Soros, Putin Speeches Give Fascinating Glimpse Into Political Climate, Coming European Collapse

Soros, Putin Speeches Give Fascinating Glimpse Into Political Climate, Coming European Collapse
December 30, 2016 Admin

Vladimir Putin and George Soros have each provided us fascinating glimpses into modern geopolitics this week.

Putin’s came in the form of a three and a half-hour-plus news conference with Russian and foreign journalists, and Soros’ in the form of a written article in some journal called Project Syndicate.

I have read each in their entirety today and it is very interesting seeing how both describe the current global political climate and the events of 2016.

Putin’s speech is the less newsworthy of the two but he makes some very interesting statements and allusions in it. Soros’ is both much shorter and to the point, and has some hopeful elements for those who share our thoughts on Europe.

Below I will shares quotes from each and my thoughts on them, starting with the transcript of Putin’s press conference.

Putin on Russian military strength:

Putin: If you listened carefully to what I said yesterday, I talked about strengthening the nuclear triad and in conclusion said that the Russian Federation was stronger than any potential – and this is key – aggressor. This is a very important point, and not an incidental one.

What does it mean to be an aggressor? An aggressor is someone who can attack the Russian Federation. We are stronger than any potential aggressor. I have no problem repeating it.

I also said why we are stronger. This has to do with the effort to modernise the Russian Armed Forces, as well as the history and geography of our country, and the current state of Russian society. There are a whole host of reasons, not least the effort to modernise the Armed Forces, including both conventional weapons and the nuclear triad.

Putin, after being asked about meddling in the 2016 Presidential Election to help Trump get elected:

Putin: I have commented on this issue on a number of occasions. If you want to hear it one more time, I can say it again. The current US Administration and leaders of the Democratic Party are trying to blame all their failures on outside factors. I have questions and some thoughts in this regard.

We know that not only did the Democratic Party lose the presidential election, but also the Senate, where the Republicans have the majority, and Congress, where the Republicans are also in control. Did we, or I also do that? We may have celebrated this on the “vestiges of a 17th century chapel,” but were we the ones who destroyed the chapel, as the saying goes? This is not the way things really are. All this goes to show that the current administration faces system-wide issues, as I have said at a Valdai Club meeting.

It seems to me there is a gap between the elite’s vision of what is good and bad and that of what in earlier times we would have called the broad popular masses. I do not take support for the Russian President among a large part of Republican voters as support for me personally, but rather see it in this case as an indication that a substantial part of the American people share similar views with us on the world’s organisation, what we ought to be doing, and the common threats and challenges we are facing. It is good that there are people who sympathise with our views on traditional values because this forms a good foundation on which to build relations between two such powerful countries as Russia and the United States, build them on the basis of our peoples’ mutual sympathy.

I find the end of that last section very interesting because it almost perfectly mirrors an article I wrote back in the fall called ‘Identitarians In The Sandbox’, pointing out the utter outrage Rachel Maddow (on the left) and various neocons (on the ‘right’) showed at Trump supporters cheering Nigel Farage and liking Vladimir Putin. In it I pointed to the fact that Russia is now far more culturally and demographically similar to 1950’s America- or present-day rural America- than the modern United States as a whole is, and that this is why Republican voters now sympathize with it to such an extent. To make a play upon the common refrain that one often hears at election time, that the state of Pennsylvania is- culturally and politically- “Philadelphia and Pittsburgh with Alabama in between”, then the United States as whole could now be called ‘New York and Los Angeles with Russia in between”.

The fact that Putin is saying something similar is highly interesting.

He also speaks about Donald Trump’s victory against the odds:

Putin: They would be better off not taking the names of their earlier statesmen in vain, of course. I’m not so sure who might be turning in their grave right now. It seems to me that Reagan would be happy to see his party’s people winning everywhere, and would welcome the victory of the newly elected President so adept at catching the public mood, and who took precisely this direction and pressed onwards to the very end, even when no one except us believed he could win. (Applause).

