etc…. Humans are rather good at being nasty, and there’s going to be commonality in some of those things.

  • Russia is a her Foxfier: The Rodina, the motherland. As many of the subject nationalties of the Russians can attest down the centuries, she can be a rather harsh step mom.

  • Thank you. When one is getting one’s phrasing from old TV shows that have folks talking about Mother Russia, it’s best to ask. ;^)

  • Mother Russia suffered from bad press at the hands of the British Empire. Nothing she ever did was good enough, on the other the hand the Turks who ran a similar system, were the sick man of Europe, who with a modicum of Enlightenment could all be turned into gintlemans.

  • Check out the picture Mr. Lileks found.

    Link for more at a page titled “The Russian Empire, 100 years ago, in living color.”

  • More photographs here;

    http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/empire/

    Notice how diverse the Tsar’s realm was. By this time the peasants were already emancipated and Russia was well on its way to becoming the breadbasket of Europe eclipsing the Argentinians. The Stolypin reforms promised a fair deal to all of Russia’s inhabitants. Left to her own devices Russia would have modernised much in the same manner as the Japanese or any large agricultural country did. But God allowed some diabolically evil men (not all of the communists, if anything the nihilists were more responsible for undermining the moral fibre of the Russians), to perpetrate quite possibly the greatest crime in human history :

    “Terrible and mysterious,” wrote Metropolitan Anastasy, second leader of
    the Russian Church Abroad, “is the dark visage of the revolution. Viewed
    from the vantage point of its inner essence, it is not contained within the
    framework of history and cannot be studied on the same level as other
    historical facts. In its deepest roots it transcends the boundaries of space and
    time, as was determined by Gustave le Bon, who considered it an irrational
    phenomenon in which certain mystical, supernatural powers were at work.
    But what before may have been considered dubious became completely
    obvious after the Russian Revolution. In it everyone sensed, as one
    contemporary writer expressed himself, the critical incarnation of absolute
    evil in the temper of man; in other words, the participation of the devil – that
    father of lies and ancient enemy of God, who tries to make man his obedient
    weapon against God – was clearly revealed.”

    – from THE FALL OF THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE: A SPIRITUAL HISTORY
    Vladimir Moss

  • “…I believe that those who put natural law and traditional values first have no greater ally than Russia.”

    I’m not buying it.

    Perhaps my judgement is clouded from spending three years doing the cat-and-mouse thing with Victor and Akula submarines, but I do not trust the Russians.

    There are strong currents in the Russian soul that run through history worn channels of fear and humiliation. Through their trials, coming mostly from foreign invaders, they have seen their salvation come, not from Christ, but from the motherland or strong-men. General Winter and Colonel Mud would save them from the invaders and then the long line of Peters and Stalins would assuage their humiliation by dominating their neighbors and briefly letting Russia play at being a world power.

    The current russian strong-man is playing to one major theme: nationalism. His tactics and course resemble the ‘ism that dare not speak its name, but was highly favored in Europe about 80 years ago.

    Any appeal to traditional values on the Rusain government’s part is meant to bolster Russian natonalism by contrasting the merely materialistic, utilitaran, and financially corrupt Russian values of national socialism with the absolutely bongers and suicidal values of Western elites.

    The fact that someone can look to Russia and see a bastion of traditional values and natural law only goes to show how far we have fallen. When your culture is at the bottom of a thousand foot pit, even the belly of a worm on the ground can seem like lofty heights.

  • Ivan

    The British approach to Russia, throughout the 19th century, was dominated by two considerations: Russian influence in Afghanistan, on the borders of her Indian empire and, after 1859, the fear of a Russian fleet in Constantinople, threatening the Suez Canal and, thus, her route to India.

    Thus, Britain did everything possible to prop up the Ottoman power and to weaken Russian influence over the Ottomans’ subject Slav peoples. It also encouraged British politicians’ love affair with the rising power of Prussia, as the bulwark of civilisation in the East.

  • Make no mistake, history will excoriate the West for its handling of Russia and her former satellites from about 1995 on. We effectively drove Russia to embrace its latest Tsar.

    How?

    Russia’s political class made a hash of economic reforms, Poland’s did not. The latter had a difficult period of transition lasting less than three years. The former had an economic depression that ran on for more than a decade and had appended to it the rapid multiplication of street crimes. The failure of constitutional government in Russia under those circumstances is unsurprising.

    You might ask yourself why we ‘drove’ Russia and Belarus into the arms of autocrats but refrained from doing so with regard to the rest of the former East Bloc.

  • G-Veg,

    Again, there’s that whole thing about stones and glass houses. What “evil” has post-Soviet Russia supported, exactly? If we’re going to list regimes, the US has its own list of objectively “evil” partners in geopolitics, and a long history with many “evil” regimes both currently existing and long perished.

    I see no reason for any American to be threatened in the least by Putin’s Russia, nor do I take seriously for one moment any sort of moralistic condemnation of Putin’s government when our own is arming/supporting Al-Qaeda rebels against Assad – as it did against Qaddafi and Mubarak.

    Tony H,

    “Through their trials, coming mostly from foreign invaders, they have seen their salvation come, not from Christ, but from the motherland or strong-men.”

    What? What does this mean? Should they have surrendered and prayed while Napoleon or Hitler wiped them out? Would this have met with your approval? What’s the point here?

    “Any appeal to traditional values on the Rusain government’s part is meant to bolster Russian natonalism by contrasting the merely materialistic, utilitaran, and financially corrupt Russian values of national socialism with the absolutely bongers and suicidal values of Western elites.”

    I don’t care. All actions have objective effects independent of their subjective motivations. Russia’s acts are objectively aligned with natural law and traditional values. They should be encouraged and praised.

  • when our own is arming/supporting Al-Qaeda rebels against Assad – as it did against Qaddafi and Mubarak.

    Al Qaeda is active in Libya. The current government of Libya is not an al Qaeda operation nor is it unfriendly to the Occident.

  • Bonchamps,
    The point of mentioning the repeated foreign invasions and reliance on strong-men is to explain the Russian national character.

    I believe the defining question of character is who, or what, you put your trust in. In other words; who is your god?

    In much of the West, the state has become god. Prior to Obama, that was the state as apparatus, not as a single man. In Russia the state, in the form of the strong-man, has ruled supreme for generations. When Putin flexes and preens for the camera he creates a resonance in the Russian heart.

    Besides their love of the strong-man, the love of Russians for the land itself should not be underestimated. The land itself has swallowed up her enemies in the past. The Russians desire to buffer her is palbably, just ask the Ukraines and Georgians.

    Dr. Zhivago said it best: “Scratch a Russian and you’ll find a peasant.”

    I agree with your statement that “all actions have objective effects independent of their subjective motivations.” What surprises me is that you seem to be saying you don’t care about those subjective motivations.

    If that’s the case, let me offer for your consideration the nation of North Korea. I don’t have hard stats, but from all reports this nation is a bastion of objective traditional values and natural law. The divorce rate is low, homosexuality rates run comparable to that of Iran, there is no epidemic of internet porn, no one is coveting his neighbors goods (or lack there of) and last I checked, over the last ten years North Korea hasn’t invaded anyone, which is more than you can say for Russia or America.

    By this measure, I think North Korea deserves even more praise and encouragement than Russia.

  • Tony,

    Why exactly am I supposed to care, presumably to the point of Russophobia, that “Russians love a strongman” and “Russians love the land”, and other such generalized characteristics? What relevance does any of this have?

    “What surprises me is that you seem to be saying you don’t care about those subjective motivations.”

    Why should I? This is the American sickness – the belief that other people’s internal affairs and moral dispositions are our intimate business. Given Russia’s objective ability to project its power militarily (which is negligible and limited to the former SSRs – and a country with a Manifest Destiny and Monroe Doctrine has no business complaining about that), its subjective motivations are almost meaningless. Meaningless, that is, to Americans who believe that the “grand chessboard” is too expensive in terms of lives, money and prestige to continue playing on.

    Meanwhile its support for Christianity and traditional values are objectively good and have objectively good effects. Maybe we’re different. I put these things above all other considerations. I don’t care if Russia dominates Georgia, any more than the average Russian cares if we dominate Central America. I care about the ruthless advance of moral cancer worldwide, emanating from the West. We are collectively responsible for this.

    As for North Korea, give me a break, please. North Korea tortures and murders Christians when they find them. And communism itself is a massive, ongoing violation of natural law – of private property rights, the rights to life and liberty, etc. If Russia were still communist, I would not take its declaration in favor of traditional values seriously. But it isn’t. It isn’t a bastion of free market idealism, but then, neither is America, which has plummeted to 18th place in terms of economic freedom. There is no comparison between Orthodox, non-communist Russia and the remnants of the Hermit Kingdom.

  • This is the American sickness – the belief that other people’s internal affairs and moral dispositions are our intimate business.

    Concern for other people’s welfare is not a sickness.

  • When concern becomes meddling, it is a sickness. There is nothing more annoying than help that wasn’t asked for and that almost always makes the problem worse than it was.

  • There is nothing more annoying than help that wasn’t asked for and that almost always makes the problem worse than it was.

    Where? And which segment of society gets to do the non-asking?

  • Pingback: Anglican Ordinariate Sacra Liturgia St Bridget Pilgrimage | Big Pulpit
  • Despotism as a form of government is not without its merits. One has only to think of the Julian and Antonine Emperors. They established the Pax Romana and the rule of law, curbed the oppression of race by race and class by class and established the strict civic equality of all the free inhabitants of the Empire. Property was protected and contracts enforced by a code of laws that is still the basis of European jurisprudence. Free labour and its derivative, free trade, flourished. Paradoxically, the government of a single will demands impersonal and incorruptible administration.

    To be popular, “government must not be arbitrary, but it must be powerful enough to repress arbitrary action in others. If the supreme power is needlessly limited, the secondary powers will run riot and oppress. Its supremacy will bear no check.” (Lord Acton, describing the theory of benevolent despotism) The French Revolution was far more a revolt against noble and clerical privileges than against royal absolutism and the Empire was its consummation, not its reversal.

    One can seew how, given its history, despotism may suit this stage of Russia’s development.

  • Michael,

    Fair enough, the British had their interests to protect. It accounts for their successful propaganda that continues to have purchase on many. But how did their perfidy work out in the end? They sold or taught the Japanese the latest in naval technology, so that in the 1905 Russo-Japanese war, the IJN units outclassed the 40-year old ships under Adm Rozhestvensky. We know the Japanese returned the favour with interest by driving the British out of the Far East a mere 37 years later. Jawaharlal Nehru, cooling his heels during one of his sabbaticals in prison wrote to his daughter:
    “I have told you in another letter of an occurrence which stirred Asia greatly. This was the victory of little Japan over giant Russia in 1904-5? India, in common with other Asiatic countries, was vastly impressed, that is, the educated middle classes were impressed, and their self-confidence grew. If Japan could make good against one of the most powerful European countries, why not India?…

    All this is as remote as the conquest of Canaan to me, my interest is in seeing that truth subsists.

  • “They established the Pax Romana and the rule of law, curbed the oppression of race by race and class by class and established the strict civic equality of all the free inhabitants of the Empire.”

    Contra Gibbon, not a word of that is true. After the year of four emperors in 69 AD the empire was a barely disguised military dictatorship, always subject to potential military revolt, living off the intellectual capital of the dead Roman Republic. Dictatorship brought its usual fruits: economic stagantion, growth of government bureaucracy and inflation. Despotism, enlightened or not, is always a door to nowhere for the people doomed to endure it.

  • Interesting comments. I have no love for Putin, but if the Lord could stir up the spirit of pagan King Cyrus of Persia to do something righteous (Ezra 1:1), so also can he stir up the spirit of Putin (or any other autocrat for that matter).

  • Paradoxically, the government of a single will demands impersonal and incorruptible administration.

    ?????

    Despotism, enlightened or not, is always a door to nowhere for the people doomed to endure it.

    I can think of examples in the post-war period where authoritarian administrations provided respite from pathologies of political culture (Chile, 1973-90; Uruguay, 1972-85; Peru, 1992-2000; Turkey, 1980-83; Jordan, 1957- ).

In Defense of Mother Russia

Friday, August 24, AD 2012

I haven’t heard much about the ongoing dispute between the Russian government and the Western media over the fate of the faux “punk rock band” ***** Riot in the American Catholic media. But this is a dispute in which I believe we ought to take sides as Catholics.