Putin, after being asked whether Obama really did tell him- in regards to hacking and election interference- to “cut it out” (classic wimpy Obama-ism I might add):

Putin: As concerns interference and what we discussed with President Obama. You may have noticed that I never speak about the private conversations I have with my colleagues.

On the hacks themselves and the Democrat Party response:

Putin: First, about the interference. I already responded to one of your fellow journalists from the United States. The defeated party always tries to blame somebody on the outside. They should be looking for these problems closer to home.

Everybody keeps forgetting the most important point. For example, some hackers breached email accounts of the US Democratic Party leadership. Some hackers did that. But, as the President-elect rightly noted, does anyone know who those hackers were? Maybe they came from another country, not Russia. Maybe somebody just did it from their couch or bed. These days, it is very easy to designate a random country as the source of attack while being in a completely different location.

But is this important? I think the most important thing is the information that the hackers revealed to the public. Did they compile or manipulate the data? No, they did not. What is the best proof that the hackers uncovered truthful information? The proof is that after the hackers demonstrated how public opinion had been manipulated within the Democratic Party, against one candidate rather than the other, against candidate Sanders, the Democratic National Committee Chairperson resigned. This means she admitted that the hackers revealed the truth. Instead of apologising to the voters and saying, “Forgive us, our bad, we will never do this again,” they started yelling about who was behind the attacks. Is that important?

Again, on the Democrats:

Putin: But it is very clear that the party which calls itself Democratic and will remain in power until January 20, I think, has forgotten the original meaning of its name. This is particularly so if you look at the absolutely shameless way they used administrative resources in their favour, and the calls to not accept the voters’ decision and appeals to the electors. As I already said, this is not a good thing. But I hope that once the electoral passions have died down, America, which is a great country, will draw the needed conclusions and keep them in mind for future elections.

The above quotes represent only a tiny amount of the 3.5 hour long press conference, but overall I would say that Putin seemed hyper-aware of the cultural issues at play today geopolitically- the ‘metapolitics’ almost. He also expressed repeated irritation at ‘the forces of globalism’. At different points in the press conference that was the Democrats in the U.S., EU bureaucrats, reporters asking him about ‘civil rights’ in Russia, etc.

He also seemed highly confident in the speech. Another two observations I had, which are probably precipitated more by the fact that I have not read Putin’s speeches widely before, were 1) his mastery of economics, which was profound (I would encourage everyone to read the first part of the speech which is mostly economic- his discussion of it seemed far deeper than most politicians one hears, and 2) what could be called perhaps sentimentality(?) or (unexpected) gentleness, for instance when he speaks out against slapping one’s children (corporal punishment) and a couple other spots like that. Also of interest perhaps were his comments on demographics in which he lauded his nation’s current positive net population growth (more births than deaths).


If Putin’s speech had somewhat more implicit relevance to our cause, George Soros’ article was much more direct. The overall tone could be described as bitter and moderately resigned yet somewhat frenetic (at least for Soros, whose writings I have read more widely).

The title is “Open Society Needs Defending”, and is Soros at his most classic.

Soros: I was an avid supporter of the European Union from its inception. I regarded it as the embodiment of the idea of an open society: an association of democratic states willing to sacrifice part of their sovereignty for the common good.

This is the overriding vision. Globalism and open borders in Europe= “the common good”.

Soros: The rise of anti-EU movements further impeded the functioning of institutions. And these forces of disintegration received a powerful boost in 2016, first from Brexit, then from the election of Trump in the US, and on December 4 from Italian voters’ rejection, by a wide margin, of constitutional reforms.

Democracy is now in crisis. Even the US, the world’s leading democracy, elected a con artist and would-be dictator as its president. Although Trump has toned down his rhetoric since he was elected, he has changed neither his behavior nor his advisers. His cabinet comprises incompetent extremists and retired generals.

There is a note of rage and alarm in his rhetoric that I have not quite seen before in other, past Soros articles.