[No, I will not give the vulgar hate group the sociopathic pleasure of having yet another Christian publication use their name]

Three members of the vulgar hate group were arrested following their desecration of Moscow’s largest Orthodox cathedral. They have now been sentenced to two-year prison terms, with the six months spent at trial counting as time served.

My position on this incident is pretty clear. I stand 110% with the Russian government, the Orthodox Church, and the tens of millions of Russian Orthodox who have condemned the vulgar hate group – and I believe all Catholics in all countries ought to do likewise.

Not simply because this appears to me to be a deliberate ploy encouraged and promoted by anti-Russian elements in Europe and the United States; not simply because in all of the Western countries hypocritically condemning Russia these same actions could be and likely would be regarded as hate crimes according to their own established laws; not simply because the right to free speech does not, never has, and God willing, never will mean the right to invade any space one chooses and defecate on the floor; not simply because I respect the religious sensibilities of the Russian people; not even because I am fairly certain that being on the opposite side of whatever cause the degenerate celebritariat is championing is almost always the best and wisest choice – ???. Not just for those reasons.

Continue reading...

59 Responses to In Defense of Mother Russia

  • Here in Scotland, it is the offence of Profanity to disturb worship. The essence of the offence is the disturbance and annoyance of the minister and congregation, and the interruption of their devotions.

    A building enjoys no special protection and it is not an aggravation of a breach of the peace or of mobbing and rioting that it is committed in a place used for worship.

    This seems to me a proper distinction.

    Of course, any wilful damage to the fabric or plenishments of the building is the crime of malicious mischief.

  • You summed it up well, Bonchamps: “The sad thing is that I believe that much of this anti-Christian hatred – and I am now speaking generally and globally – is motivated merely by the fact that vulgar, hateful people cannot tolerate the existence of other people who, even though they are as oppressed by sin as everyone else, aspire to be something more than mindless animals who do nothing but hump one another and follow the latest idiotic trends. Sloshing about in a sewer filled with their own spiritual feces, they must pull everyone else down into it, and erase any suggestion that it might be possible to escape. That is the only way it can be enjoyed.”

  • The problem with calling the group in question a “hate group” is that, despite the name, they do not hate Christianity. As I understand it what they’re protesting is the perversion of the Russian Orthodox Church by the Russian government. Disagree with their methods, and even disagree with their point of view about the Church hierarchy, but this isn’t a Madonna situation where they were being needlessly provocative in an effort to harass Christians. They’re calling attention to something which is legitimately troubling. John O’Sullivan has more details about them here and here.

  • The jerks have a point. There’s something wrong in Russia, and the Orthodox Church is happily cooperating with it.

    There was a case in Chicago in 2008 where a group of protesters disrupted a mass being said by the Cardinal. They received probation, community service, and a $2600 fine (to pay for cleaning the fake blood out of the carpet). That seems appropriate.

  • No, Paul. I will not sign on to what seems to me to be a morally and spiritually blind bandwagon assault on the Russian state. In a world in which millions of Christians live under direct Islamic oppression and are increasingly marginalized in the secular West, Russia stands out as a beacon of hope for afflicted Christians.

    In my view, and in the view of millions of believers, this group’s act was OBJECTIVELY hateful. It had the effect of rallying the average Russian around this supposedly dangerous regime. Even if you’re right and they don’t hate Christianity – frankly I find it impossible to reconcile their actions with any sort of love for it – they have violated Christianity. All theological and historical disputes with the Orthodox aside (and we can’t just forget those either), they willingly and knowingly defiled a sacred space. In my view, this is a hateful act. Maybe their subjective rage is channeled at Putin, but their objective victim is Christianity.

    And it is far from their first anti-social act. Other members of this group have engaged in public orgies, for heaven’s sake. A Ukrainian sympathizer also cut down a cross memorializing the victims of Stalin’s genocidal campaign. Their very name is an affront to any sort of public Christian morality.

    Nope, I’m not on the anti-Russia bandwagon, and not going to get on it any time soon just because they don’t like the neoconservative foreign policy (yeah yeah “neoconservatism doesn’t exist”, whatever) of remaking the Middle East, which has included the ousting of secular regimes relatively friendly to the millions of Christians in the region and their replacement with Islamic fanatics who murder and oppress them. I actually have family in that part of the world.

    No, what I see here is a government under assault from a gaggle of Western anti-Christs who are enraged at the existence of a country whose leadership isn’t afraid to openly profess a traditional form of Christianity. I absolutely will not side with them or the filth they seek to defend.

  • Pinky,

    “There was a case in Chicago in 2008 where a group of protesters disrupted a mass being said by the Cardinal. They received probation, community service, and a $2600 fine (to pay for cleaning the fake blood out of the carpet). That seems appropriate.”

    There was a time when they would have been publicly disemboweled. If they did this in a mosque in the Middle East, they would have been torn to pieces. If they did it in a mosque in Europe, they would probably go to jail for longer than two years.

    I think 18 months behind bars is comparatively light. Maybe it will cause them to think long and hard about the seriousness of defiling a sacred space and disrupting social order. If this was some kind of first-time offense by a group of silly teenagers, I would agree with you. But this is a group of anti-social provocateurs that have repeatedly engaged in public acts of blasphemy and obscenity. They are finally getting their just deserts.

  • With all due respect, I believe that Bonchamps’ responses to Paul Z. and Pinky are correct. I agree.

  • “Since its formation in presumably 2008 Voina has staged in public a succession of extreme actions described as performance art. These have included the painting of a male phallus on a St. Petersburg Bridge, the staging of a public orgy at the Timiryazev Museum in Moscow involving nudity and (apparently) full penetrative sex (Tolokonnikova was a participant though heavily pregnant), the throwing of live cats at the staff of a McDonald’s restaurant in Moscow, the overturning of police cars apparently on one occasion with a policeman inside, the firebombing of property with petrol bombs, the staged hanging of an immigrant and a homosexual in a supermarket, the projection of a skull and crossbones onto the building housing the Russian government, the spilling of large live cockroaches onto the stomach of a pregnant member of the group (Tolokonnikova again) and the theft of a frozen chicken from a supermarket, which was stuffed up the vagina of one of the women members (apparently Maria Alyokhina, Tolokonnikova apparently was also present).”

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/118287.html

    No civilized nation should be forced to tolerate this. They ought to all be institutionalized, truth be told.

  • this isn’t a Madonna situation where they were being needlessly provocative in an effort to harass Christians.

    In Madonna’s situation, it is nothing but a marketing strategy to prolong her already far too long public career.

    I am with Bonchamps on this one. At least the Russians seem to take Christianity seriously.

  • n a world in which millions of Christians live under direct Islamic oppression and are increasingly marginalized in the secular West, Russia stands out as a beacon of hope for afflicted Christians.

    Russia is essentially a state run by organized criminals, headed by a pseudo-authoritarian regime. It continues to flex its muscles over its former satellite countries.

    All theological and historical disputes with the Orthodox aside (and we can’t just forget those either), they willingly and knowingly defiled a sacred space. In my view, this is a hateful act.

    I don’t disagree with that, nor do I disagree that their act is otherwise repugnant. I am merely contending that their motivation is distinct from cowards like Madonna and others who employ shock for the sake of shock.

    Nope, I’m not on the anti-Russia bandwagon, and not going to get on it any time soon just because they don’t like the neoconservative foreign policy

    A complete non sequiter.

    No, what I see here is a government under assault from a gaggle of Western anti-Christs who are enraged at the existence of a country whose leadership isn’t afraid to openly profess a traditional form of Christianity.

    I think you are blinded to what Putin and the Russian leadership is about. They are about as “Christian” as the current American ruling regime.

  • Paul,

    We’re not going to see eye to eye on this. You subscribe to one narrative about Russia, and I find the truth better represented in a different set of facts and perspectives.

    Even if Putin in his heart was a cold, dark atheist, his public support for the Orthodox Church means something and has a significance apart form whatever he and his lieutenants actually believe.

    Oh, and what I said was absolutely not a “non sequiter.” That is exactly why many in the West oppose Russia. I don’t give a damn if it “flexes its muscles over its former satellite countries.” For a country that developed the Monroe Doctrine and has been actively trying to preserve global hegemony to be miffed by that is beyond hysterical.

  • Bon, you seem to be ascribing bad motives to those who disagree with you. Personally, I’ve seen no information on which to build a positive narrative about Russia. All indications are that any kind of dissent is silenced by the government. I can’t get that worked up in support of this punk band doing some terrible things, but if the reaction to it is emblematic of a regression toward totalitarianism, then it’s definitely to be criticized.

  • Pinky,

    What “bad motives”? I don’t attribute any bad motives to you or Paul. If you mean the Western media establishment and the neocons, yes, guilty as charged, I think their motives are bad and their pontificating on the evils of Russia to be among the most hilariously hypocritical things I have seen in my life.

    It is simply false that “any kind of dissent is silenced by the government” – anti-government protests involving tens of thousands of people have taken place in Russia with no more or less police concern than that which you will see at the RNC and DNC conventions this year.

    The reaction to this band is also most emphatically not a “regression towards totalitarianism” either. The laws under which these disgusting criminals were prosecuted are similar to laws that exist on the books in every Western country – laws that would be quickly invoked and enforced if a politically-protected group was the target of a similar outrage.

    Maybe you haven’t seen any positive information about Russia because you haven’t even consider the possibility that it might exist. It does.

  • What these people did violated the rights of Russian Christians and the Russian Orthodox Church. They deserve to be punished, and I would call for the same punishment if it were done to a Catholic Church here.

    In fact, some imitators HAVE done this sort of thing in Catholic Churches in Europe, and are now facing similar sentences!

    Is the Catholic Church in Germany and the German government “regressing towards totalitarianism”? To ask such an absurd question is to answer it.

    http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/24/13454525-copycat-pussy-riot-protesters-could-face-3-year-sentence-in-germany?lite

  • Don’t you people get it? This is about Christian rights. Forget your views about Putin and the Russian government. The movement, the people supporting the vulgar hate group are doing so because they want to encourage MORE obscene violations of Christian holy places. They want to take away our rights to have our own sacred, protected times and places.

    This is a time to stand in solidarity with, if not the Russian state, at least your fellow Christians!

  • I worry about my fellow Christians in Russia. I see a far greater threat to their future from Putin than from that band. Their actions, while offensive and ridiculous, were dwarfed by ongoing anti-government rallies alleging electoral fraud and widespread political corruption.

  • Well Pinky,

    I completely disagree with you. In fact I find your statement to be quite at odds with demonstrable fact and reality. Putin has restored the Orthodox Church to prominence and importance in the nation.

    You really need to take a good, long look at the international forces arrayed against the Russian government and the Orthodox Church – what they believe, what they stand for, what they want to accomplish, what they have accomplished in the West. I will without hesitation and with a measure of pride take the side of the Russian establishment over the morally and spiritually degenerate Western establishments any day of the week. What a government publicly endorses and promotes is as important as what it “really does”; what our governments promote are impiety and anti-Christian prejudice, and what the Russian government promotes is piety and respect for established Christian institutions (without, to my knowledge, violating anyone’s individual rights to religious liberty). I don’t care if they get something politically out of it. It has effects that are only good, that are in fact the greatest good for a society.

    Every country, even the United States, has been rocked by allegations of massive electoral fraud and political corruption. We had one president who was impeached recently, another who ascended to the White House in spite of losing the popular vote (which was extremely close), and an administration that is almost certainly complicit in sending illegal guns to Mexico for the purpose of creating a pretext to crackdown on the 2nd amendment. Frankly I see nothing taking place in Russia that is any more alarming than what I see in any other country, certainly nothing worthy of special, explicit hostility.

  • I’d also still like to know if the German Catholic Church and government are displaying signs of totalitarianism and repression in the charges they have brought up against the copycat sympathy protesters, linked in my previous post.

  • Bonchamps, with respect, your entire argument in defense of Russia seems to be based on the idea that all the other western countries are gripped in the throes of secularism. While this might be true to a certain extent, that fact does nothing to exculpate Russia from the charges that its administration or government are corrupt. I think anyone who has studied Russia from afar could tell you that many aspects of Russian life, at least in the political sense, are not much improved since the days of the USSR.

    I don’t care if they get something politically out of it. It has effects that are only good, that are in fact the greatest good for a society.

    This is fairly naive and horrifying. Naive in the sense that you seem to take Putin’s “piety” at face value. Putin is acting not to solidify the Church and sanctify his people, but rather cynically to ensure that the Church has his back. It’s horrifying because you’re essentially saying that cynical piety is all right because it keeps the people in line.

    Frankly I see nothing taking place in Russia that is any more alarming than what I see in any other country, certainly nothing worthy of special, explicit hostility.

    When political opponents here are murdered or almost murdered with the regularity they are in Russia, then I might be more inclined to agree with you.

  • Paul,

    I stand by what I said, and naturally, I reject your spin on it.

    I am absolutely not saying that it is ok to lie about piety to “keep people in line.” I do believe that the government probably considers all of the costs and benefits of its policy decisions (as all governments do), and that there is really nothing wrong with benefit from mutual interests, even if both parties have different reasons for having that interest. Government-promoted piety is positively good, regardless of why it is done. The “why” will matter as far as their individual souls are concerned, but those who benefit from living in an explicitly Christian culture will also benefit. There is nothing “horrifying about this.”

    I take Putin’s belief that the public restoration of Orthodoxy as a defining aspect of Russian culture and politics is good for Russia as a nation at face value. His personal piety is a different story.

    Since we obviously don’t agree on these issues, we should probably both move on before this gets as ugly as I fear it can get.

  • The German case is quite different. There, the protesters disturbed public worship. Every state in Europe guarantees freedom of worship and such actions are rightly criminal.

    That is a very different matter to staging a protest in a building sometimes used for worship, but when no service was in progress.

  • I don’t think it is “very different.” It is somewhat different, but these are differences of degree and not kind. I’m not positive but I believe there were people in the cathedral at the time trying to pray.

  • I mean, what the hell would be the point of a protest if there were no people around to see it?

  • The Russian Orthodox Church has valid Holy Orders and valid Sacraments, though it is not in union with Rome. Even Rome recognizes the validity of Eastern Orthodox Churches, of which the Russian one is an autonomous, autocephalus member. As such, isn’t there a Tabernacle in the Church where the Pussy Riot was staged, and doesn’t that Tabernacle contain the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Blessed Lord and Savior? Don’t Eastern Orthodox do it the same way? Orthodox Anglicans do. So the actions of the Pussy Rioters are even more reprehensible.

    Get out of thinking that the Roman jurisdiction is the only Catholic one. It demonstrably is not, and Rome’s recognition of the validity of Eastern Orthodox Holy Orders and Sacraments is a case in point. BTW, even the Pope had kind words to say about the recent meeting between Patriarch Cyril of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Roman Archbishop of Poland.

  • While this doesn’t relate to the merits of the case (I’m in agreement with Pinky and Paul Zummo on them), for informational purposes:

    “As such, isn’t there a Tabernacle in the Church where the Pussy Riot was staged, and doesn’t that Tabernacle contain the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Blessed Lord and Savior? ”

    The Russian Orthodox do not reserve the sacrament in a tabernacle, because the bread and wine are combined and served out of a single chalice (the intinctioned cube of Eucharist is dropped into the communicant’s open mouth by the priest using a a golden spoon).

    Actually, I’ve had some Russian Orthodox folks online (which, as we all know from Catholic combox wars can be a weird sample) tell me that they consider the Catholic practice of reserving the sacrament in the tabernacle and most especially the Catholic practice of Eucharistic adoration, to be idolatrous. “It misses the point that the Eucharist is food” was the way it was put to me.

    While it in no way excuses the behavior of the punk band, there is, honestly, reason to be concerned about the Russian Orthodox Church and its place in modern Russia. Keep in mind, despite the official atheism of the Soviet regime, there were strong and disturbing ties between the ROC and the communist regime. These ties have continued in Putin’s Russia, where not only are a lot of ex-KGB types running the government, but Patriarch Kirill himself has been strongly implicated as having been a long term KGB informant and collaborator.

  • Thank you for the clarification, Darwin.

  • “I’m in agreement with Pinky and Paul Zummo on them”

    I’m not the least surprised about that.

    “there is, honestly, reason to be concerned about the Russian Orthodox Church and its place in modern Russia”

    I’m more concerned about the place of the Church in the West and under Islamic rule. I don’t see why it is any of our concern at all what happens in Russia, which is not persecuting Christians, which is not threatening any of our legitimate interests, and which has a government that has the overwhelming support of the people.

  • One might care because they like to threaten Catholic Poland at times, or because although the Orthodox are not officially persecuted by the state, the Orthodox have consistently used the state to harass Catholics in Russia — going so far as to effectively kick Catholic clergy out of Russia by revoking their visas.

    One might also consider it problematic for a Christian church to explicitly align itself with an oppressive and at times murderous regime. That can seem helpful at times (especially when the other options seem fairly barbaric — though that’s not the case with Russia) but in the long run being too cozy with nasty people never seems to work out very well.

  • “One might care because they like to threaten Catholic Poland at times”

    Oh please. When did the post-Soviet Russian government threaten Poland? Other than, perhaps, in response to NATO’s belligerent insistence upon a missile shield (why do we have a divine right to that again?)’

    “or because although the Orthodox are not officially persecuted by the state, the Orthodox have consistently used the state to harass Catholics in Russia”

    Ok. That’s a legitimate problem and it should be addressed. I’ll grant that one, no question. But it is hardly a matter that warrants Russophobia, or joining in the obscene chorus of celebrities, government officials and media personalities condemning Russia on the grounds that these hideous criminals were simply “expressing themselves.”

    “One might also consider it problematic for a Christian church to explicitly align itself with an oppressive and at times murderous regime. ”

    You really need to take off the nationalist blinders. This country has only been free of racial apartheid for a generation, has supported murderous regimes around the world for geopolitical gains, and has killed millions in “wars of choice.” I’m not saying that all of these acts were totally unjustifiable, but together they constitute the thinnest of glass houses from which no stone ought to be cast.

    The bottom line is that the forces arrayed against Russia in this case are enemies of Christianity. In this case, Catholics ought to stand in solidarity with the Russian Orthodox against the onslaught of hypocritical condemnation coming from people like Obama, Madonna, the rest of the vapid Western media-government complex.

  • You really need to take off the nationalist blinders. This country has only been free of racial apartheid for a generation, has supported murderous regimes around the world for geopolitical gains, and has killed millions in “wars of choice.” I’m not saying that all of these acts were totally unjustifiable, but together they constitute the thinnest of glass houses from which no stone ought to be cast.

    If the Catholic Church (or any other) was as totally subservient to the US government and US national interests as the Russian Orthodox Church is to Russia’s, I would consider that very, very problematic as well.

    And that’s despite the fact I think it’s clear that the US is a much safer and better power to have controlling the international scene than the Russians. I’m about as comfortable with Putin’s Russia as I am with what China has developed into. It’s not an “evil empire”, and Putin is certainly no Stalin, but that’s praising with faint damns.

    Am I joining the chorus of people decrying Russia’s action? Not at the moment. The band does basically sound like hooligans to me (even if they’re hooligans on the right side when it comes to Putin) and if you’re going to stage a protest such as theirs in Putin’s Russia, you can’t be surprised to land in prison for a couple years. So my reaction to the celebrity fuss is basically, “What, this is what it took to make you notice the repressive regime in Russia?”

    But I do not think that Putin’s regime is good for Russia, and I don’t think it’s remotely a benevolent force in the world.

  • Darwin,

    Suffice to say, I disagree with you across the board. I’m particularly disturbed by the fact that you are more concerned with getting in shots at “Putin’s Russia” than you are the the sanctity of holy places and the rights and sensibilities of fellow Christians. I believe your priorities are completely wrong, and I’ll leave it at that.

  • While I think that what they did was bad — I think that Putin’s attempt (successful, thus far) to coopt the Russian Orthodox Church to support his own corrupt and violent ends is more blasphemous than anything that these bozo protesters have done.

  • Well, let me put it this way. In the future, I’ll make another big foreign policy post with special emphasis on Russia/Putin and we can hash it all out then. I’m neither willing or able to do it now, though.

  • It is perhaps worth recalling that the Kram Khrista Spasitela was built by the blood-spattered tyrant, Tsar Alexander to commemorate the defeat of Napoléon. Tchaikovsky’s 1812 Overture was commissioned and first performed at its dedication.

    It is a monument to the victory of despotism and ignorance over freedom and enlightenment and to the defeat of that Grande Armée, whom Hilaire Belloc hailed:

    “You who put down the mighty from their seat
    Who strove to fill the hungry with good things
    Who turned the rich man empty to the street
    And trailed your scabbards in the halls of kings…”

    It could be truly said of Moscow, as was written of Jerusalem, “If you had known the time of your deliverance…” Alas! its priests, too, then as now, had “no king but Caesar.”

  • I mean seriously, anyone who praises Napoleon while denouncing another ruler as “blood-spattered” is brain-damaged. And the suggestion that Napoleon’s army was bringing “enlightenment” and “freedom” is just as arrogant, deluded, and disgusting as the illusions of people who think they can bomb and mass murder the Muslim world into democracy.

    From now on, leave your sanctimonious comments and pedantic lectures on someone else’s posts. They aren’t welcome here.

  • Against the bigoted, ignorant, Russophobic filth penned by Belloc (whom I’ve never cared for) and praised by MPS, I offer a passage from the Marquis de Custine’s multi-volume work “The Empire of the Czar”, written in 1843:

    “Moscow is everywhere picturesque. The sky, without being clear, has a silvery brightness: the models of every species of architecture are heaped together without order or plan; no structures are perfect, nonetheless, the whole strikes, not with admiration, but with astonishment. The inequalities of the surface multiply the points of view. The magic glories of multitudes of cupolas sparkle in the air. Innumerable gilded steeples, in form like minarets, Oriental pavilions, and Indian domes, transport you to Delhi; donjon keeps and turrets bring you back to Europe in the times of the crusades; the sentinel, mounted on the top of his watch tower, reminds you of the muezzin inviting the faithful to prayer; while, to complete the confusion of ideas, the cross, which glitters in every direction, commanding the people to prostrate themselves before the Word, seems as though fallen from heaven amid an assembly of Asiatic nations, to point out to them the narrow way of salvation. It was doubtless before this poetical picture that Madame de Stael exclaimed – Moscow is the Rome of the North!”

  • Well, de Custine went to Russia looking for arguments against democratic governments which he opposed. He liked the Russians but was appalled at the autocracy he found. Many of his quotations are absolutely damning, and could apply to Putin’s regime today:

    “I don’t reproach the Russians for being what they are; what I blame them for is their desire to appear to be what we [Europeans] are…. They are much less interested in being civilized than in making us believe them so… They would be quite content to be in effect more awful and barbaric than they actually are, if only others could thereby be made to believe them better and more civilized.”

    “Russia is a nation of mutes; some magician has changed sixty million men into automatons.”

    I heartily recommend his Letters From Russia which gives a nice overview of what he saw in Russia.

    http://www.oxonianreview.org/wp/the-marquis-de-custine-and-the-question-of-russian-history/

  • I don’t have a problem with the Russian government’s prosecution per se. But two years in prison seems wildly excessive.

  • Donald,

    I don’t particularly care for autocracy, or for the head of the state to be the head of the church – these are aspects of Russia I can do without.

    But a nation that produced Tchaikovsky, Mussorgsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Balakriev, Borodin, Rachmaninoff, Stravinsky, Shostakovitch, Prokofiev, and many lesser known but equally talented artists and musicians is not a nation of mutes and automatons. The Russian 19th century produced some of the most enduring and amazing artwork I’ve ever known.

  • I don’t have a problem with the Russian government’s prosecution per se. But two years in prison seems wildly excessive.

    These broads are serial public nuisances, so something more severe than parole after 20 days might be expected.

  • “The Russian 19th century produced some of the most enduring and amazing artwork I’ve ever known.”

    I have long been a student of not only Russian history but also its culture. I even took three semesters of Russian language as an undergrad, to the detriment of my gpa, alas. There is much to admire in Russian culture. As to Russian government, I am afraid that an all too accurate assessment was given by a Russian nobleman after the murder of Paul I in 1801: “Despotism tempered by assassination, that is our Magna Carta.” A good book on Russian culture is James Billington’s The Icon and the Axe.

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Icon-Axe-Interpretive-History/dp/0394708466

  • Art Deco,

    They’ve already been in jail for six months. I don’t think you can call that getting off easy.

  • Although it seems clear that Vladimir Putin is up to no good in co-opting the Orthodox church to his grandiose plans, nonetheless these punks have deliberately chosen to insult the memory of millions of victims of Communism by cavorting at the restored Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, which was destroyed at the orders of the monster Stalin.

  • >Oh please. When did the post-Soviet Russian government threaten Poland? Other than, perhaps, in response to NATO’s belligerent insistence upon a missile shield (why do we have a divine right to that again?)’