He also offers predictions on the US:

Soros: I am confident that democracy will prove resilient in the US. Its Constitution and institutions, including the fourth estate, are strong enough to resist the excesses of the executive branch, thus preventing a would-be dictator from becoming an actual one.

But the US will be preoccupied with internal struggles in the near future, and targeted minorities will suffer. The US will be unable to protect and promote democracy in the rest of the world. On the contrary, Trump will have greater affinity with dictators. That will allow some of them to reach an accommodation with the US, and others to carry on without interference. Trump will prefer making deals to defending principles. Unfortunately, that will be popular with his core constituency.

Soros’ greatest worries emerge when he begins discussing Europe, however.

Soros: I am particularly worried about the fate of the EU, which is in danger of coming under the influence of Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose concept of government is irreconcilable with that of open society. Putin is not a passive beneficiary of recent developments; he worked hard to bring them about. He recognized his regime’s weakness: it can exploit natural resources but cannot generate economic growth. He felt threatened by “color revolutions” in Georgia, Ukraine, and elsewhere. At first, he tried to control social media. Then, in a brilliant move, he exploited social media companies’ business model to spread misinformation and fake news, disorienting electorates and destabilizing democracies. That is how he helped Trump get elected.

The same is likely to happen in the European election season in 2017 in the Netherlands, Germany, and Italy. In France, the two leading contenders are close to Putin and eager to appease him. If either wins, Putin’s dominance of Europe will become a fait accompli.

I do not know whether the latter paragraph is simply Soros giving voice to his fears, or represents his legitimate prediction for what will happen. If a legitimate prediction, then 2017 surely would be a year of change! The Italian election was positive, but if Geert Wilders wins in the Netherlands and Merkel somehow loses in Germany,  that would represent a pretty monumental shift (especially if it includes a le Pen win in France).

Soros calls this potentiality a ‘victory for Putin’ and states that it would allow for Putin’s “dominance” of Europe. This seems hyperbolic but perhaps Soros is speaking what is to him an emotional truth more than a literal one. Or he expects the type of people who read his articles will believe it anyway.

It is this question of likelihoods that is key however. Surely were Nationalists to come to power across Western Europe and rollback all of the mass-immigration, nutjob liberalism, ethno-masochism, and cultural suicide that has been achieved in the last forty years, that would be the death of all that Soros has pushed for, but such an ‘electoral Reconquista’ does not strike me as likely at this juncture, whatever Soros’ temporarily fearful ramblings might be.

Those of us fighting and praying for such a Reconquest know that it can only come once Western Europe disintegrates, K-Selection ramps up, and native Europeans are truly-confronted with their own existential-mortality. Soros’ article provides hope of that kind too however, as the concluding two paragraphs show:

Soros: I hope that Europe’s leaders and citizens alike will realize that this endangers their way of life and the values on which the EU was founded. The trouble is that the method Putin has used to destabilize democracy cannot be used to restore respect for facts and a balanced view of reality.

With economic growth lagging and the refugee crisis out of control, the EU is on the verge of breakdown and is set to undergo an experience similar to that of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. Those who believe that the EU needs to be saved in order to be reinvented must do whatever they can to bring about a better outcome.

A “breakdown” similar to what the Soviet Union went through in the early 1990’s would be a drastic, historic development in Western Europe. If Soros truly thinks that is coming- if that is not fearful hyperbole on his part- then that is a game changer indeed.

For it means that Western Europe would have the political vacuum and existential catalysts needed for Reconquest to occur. Soros and the evils he has wrought in Europe, which leaders like Merkel brought forth through their zealous religious devotion to Cultural-Marxism and ethnic-suicide, would be cleansed from the land. The issue of Islam and Islamic invasion would be dealt with in one way or another. “Blood and soil” European homelands would be created, dedicated to preserving our people’s heritage and history.

It is a beautiful and hopeful vision which at this time seems far, far away, but given the developments that have Soros so worried, it is seeming more and more possible every day.



*Feedback Highly Welcomed*

Brothers: What thoughts have you on these speeches and tidings? Do Soros’ statements give you hope? What does 2017 have in store for Europe?

Comments (32)

  1. SteveRogers42 12 months ago

    Mr. Putin is a great, great leader. As the only European Nationalist currently in power, he has done tremendous work as a barrier to the Globalists — in Syria, in Crimea, and in the world of ideas. I look forward eagerly to the spectacle of Trump and Putin working together to set things right. There is absolutely no reason that the American and Russian nations should be enemies — friendly competitors, yes, but enemies no more!

    Since we know that Mr. Trump’s emissaries have opened up lines of communication with Nationalist parties in France and Austria, it is only fair to assume that the Russians have been doing the same thing, only more so. (For instance, his activities in support of the Greek Orthodox Church on Mt. Athos.) In this 4GW environment, Russia (and soon the U.S.) will be poised to openly operate in support of the liberation of Occupied Europe. Why, it’s almost like we’re gettin’ the band back together!

    Soros’ words are like the buzzing of Beelzebub’s flies. Since he is an apprentice Deceiver, who knows what his words mean? Why he has not assumed room temperature long ago is a mystery — probably has something to do with rituals that would drive H.P. Lovecraft insane. We can only hope that his Master calls him home to Lake Napalm soon.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Lol great way to put it. I hope he is called away soon too. Perhaps not before he sees our triumph though and all that he has wrought destroyed.

      A Saruman level turnaround a la LOTR is perhaps too much to hope for, but it would be great to see Soros get his comeuppance.

  2. Rick 12 months ago

    Interesting thoughts, In contrast to you I’m very familiar to Putin, actually I use to live in Eastern Ukraine (the Russian part), and I have to say I have always been impressed with his ability to speak in depth and with knowledge on a wide array of subjects especially economic systems, geo politics and history and from what i have experienced he is genuinely popular with average Russians.
    Soros has only been on my radar for maybe a year or so, and I don’t think I’ve even seen a statement directly from him before.
    I think he is trying to stir up his base, so to speak. Both of the major victories that we have seen this year (Brexit & Trump) occurred amidst some complacency on the left which most likely hurt their turnout. Austria was also very nearly an upset the first time around and I imagine the turnout was higher in the second election that Hofer lost.
    Either way, I think our side is gaining strength of course, but i expect the left to turn up the heat in 2017 interesting times I believe the most committed side will win and we will know who that is within the next 24 months.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Yes interesting thoughts..

      In America at least I think one possible good (and likely) scenario would be the Democrats sort of pulling a ‘Corbyn’ and following suit with the labor party, in which the idealogue true believers on the Progressive side use their power to put in fellow true believers (like they did Corbyn in the UK) to the detriment of the more realistic side of the party and to the detriment of their political success. If the Democrats in the US allow Keith Elison to become DNC Chair I believe that will be their ‘Corbyn moment’, as it would make the left wing base very happy, but be poison to their electoral hopes anywhere other than the nutjob leftwing coastal areas.

  3. lonetigerandcub 12 months ago

    On the subject of the George Soros interview, I too was thinking that what he said could very well be a rallying cry for his many minions. I hope that he is truly in fear of losing control over Europe and the U.S., it would definitely signal a chance at cultural liberation. As far as Putin is concerned, I am cautiously optimistic. While working to free Europe from its bonds of ideological slavery and suicide, we must be careful not to make deals with devils in order accomplish our goals. While I am not a subscriber to the latest “red scare”, it would be easy for Russian nationalism to become Russian expansionism under his control or for him to send troops into Europe in order to “help maintain peace” if/when Europe does collapse.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Hey lonetigerandcub- Thanks for the comment – very well-reasoned.

      I agree, I think cautious optimism is the proper response. I think as far as Russia goes vis a vis our goals and Western Europe’s future, the question will come down to whether Russia and the Visegrad Nations can work together to positively influence events on the Western side of the continent. If they can, and they proactively work to back resistance movements there, and outspokenly oppose and condemn the suicidalists and traitors, then I think much good could come. If their mutual distrust and animosity causes one side or the other to orient themselves more with Western Europe however, that would be the opposite.