    Um … how does a missile *shield* signify belligerence? All it does is prevent missiles from destroying a country. Yes, I know, Russia thinks it’ll just protect us from nuclear retaliation if we attack them. But to you seriously think any president (real or potential) – Bush, Obama, Romney, Ryan or another realistic candidate – wants to incinerate innocent Russians in an aggressive nuclear strike?

    Poland’s desire to be defended from Russia is understandable, given the recent East European history – Russia dominating Poland in the 18th century, the Partitions at the end of said epoch, the Russian occupation of central Poland in the 19th century (and the brutal repression of any and all Polish rebellions during that time), the Soviet invasion of Poland in 1920-21 or so, and of course Stalin’s betrayal of the Warsaw rebels and subsequent establishment of a Communist puppet state in that land after World War II. And that’s not even counting the rivalry between Moscow and Poland for Eastern Europe in the centuries before Peter the Great.

    Even if we forget Poland (since, given history, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Kremlin thought trying to dominate/occupy/control that country is too much trouble than it’s worth) , there’s still the ex-Soviet republics, which Putin’s Russia is trying hard to dominate. Just think about the 2002 hacking of Estonia, Russia’s interference with the 2004-2005 Ukranian elections (Putin was on the losing side of the Orange Revolution), and the 2008 invasion of Georgia, among other things. Want to know why Alexander Lukashenko is still dictator of Belarus. Because he and Putin are BFFs.

    Honestly, I find it quite ironic that such a devoted opponent of US imperialism (real or otherwise) seems to be just find and dandy with Russia’s very real imperialism in eastern Europe and the Caucasus region.

  • They’ve already been in jail for six months. I don’t think you can call that getting off easy.

    Did I even imply it was?

    These women are attention whores. They thrive off challenging authority with paying trivial prices for it. Give them small (but escalating) jail terms for each instance of vandalism, disorderly conduct, disruption of a religious service (a class A misdemeanor in New York, btw), criminal trespass, and resisting arrest. Eventually, though, it is not unjust to point the cannon at the cat. They ought to do themselves and everyone else a favor and get normal jobs.

    As for Russia, it is a foreign irritant, not a peril. As for the Russian political order, regrets but the attempt at democratic institutions was contemporary with an economic catastrophe. One ought to hope for a recovery in fertility, successful improvements in the effectiveness and reliability of police and courts, and a regulatory regime that does not ratify or promote rent-seeking before one hopes for a restoration of competitive elections. (Even so, Putin’s regime is likely the most liberal-democratic in the civic realm of any outside the periods running from 1905 to 1918 and 1988 to 1999).

  • >As for Russia, it is a foreign irritant, not a peril.
    Tell that to the people of Eastern Europe…

  • The basis of the the ABM Treaty is that in the realm of ballistic missiles so called defensive weapons tend to destabilise existing deterrents. If the Russians had wanted to use their missiles against the Poles, the propitious time was in 1989; that era is long gone now. The Poles should not rely on bear baiters in the Pentagon for support, but instead come to a regional understanding with the other Europeans including the Russians.

  • Tommy,

    To answer your questions…

    “Um … how does a missile *shield* signify belligerence? All it does is prevent missiles from destroying a country. Yes, I know, Russia thinks it’ll just protect us from nuclear retaliation if we attack them. But to you seriously think any president (real or potential) – Bush, Obama, Romney, Ryan or another realistic candidate – wants to incinerate innocent Russians in an aggressive nuclear strike?”

    Do I think that any of these people want to attack Russia unprovoked? No. Well, maybe John McCain… but this is besides the point. To deprive Russia of first-strike capability can only be interpreted as hostile. Do you seriously expect Russia to just assume the permanent good intentions of the West? You speak of “recent history” going all the way back to the 18th century. Russia only needs to go back as far as Operation Barbarossa to justify the maintaining of a sphere of influence and nuclear first-strike capabilities.

    It is unreasonable to demand of others what you would find unreasonable if demanded of you. You would not rest on the assumption of Russia’s permanent benevolence, and so it is absurd and almost dehumanizing to expect them to do likewise.

    “Poland’s desire to be defended from Russia is understandable, given the recent East European history”

    Poland really has nothing to do with this. It was brought up by Darwin as an example of Russia’s offenses against another Christian nation – as if no two other Christian nations have gone to war, as if all three Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox nations haven’t engaged in regrettable belligerence and war with one another.

    A NATO missile shield isn’t about protecting Poland from a nuclear strike, for heaven’s sake. It is about limiting Russia’s offensive and defensive capabilities.

    “there’s still the ex-Soviet republics, which Putin’s Russia is trying hard to dominate.”

    Oh really? There’s no other power using its own international spy agency to ferment political upheaval and regional opposition to Moscow in these republics? There’s no power whose actions are obviously aimed at the complete encirclement of Russia?

    Russia would be insane not to oppose the West. The color revolutions are CIA-engineered shams.

    “Honestly, I find it quite ironic that such a devoted opponent of US imperialism (real or otherwise) seems to be just find and dandy with Russia’s very real imperialism in eastern Europe and the Caucasus region.”

    I am not opposed to imperialism as an abstract category. I don’t have an abstract, moral problem with say, the Monroe Doctrine. But – and I will elaborate on these issues much more when I eventually do a big foreign policy post (maybe after the elections) – I do believe that

    a) Russia is completely right in identifying Western actions in the ex-Soviet republics as encirclement, and this is fundamentally hostile
    b) Russia is completely justified as a nation in opposing Western attempts to encircle it
    c) Russia, in supporting the secular dictatorships of the “Islamic” region of the world (North Africa, Middle East, Central Asia, etc.) is objectively supporting the Christians who live relatively unmolested under these regimes, while recent US support for Islamic fanatics in Lybia, Egypt and now Syria is – among other things – a direct threat to tens of millions of Christians around the world.

  • Russia is repressive. Nice to see you’re sadistically enjoying P**y Riot’s suffering (clearly, you find femininity&female organs scary) When Russia passed its antigay laws… the first man arrested wasn’t gay, but a straight married man. Russia has been against free speech for years. Read about Dostoevsky and Tolstoy.

    You’re defending oppression&censorship. P**y Riot isn’t sociopathic;they were battling the sociopathic Vladimir Putin.

    How to sweet someone who revels in the censorship and oppression of others. You’re just like Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor. You HATE women and freedom.

  • Susan, the pu$$y rioters defiled a Christian Church. If their intent was to protest against Putin, then they should have carried their protest to a govt bldg, NOT a Christian Church.

    Having pro-sodomy filth laws isn’t fre speech. It’s promotion of godless sexual idolatry and iniquity. The gays who won’t repent belong back in the closet where they belong, and Christianity belongs front and center in the public square.

    As for the first man arrested who was straight, if he was promoting homosexual filth, then his arrest, regardless of his sexual orientation, was right and correct. There are only human rights, and the filth of these sexually promiscuous creatures does not qualify as a human right. Indeed, for this kind of filth God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.

  • How to sweet someone who revels in the censorship and oppression of others. You’re just like Dostoevsky’s Grand Inquisitor. You HATE women and freedom.

    If that’s the way you want to put it, sister, go ahead. Betwixt and between hating women and freedom I have little time for vulgar professional adolescents who deface public property and disrupt other peoples’ common activities.

  • I will leave the judgement on Putin’s Russia to historians who will doubtless have better access to the information needed to make that judgment than any of us is likely to get.

    What is clear is that this band willfully defiled a church. In any country, rights are not absolute, but need to be balanced against other rights. If they had been sent to jail for two years for making their “protest” in Red Square, I would be supporting their right to free speech (even if I very definitely disagree with much of what they are saying). They do not however, have a right to enter a church or other non-governmental or non-publically owned space in order to make that protest.

    Personally, I get the impression that they wanted to be arrested; they got what they wanted and I am not going to loose too much sleep over it.

  • Susan,

    The most frightening thing about your kind is your complete inability an unwillingness to recognize the rights and freedoms of others. In your sick, twisted, limited world view, religious worshipers have no rights and freedom. If you decide you want to stomp into our churches and menstruate on the floor, you believe you should have that right, and that we have an obligation to sit there and like it.

    Well, let me tell you something sister. Under the laws of civilized nations, you don’t have this right, not in Russia, not in the U.S., not anywhere. If you think preventing and punishing such vile, hateful acts is “censorship”, then you are sick in the head and you belong in a mental institution. In a just society, a rational society, you would have already been committed.

  • May God bless Bonchamps, Maryland Bill and Art Deco.

  • God Bless all of us. Just because people disagree with Bonchamps about the nature of the Russian government, that doesn’t make them the enemy (and even if they were, we still should ask God to bless them).

    I do have reservations about Putin’s government, a lot of them. But I know I don’t know enough to be sure one way or the other. I also know that to a certain extent, whether Putin is a saint or a sinner, it doesn’t change the wrongness of what this “band” did in a Church.

  • Susan, I disagree with Bonchamps about this, but I wouldn’t accuse him of hating women or freedom. Attacking someone’s motivations is bad form. And also, just because Putin is a sociopath, that doesn’t mean his oppnents aren’t.

  • The Russian Orthodox do not reserve the sacrament in a tabernacle, because the bread and wine are combined and served out of a single chalice (the intinctioned cube of Eucharist is dropped into the communicant’s open mouth by the priest using a a golden spoon).

    Darwin, you are wrong. We do in fact keep the reserved Sacrament in a tabernacle on the Holy Table at all times, for Presanctified Liturgies during Lent and for the communion of the sick at all times of the year. Just because we don’t have a practice of Eucharistic Adoration outside of a liturgical context doesn’t mean that the Altar does not at all times have the Holy Gifts placed on it.

Quaker Suicide Bomber Kills 31 at Moscow Airport

Monday, January 24, AD 2011

The death toll is at 31 but a Quaker terrorist group is being speculated as the possible perpetrator to this horrendous act of violence in Moscow’s most busiest airport.

Terror analysts are surmising that it could very well be the work of the Quaker extremist group called “The Real Quaker Faith”.  A minority of analysts are insisting it is the work of the “Reformed Amish Fellowship of Unsmiling Dutch”.  But most agree it is Christian sect of believers that are being credited (sic) for these latest bombings in Russia.

The attacks look very similar to the acts of terror committed by the “Religious Society of Friendly Russia” terror group as well as the “Russian Friends Religious Society” terror group where recent suicide bombers set themselves off at Unitarian-Universalist Churches as well as Tony Robbins seminars.

President Obama has already issued a statement of not jumping to conclusions and is urging caution in rushing to judgment and laying blame.

Sarcasm off/

Continue reading...

Polish President, Top Brass, Die in Plane Crash Over Russia

Saturday, April 10, AD 2010

The London Daily Telegraph is reporting that Polish President Lech Kaczynski, his wife, the Polish army chief, and most of the Polish political elite and their wives perished in a plane crash over Russia.

“It clipped the tops of the trees, crashed down and broke into pieces,” Mr. Sergei Antufiev reported of the Polish plane carrying President Lech Kaczynski how it crashed.  “There were no survivors.” Polish state news agency PAP reported the same.

In the case of a president’s death, the speaker of the lower chamber of parliament, Bronislaw Komorowski, takes over as head of state, Mr Komorowski’s assistant Jerzy Smolinski told Reuters.

Poland declared a week of national mourning as shocked citizens flocked to lay flowers and light candles outside the seat of government.

Notable Catholic blogger Damian Thompson, understanding the Polish people’s propensity for conspiracy theories, is speculating that many will begin blaming a cabal of Russian agencies for this tragic accident.

Let us keep those that have died and the grieving Polish people in our prayers.

For more breaking news of the tragic death of Polish President Lech Kaczynski click here.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to Polish President, Top Brass, Die in Plane Crash Over Russia

  • A terrible tragedy for a great people:

    May their souls rest in peace.

  • Amen to that, Donald.

  • “…and make eternal Light to shine upon them.”

  • It’s also worth mentioning that Bishop Tadeusz Ploski, the head of the military ordinate in Poland, also perished in the crash.

  • “A terrible tragedy for a great people.”

    Indeed. I recall my mom (who passed away recently) remarking when Pope John Paul II was elected, that if any nation deserved to have a pope of its own, it was Poland, whose people had steadfastly kept their faith under communism all the while Italians were ELECTING communists to public office.

    We should remember them tomorrow on Divine Mercy Sunday — a feast we owe to two Poles, St. Faustina Kowalska and Pope John Paul II.

  • …Shoot, I’m not prone to conspiracy theories and this sounds like the opening for a really, really bad conspiracy movie.

    Poland is “less developed”?