      One tangent that I have been thinking of involves parallels with the 1930’s/40’s, when two totalitarian ideologies (Nazism and Communism) agreed to ignore their differences temporarily in order to achieve short term goals, compared to today, when two similarly totalitarian ideologies (Progressivism and Islam) seem to be doing something roughly similar, in terms of benefiting from each other or ignoring their mutual exclusivity short term (on the side of the Progressives at least) or at least taking advantage of each other. I think this iteration of such events will have just as disastrous effects as the first time around unfortunately.

  4. Laguna Beach Fogey 12 months ago

    I have been impressed by Putin’s class and restraint. My admiration increases.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      I agree Laguna Beach. I am always hesitant of liking Putin ‘just because’ Hillary and Soros and all our other enemies dislike him. That would be a little too simplistic (or ‘reductive’ as the liblabs like to say). And I am sure he does do many extra-legal skull-crushing type things. Yet, given the chaos that reigned in Russia before he took charge, its quite possible the alternatives would be worse. With that being the case I certainly am willing to admit that he is an impressive, charismatic figure, whose views on cultural issues seem much more in line with ours. I don’t think he is an Identitarian, to use that word broadly, or at least no more than an implicit one, and I think his loyalties and emotions are to Russia far more than any other designation. Yet he is an inspiration for his strength and demeanor, and for the fact that he has resisted the inroad of ‘modernizers’ like Soros et all who would seek to depose him and turn Russia into a land of Wells Fargos and gay bars, and then flood it with Muslim immigrants just as they have done across Western Europe.

  5. SteveRogers42 12 months ago
    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      God-Bless that AnonCon, glad we have his mind on our side he is a smart fellow.

      It was interesting I even heard some pretty mainstream Republican talk-show hosts saying that (quote-unquote) “Puting alpha-maled Obama”. One of the ones who said this was even a fill in for Glenn Beck on The Blaze… very interesting stuff…

  6. Rick 12 months ago

    The challenge in the US will be Trump staying the course and not drifting into a “fiscal conservative, social liberal” position.
    In Canada we had a right wing populist movement opposed to Multiculturalism that started 25 years ago called the Reform Party, It became the dominant party in Western Canada and merged with the Progressive Conservative party (which was a greatly diminished party at the time) together they formed the Conservative party and won the National election in 2006 under Stephen Harper.
    In the 9 years of power they made some minor economic improvements and did nothing to even slow down immigration or social movements like gay marriage. Now the SJW in chief Trudeau is in power and I think most people would consider Canada like Sweden “Unsaveable” So “Cucking” is far more dangerous than anything the left will do.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Well said Rick. I knew of Harper back when I was still half liberal in 08, and he is one of those politicians I both hated both when I was a liberal (because he was big on the war on drugs and harsh prison sentences and against alot of the sort of libertarian stuff I was focused on) and once I became a conservative (and now far-right deplorable Identitarian). I would say Lindsey Graham and John McCain and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore would be some of the others.

      There is a fantastic article on Counter-Currents today called ‘Make Modernity Great Again’ that talks about some of the same stuff in your comment- basically the relationship between ‘progress’, conservatives, progressives, and fascism and why conservatives have so wholly failed to stop ‘progress’ even as it gets more and more sick/crazy/extreme/demented.

  7. Abelard Lindsey 12 months ago

    I dislike and disagree with both Putin and Soros. The difference is that, as an American living in America, Putin has no desire to have influence over me. Soros does. And that makes Soros far worse than Putin.

    I stopped viewing Russia as an enemy on December 25th, 1991. I see no reason to view it as one today.

    Soros, on the other hand, is a liar and hypocrite with his call for an “open” society. A truly open society would be one largely free of government regulation that will allow small to medium sized business to compete with the large corporations. What Soros wants is not an “open” society, but rather a neo-feudal one where the well-connected get to operate world-side and everyone else who is not connected is limited and hamstrung by all matter of government regulations, intended to combat hoaxes such as “climate” change.

    In other words, Reagan believed and worked to create the open society. Soros is working to create a closed society based on crony capitalism, then lie to us by calling it an “open” society.

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Reagan did have his faults, as Rick points out below (the mass amnesty move particularly boils my blood) but I think you are right that there is a significant difference between the kind of societies that folks like Reagan created or sought to create, vs what Soros represents.

      I think my ideal economic system for our potential ‘post reconquest’ societies would be a one that maximized small business and asset ownership, and sought for ‘every man to be his own master’ as they say. It would be capitalistic all the way, but not capitalism in terms of multinational corporations and rich global elites like Soros controlling everything, but rather capitalistic on a micro level. Sort of like the Shire in Lord of the Rings. I have written about this before but can’t help but belabor it when economic questions come up 🙂

      And yes I agree 110% on the barriers to small business. Having owned and operated several small businesses myself, the regulations make it quite onerous. It is still a million times better in the US than Europe though as far as I can tell. Indeed the UK is particularly horrible. They just changed the laws there so that small scale real estate investors/landlords can no longer write off the interest payments they make on the rentals they own that have mortgages on them- this is significant because it means many of those rentals went from cashflowing 100-200$ profits per month, to now LOSING money each month. The UK did this in part because there is so much animus in the media and society against any form of capitalism, and people there demonize these small time landlords, but what is most sick and awful about the story is that they still allow large corporations to write off that interest! So basically what they have done is shifted it so that rental houses will be far more likely to be owned by huge multinational companies than by regular UK citizens. Now of course this pals to importing in millions of Muslims and allowing them to rape and torture your nation’s children, but it is a perfect example of the kind of small policies that favor those like Soros, and hurt those ‘regular folks’ that are what make societies function.

  8. Rick 12 months ago

    Reagan unfortunately gave amnesty to about 3 million illegal immigrants back in the 80’s, in exchange for border security which let’s be honest has never materialized, and California has been a blue state ever since.
    So in some ways his open society produced a similar result to George Soros’

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      (A tangent related to the southern born and illegal immigration) I am hopeful that Mexico’s economy- which looks to thrive over the next 30 years if they can keep their act together- will be a pull factor bringing lots of their people back home form the US. If Trump’s policies can act as a push factor, then we might see pretty darn organic ‘repatriation’ that undoes what Reagan/Clinton/Bush/Obama wrought over the last few decades.

      That depends on Trump holding strong though and border security and non-amnesty not being derailed by the likes of Soros and his minions, which is an outcome that is unfortunately still far from clear…