  • This is quite a shock – hadn’t heard of this till I came onto the blog.
    No doubt it’ll be all over the TV news in half an hour.

    Thanks for that youtube clip Don.

    I recall my father speaking very highly of the Polish soldiers during the Italian Campaign in WW2 when Kiwis and Poles, together with Canadians, South Africans and Gurkas fought together. When I was a lad, I knew several of dad’s friends who fought in the NZ squadrons in the RAF who also spoke very highly of the Poles. Only trouble was, they couldn’t carry on a conversation with them. (language) 😉

  • ace,

    You’re deranged.

  • Ace’s comment has now entered the Trash dimension Don! For the Poles Don, they rightly thought they were fighting a Crusade druing World War II.

  • It was reported that one of the three original leaders of Solidarity movement was on that plane also. I remember the first or second strike (1980) a priest came to speak to our prayer group rode up on his motorcycle with a bumper sticker Proud to be Polish. These events gave us such hope.

  • Ah, I have been busy with other matters and haven’t been online – but these deaths have greatly saddened me. I’m half Polish and my late mother was both very devout and very proud of her Polish heritage. Playing the comparison game is odious, but if Ireland was misruled by Britain for centuries, consider the lot of poor Poland, with not one, but two powerful and ruthless neighbors – Russia and Germany – to contend with. It was my hope, after Communism fell (much credit to the Pope and the brave men and women of Solidarity)that Poland’s story would finally be a happy one. This tragedy, coming on top of so many others in Polish history – well, my heart and prayers go out to those people.

    But the silver lining is that democracy in Poland is strong. Unlike many in the West, they are not a people who take their freedom for granted.

Russian Christian Soldier a Martyr of the Chechen War

Saturday, February 20, AD 2010

This is an fascinating story: a Russian soldier who was killed on his 19th birthday in 1996 is being venerated in his home country as a martyr and an icon of him is giving off aromas of myrrh:

Today according to Inferfax of Russia in  Penza, an Icon of Evgeny Rodinov  gave off aromas of myrrh in the St. Lukas Church at the Penza regional oncologic dispenser. Russian soldier Rodionov was executed in Chechnya in 1996 after refusing to renounce Orthodox faith and take off his cross.

“Myrrh came out in two spots, in a palm of his hand and where one wears the cross,” the church Rector Alexy Burtsev told journalists.

According to the Church Rector, it happened during the All-Night Vigil on February 15.  Those in attendance, at the Church, stood behind praying, and took in the strange pleasant aroma.

The priest noted that on February 15, 1996, Penza-born Evgeny Rodionov was captured in Chechnya, imprisoned for hundred days and when he refused to renounce Christian faith, militants beheaded him.?

Yevgeny Aleksandrovich Rodionov (Russian: ???????? ??????? ?????????????) (May 23, 1977 – May 23, 1996) was a Russian soldier who was kidnapped and later executed in Chechen captivity. The purported manner of his death has garnered him much admiration throughout Russia, and even prompted calls for his elevation to sainthood.

Rodionov was born in the village of Satino-Russkoye, near Podolsk, Moscow Oblast. Though he aspired to be a cook, he was conscripted into the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation in 1995. Private Rodionov was deployed to Chechnya, he served in border troops and on February 13, 1996 he was captured by Chechen rebels. They held him captive for more than three months.

On his 19th birthday Rodionov was beheaded on the outskirts of the Chechen village Bamut. According to his killers, who later extorted money from his mother in exchange for knowledge of the location of his corpse, they beheaded him after he refused to renounce his Christian faith or remove the silver cross he wore around his neck.

Yevgeny Rodionov was posthumously awarded the Russian Order of Courage. There is a growing movement within the Russian Orthodox Church to canonize him as a Christian saint and martyr for faith. Some Russian soldiers, feeling themselves abandoned by their government, have taken to kneeling in prayer before his image. One such prayer reads:

Thy martyr, Yevgeny, O Lord, in his sufferings has received an incorruptible crown from thee, our God, for having thy strength he has brought down his torturers, has defeated the powerless insolence of demons. Through his prayers save our souls.

As of 2003, religious icons depicting Yevgeny were becoming increasingly popular. Yevgeny’s mother has one herself; she has suggested that the icon of her son sometimes emits a perfume which she believes to be holy, to the extent that it actually drips with it.

Evgeny Rodinov, pray for us!

_._

Reprinted with permission by Eric Sammons of The Divine Life.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Russian Christian Soldier a Martyr of the Chechen War

Poland And Russia Battle Over WWII History

Tuesday, September 1, AD 2009

Today is the 70th anniversary of the beginning of World War II as Germany bombarded Westerplatte with canon fire.  Katyn massacre posterEventually Germany made peace with their neighbors by recognizing the role they played in the devastation of Europe.  Since then Europe has experienced only one conflict[1] since the end of World War II.

But Russia remains another matter.

Russia continues to be belligerent in their interpretation of the war.  Denying much culpability in their conflict with Poland and even insinuating of Polish-German designs on the Soviet Union.

In the days leading up to anniversary, Russian media has aired a string of accusations against Poland, claiming that Warsaw intended to collaborate with Hitler in an invasion of the Soviet Union, and that Jozef Beck, Poland’s foreign minister in 1939, was a German agent. Moscow broadcasters have also claimed that there was a “German hand” in the 1940 Katyn massacre of thousands of Polish PoWs, an atrocity generally held to have been the exclusive work of Stalin’s secret police.

In fairness, the de facto ruler of Russia, Vladimir Putin, did offer a conciliatory tone relating to Russia’s aggression towards Poland:

“Our duty is to remove the burden of distrust and prejudice left from the past in Polish-Russian relations,” wrote Mr Putin, who went on to describe the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact as “immoral”, and also thanked Poland “from the bottom of my heart” for the 600,000 Poles who fought on the Eastern Front under Red Army command.

Continue reading...

12 Responses to Poland And Russia Battle Over WWII History

  • Great post, Tito–and an important reminder of the world-spanning nightmare that began on this day.

    I grit my teeth to say this, given that Putin is nothing short of a murderous thug, but his statement is an excellent one. Given where Russia is now, his opinion counts for more than the increasingly rabid pro-state media’s. Or Dmitri Medvedev’s.

  • I agree, Mr. Medvedev is nothing more than a symbolic leader.

    I don’t see Russia apologizing for anything in the near future. If the current Oil drop in prices hasn’t shaken Russia, then nothing will.

    Russia needs to admit their role in World War II of being more than a ‘benevolent liberator’.

  • I grit my teeth to say this, given that Putin is nothing short of a murderous thug…

    As if the ex-KGB, who himself was responsible for many heinous crimes, could actually be considered anything less than.

  • It’s nitpicking, but I think the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956, to cite but one instance, would count as another European conflict post-1945.

  • This is the kind of “nitpicking” I actually appreciate.

    Well done.

  • Putin might also call immoral the fact that the Red Army stood by and did nothing after the Polish Home Army rose in revolt in Warsaw in 1944 while the Soviets were at the very gates of Warsaw. For 63 days the Soviets did nothing to aid the uprising. They allowed the use of Soviet air bases by the Western Allies dropping supplies to the Poles only near the end of the rising after the Soviets knew it was nearing defeat. As ever, Stalin was only too happy to have Hitler kill Poles for him.

  • Don:

    You can hardly blame the Soviets for being the Soviets. A successful Polish Home Army would have been a potential contender for power in post war Poland.

    As Professor Norman Davies points out in his history of the Warsaw Rising much of the blame for the rising failure can be laid at the feet of the British and the US governments which encouraged the Poles to revolt and promised assistance when they had no way to provide such assistance and knew such resistance would be futile but would aid them by tying up German troops.

    http://www.warsawuprising.com/paper/davies1.htm

    The Poles – as before the war – were fools to depend on the assurances of countries that had no means by which to provide assistance.

  • Bloody murderers Awakaman can always be blamed for being bloody murderers. I have read Davies’ book and as usual he mixes insight and rubbish. It was the Polish government in exile in England that was pushing for the revolt. The Americans and Brits could care less since holding down troops in Poland, which never amounted to more than a few low grade Wehrmacht divisions diverted from the Eastern front, was of little consequence to the Western allies. They wanted more recruits for the Polish forces fighting in the West and operations in Poland were a very low priority for the Brits and the Americans.

    As for the Poles being fools, they fought gallantly throughout WW2 against foes seeking to exterminate them. They engaged in no action against Hitler or Stalin in 1939, but they were a marked nation. Against all the odds they have outlived as a people both Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. I regard them not as fools but as rather one of the more heroic nations that fought in WW2.

  • BA,

    Not at all, it isn’t nitpicking.

    I’m a history aficionado and so I’m surprised that I forgot about the Hungarian Revolution of ’56.

    Good catch!

  • As Professor Norman Davies points out in his history of the Warsaw Rising much of the blame for the rising failure can be laid at the feet of the British and the US governments

    And professors can always be blamed for being professors.

    “What is the function of intellectuals, but to tell us that things are not as ordinary people perceive them?” – Fr. Neuhaus.

  • usa stood by and watched more than 20 million russians getting killed. When the Sovietuning was standing before poland they “interveined”.
    Usa the great liberator….

    Who else when not russia?

  • What complete rubbish. The US provided extensive lend lease aid to the Soviets throughout the war, which included hundreds of thousands of vehicle and extensive food aid to feed the Red Army. The British and the Americans tied down one-third of the Wehrmacht in the West throughout the war, and the bomber fleets of the British and the Americans devastated Germany and forced the Luftwaffe to redeploy from the Russian front many of their fighter squadrons in order to defend Germany from the Allied bombers.

66 Responses to Russian Professor Predicts Breakup of US in 2010

  • Hey! As a Virginian, I hope you all down in Texas will hold off Mexico while we stand fast against the EU up this way! Russia will pull back nubs if they grab for Alaska. Canada would surely say, “Do we HAVE to take our share? Americans are so hard to manage.”

    United we stand.

    Back to my hole with my religion and gun…

  • I’m not so sure that I agree with the divisions. California, Oregan, and Washington I see going their own way together, being a firm Pacific nation, and certainly I’d agree that a fair amount of the Atlantic coastline would indeed form their own group and join the EU. I deny that Canada, China, or Mexico would take hold as sovereign over any division. We Americans are a little too free-wheeling for that to happen. Any takeover would have to be military. But as for the central divisions, I might have shunted off anything east of the Mississippi to the Atlantic Seaboard Committee and Trust Fund, and included Idaho and Utah in the Western American Union. I don’t know about Nevada, but probably most of it, with Las Vegas and Reno breaking off to California.

    In my dreams, Wyoming would be the lead state in the secession, since we have so much fun with our representation in Congress.

    In reality, I started to think that we’d see such a secession, in that the U.S. seems predominantly left-tilting on the coasts, and right-tilting in the middle. One of the things that help fuel resent in the South at the time of the secession just prior to the Civil War was the clear division between North and South on how the states voted in the presidential election. When that clear division seems cropping up between the heavily-populated coasts and the sparsely populated mid-west-to-western region, it starts to feel like the same scenario. Fortunately, the recent election painted the map by far more blue than I expected, so I guess Wyoming will just have secede on her own.

    Maybe we can convince Texas to join, but the relative isolation might make coordination difficult.

  • I am sure the Union will be maintained, but if anyone would care to make an offer to Illinois for the city-state of Chicago…

  • While I don’t see anything like this as being all that likely, I must admit finding the division question very interesting.

    I’d see Idaho sticking with whatever Montana and Wyoming did — and probably Utah going the same way. Nevada leaches so much money from California that Reno and Los Vegas would be strongly incented to stick with the coastal states, though the rest might want to join Texas. I could see Arizona and Southern California east of Barstowe going with Texas as well.

    Another thing this fellow seems not to have taken into account is economic similarity. Texas, Georgia and Florida all have fairly booming tech economies, and Texas, Georgia, Tennessee and Kentucky benefit a lot from non-union manufacturing. Arkansas could, of course, simply become the Independent Republic of Wal-Mart.

    So I’d tend to see a good chance for a tech and manufacturing-based, moderately conservative and free trading southern republic including the Texas Republic as shown plus the Carolinas, Kentucky, Tennessee and West Virginia. Perhaps the non-DC-suburb part of Virginia as well.

    Then you’d have to sort out the political and cultural differences between the Great Lakes states and the Great Plains & Rocky Mountain states.

  • He doesn’t know what he’s talking about. California is going with the Cylons.

  • This guy’s never been to the South. The Texas Republic, indeed! fah!

    And if you think all the Cubans and Puerto Ricans in Florida are going to knuckle under to Mexico, I’d say you don’t know jack about Hispanics, either.

  • LOL

    Right. Arizonans in league with California. We hate Californians. Actually, I don’t see Arizona tolerating any other state. We would have to go it alone.

    It’s easy for a Russian, who lives in a disordered society that has rarely if ever functioned well except under absolute totalitarianism, to imagine us cutting each others’ throats. We are divided now, but I don’t see any of us willing to drive a tank over our political enemies just yet.

  • I doubt this will happen as well, though it is interesting to note that the same professor predicted Russia’s rise during Yeltsin’s abysmal rule. Hence why he is getting a lot of attention now.

    As far as division is concerned, I find it laughable that Mexico would have ANY control whatsoever. Being that the majority of my extended family are proud Mexicans (living in Mexico), I see the reality of high corruption and a weak central government (considering that the government is created on the French model of a ‘strong central government, this isn’t good news).

    Hispanics cannot be painted as a monolithic group at all. Chris M. is correct on that point for sure. Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans all look down on each other for various reasons. Even among Mexicans, Mexican immigrants look down on Americans of Mexican descent and visa versa (it’s incredibly nasty).

    As far as Canada and China having influence that is beyond fantasy. IF the U.S. were to have “internal conflicts” I can understand Hawaii falling under California or Japan protection, but not under Chinese.

    I certainly see divisions between the two coasts and the rest of America, but if there were to be a break up of the states, seeing the northeastern U.S. (parts of New England) have some of formal relationship with the E.U. seems plausible.

    But for the sake of argument, IF there were to be a Second Civil War, I don’t see how the coastal states would be able to hold-out as combatants against the rest of America.

    Now back to clinging to my guns and religion.

  • Rob,

    Having lived in Arizona for more than 10 years I agree with your analysis. Arizonan’s have contempt for Californians. I’d also have to say that Washingtonians and Oregonians have no love for Californians as well.

    Shoot, Californians don’t like each other for that matter. Northern Californians and Southern Californians don’t like each other. Throw in the central basin and the extreme north I could easily see California breaking up into two to four states (Fredonia, Alta California, Central California, and the city-state of Los Angeles).

  • Enough of this California-bashing. In my experience, there are few people who actually know native Californians. Many Californians are transplants of some stripe or another. They move from NY to west LA, work in The Biz, and think that their little, insular world is “California.” These NY transplants live here a few years, get bored, and move to Washington, Montana, Arizona, etc., and proceed to tick off the locals there. And in turn, those people think these transplants are somehow “Californians.” Sorry to disappoint you all…

  • Reading this Russian analyst, I can now easily imagine how weird and off-base American analysts sound to native Russians.

  • J. Christian,

    I believe south Floridians have that same attitude towards transplanted New Yorkers in Miami.

    California should be able to put up some sort of quota of New Yorkers moving to California. Can states do that amongst themselves?

  • The Professor Doctor’s map looks like nothing more than Government by Sports Mega-Conferences. From Florida to Texas there goes SECLand, populated by large numbers of people still reenacting the Civil War with every football game. Then that large swath of Big 12 Land, taking in Texas, Oklahoma, and anyone else they dadgum well please. Produces high school quarterbacks that conquer throughout the republic. California is heaven knows what. The southern part belongs to USC and the rest to remaining Pac 10 Land. Who woulda thunk it. A third-rate Russian professor, providing minor satisfaction to countrymen afflicted by acute alcoholism, TB and HIV; a pre- WWII infrastructure; and the dreams of tyrants muted by the price of oil- is really a proponent for The College Bowl Structure As We Currently Know It. And no playoff system, thank you very much.

  • At least, Sarah Palin will be able to see Russia from her house!!!

  • Obviously, this professor knows nothing about Tennessee…..(and we ARE in the SEC.) Lol!

  • I just noticed that.. TN and KY join the EU?? Maybe after depopulating both states!

  • Enough of this California-bashing. In my experience, there are few people who actually know native Californians. Many Californians are transplants of some stripe or another.

    True. As a native born Californian I’d certainly assert that most real Californian’s are the most laid back and easy to live-around folks you could meet. (Though that didn’t stop me from wanting to leave.)

    I could certainly see California breaking up, though. In twenty five years of living in California I never once ventured north of Yosemite, and it was no loss. That LA belongs to a state whose capitol was Sacramento was always a source of utter confusion to me. (Though if there’s someone who should be sent off to be their own city state, it should be the Bay Area. Their mayor already thinks he can make state law.)

  • Pingback: Soybeania Forever! « The American Catholic: Politics and Culture from a Catholic perspective
  • I don’t like these teams. I really have to play with California?

    -Arizona Guy

  • This may be an interesting theory that hopefully remains that way. If you’ve watched any of the short-lived series “Jericho” you may see some similarities between Panarin’s theory and the show. The gist of “Jericho” is the country divides into six nations after a domestic terrorist attack in which 24 major metropolitan areas are destroyed by nuclear bombs. It appears that Mr. Panarin has watched the same show or provided part of his theory to the producers. I hope that art doesn’t replicate life in this particular instance. “Do not tread on me,” Mr. Panarin.

  • Russia will suffer their own civil war before it ever happens to the United States.

  • The Central North American Republic would have a larger population than Canada (by around 20 million). I don’t think we’d fall under the influence of the Canucks (although I live in NoVA now, I’d move back to the Midwest to get out of the EU. I think it’s all a scheme to talk about how Russia should get Alaska back (does a certain Russian academic have a crush on Sarah Palin?).

  • The Russians sold Alaska fair and square and it’s ours until the end of time. If anything we may end up purchasing Kamchatka before we let go of Alaska.

    For the record, Texas doesn’t recognize Alaska.

  • Powerline has interesting comments by Mark Falcoff on the article by the Russian professor.

    “When I was a graduate student of international relations at Princeton decades ago I remember one of my professors, the late Harold Sprout, explaining that one way to analyze a foreign country’s behavior was to appreciate its own historical perspective. Given what has happened to Russia in the past two decades, its idea that the U.S. is a fragile empire of disparate entities (while wrong) is at least understandable. In many ways indeed it is a projection onto its supposed rival its own experiences.”
    http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/01/022456.php

  • Yoh bros. Why don’t youse rebels just split along the Mason – Dixie line? Seems fine and dandy for bible faced hypocrites

  • Andrew,

    Actually, the Russian “prediction” reminds me of the world portrayed in Robert Heinlein’s Friday. Heinlein’s divisions certainly made more sense. Given that it was a Russian doing the predicting, I was also reminded of the old miniseries Amerika.

  • Why would Utah want to go with California? People would still come here to ski, snowboard, visit our parks, do business, etc. Our economy wouldn’t be affected at all!

    We have a large air force base here, the productions plants and companies for the US space program, etc., and a lot of Utahns are already military trained.

    We’re small, so why would we want to be steamrolled politically by the West Coast, especially since we’re more conservative?

    Plus, California is looking like it’s on the road to bankruptcy while Utah’s managed to weather the economic storm fine and we have minimal state taxes and still have sound state finances!

    Utah would be better off by itself.

    And without half of our income going to the Feds or California, we’d be rich, too! People would flock to the Mountain West! We could defend ourselves with air superiority over the western desert but wouldn’t need to since California could take the hit if China decides to invade.

    And all we have to do to hold back others is hold onto the nukes stored here and have Thiokol Co. (which makes the shuttle booster rockets) maintain and produce ICBMs and larger nations wouldn’t want to invade us; we’re small, anyway! Thus, we’d make the risk too high for the benefits a foreign nation (or former US state) would have from trying to take Utah.

    Utah would prosper in this scenario.

    This guy’s crazy but it is kind of fun to think about.

  • The US is a third world economy and has been living on credit for years. A nation where half are banged up, live in pverty with no medical care, rely on tips to make a living and have 3 jobs to make ends meet is headed for self destruction. The Foundation myth that Americans swallow is a smokescreen for the fact that the Revolutionery war was in fact Americas first civil war, between loyalists and rebels. When the rebels were seen to be enriching themselves by confiscationg loyalists property and renaging on their debts the undecided followed the example of the lawless. That is the American weakness, everything has been seized and not paid for. From the genocide of the Native Americans to the non paying of income tax until 1915 allowing the robber barons to prosper. America was not a proper democracy until 1830. The land that was ceded to them was as a result of The Treaty of Vienna, they never won the land in battle. At the start of World War 1 Belgium had a bigger army than the Americans. America has lived beyond its means for years with no competition from abroad the auto industry has been churning out obselite gas guzzling trucks posing as vehicles for years. The only way an American can get medical cover is thru his employer, so if he’s not employed he’s not covered. It’s ironic that the temper tantrum of not wanting to pay taxes for the protection of the Royal Navy has led to an economy which spends trillions of tax dollars on defence. At the end of the war of independance there were more Americans serving in the British Forces tahn Americans in the revolutionery army. The colonies all go the same way. Unleashed to govern themslves they become corrupt and turn on each other. American businessmen appear to model their practices on those of the mafia. Madoff is surely destined to appear in the Wall Street Hall of Fame (or should that be shame?)

  • Thank God for 1776. Without America Great Britain might well now be one of the lesser provinces of the German Reich.

    As to your opinion of America, I prefer that of a greater Englishman who wore a redcoat in his youth:

    “No American will think it wrong of me if I proclaim that to have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. I could not foretell the course of events. I do not pretend to have measured accurately the martial might of Japan, but now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death. So we had won after all! Yes, after Dunkirk; after the fall of France; after the horrible episode of Oran; after the threat of invasion, when, apart from the Air and the Navy, we were an almost unarmed people; after the deadly struggle of the U-boat war — the first Battle of the Atlantic, gained by a hand’s breadth; after seventeen months of lonely fighting and nineteen months of my responsibility in dire stress, we had won the war. England would live; Britain would live; the Commonwealth of Nations and the Empire would live. How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end, no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care. Once again in our long Island history we should emerge, however mauled or mutiliated, safe and victorious. We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end. We might not even have to die as individuals. Hitler’s fate was sealed. Mussolini’s fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder. All the rest was merely the proper application of overwhelming force. The British Empire, the Soviet Union, and now the United States, bound together with every scrap of their life and strength, were, according to my lights, twice or even thrice the force of their antagonists. No doubt it would take a long time. I expected terrible forfeits in the East; but all this would be merely a passing phase. United we could subdue everybody else in the world. Many disasters, immeasurable cost and tribulation lay ahead, but there was no more doubt about the end.

    Silly people — and there were many, not only in enemy countries — might discount the force of the United States. Some said they were soft, others that they would never be united. They would fool around at a distance. They would never come to grips. They would never stand blood-letting. Their democracy and system of recurrent elections would paralyze their war effort. They would be just a vague blur on the horizon to friend or foe. Now we should see the weakness of this numerous but remote, wealthy, and talkative people. But I had studied the American Civil War, fought out to the last desperate inch. American blood flowed in my veins. I thought of a remark which Edward Grey had made to me more than thirty years before — that the United States is like “a gigantic boiler. Once the fire is lighted under it there is no limit to the power it can generate.” Being saturated and satiated with emotion and sensation, I went to bed and slept the sleep of the saved and thankful.”

    – Winston S. Churchill, _The Grand Alliance_

  • The American people revere Sir Winston, it helps that he had a pushy American mother. The British people on the other hand voted him out of office at the first opportunity. It amazes me that so much adulation is given to Sir Winston by Americans who should really go down on their knees and give thanks for Roosevelt, truly he was our and your saviuor, for without his political will, Churchill would have become what many expected, a failed politicion. His grasp of strategy was non too good given his record of attacking the Turks during World war 1 and inflicting murderous casualties on Commenwealth troops at Gallipoli.

    It is always painful for a nation to confront the truth, Americans are as much victims of their own propagan as were the Germans and Russians who were led by the nose into Fascism and Communism. After the fall of these two, there are still those who worship Hitler and Stalin.

    My view is that the original 13 colonies plus Florida should come back into the fold. Imagine the untold wealth this would generate for the inhabitants. Not in the EU as the UK is not, but part of Team GB. From day 1 they would get free medical care, and be entitled to any number of welfare benefits which would really raise up the under class (not just promises as given by Obama). Americans from the other states would flock to a properous economy when the dollar is only fit for wallpaper. In truth Americans are seen abroad as rather gullible, niave, folks who don’t have a good grasp of History or Geography. On the other hand American Business people are regarded as Mafia who wil suck you dry of every last dollar.
    North America includes Canada, and their are still plenty of Empire Loyalists alive and well both in the States and Canada. New Yorkers whose ancestors served in the !st Royal New York Rifles are combing geoneolgy sites to find compatriots. (don’t believe me? just Google it)
    I sense that the good Dr does not believe me, this is not my personal opinion but historical fact. If the 50 States were soveriegn countries you would be far better off in what is in effect a Free Trade Zone. That is all that you have got. A 50 country free trading zone but you introduced a whole new layer of buracracy on yoursleves in the shape of federal taxes. It is truly amazing that despite the song and dance you made about tea tax you now hand over trillions to a governing burearcay and the only way you can some of your tax dollar back is by lobbying and pork barell politics..
    When the UK introduced the NHS under the elected government that took over from Churchill Doctors surgeries were overwhelmed by women presenting with prolapsed wombs. Those who could not afford treatment used towels and rags to hold the womb in place. What is hidden in the US?

    Churchill had a job of holding the Allies together in WW2, the Americans think there industrial might prevailed but in truth the real slaughter was on the Eastern Front where Mother Russia lost 30 million. Churchill sucked up to Stalin as much as he did to Roosevelt, he had too.

  • “The British people on the other hand voted him out of office at the first opportunity. ”

    After the war was won in 1945. Then, after a few years of socialist government, they voted him back into office as Prime Minister in 1951. They also voted for him overwhelmingly in 2002 in a BBC poll as the greatest Briton of all time.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/tv_and_radio/2509465.stm

  • We had to have a socialist government after WW2 because the Liberals left in power after WW1 promised “homes fit for heroes” but failed to deliver. Churchill was past it when he returned and was in his dotage, the Tories used him to get re-elected.
    Meanwhile back to the first American civil war go here to see the list of American units in the British Army.

    This is a list of British units in the American Revolutionary War (1775-1783) who fought against the American rebels and their French and Spanish allies in the North American colonies, including battles in Florida and the West Indies. In addition to the regular army it includes German auxiliary units (known collectively as Hessians), and militia and provincial units formed from Loyalists, West Indians, and Canadians.

    No battle honours were ever awarded to British regiments who fought in America as it was seen by the British to be a civil war.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_Forces_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War

    The freed black slaves, the black loyalists, who came over to the British side were rewarded with thier own country, Sierra Leone, and named its capital Freetown. Those black slaves who remained in the rebel hands continued in serfdom until the second American civil war. Some would say the fate of black Americans has not changed much summed up by the phrase, “They swapped the Southern rope for the Northern dope”.

  • The Black Loyalists see

    http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BMY79c675JsC&pg=PA145&lpg=PA145&dq=founding+seirra+leone&source=web&ots=8XySXCsPyv&sig=D5ZhDgW363trypwjr6VlnoQ9AUA&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result

    Rebels and Redcoats: The American Revolutionary War
    Published to accompany a four-part BBC TV series – written and presented by military historian, Richard Holmes, this book offers a somewhat controversial and revisionist view. Most people regard the American Revolutionary War of the 1775-83 (also known as the War of Independence) as a popular struggle for liberty against an oppressive colonial power. This book demonstrates that it was in fact America’s first civil war.

    http://www.amazon.com/Rebels-Redcoats-American-Revolutionary-War/dp/000715626X

  • Redcoat, every American school child knows that the Tories fought for the English. This of course does not detract from the victory of the Patriots but rather magnifies the glory of the victory since they had to contend not only with a foreign foe but also a domestic enemy. The Tories throughout the war were utterly dependent upon the English and showed a striking inability to control territory without protection from the Royal Army. When organized into military units by the English and trained as regulars the Tories proved as effective on the battlefield as the English units they fought beside. Without English assistance the Tories proved totally ineffective to raise armies of their own and wage their own war against the Patriots. Their few attempts to do so ended quickly in routs. When the English decided to toss in the towel, the Tories who fought with them meekly went into exile rather than attempt to carry on the struggle on their own.

    As to Churchill, he was more effective in his old age than most British Prime Ministers at any age. The turn to the socialists in 1945 was part of the process by which Great Britain has been turned into Weenie Britain with a nannie state that crushes intiative and breeds hopelessness. Thatcher, your last great Prime Minister, was a ray of light, but she was unable to undo all the misteps that have made Britain a third-rate power.

  • Greetings to all those who are in search
    of Americans who remained Loyal
    to the British Crown during the
    War for Independence

    http://www.royalprovincial.com/index.htm

  • I am not running Churchill down, that would be silly but in discussing history and miliatary campaigns you have to take in the strategic objective. What exactly was Churhills war aims? The UK declared war on nazi Germany following the german army invasion of Poland. After the war Poland was “liberated” by the Soviet Union not the UK so there is a case to say the UK failed to achieve its objective. Americans woke up after WW2 and decided to run down the British Empire, they wanted one of their own, and the principle architect was John Foster Dulles. In no way could he be described as a friend of the UK. So again as the British Empire faded away into a Commonwealth there is a case for saying that Churhills war aim of maintaining the British Empire came to nothing. So that’s two failures on his part.
    War has to have a point, that is why there was never any danger of the Cold war escalating into a hot war. Neither the US or the Soviet Union could see any point in inheriting a nucluer wasteland.

    California has a GDP just below that of the UK, it seems to many that a prosperous state such as CA is subsidising the non productive states. Some of your states have a lower population than we have in our major cities.

  • California has a GDP just below that of the UK, it seems to many that a prosperous state such as CA is subsidising the non productive states. Some of your states have a lower population than we have in our major cities

    wow, you’re not even remotely familiar with our culture or how our political system operates, are you?

  • Redcoat,

    It’s possible to find the endorsement of impossible historical political grievances charming, but you seem to have your arguments a little tangled up. For instance, you charge that the US is guilt on the genocide of the American Indians, and yet I don’t get the impression that you want to return Canada to the French and the Native Americans, nor that you want to evacuate all whites out of Australia and New Zealand.

    Similarly, you blast the US for having a sky high national debt, calling it a pyramid scheme and a third world economy — yet you then praise California whose state debt is so bad that it may need to declare bankruptcy in the next year or two, if it isn’t bailed out by the Federal Government. Not to mention that California was one of the prime offenders in trashing the national economy with the real estate mess over the last six years. (Which was the reason this native Californian bailed for the saner home market of Texas five years ago — where I bought a home that is still worth more than a paid for it and the economy is humming along.)

    The charm of the Torry cause is mostly a conservative one, yet you try to wile people to support it with promises of a socialized welfare state.

    Still, as I say, quixotic historical causes charm my conservative instincts. So I’ll entertain your advocacy of the US rejoining Britain — after you blokes kick out these imported pretenders from Germany. Get some descendants of James II on the throne, or better yet get rid of the silliness of the whole last thousand years and find some descendants of Harold Godwinson and Edith Swanneck.

  • The verge of bankruptcy looms large for the USA as a whole, not just CA, and all because of the American Financial system lending money to people who have no hope of paying it back. Everything is on credit. Other countries in the same predicament are those with dollar reserves. The UK has no reserves linked to the dollar. Apart from anything else I resist the temptation to go with the herd mentality, so called experts, like this Russian Professor, have a 50/50 chance of being proved right/wrong as the case may be. How long ago was it that “experts” were predicting that oil would go to 200 USD? We in the UK are grateful for the US armed services who laid down their lives in WW2, but, in reality, you were acting then as loyalists as we fought our old foe Germany. To say that the US saved the UK from becoming part of the Reich is like a Brit saying that we saved you from speaking French and Spanish (although you seem intent on importing Spanish) because the Royal Navy defeated the combined French and Spanish fleet at Trafalgar and our Royal Rifle brigades who had learnt their trade in the American war, defeated the French at Waterloo. We don’y make that claim because it is too sweeping a generalisation. Prior to the outbreak of WW2 America had many pro German elements. Go to Youtube and dig up the old archive footage of American Nazi footage. “From Detroit they came, from Chigago they came” and so on.
    I love America and visit many times a year, but when I leave I always have the same thought. “It’s a beautiful country but its wasted on the Americans”.

    I was last in Boston and Rhode Island. It’s always the same, the American motorist appears straight out of the 1950’s. For a start the roads in RI are appalling, full of potholes even on the main roads, plus the signage is laughable, as it is allove the US. As a drive sedately along I am overtaken by hill billies in old crocks of SUV’s doing a reckless 80mph in a lump of old iron while shouting into their cellphones. Later I drive past the carnage with a babys pram strewn across the road. This reminds me of the phrase, “What’s the difference between an SUV and a hedgehog” Why, a hedgehog has the pricks on the outside.

  • Redcoat,

    Being descended from Welshman I demand the return of Cymru, and for that matter the rest of Britain to the original (aborigenes in your language) to the Welsh. We have been part of an apartheid system of being forcebly moved to the fringes of Britain and demand our rightful lands returned to us for posterity.

    I demand that all the Germans (Angles and Saxons) and Danes (Jutes) that infest the holy land that is Greater Wales return from whence they came to rectify the wrongs imposed upon us Celts in the name of Owain Glynd?r.

    The Brythoniaid will rise again!

    Sounds a bit off-base doesn’t it? That’s how we ‘colonials’ read your comments.

  • I must admit, there’s a sort of endearing innocence to Redcoats’ pride in the English social welfare institutions. Perhaps he doesn’t realize that when American progressives try to sell the idea of socialized medicine to the populace here they always assure us: “Don’t worry, it won’t be nearly as bad as the UK’s NHS.”

    Still, lest anything think that one has to sound like a yahoo in order to be all Up With the English, you can always check out Flanders and Swan’s “The English Are Best”

    From back when England was comparatively civilized.

  • “To say that the US saved the UK from becoming part of the Reich is like a Brit saying that we saved you from speaking French and Spanish (although you seem intent on importing Spanish) because the Royal Navy defeated the combined French and Spanish fleet at Trafalgar and our Royal Rifle brigades who had learnt their trade in the American war, defeated the French at Waterloo.”

    Napoleon had no designs on America as he proved through the Louisiana purchase. If he had been foolish enough to send a force over against us, I suspect we would have given them the same reception as the elite of the Royal Army under Packenham received from Jackson and his backwoodsmen at New Orleans in 1815. I do feel grateful for the stand the Brits made against the Nazis from 1939-1941 when there was absolutely no hope of victory and they fought on anyway against an evil second to none. That truly was their finest hour.

  • I might also note that my great Uncle Bill, a Newfoundlander, fought in the Royal Army from 1939-1945. When asked why he was enlisting he said, “Someone has to teach the Limies how to fight!” My own father considered enlisting in the Royal Army after marrying my mother in Newfoundland, but when told that he would have to renounce his American citizenship he declined.

  • -To say that the US saved the UK from becoming part of the Reich is like a Brit saying that we saved you from speaking French and Spanish (although you seem intent on importing Spanish)-

    This from a man in whose country many areas are now run under sharia law. We’ll do just fine absorbing the Latin American population, thank you. Talk to us after they put your wife in a burqha, dhimmi.

  • Anyone who thinks that the EU would take Kentucky and Tennessee or that anyone in Texas would be under “Mexican Influence” needs to have a background check done on their credentials. I don’t care how many degrees he has in Russia or how often State TV there interviews him for these beliefs. This man should take a vacation here. Maybe he’ll go back and suggest to the Kremlin that they put Russia up for sale.

  • Tito Edwards – I’m with you on that one as I am Welsh born myself and find it hard to accept the present Prince of Wales who is an English imposter. A penny for your thoughts and a full and frank discussion has been beneficial to us all without descending into personal abuse. It is always very dangerous to tackle Americans on the foundation myth because it is embedded in their hearts like reinforced concrete and surrounded by a peculiar nationilstic fervour that brooks no challenge. Many myths have been perpetuated by the media and this is something I always encourage my American friends to disassemble.

    The myth that parts of the UK are under Muslim law is like saying some parts are under Catholic law. Practising Catholics where ever they live around the world look to the Pope as thier leader. Muslims look to thier spiritual leaders in the same way. This is completely different to having an alien law imposed on you which obviously is not happening. I don’t want to get drawn into to this but I understand the official Catholic line on abortion is pro-life, notwithstanding this, women in the UK are legally entitled to an abortion, a plane lands in England from the Irish Republic every day carrying women coming over for terminations.

    I simply wanted to opine that the Atlantic States would do better to become part of the UK not the EU. Joining the EU would mean swapping American Federalism for European Federalism. Not a lot of difference there then.

    Despite our true Welsh Prince having been decapitated by the English, his head par-boiled and exhibited on a stake on London Bridge, today Wales has its own Parliament, as does Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Its called devolved Government and that is probably what the Atlantic States would enjoy. Thier own elected representatives caring for the interests of their own state. Those who live in Cornwall are treated as part of England.

    The media easily whips up mass hysteria, after all the news bread and butter is “death, shock, and horror” and “If it bleeds, it leads” Tabloid papers leaven this with “Human interest stories” I have felt for some time that the Americans really believe that the UK is in imminent threat of being taken over by Islam. Fear not, the zenith of the Caliph was when Southern Spain was ruled by the Moors, when they tried to advance further north they were defeated by the French.

    Donald R. McClarey – Napoleon had no designs on America but he had plenty on England. It was the French Navy at Yorktown and the French army that sealed the fate of Cornwallis, redoubt 10 was stormed by dissident French units who were promised that their old unit, which had been disbanded, would be reformed if they carried the redoubt.
    Without the French allies Washington may not have enjoyed the success he did. The Spanish as always jumped in to have a go as well. In defeating Napoleon the British learnt form the American campaign of the importance of aimed shot and taking cover. At that time the accepted practice with a musket was the volley and usually because the blood was up, without waiting to reload, the line broke into a bayonet charge.

    Your hunters and backwoodsmen fought differently, not in the European model, as the British Army was trained for. They took cover behind trees and aimed shot picking off the British Officers first. As a result the British Fusiliers then developed into Riflemaen and adopted the same American practice and used it on the battlefieds of Europe against the French who without this lesson still used volleys. For that we have to be thankful.

  • I find the professor theory interesting and in some ways a very big possibility. Think about it, as we are trying to bailout industries to keep our country afloat and we are believing in a new president and hoping that America is prepared for a minority race to lead us into a better future.

    Everybody keeps mentioning that America will not allow this to happen, but we as Americans have also become very spoiled and don’t seem to want to work anymore but expect things to be handed to us. When we don’t get what we want, we find an easier route. What is easier than fixing a trouble country – allowing another country to fix our lives for us.

    For the U.S. to break apart, we are more than likely not believing in the American dream and are in such a depression that we no longer want to try.

    I am not fighting for the Professor’s theory, but I am only speaking about what could be possbile sometime. To believe that it absolutely won’t happen is to be in denial as every country and government has to rise and fall. Whether we do it together or just give up is going to depend on what morals and values we have invested into the future generations.

  • California has a GDP just below that of the UK, it seems to many that a prosperous state such as CA is subsidising the non productive states. Some of your states have a lower population than we have in our major cities.

    Be careful about linking productivity to population. Wyoming has the least population in the union, only around 500,000 (counting tourists), and yet we run a huge budget surplus thanks to our resources. California for a number of years has either run a budget deficit or has barely gotten by. Moreover, due to their laws, they can’t provide all of their own energy needs. We in Wyoming launder our energy through Oregon, which is then presented to California as “green”. You could claim that we Wyomingites do more than our fair share.

    But there’s no problem with any one state subsidizing other states in the union, anymore than there’s a problem with a rich district in a city subsidizing the poor district. That’s part and parcel of being a union.

  • Redcoat,

    You won’t find malice here at American Catholic (I hope). Your ideas and thoughts are certainly provocative and welcomed here.

    I’m not to bothered by Wales ajoined to England, but I find it insincere to put a German as the Prince of Wales, especially the current holder since he holds almost no Christian values at heart.

    I’m aware of the devolved government under Tony Blair, though if I were an Englishman I would have fought it tooth and nails. From a secular point of view it just adds another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy.

    I’ve only recently have been studying and learning more about my wonderful Welsh ancestry and I do like where Wales stands now, attached as unified kingdom under English with the Scots and Irish. Though I strongly oppose ANY integration whatsoever into the E.U.

    In Jesus, Mary, & Joseph,

    Tito

  • Tito,

    Llandilo was the coldest part of the UK last night with a temperature of -14C. It is easy to get to South Wales on the M4 motorway which runs from West London, past Heathrow, practically to Ammanford. Our family along with most inhabitants of these islands have oftened discussed emmigrating. My namesake sailed to Madagascar in 1792, some family went to Fargo, USA, in the 1800’s, but I decided against North America after hearing that an Uncle who went to Canada was killed in the first week when two trains met head on. Many Welsh Christians left to make a promised land, they still speak Welsh in parts of Patagonia, South America. Simon Jenkins was going to write a book on 1,000 Welsh churches, but he was pipped by someone who brought out 100 churches of Wales. He now has a book called “Wales”

    A hat tip to Wyoming, I don’t know if that State was in the dust bowl, but as a family of Welsh farmers, the intensive cultivation of US farmland was hotly debated. Big can be good but sometimes it pays to think small. The US, to us, has the advantage of being 50 countries in middle America, who have sufficient mass to trade with each other. The disadvantage is lack of competition, and the US auto industry is an example.

    I would say the Welsh are happy with their lot. With a devolved Parliament the nationlistic urge is curbed, while introducing beneficial laws for the Welsh (such as free medicines, prescribed by Doctor’s, something they also enjoy in Scotland, so much so, that some English towns on the borders want to join Wales or Scotland) while we still have the embracing arm of being governed centrally.

    If the Atlantic States did revert to the UK I now see a problem, namely many descendants of loyalist families would probably sue for the return of land, property, and businesses confiscated (stolen) by the rebels. These claims could end in in the European courts which are processing many similar claims of Eastern Europeans who had their estates confiscated by the Communist Soviets.

    The hypothesis of the break up of the USA is just that, but nothing can be ruled out, after all our own Defence plans includes the possibility of another war with the US
    with Russia as allies. Russia now free of Communism sits on the fence between Europe and Asia. Under Soviet domination it resembled the US with all countries combining to form one whole. This is where their manpower came from, mainly Asia. Now it is split apart and and we can see what the Russian Proffessor is getting at. The Baltic States favour Europe. Swedes fly and sail to Estonia to do their shopping. European countries are standing in line to join NATO and the EU. What we see today in the break up of the Soviet Union could then be a possibility for the US. But, while the Soviet countries stayed as countries, with their own culture, history, religion and culture, suppressed and now released, the US States are uniformily the same, up to now sharing a common language (albeit somewhat mangled) and an Anlgo Saxon heritage, so the balance is the other way.

  • Nice welcome to join the eu.
    we can use more people to start a war and kill everyone agains us.
    Like: Tito Edwards and Redcoat enz, enz.

  • Hey!! What does this russian think he’s doing? Everyone down south knows that we’d stick together! It’s time to rise again! lol -Arkansas

  • The south will rise again – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opxuUj6vFa4

    There is no way that wealthy states will pay for the debt of liberal states in the north. I dont see a civil war as much as I just see a sucession of Texas followed by about 6 other states to form their own country.

    The USA is not going to last- as much as it hurts to say.

  • 4/26/08
    9:45 am

    my soul does see…before the peace
    another zugzwang activity.
    it’s all to real;
    we’re failing with direction.
    corporate scandals and corruption thunders
    confidence in the dollar continues to wane,
    a 4th marker of crude happens on exchange
    with alarming rise
    the petro euro allures the eyes of dubai.
    nymex and ipe must do
    what naturally comes next,
    and this leaves the [u.s.]
    with little trust;
    executed by the posion pawn,
    a trick box of economic destruction.
    abaddon thunder
    behind the veil
    has stolen foreign reserves
    and the dollar no longer services debt
    through investors on dragon shores.
    my soul does see…the collapse of
    [u.s.] soveriegnty.

  • Newton has nothing to do with climate I just like inventors, philosophers, poets. Sorry im a nerd. I love history also. To me life is a paradox. Ill leave im just a 20 something year old in the the medical field. By the way you guys some on here have great agruments, would make good lawyers. ;)! Merci!

  • Sorry, im trying to learn more about our economy and politics and I found some nice people who responded. Can someone tell me what do mean a cival war is going to happen so I can book a plane trip to Europe now and start packing. :`(

  • Do you honestly believe they will let Mexico just have Texas with all the oil?? And some of the largest US military bases and commands are in the areas predicted to go to Mexico??? Come on, Mexico can’t take care of itself now. What has this Professor correctly predicted in the past anyway?

    The economy and climate changes should be watched, but I am not about to loose any sleep over a civil war happening in the horizon.

  • Yesterday they said climate was fraud and it wasn’t a concern and they backed it up with websites and it was on the news and that they are just trying to scare americans. I got bashed for it. 🙁

  • Well, its December 15 with no civil war. It sounds like another conspiracy theory out the window. Of course Pak Alert Press is saying something about Obama organizing something around one million troops for possible civil war by the end of winter 2010. Well see.

  • This is December 29, 2009. The Russian professor said that civil war would break out in November of 2009. He also said that if this did not happen he has a ready explanation. Civil war has not started. We are still here. I looked for the explanation and have not found it. Anyone know where it is?

  • Our Lady of Fatima said “Nations will be annihilated”.
    She specifically didn’t say in what way they will be annihilated. Very bluntly, I would take the Russian Professor seriously, as the Church say’s, God will not be mocked!!!
    Abortion, 50% divorce rate. lukewarmness especially by us “Roman Catholic’s, pathetic LOW numbers of men and women willing to sacrifice themselves( but willing to sacrifice themselves for worldly things, career’s that most likely won ‘t help them get to Heaven actually for real when they die ) for the Kingdom of God by joining Roman Catholic Religious Order’s.
    Pathetic low numbers of Roman Catholic’s going to confession every week and or a month thus presumption they are receiving Holy Communion worthily.
    People having more faith in secular medical than than in the power of the keys, namely Christ Jesus healed people from being crippled, etc by absolving them of their sins.
    Sin’s of the3 parent’s and their little children get to suffer the consequences because the parent’s or grand parent’s or great grand parents ( sin’s of the parent’s past on to the 3rd or 4th generation ) didn’t make enough satisfactory amends either by invincible innocent ignorance or by culpable ignorance or actually knew and blew it off as it was nothing.

  • Pingback: Russian Professor Predicts Breakup of US in 2010 - INGunOwners
  • Son of a gun! Looks like he was right! Look at what’s happening in Arizona – the federal government has refused to protect its citizens! Look what’s happened in DC – a socialist is now president of the US!!

  • The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, how does a nation that is ethnically diverse from sea to shining sea devoid along ethnic lines? This guy is a fool think god he is one of their best! How will Mexico gain control over the South East? Mexico is close to spliting into different parts not The USA. Why don’t he just call it an Aztec empire? I would think they would go for Arazona before the South East USA really this guy is stupid and knows little about the history of North America. Mexico has white flight trust me I am a Taxi driver in Austin, Texas it is plan to see they are fleeing Mexico and buying homes in west Austin. The US immigration problem makes it hard for people of Native decent to come here legally not people of European decent. How would that whole Mexican thing go over in the South East a place where Native American ancestry is very common? Oh yeah and the kill ratio is about 100-1 btw really dude get real!

  • I just wanted to make a comment here. I read only a few posts but enough to give my opinion. I live in Canada and believe me Canada is in no situation to swallow up any part of the US. What we are all afraid of including the American people is this NAU known as the North American Union. We all don’t want any part of it. We are all different even though we have a lot in common with the US. We are great neighbors and want to keep it that way but we are very different in our outlooks and politics. There is going to be a great deal of problems in the US and it is just starting to come to fruition and there will be problems here in Canada as well since so much is multicultural. There are problems in Europe as well and nobody is going to not feel the lumps of what is coming. If you follow the alternative news instead of just mainstream you will learn so much more. All this is done by design by the globalists (secret societies and all) to get us at each others throats. If we don’t jump on one another then we win and they lose. Who do you think did away with our jobs and outsourced them to China, India, etc. Mexico is suffering badly folks. Lately Russian military aircraft have been invading our airspace here in Canada so that is a worry. I do know that they are in tanglements with our government over the Arctic to want to take some of it for their oil drilling as well as some European countries. I don’t put anything past anybody anymore for what I know what is going on. I do know that the US is bankrupt and printing money to survive which will lead to Weimar Germany type of hyperinflation. The US was the greatest economy of the world and now look at what happened. Honestly it will take more decades to pay back if not longer than what any of us will ever see in our lifetime. I do know that Russia and China have their sites on the US so everyone wake up and not let the globalists and secret societies of the world turn us all into slaves. Remember the book in school called 1984 well people that is what is happening and I used to think that it was a very stupid book – fiction – well come to find out it wasn’t fiction but reality. Take care everybody and hold on for the ride. The world’s leaders are only puppets and the real power is behind the screen.