  9. Moggy 12 months ago

    As far as 2017 in Europe is concerned, I confess to cautious cynicism. Despite the brave efforts of many patriotic CENTRISTS, the Statist Far Left reactionary Establishment forces are keeping a brutally tight lid on events. So far. Those who march and protest against the invading Muslim hordes, are systematically labelled “Far Right” by a still fearful and Government compliant media. Bought and paid for. Anybody who has read Tommy Robinson’s rather excellent book (“Enemy of the State”) will end up marvelling at how totally stitched up the Legal and Police system was -and is- against him. And what a tough, stubborn, loveable cuss of a fellow he is. Paul Golding of Britain First is now undergoing the exact same rough treatment. Tossed into a prison choca-bloc full and effectively run by mad Muslim firebrands. Protected by a thin blue line of demoralized, cowed prison wardens, living in daily fear of violating some nut job’s sacred rights. And losing their jobs. Reading the stories of these two men, any fair observer will conclude several things: 1) there’s nothing “far Right” about these guys. They are just working class Patriots, centrists, expressing widely held popular sentiments, and clamoring against obvious abuses, such as rampant grooming gangs, and creeping (Creeping? More like galloping) Shariah Brutality and Misogyny. I refuse to call it “Law”. 2) The unequal treatment of screaming, wide eyed Muslim hotheads versus the treatment of native Patriots is quite startling. What’s perfectly good for the fearsome Muslim Goose, hysterically screaming death threats via megaphone in public and blocking streets, anything goes, is NOT good for the much more politely speaking, somewhat bemused Patriot Gander. The poor -stunned- Gander is allowed barely one thousandth of what the damn Goose can pull off. 3) There is still a long way to go to arouse Europeans out of their long and perilous slumber. The Chamberlain and Munich style appeasement brigades are still hard at it, tediously wrapping themselves in the inevitable flowing mantle of righteousness and claims of moral superiority. Not to mention arrogantly always laying claim to superior intellect and academic understanding of issues that are far too complicated for the alleged uneducated, unwashed and ragged masses to comprehend. 4) However, whispers are coming out of the also inevitable hardening of attitudes in some quarters. Across Europe, from Sweden to Brussels, and from Italy to Newcastle, embittered young men are forming into different organisations, with different command structures, determined to defend their culture and loved ones. It is open knowledge that the Muslim radicals are well armed, and that further military grade hardware continues to pour in from eastern Europe. The weapons for the Paris massacre as just one of many examples, were bought in Molenbeek, Brussels, and, if you were a flowing beard and pyjamas, and look the Allahu Akbar part, the acquisition of an AK 47 takes you about twenty minutes and 500 Euros. Such well documented absurdities, coupled to ongoing bloody massacres and carnage, inevitably is producing a reaction. A stealthy counter arming, possibly with the aid of CNC technology, much to the alarm of whining politicians, and exhausted Police Forces. So, yes, 2017 will not be a breakthrough for our cause, but it will likely mark steady progress. Let’s hope we can yet get around around to cooking that fearsome Goose…

    • Author
      Admin 12 months ago

      Let’s hope so indeed.

      Our commenter Nxx brought to my attention the term ‘anarcho-tyranny’ to describe the conditions you reference, in which one population (Muslim immigrants) is allowed to run roughshod over the laws, violating them at will and terrorizing/raping/enslaving other groups as they please, while those other groups (native Brits) are subject to overwhelmingly strict interpretation of the law (years in jail for leaving bacon near mosque, then getting killed in prison).

      • Francis Meyrick 12 months ago

        Yes, I saw that. Slamming Paul Golding in a Muzzie run prison, and endangering his life, surrounded by Allah Ack-Ack-(cough) retards, is a sign of how desperate the British Establishment is to muzzle the centrist, popular protest movement by any and all means. I think they know they are losing. Their appeasement-surrender policy is being increasingly challenged by the people. I smell gun powder.

        • Author
          Admin 12 months ago

          That would be a positive smell indeed.

  10. SteveRogers42 11 months ago

    We now have a literally God-given opportunity being handed to us:

    This chance will not come again in our lifetimes.

    • Author
      Admin 11 months ago

      I agree completely Steve. Indeed if America can survive roughly intact, as opposed to becoming North Brazil or something similar, I think people will look back decades hence and see the last year as the fundamental reshaping of Occidental geopolitics.

      I think the future of the Occidental world is an America- Eastern Europe- Russia triangle. Western Europe is doomed. We may be able to save some of it but those areas will never be more than small outposts within a tide of Islamic misery. Eastern Europe will be the cultural home of our people, and Russia and the US will be the two remaining majority white powers on earth aligned with it.

      At least that is what I am thinking lately. Of course it is possible Trump is deposed and America does become Brazil. OR, that America fractures into several small nation states, etc.

      How would you like to see the next couple years progressing vis a vis Trump/Russia/etc?

  11. SteveRogers42 11 months ago

    Ordinarily, I wouldn’t be bold enough to offer an opinion in a public forum because I’m not a subject-matter expert. I’m sure you have readers who have lived in Russia/EE and other readers with greater formal education on this topic. However, I think that we are entering a period in history where instincts and emotion trump (heh) logic and pure reason, and in that context I think that my impressions may have some value. Truly, we are now in uncharted waters and “there’s something going on.”*
    I have always felt that history has dealt the people of Russia a lousy hand. From the Mongols, through the Czars and the commies, it’s been a legacy of poverty and oppression, broken only occasionally by a brief light of hope. The poor bastards have never really had a chance, and on top of that, they’ve always been excluded from the Cool Kids Club of Europe due to their “backwardness” and “barbarism”. Now comes Mr. Putin, a pragmatic nationalist who certainly appears to be acting in the best interests of his country and his people. He doesn’t run his country the way Jimmy Stewart would run a New England town meeting, but IMHO, it’s the best deal Russia has ever had.
    Now the zeitgeist has put Donald By-God Trump into office in the U.S., and Mr. Putin has a fellow alpha male with whom to work. My belief is that the two of them will understand each other perfectly, and come to an agreement that 1) We have no vital national interests which collide with one another, and 2) We are in imminent danger from a mutual enemy. On a deeper level, both men are committed anti-Globalists, and that struggle will be the defining issue of our lifetimes.
    Those factors will provide the background for unprecedented cooperation in every area, from the practical to the symbolic. (Mr. Trump mentioned “unlocking the mysteries of space” during his inaugural address. Can you imagine the diplomatic and psychological value of a joint USA-Russia Mars expedition? The possibilities are endless.) Looking down the road, and speaking purely from an American perspective, this Russo-American cooperation would serve to pry Russia away from China, and this separation should always be our geopolitical “prime directive”. That’s Nixon 101.
    I agree with you that the Visegrad nations and the Balkan states are vital to the project of cultural preservation and renewal. Care should be taken to foster the growth and strength of their Alliance, keeping in mind that they have a justifiable fear of Russia and other matters of their own national interest. I hope that historical animosities would not drive them away from the Russo-American Cooperative Society.
    It’s a validation of r/k theory that the stresses of life under communism seem to have fostered strong cultures and strong people, while the prosperity of the West has pussified its men and twisted its women into an unrecognizable mess. When I think of our EE cousins, I think of men like the Klitshko brothers and women like our glorious Empress Melania (Thank you, Slovenia!) By contrast, formerly-proud nations like France and Britain allow the biggest losers in the world (whom they used to literally OWN) to slither into their homelands en masse, rape their daughters, run them over with trucks, and promise more and better violence once reinforcements arrive.
    This is becoming a rant, so I’d better sign off…but even though the conduct of Western Europeans is a head-scratching disappointment, I’m certainly not willing to write them off just yet. After all, it’s always darkest before The Don.
    And there’s something going on…

  12. SteveRogers42 11 months ago

    An Eastern reaction to deadly violence. Totally flat affect. “Just business, nothing personal.” I imagine the (successful) gunfighters in the Old West were much the same.

    • Author
      Admin 11 months ago

      Hell yeah man that was extremely cool.

      That must be one bad area of Wisconsin man… quite a bold little criminal assault. I lived in Madison for a summer and while it is a liberal college town, most of Wisconsin is all white farm towns. Must have been a suburb of Milwaukee or something…

      Those Eastern Europeans are what needs to be replicated among all the other Occidental men.

  13. SteveRogers42 11 months ago
    • Author
      Admin 11 months ago

      I agree 100% Steve. I have seen that picture floating around before and its an apt summation of things as I think I have ever seen!

  14. SteveRogers42 9 months ago

    Russian naval operation:

    • Author
      Admin 9 months ago

      LOL HA! I didn’t know what to expect when I first saw the wikipedia page lol… That was great.

      On a related note, that Tom Hanks movie Captain Phillips… great film… just got reminded of it.

  15. SteveRogers42 9 months ago

    RealTalk from Hillsdale College:

    • Author
      Admin 9 months ago

      That was an EXCELLENT article Steve. Kept multiple quotes for future use. I think the author nailed it in every section, especially about the Crimea and the ‘revolution’ in Ukraine.


  1. […] European Civil War: Soros, Putin Speeches Give Fascinating Glimpse Into Political Climate, Coming E… […]

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *