Counter-Currents
The Finnish army on maneuvers.
1,183 words
I am a Finnish nationalist who has been following the American Dissident Right for many years. I greatly admire and regularly follow many of the superb writers and sites in this milieu. However, I feel that at least some American dissidents do not fully understand the European point of view on the Russo-Ukrainian war.
Some prominent American nationalists support Russia in their war with Ukraine, while among European nationalists, especially in Eastern Europe, there is widespread support for Ukraine. I have seen arguments from the American side that people on the Ukrainian side are simply victims of liberal propaganda, while European nationalists see the support of some Americans for Russia as a sign of ignorance about European affairs.
I am arguing that it is in fact in the national interest of certain European nations to oppose Russia in their war with Ukraine. It is not my intention to turn Americans into supporters of Ukraine, but simply to show that Europeans have legitimate reasons for siding with it. I shall also look at this war in the larger context of the Pan-Western cultural war. I will not make any arguments about the war’s morality and instead focus solely on why it is in the interests of many European nationalists to support Ukraine.
It is logical for an American nationalist to support Russia. Ukraine is in the liberal sphere of influence, and the global liberal democratic system is an enemy of the Historic American Nation, Western civilization, and white nations everywhere. Therefore, supporting an enemy of the liberal regime seems like the right thing to do. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, as the old saying goes. For many Americans, this war between Russia and Ukraine is a battle between a healthy conservative state and the degenerate liberal order. This is not the perspective of many in Europe, however.
My country of Finland shares a long border of approximately 830 miles with Russia. We still have conscription, with most males serving in the military for a period from half a year to a year, depending on the conscript’s role. With a population of only 5.5 million, our defense forces have an official wartime strength of 280,000 soldiers, with hundreds of thousands more in reserve to replenish losses. Our military is focused almost completely on conventional ground war, and there is only one reason why it exists at all: Russia.
Finland is not part of NATO, but does cooperate with it and is a European Union Member State. Our current government, as well as all the major parties except for one and the permanent bureaucracy, are firmly in the liberal, pro-United States camp. This means that in Russia’s eyes, we are a hostile state. In essence we have all the liabilities of being in NATO without the security guarantees that would act as a deterrent. Consequently, I conclude that there is a real chance that Russia could use military force against us.
Even if we were actually in NATO, like many Eastern European countries bordering Russia, the Russian threat would still not be completely dissipated. It is possible that the Russians might gamble that if they quickly take the Baltic countries or Finland, NATO will break up instead of going to full-scale war against Russia to liberate them. It might well turn out that there is no political will to fight for a few small European countries if the cost is a new world war that, in the worst case, could go nuclear.
Our regime upholds anti-white policies, like all the other liberal regimes. A Russian occupation is not a preferable alternative, however, nor is a puppet government or protectorate status. Losing the ability to control one’s national destiny is not something that any nationalist could accept. It is therefore in the interests of Finnish nationalists to reduce the chance of a Russian invasion, and the war in Ukraine offers a way to do this.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s The Year America Died here.
If the war goes badly for Russia, it will reduce Russia’s capability to wage war in the future. Firstly, there are the direct casualties and losses in equipment. Western sanctions could also cause the Russian economy to falter, likely forcing them to reduce their defense budget. Finally, large casualties and a failure to achieve their objectives reduces the government’s political capital and the desire for further wars among the population. Iraq and Afghanistan killed any desire for more war among the American population, and the same could happen to the Russians if the invasion of Ukraine ends in disaster.
An American could easily make the counterargument that this is petty European nationalism, and that it is detrimental to the larger culture war being waged throughout the West. Putting national interests above civilizational and racial interests is indeed counterproductive. Let us therefore look at what the war in Ukraine means for the larger struggle.
Ukraine is a sideshow. Whatever happens, it will not have any major impact on the global culture war. The satanic mills of the liberal leviathan will continue grinding just like before. A Russian victory will not diminish their media power, financial resources, or their hold on our institutions. Likewise, a Ukrainian victory will not increase their power in any significant way. The fight taking place within America will not be affected by whether a poor Eastern European country is retained in the liberal sphere of influence or not, just as the Taliban victory in Afghanistan did not have any real effect, either. The only consequence of a Russian victory will be a few liberal tears, which is undeniably enjoyable but quite unimportant in the culture war.
Another claim is that Russia is a conservative ally of ours. The argument is that while the war itself might be unimportant, a weak Russia will mean the loss of an important ally. It is not true that Russia is our ally. They are an old-fashioned imperial state and are only interested in expanding their own power and sphere of influence. They have no desire to see our side win, and I suspect it would in fact be in their long-term interests to see the West’s decline advance to final collapse. Russia itself is not even a real nation-state, but rather a multiethnic empire with a decreasing population of white Russians and an increasing population of non-white Muslims due to birthrates and immigration.
Contrary to liberal propaganda, Russia has not provided any significant aid to European or American nationalists. Russian officials sometimes make critical comments about the West’s wokeness, but that is basically the only extent of their support. A weakening of the Russian state would not therefore affect our side adversely or deprive us of resources.
To conclude, it is in the legitimate interest of many European nationalists to support Ukraine in this war. But while the war is important for many Europeans, in terms of the larger culture war it is an unimportant sideshow. A Ukrainian victory will not adversely affect the culture war in America nor in Europe. American dissidents do not lose anything if Ukraine wins, while many European nations have much to gain.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
68 comments
Russia losing would, IMO, terminally finish Russia, and start the process of the filleting of Russia by the globalists into nice little digestible pieces… to integrate these parts into the globalist prison planet. A downfall of Russia would also mean that the globalists will have won against China: i.e.: a downfall of Russia would be the end of the Free World, the total victory of the globalists.
There is also no imperial motivation from Russia: have the USA declare that Ukraine won´t be in Nato and that Ukraine will be neutral and there´ll be no war. All this is entirely and exclusively the fault of the globalists.
I don´t understand how one can discuss something like… uuh Russia bad Russia not european etc.
Really: please prove me wrong here because I don´t get it !
Your rant is ill-informed. China is an evil enemy of the white man. It is the main long-term geopolitical threat to the West (we don’t only have internal racial threats, even if these are the most pressing problems for the moment). And Russia and China are presently politically aligned anyway.
I can’t believe a CC reader still talks about the “West” as an equivalent for White people! In my mind the modern West is the embodiment of all the degeneracy that is going on in the world. Thank God for Russia and China. These, if successful as societies, can destroy the argument that “democracy” is the only system conducive to social and economic prosperity.
I can’t believe a CC reader still talks about the “West” as an equivalent for White people! In my mind the modern West is the embodiment of all the degeneracy that is going on in the world. Thank God for Russia and China. These, if successful as societies, can destroy the argument that “democracy” is the only system conducive to social and economic prosperity.
Wow! You manage to pack an enormous amount of misunderstanding in very few words.
The “West” will always be the civilization of whites. We created it; it is ours historically and morally. Perhaps this is mere semantic confusion. For me the “West” is pre-progressive/diversitist Europe and its overseas diaspora. The “West” is a civilization whose fundaments, as with most civilizations, are first, race, and second, religion. The “West” is white, Christian civilization. I respect, but do not agree with, those who see the essence of the West as purely racial. That might have been true up to perhaps 800 AD. But Christianity is responsible for much of the greatness of our people, and it is associated with nearly all of it, post-800 AD. Anyway, for me, the West is European Christendom, even though our roots are ancient (how could they not be?) and pre-Christian.
For you, I guess, the “West” refers to the geographical territories under the postwar American security umbrella (and dominance). Thus, for you the “West” includes American ghettos, a Londonistan ruled by a Paki, “liberal [managerial] democracy”, a “French” soccer team comprised of Africans and Arabs, LGBTQ, etc. To me, these are alien abominations superimposed upon the Real Occident.
I’m an anti-democrat, at least theoretically. Democracy has been seen for thousands of years in the West as a bad form of government. Pragmatically, I’m somewhat supportive of real democracy in the historic Western lands, if only because those in power (the “elites” – “elite” in power and cultural influence, not moral character or genuine ability) are so racially disloyal (where not actually simply hostile aliens), as well as degenerate in character.
I completely agree that modern “liberal democracy” (or any type of democracy) is unnecessary to civic power and economic prosperity. I utterly disagree that either Russia or China are in any way “successful” (except as predatory parasites, especially the latter), or models for what whites should aspire to. Please read a little about life for normal people (those without power) in these two hellholes.
Russia and China may not be as sociologically (esp. sexually) degenerate as the West, and China is certainly much less racially and ethnonationalistically degenerate. But there are many undesirable traits that can be grouped under the general heading “degeneracy”. Although the West, in tandem with its artificial diversification, is growing ever more corrupt, it is still much less so in the traditional legal sense than either Russia or China. It is much easier to do honest business in the West, and the traditional rights of whites (especially in the Anglosphere, particularly America) remain far more respected than any such rights in Russia or China. Daily life for ordinary citizens in those two dictatorships is not pleasant. Racial bootlicking is getting worse in the West, but obsequiousness towards those in power remains much less necessary than it is in Russia/China.
One should always try to assess facts accurately, without ideological preconceptions.
I see “the West” as a replacement identity for Christendom. The ideology associated with “the West” is based on the so-called Enlightenment rather than Christianity and tradition, and it is an ideology that has allowed Jews to gain control of our civilization—why not since the Enlightenment teaches us that religion doesn’t matter? We were vital as Christendom, but we are degenerate and enslaved as “the West”. I want “the West” to die and Christendom to become resurgent. Failing that, I would rather assimilate to Chinese civilization as that’s certainly preferable to continuous subjugation to the worst of mankind.
With due respect, Peter, while I agree you’ve made a valid point in the second paragraph of your comment, I wish to politely admonish you and point to the fact that China is by no means part of the Free World! Also, it must be made clear here, which is extremely important but often seems confusing and misleading to many White nationalists in the Dissident Right circles, thanks to ignorant, shallow or obfuscated panda-huggers like Andrew Anglin, that China is NOT an enemy of globalism. China is imperialist in nature, not nationalist. And China wants not to eschew globalism but to lead Globalism. In another word, China yearns to be the boss and eyes for the leadership position on globalism.
Lord Shang gets the picture very accurately in this regard. If you want to know more about the true nature and the characters of China analyzed in-depth, you are recommended to read old articles posted by “F. C. Comtaose” on this Counter-Current website. Thank you.
Riki-Eiki, I thank you for the measured words… To clarify… I only wrote that way in order to be short, so here a bit more extensive: the end of China would be the total victory of the globalists and THEREFORE the end of freedom. Not because China would stand for freedom (it doesn´t) but because of the total victory of the globalists.
I.e.: the only chance for freedom is to prevent the victory of any one single power ! THAT´S why Russia must never fall !
Yes, maybe one day we can have republicanism all over the world, i.e. small businesses, minimum state, gunrights…: then we don´t need the structure of mutually balancing superpowers anymore; but until then, we must prevent victory of one player over all others.
Secondly, I still don´t understand how nobody here seems to understand that this conflict is NOT if… uuh erm yeah Russia just wants more territory and so moves towards Ukraine and so we have to take sides based upon some preferences… if Russia is conservative enough or something. Man man man… facepalm… ! : Russia PREVENTS NATO from becoming overly powerful ! Would someone here please bother to take note of that ?? No Nato no war ! Is that so difficult to understand ?
And since that is the only issue here… why would anyone bother to wonder who he should root for based upon some preferences or resentments? It´s completely irrelevant ! No matter how multicultural Russians may be or how white and / or paganistic etc. whatever Ukrainians may be: this is totally beneath any point. The Ukrainians will, after the war, be the same Ukrainians as before the war: simply WITHOUT NATO WEAPONS ! on Russia´s borders ! How difficult is that?
Peter, your argument is clear, but Russia is an emotional topic for many, and Ukraine is an emotional topic for some.
I agree that a return to the unipolar world of 1990 to, say, 2020 would be bad for us Whites. America’s ruling cabal would pursue White genocide at a faster pace if it had no fear of any potential security competition.
This immediate war—Putin’s Russia invading Ukraine under these circumstances at this particular time—may very well have been prevented if only U.S./NATO could have committed to maintaining Ukraine as a neutral state.
But how is everyone so sure of these counterfactual assertions that if NATO had never expanded, a revanchist Russia would never have threatened the sovereignty and territorial integrity (not to mention lives and limbs, homes and families) of smaller European countries—many of whom only just gained independence accidentally amid chaotic collapse of the Soviet Empire 30 years ago?
Putin laments loss of Soviet Empire. Putin praised and justified Stalin’s 1939 Winter War Russian invasion/annexation of 12% of already-tiny Finland, including much of Karelia and second-most important Finnish city Viipuri/Viborg (displacing 450,000 Finns who fled ancestral homelands forever rather than remain under Russian rule; repopulated with Russians to this day); Putin described this Stalinist aggression as merely “correcting historical wrongs” (in Putin’s personal opinion) of where the Russo-Finnish border should be drawn.
Why is it automatically assumed peace-loving Putin/Russia are always 100% honest, ever negotiating with neighbors in good faith—as if only the West would ever engage in diplomatic duplicity and military aggression..? NATO/Western alliance has remained a hard deterrent to potential Russian aggression. Otherwise why would Putin not have seized opportunities to annex ex-Soviet satellite states, if he could do so with impunity?
We just had 82nd anniversary of 5 March 1940 execution order signed by top leaders of Soviet Russian Poliburo (Stalin, Molotov, Kalinin, Kaganovich, Mikoyan, Voroshilov) authorizing NKVD secret police commissar Lavrentiy Beria to carry out mass-executions of Polish prisoners and dump their corpses in mass graves, largest in Katyn Forest. For decades, the world believed Russian claims “Katyn Forest Massacre” of ~25,000 Poles was war crime perpetrated by German soldiers; Moscow held show trials of German POWs; Soviet memorial built to Polish victims of “Hitlerite” Nazi Fascist terror.
Not until ‘glasnost’ in 1989 were archives opened to documents clearly indicting the Russians in the atrocity, not Germans. A year before fall of Soviet Union, Gorbachov finally acknowledged Soviet Russia’s guilt for Katyn Forest Massacre in 1990; Yeltsin transferred infamous 5 March 1940 order from Russian archives to Lech Wałęsa’s newly-independent Poland.
Vladimir Putin re-sealed all old Soviet archives briefly open under Gorbachov/Yeltsin. If it were up to KGB colonel Putin, would this have even been investigated—such damning documents ever have seen the light of day—much less Putin accept responsibility and apologize? On the contrary, over the last decade Putin’s Russia has shifted back to teaching old known Stalinist propaganda lies including the hoax of German “Hitlerite executions of Polish officers” in Katyn Forest. What other lies is the Moscow Kremlin telling that the Russian people and/or the world still believe?
People talk of NATO expansion as if it were all initiated by Washington and forced onto European nations—NATO has been invading/annexing territories no different from Russian imperialism. Yet in reality all the countries that joined NATO applied for and vigorously sought out NATO membership. Looking from afar in Washington and Moscow it may look like NATO has “expanded” eastward on the map, but looks differently from European capitals where people overwhelmingly preferred to align their countries with the West behind NATO shield from Russian aggression ASAP. If not for countries voluntarily joining NATO, map today might look very different—instead Putin’s reborn Russian Empire expanding westward, annexing these countries by force.
According to Pew Research, in 2019, favorable views of NATO were already on the rise compared to 2007, e.g. in 77% favorable in Lithuania (up from 59%), 82% in Poland (up from 72%). Notably, in Ukraine only 34% had a favorable view of NATO in 2007; by 2019, 53% of Ukrainians viewed NATO favorably:
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/02/09/nato-seen-favorably-across-member-states/
Favorable outnumbered unfavorable in all 2019 NATO member states except Turkey and Greece. Does anyone believe Putin’s “peacekeeping mission” and “denazification” invasion of Ukraine (triggering massive humanitarian crisis overwhelming Poland and even Germany) will make anyone else in Europe question their NATO/Western alignment to instead pursue closer ties to Putin’s pariah state Russian Federation?
It’s helpful to remind American nationalists who are cheering Russia that there are independent and sovereign nations caught in the middle. And they have a right to decide who they ally with, regardless of how outsiders view these alliances.
Americans see their government and it’s NATO tentacles as an extension of globohomo. They understandably want to limit this expansion, as condescending as this may seem to the small nations receiving this unsolicited advice.
But after the Cold War these little countries must have felt quite vulnerable. They had very recent memories of Soviet occupation and were looking for security. NATO was an obvious choice. And this fear persists to this day.
It’s easy for Americans to criticize Ukrainians or Finns looking for NATO membership because we are at a much higher level on Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. We are well past the “security” stage and can entertain ourselves with more frivolous pursuits. But Eastern Europe was and non-NATO members still are at the lower levels of this hierarchy. Discussions about LGBTQ, Western consumerism, and even mass immigration mean nothing to them, if they still fear aggression from their Russian neighbor.
Valkoinen Kuolema… sorry for the late answer… all fair points. My answer would be: security is built by : -buffer zones; -arms limitation and arms control; -confidence-building measures; -disarmament.
Uncomfortable as that may be, the former eastern-european Sovjet-block countries would have to have stayed neutral, and then see if Russia invades. If Russia invades, Nato can immediately move eastwards itself.
I´m sure there are lots of measures outside of maximum positions of “in Nato”, “in Russian block”.
How to build security: a CENTRAL issue! All jewish war-mongering is 100% based upon the *possibility* of aggression… with that, all jewish aggression is justified (as “defense”) and that is just not how security is done ! Central point !
Generally, the jewish imperialistic method is always fully based upon FEAR-mongering ! It is always uuuh biig dangers threatening us… as recent as the geezer flu.
It is therefore quintessential that we deal with risk in a rational manner: empiricism, trial and error, scientific method.
To “Valkoinen Kuolema” Very good observation about Putin’s neo-Stalinism. He could (and should) destroy all the remnants of the Bolshevik past, but he chose not to do it. That shows that he is NOT a true Russian nationalist or patriot. He is a cynical bastard who found that the old Soviet model is very convenient to him.
Having said that the Ukrainians are idiots being used by the hateful and ultra-decadent Western world (the USA and the disgusting EU). I do not like Putin, BUT, let’s be realistic and cynical (as the great Machiavelli). Putin is THE LESSER EVIL in this confrontation, therefore I would love to see the Jewish/Ukrainian regime destroyed.
I cannot believe what I am reading. What a bunch of scaredy cats. The big bad Putin. Are you kidding me or what? Russia is a shell of the Soviet Union. It is never coming back. How can you understate just how important the Taliban triumph over NATO was? It effectively was coup de grâce to the American war machine even more than Vietnam was.
Reading between the lines here it is obvious that many here do not believe Russians are even white. That Vladimir with his pasty skin, large nose, blue eyes and blond hair is just a mongol right?
Putin is not /our guy/, but he doesn’t need to be. The role he is playing right now is the role Assad played and the role Saddam and Hitler played. The entire New World Order is against him and his people. He has all the right enemies. That should tell you all you need to know and who you’re allying with. It matters not that he is a civic imperialist.
Let’s look at what his reckless acts already accomplished: singlehandedly ended the pseudo-pandemic in a heartbeat, which nothing and nobody could do for two years.
Next suspicious allegiance is the single-issue Russophobia A-ZOG Battalion. I truly believe many of you love the LARPing aesthetics regardless of its actual purpose. They are just the Shabbos goyim sentries of a puppet ZOG government just like the Christian phalanges in Lebanon were for Israel against Hezbollah/Palestinians.
A Russian triumph will be a tactical victory against neoliberalism. You forget that liberal democracy is also the enemy. Demographics are not on the side of any Eastern European country anymore to have these wars.
If you actually listened to what Putin said in his raison d’être he mentioned how Ukraine was being systemically depopulated by emigration like all of these countries. That’s part of the plan. Then they will bring in Africans and Arabs in this straightjacket vector called the European Union to marshal Muh economy.
One such country in the misleading interstitial of prosperity is Slovenia. Totally innocent people finally experiencing wealth before they are force fed immigrants, but it is coming. Then it will turn into another Ireland.
And no, Muslims are not replacing Russians. Look at the actual TFR for each ethnicity. They are all declining. Muslim areas have always been part of Russia. They have mostly stayed in their regions. Putin naturalized a large bumper crop of central Asians in Moscow, which is a problem that Russia will have to reckon with, but not today. There is a bigger enemy.
I root for any enemy of ZOG.
Hello, everybody, I will try to explain a few things.
I am from Europe (Croatia) I am a nationalist and I consider myself old European right, like my father and my grandfather (who fought a bloody war against communists).
Few things you must know:
Putin is a rigid bolshevik whose worst nightmare was the collapse of the soviet union, don’t even dream that he is a conservative Russian antiglobalist leader.
Putin was KGB officer, Putin’s father was a bolshevik NKVD officer, Putin’s grandfather was a personal cook for Lenin and Stalin (in their weekend cabin), Putin’s general staff officers are all soviet communist officers, Putin’s inner circle people are almost all ex KGB agents, Putin’s (Russian) army still use the red star as a symbol, thousands of metro stations, streets, and squares across the country continue to bear the name of Soviet bolshevik-communist leaders and officials, while almost every town or city has a statue of Vladimir Lenin.
So every European nation who knows what is communism will fight against this KGB Putin empire.
Also so-called alt-right, new right, etc. must know that no European nation wants to live in Putin’s Euroasia (from Vladivostok to Gibraltar according to Aleksandr Dugin).
Also alt-right, new-right leaders better ask themself why at the same time they receive finance from Russian organizations at the same time black lives matter, Antifa, etc. also receive financial aid from Russian organizations.
At the end I just can say don’t be naive and speak with older people who have dealt with communists and their methods and their tricks.
“If the war goes badly for Russia, it will reduce Russia’s capability to wage war in the future.”
The fact that a Finn wrote this is astounding.
The fact that you are “wow, just wow”ing an obvious truth is astounding.
I dunno Greg, in a recent podcast you mocked Andrew Anglin by claiming he would say “It’s an existential threat to their existence”.
I was quoting him. I thought it was funny.
Victory by Ukraine leads to the expansion of globohomo and more White replacement. Ukraine has a Jewish prime minister and is run by mostly Jewish interests. Whatever small leash they give to pro-White Ukrainians, they will snatch it away as soon as possible. Right now they are going after Poland and Hungary for resisting the White replacement agenda. The only way to save the White race is for the destruction of the globohomo empire, and a loss to Russia here helps to bring that about.
Russia under Putin is a multiethnic (and antiwhite) criminal empire. Both Putin and Zelensky are enemies of the racial West. Therefore, we should let them fight it out, and simply send humanitarian aid to help displaced and (oppressed, by both sides) white Ukrainian refugees.
You over estimate Ukraine and it’s influence. They will eventually join the thé EU like Poland and many young Ukrainians say they want this. I asked many younger and older Ukrainians and the younger ones, including an ethnic Polish Ukrainian former soldier who was quite young were the most enthusiastic over the prospect of EU membership while the elders I spoke to were more cautious and worried about the cost of living going up. All in all there was never a thought in their minds over African migration into European cities like Paris or London and if it could happen to them.
Uh. Yeah, Putin is jewish too. So . . . both nations serve globohomo and seek white genocide. The gentleman just listed that Russia is now more Muslim than White Russian; so it will someday look more like every other nation currently under ZOG.
Putin is Russian Orthodox. There are 143 million Russians, 111 million are ethnic Russian. that’s over 80%. There are other White minorities, about 6% are Muslim, and oddly enough, many of these Muslims are Pale skinned. Jews apparently make up less than 1% of the Russian population. It’s a shame to have two White nations fighting each other, but the Jewish leader of Ukraine decided to go all-in with globohomo. The Ukrainian people need to remove him and put in a leader who actually represents the Ukrainian nation.
Fake news! There is absolutely no evidence that Putin in a member of the tribe. It’s true that he cozies up with the leaders of “our greatest ally” but it’s because he is who-wise and probably agrees with Ludovichi’s comments that uncle A. Should’ve postponed his assault on them “sin die”!
It’s important not to take sides in this conflict except to hope that it ends as soon as possible. Both sides are against the interests of common people. Putin’s government has been working to kill off his population with mandates of his dubious Sputnik “vaccine”. He has also shown interest in developing centralized currency (a form of absolute control) and is a puppet of the World Economic Forum. And the other side is….globohomo. Another false dichotomy.
Succinct and well-argued. I congratulate the author on his excellent English (Europeans, at least on the Continent, always put us Americans to shame, linguistically). As this seems to be his first CC essay, I hope he will contribute more, especially in keeping us apprised of the racial and ethnonationalist political situation in Finland, and any other European countries within his sphere of particular familiarity.
As I have argued in comments to other CC posts, I want the US basically to stay the hell out of Ukraine (although I freely admit, the situation is geopolitically – and even georacially – complicated), other than to provide humanitarian aid to actual (white) Ukrainians. One could make a WN case for shipping arms to the Ukrainian resistance (it will weaken Putin and Russia, and perhaps even hasten an ethnic Russian Revolution to overthrow him and his non-ethnic-Russian ruling kleptocracy), but who knows what nuclear option a cornered Putin might employ? If he started to lose his grip on power, might he lob nuclear missiles at his European enemies, or even America? Is fighting for … Zelensky … worth that risk?
If the Russians were sent to exterminate Ukrainian antifa and Soros-backed elements, I would strongly support them. This does not seem to be the case, however suspicious the Zelensky regime is to any right-thinker. If anything, with Putin’s descriptions of “Ukrainian Nazis”, it’s possible (or not; perhaps we’re only dealing with empty agitprop) that at least a side motivation of his is actually to hunt down elements of the Ukrainian racial-nationalist Right. Putin has never been much of a friend to Russian white nationalists (the weird and racio-ideologically inconsistent Aleksander Dugin is NOT one of us), and while he has admirably and unapologetically exterminated various domestic Muslim terrorists, he has also made various political and cultural-legitimationist overtures to Russian Muslims, while making no effort (and arguably the opposite – see article below) to restore the ethnonational primacy of Russians in Russia. He is also in thick with many of the Jewish oligarchs exploiting and scamming the ethnic Russian people.
Can anyone (more informed than I am) point to any real prowhite accomplishment of Putin’s?
_________________________________________________
Here is a good start to assessing Putin from a prowhite perspective (all WNs should read this series, if you haven’t already; note it was written pre-invasion):
https://nationalvanguard.org/2022/02/a-russian-nationalist-on-the-ukrainian-dilemma-part-5/
Here is the author’s (“Wolf Stoner”) own summary of the essential issues in this Russia/Ukraine conflict:
To sum up the main ideas of this series:
1. The confrontation between Putin’s Russia and the “liberal” West is real and based on conflicting and competing globalist visions.
2. Both sides are anti-national and anti-traditional. Both sides incorporate delusional globalist ideas and insane beliefs in a universalist deracinated society. The only disagreement between them is over which faction should command the globalist world.
3. Both sides are offshoots of the post-WW2 world order based on the negation of traditional European values and false “humanist” ideals. Both sides perceive our racial/ethnic identity as a great threat to their agenda.
4. Ukraine (like other east European countries) is caught between those two competing monsters, and is compelled by circumstances to choose sides between them.
5. Ukrainian nationalists struggle against the real threat of hostile power from the east (they are not puppets, as Russian propaganda and its conservative Western parrots depict them). In essence, this is a continuation of the wars fought in 1918-1920 and 1941-1955 (guerilla warfare against the Soviet terror state), with the same actors and the same ideals. In this particular case, Russia represents a globalist force and Ukraine is the side that fights for its national identity.
6. There is a global dimension to this Russian-Ukrainian war. If viewed from this perspective where Ukraine is an ally of NATO and the USA, Russia looks more like a righteous defender of identity that struggles against the globalist system. Therefore, this whole question is multifaceted and can’t be evaluated as a simple phenomenon.
7. Putin’s regime is a successor to the Soviet state in all its aspects. It has the same core internationalist ideology (with the only tangible difference being that it allows private economic activities), and the same people (and their descendants) in power. Modern Russia has nothing in common with Tsarist Russia, except for some state symbols borrowed from the Russian empire
8. This state inherited all the anti-Russian characteristics of its Soviet predecessor. It would not be an exaggeration to assert that Putin’s state is systemically anti-Russian because it is built on the assumption that the main threat against the state emanates from any awakening of Russian identity. Therefore, it does everything in its power to suppress Russian ethnic identity. The ongoing ethnic replacement policy is the logical outcome of this systemic mindset. In this way, both systems (Russian and American) are strikingly similar. Both systems consider their own native populations to be the main threat facing them.
Points 1 to 8 are an excellent summary. Very useful.
I genuinely don’t believe that Russia is trying to rebuild its empire. It is demographically and economically incapable of occupying and holding geographically large nations like Ukraine or Finland, particularly if a partisan insurgency is constantly sniping at the invaders. Finland or Poland or Estonia’s fears that Russian tanks will soon arrive on their streets seem unfounded. I’m confident that even Ukraine will exist in some form once the bullets stop flying. It may be smaller and less populous, but it will be more homogeneously Ukrainian, less influenced by its Russian minority and, consequently, more politically harmonious. The only thing that could prevent this favorable outcome is continued provocation and instigation by the US and its NATO lackeys.
Well said! Exactly my thoughts.
I mostly agree. Putin is no fool. He understands the pathetic state of the Russian economy – and the civil society (which is breaking down in “Middle Russia”, as in Middle America). He is basically trying to incorporate ethnic-Russian-dominant territory in the far East of Ukraine into Russia (or else to leave it as a sovereign buffer zone state, like Belarus). He doesn’t want to simply conquer and absorb Ukraine; it’s not worth it, given its economic backwardness and historic antagonism. Perhaps, at this point, he hopes to install a puppet regime in Kyiv. His oligarchs also want to eliminate Zionist Zelensky and his oligarchs (this is a bit of a gangster war, with the poor Ukrainian people – and ordinary Russian soldiers – trapped as pawns in the middle).
I agree Ukraine will likely exist, perhaps territorially smaller, once the fighting stops. I am less sure that Putin would not also like to grab the Baltics – but he surely knows that would trigger NATO intervention. Only if he really is a madman would he embark upon such insanity.
I was in Ukraine and I assure you they do NOT care about White Americans any more than Russians or Finns do.
In fact most Europeans and British are anti American on both the right and left.
I only care about this war as it has captured my country and made it act insane. The president of the US sounded like the president of Ukraine in his speech and there were more Ukrainian flags in congress than American flags.
Putin thinks he’s Peter the great and his ex KGB past has him lamenting the end of the Soviet Union as the worst event in Russian history. Strangely this honor didn’t go to the many White Russians who died for Russia in WW2. The 3rd largest city in Russia is Islamic.
Putin has also allowed the Chinese to colonize Siberia now. Most White Russians say they feel uncomfortable with this.
Even Sino experts in Europe say the relationship Russia has with China is deeply unbalanced and made to suit Chinese agenda and will eventually be a problem. Watch the documentary When will Siberia be Chinese again? for more perspective on this.
I live in a city with 26,000 Ukrainians and I often wonder if this is their biggest export. Most of them are Jewish like actress Mila Kunis or the woman Alec Baldwin shot. So I am not rooting for anyone. I want my country back and I know Europeans aren’t going to care about this nor do I expect them to but I ask that the insanity stop.
Which third largest city is Islamic? I doubt Muslims are a majority in any of the 10 top most populated Russian cities, https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/20-biggest-cities-in-russia.html
Moscow has the largest Muslim population. Islam exists in Russia as part of her historical heritage, not as a religion and a people artificially imported by a globalist ruling class. France and Britain are culturally more Islamic than Russia.
Chinese are a small declining presence in Siberia, https://thediplomat.com/2019/06/the-myth-of-a-chinese-takeover-in-the-russian-far-east/
Kazan. Also yes Moscow is very Islamic now too.
https://shiawaves.com/english/news/80564-tatarstan-to-recognize-kazan-as-the-first-city-in-the-islamic-world-in-which-the-holy-quran-was-printed/
It’s not a part of Russia’s heritage? Well tell the Russian’s this because the younger ones think it is.
This is what happens when you keep adding land from the east to your empire. Russia doesn’t need more land, it needs to cut itself off from the former eastern satellite states like Kazakstan.. but it won’t.
Also Indians are growing majority in major citée in Russia. How is this not going to eventually be a problem ? Anyways not my problem.. I care more about the USA than what a Finn is worried about. Finns live a far better life and have a majority in their cities than the average White American does at home. We have endured 2 years of looting riots and anti White insanity and no one in Russia or Ukraine really care. It’s not their problem. So again I say I want my county back amd the insanity over Ukraine to stop. Send that Jewish Ukrainian dancer Maksim who fled with women and children back to the USA using his American passport to get into Poland BACK to Kiev. Put your money where your mouth is.
Of course “Islam exists in Russia as part of her historical heritage”, but also it is part of it’s genetic makeup, its imperial and genocidal fervor.
So much part of it that the Putin the Saviour supposedly produced few offsprings with a Tatar Muslim, Alina Kabaeva.
But that’s OK. It is part of their heritage. Ivan the Terrible was part Tatar too.
Russians are whiter than Americans, on top of which American culture fetishes blacks and diversity. Many of the so-called “Asiatics” of Russia can well be said to be whiter than the current French, British, Italians…Just look at the Chechens with genetic roots mostly in the Caucasus and Europe…broadly connected with European populations both on the Y-DNA (the paternal side) and mitochondrial DNA (the maternal side). Eastern Europeans resent Russians to the point of preferring American culture and diversity, which is why Poland is slowly becoming another globalized nation.
Seems you don’t understand.
Not GloboHomo tried to exterminate all of us. Russian people did exactly that for many hundreds years. Not the Congolese did the Holodomor, but the Russian people. So who is the bigger danger? The Congolese that can be sent back anytime (to the benefit of their country too), or the genocidal idiot bombing European cities?
Your version of salvation is a lie. Russians saved no one at any point in history. Because you lost an easy cultural fight in Paris, it doesn’t mean that you need to blow up everything and give once again half of Europe to a bloody genocidal idiot. It has been tried and the outcome was horrendous. Or you secretly hope the Germans will fight on your behalf?
What do you think will happen when Russia will be neighboring France? They will respect you tremendously or pull an Ukraine on you too? What do you think will happen when a victorious Putin will put some nukes in Mexico? I see that Lopez Obrador is friendly toward Russia lately. So is the Brazil’s Bolsonaro. With your flawed judgement you probably are all on for a very nasty surprise. Cuban Missiles Crisis will be seen as kiddie play from a much better era.
Globalism is here because the fiber optics, telecommunications satellites and computers. You can make it work for you or against you. You can not un-invent them in order to suppress “Globalism”.
You can not play by yourself any longer. China will crush you one by one, exactly as Russia wants to crush us. We need our version of globalism with a place for everyone in his own country and culture. Even for Congolese – in his own country in Africa.
I am sorry but if you believe Russian were the cause of Holodomor, then you have accepted the enemy’s narrative. Holodomor was caused by the same group of people who were behind the Bolshevik revolution (i.e. the greatest catastrophe in Russian history).
Please open a history book and let out “the narrative”. Check who in the hell were those who so happily pulled the trigger. No killing of a such scale could be done without the foot soldiers.
You are the victim of a Russian narrative when Russia “dindu nuffin evah” and the Ukrainians, and everybody else, just killed themselves by the millions.
It is documented that all the marshals, all the commanding officers, all the foot soldiers, both the army and NKVD interior armed forces were RUSSIANS. As was the main political culprit: Molotov.
So please stop patronizing and do your own research. You have all the data readily available at a click distance, thanks to the superb western thing that Internet is.
Even now the Russian are all so happy for invading Ukraine. Not happy because they lost the war and made a fool of themselves. Russians are not happy with Putin because he bungled up such an opportunity to invade another country.
Otherwise the entire Russian army would be at the Kremlin wall arresting Putin, the oligarchs, and the bloody idiots that supported him. Yet the Russian army is bombing cities in another country, triggering the worst humanitarian crisis. Not that I forget the Chechen gangs of rapists, and torturers, sent by Putin to the really wet jobs.
Hi Ricardo,
You are right about Islam being a part of Russian history but recently there has also been considerable immigration from Central Asian republics to major cities.
I understand why many Eastern Europeans are wary of Russia, but I don’t think it’s a realistic threat in the near future. The Russians only invaded the Ukraine after they came to believe there was no other way to obtain a favorable solution to the ongoing crisis created by the 2014 Euromaidan revolution – the situation prior to this was acceptable to them. And the stiff resistance offered by the Ukraine will surely make them more hesitant to take any aggressive action for some time since Finland and Poland would almost certainly be more difficult to conquer even leaving aside the factor of NATO. In the long term the US led post-WWII order is doomed in any case and if Eastern Europeans are determined to protect themselves from any potential Russian attack after it’s gone they’ll have to find another solution – this surely cannot be anything other than a RW nationalist successor to the EU.
I do believe, however, that a Russian victory will be a net benefit to nationalists around the globe. The unipolar world order is used to enforce anti-White progressive globalism. It’s downfall and the rise of a multipolar order will make it far easier for nationalists to gain and maintain power. Many people have pointed out that nationalists have made great strides in Hungary and Poland, but for how long and far can they go? There’s no doubt that if the US and EU decided they’d crossed a line they could crush them if they wished. Breaking the ability of the globalist powers to destroy opposition through both economic warfare and direct military intervention is a necessary step for securing true national sovereignty. Nationalist states may then create their own mutual defense organizations free of hostile strings. It is very unfortunate for the Ukrainians that this will come at their expense, but this is a result of poor strategic decisions on their part and must serve as a lesson to other nationalists not to trust the international order. As long as the Russians don’t force mass immigration, the Ukrainian nation will survive and may someday rise again.
Ok, that’s annoying. I put a couple paragraph breaks in there but they don’t show up in the preview. If someone would care to explain how the formatting works I’d very much appreciate it.
I agree with this assessment. It’s unfortunate that Ukraine will be a martyr but this event may be a net benefit for nationalists.
Whenever a hole can be poked in the US paper tiger, it undermines the system’s legitimacy which works in our favor. For all the tough talk, the US-EU-NATO were feckless when Russia committed to war. It’s similar to the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. We all cheered that, not because we supported the Taliban, but because it exposed the US empire for what it was: incompetent, reckless and unworthy of support.
As people lose faith in the system, space for nationalists may be created. Metapolitically, the Russia-Ukraine war may work in our favor.
(I’ve had the same problem with paragraph breaks. In the past I’ve double spaced my breaks to make sure it doesn’t appear as a single block of text.)
The US loses credibility and prestige at this point whether Russia wins or loses. But it would be a nice bonus if Putin loses too.
Putin jailed and otherwise persecuted a number of sincere White Nationalists because they were inconvenient for his multi racial state. He harbors no sympathy for us. In Cold War 1 communism and capitalism were two sides of the same coin, with the genesis of the Neo-cons being ex Trotyskites who thought the USSR was simply too extreme. In Cold War 2 the positions are reversed with the Russian oligarchs thinking that globohomo is too extreme but with their differences in ideology being in degree, not in type.
Russia originally wanted to join NATO not for peace and sunshine but because they wanted to be part of the globohomo order and get a piece of the pie.
Simply put. Most American far-rightist are not nationalists of any form. They are just some guys on an intellectual trip and contrarian streak in their characters. Same with Covid, same with invasion in Ukraine.
I was saying the same thing in 2014 when they invaded Crimea and Donbas. People like Hunter Wallace would in one breath say it is nothing of their business, some war across the ocean and in the second breath start shilling for Russia even though they never get anything out of them. If Russia has spend 0,01% of their American espionage budget on donation to Southern Nationalist cause it would have propelled that movement by a 10 fold. But why do that if they will shill for you for free?
Is Greg the only prominent figure with the correct stance ? I am curious to know if there are some others? And I am also happy that CC was the only American outlet I have ever donated to.
Nationalism or Imperialism, choose one.
Kind of significant:
Usual wimpycon Rod Dreher of The American Conservative admits that Third World immigration (at least in Europe) = invasion. He also properly worries about Ukraine escalating into a nuclear war, and therefore wisely counsels that we stay out of that conflict, which contains no clear American national interest favoring either side.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/absence-of-a-tragic-sense-russia-ukraine/
As I pointed out a few days ago, all we should care about is avoiding nuclear war (which would further reduce if not eliminate the chances of white and Western survival, as those missiles would be heading to Europe and the US, not China or the Third World); providing humanitarian aid to white Ukrainian refugees; and not rallying ’round the flag to bolster the illegitimate Biden junta in any way. Let Biden make his usual mess, and then ‘own’ it, as with Afghanistan (the disastrous withdrawal from which almost certainly lit the spark that produced the Ukraine conflagration).
Since we (the dissident right) have absolutely no ability to influence the outcome, we may as well keep calm and see what happens.
I read this article carefully and correctly got the gist it intended to make. Furthermore, I agree to its validity and the article is indeed a well-reasoned, insightful, and persuasive one. However, I did perceive a contradictory and baffling point in the midst of it.
“Our regime upholds anti-white policies, like all the other liberal regimes. A Russian occupation is not a preferable alternative, however, nor is a puppet government or protectorate status. Losing the ability to control one’s national destiny is not something that any nationalist could accept.”
If the Finnish, together with other Western and Northern European countries already have anti-White regimes, as the author himself clearly stated, isn’t the ability to control one’s national destiny (for the survival and prosperity of ones’ native White populations) not in the hands of those European nations anyway? If the “puppet government” or “protectorate status” for those countries, as a result of Russian victory, could more or less facilitate to bring about a less drastic anti-White, if not a decidedly more pro-White, situation in those countries, isn’t that a desirable and worthy outcome?
It seems the logic is, better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.
We arein the horns of a dilemma: if Putin wins, it will be the end of Ukraine; if Ukraine wins, it will be the end of the White race.
Why? because the Globalist neo-liberal elite, WEF, Davos crowd (whatever you like to call them) will flood Europe and the diaspora with Black and brown people. They will destabilise Putin though an economic war, so that they can foment a colour revolution in Russia.
Fortunately, this dilemma, and this whole discussion, is a moot point because Russia already won the military war; now they will win the economic war.
These are historic times: first the globalists lost the COVID narrative; now they lost in Ukranine. It is the beginning of the end for their dream of a New World Order.
Certainly the liberal media are again spinning the narrative that Putin caused Trump to be elected, bankrolled the Brexiteers and is the doyenne of the ‘far-right’. Thus supporting Ukraine, arraigning Putin and crushing his aforementioned tentacles in the West are all of a piece for them. We can expect another crack-down on the dissemination of dissident-right ideas and should exercise caution accordingly.
This is, once again, a Zionist war, a war against White People. Zionist is the only winner, when White People slaughter each other. They profit, always, when we suffer. Every single time.
This war has already weakened Russia, weakened Ukraine, and as you well understand, it has particularly weakened The West. All West is now suffering from an Energy Crisis clean out from Zionist Hell.
And the Winner? Well, who has just cheated all the White Countries? Who has collected, when our people have suffered and become slaves of the eternal debt? Do I have to list the names? No, you know them, we all know them, and those names are not the names of our brothers and sisters.
It is useless to analyze, who wins and who loses, when the winners are there to be seen, and we are dying.
Just to put a Finnish perspective on the matter. One of the great heroes of Finland, Marshal Mannerheim, knew the configuration of Russia and Soviet Union a long time ago. When askes, after the war: “What is your opinion about Russians?”, he answered, more or less like this: “I have no problem with Russians, but I do not like the Communists”.
As it was then, the Enemy is not Russia or Russians, but the Enemy within, the Zionist, who has one aim, and one aim only: To destroy Whites and White Countries. All the rest is useless, and stupid, speculation.
Spot on! Always ask Cui bono and look at the big picture. Ultimately the enemy does not care for any nation except their own.
I don’t support Russia, because I don’t trust or like Putin after what he did to his own Russian nationalists. Ukraine is whiter than Russia. Liberal vs right wing are not relevant. Ukraine is whiter, so its a no brainer for me.
I don’t care if Russia is a military power, any more than I care if China is a military power, because they are just as anti-white as America. If America calls Putin’s nuke bluff and enters Ukraine, they will tear through Putin’s war machine like tin foil.
Did you see Elon Musk’s tweet about AI? If he has something unimaginable, imagine what the US military has. Human soldiers could already be obsolete, or soon will be.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1500330068228280321
“Even some of the best AI software engineers in the world don’t realize how advanced Tesla AI has become”
Unfortunately Elon Musk is something of a snake-oil vendor when it comes to AI. His most advanced vehicles are not road-safe without the constant attention of a human being. There are numerous videos illustrating these remarks to be found on YouTube: I highly recommend the channel of ‘Thunderf00t’.
@Vehmgericht
Musk BS a lot, because you have to be a good salesman to run a successful business.
I suspect Musk made that tweet in relation to John Carmack making a $10,000 bet with people on Twitter, that fully autonomous verhicles will be a reality at latest 2030.
US gov secret research is decades ahead of what civilian companies have. The first we will learn they have AI, is when they announce they are using it in a new war. When AI is used on the battlefield against humans, it will be like jet airplanes vs bows and arrows.
In my previous comment, I mentioned that the military war was already won by Putin, and that next was coming the financial war.
And now, I came across this excellent article on what’s coming next:
https://tomluongo.me/2022/03/06/thanks-putins-war-ukraine-race-great-reset/
I hope Tom Luongo is right, because this would be the end of The Great Reset, and its attempt to erase the White race.
P.S.: I hope that all my White brothers and sisters are buying as much Bitcoin as you possibly can.
Intersting piece you linked there, especially the theory of Putin’s plan for the replacement of Petrodollar. A bit fantastical if you ask me, but not impossible.
It’s becoming SOP among the maintream American pundit class to frame the current Ukrainian War in terms of the 1938 Munich Crisis. Putin is Hitler, Ukraine is the Sudetenland, appeasement of the Kremlin will lead to a bigger European war, etc.
But instead, consider how Putin sees himself in light of his predecessors in the Kremlin and St Petersburg: Trotsky (fought wars in the Ukraine and against Poland during the Russian Civil War), Alexander III (completed Russian conquest of Central Asia), Alexander II (defeated the Turkish Empire, 1877-78), Catherine the Great (annexed the Crimea), and Peter the Great (seized Sweden’s Baltic provinces).
Sean McMeekin’s Stalin’s War, reviewed in various places around the interwebs (including Counter-Currents), looks at Moscow’s various offensive moves in the World War II era and concludes that Stalin “played” the Western powers. Rather than invoking Munich, conservatives might bring up the various Big Three Conferences. Yalta 1945 used to be standard conservative boilerplate but has long since gone down the memory hole in the race to fight Hitler v_2.0.
Russia today is in the same general geopolitical position as the USSR back then. And that position is much, much different from that of the Third Reich 1933-45. Russia-USSR is an autarkic power stretching across Eurasia. The Reich was initially confined to Central Europe and lacking in many natural resources, notably petroleum, required to run an industrial-military economy. Russia possesses those resources and in 2022 has an added advantage in that its eastern frontier has largely been secured by agreements with China.
Point is, the Western commentariat is reading the current Russo-Ukrainian war all wrong. And if the premises are wrong, then any ensuing strategy will spin out in the wrong direction. This will have implications in the event of NATO getting involved in a shooting war in the Eurasian heartland.
I’m gonna attempt to make a make a more holistic analysis of Russia and China, and I’m going to make this analysis from a Pan-Western/Civilizational perspective:
1. Unlike some Middle Eastern shithole like Iraq that can be invaded and conquered in a month with effectively zero bloodshed for our guys, there is no military scenario where America, West Europe, or East Europe can subdue Russia, China, and for that matter, India, without massive bloodshed – and, in all likelihood, thermonuclear war. The Eastern hemisphere *will* be controlled and dominated by those three nations for the foreseeable future.
2. If China is some evil threat to the West like conservatives and Right Wingers believe, if Russia is secretly plotting Holodomer 2.0 like East European nationalists believe, and if India has its own global ambitions of some ambiguous variety, then what are the rational policies that can effectively contain Russia, China, and India? Again, forget about a shoot out war with them. They are nuclear states, and even if they weren’t, China and Russia both have massive military forces, while India has a population over a billion people. Like Japan in WW2, they would fight to the last man. It is physically impossible to subdue China and Russia without sacrificing tens of millions – more likely, hundreds of millions – of White lives. There’s no calculus of that scenario where the benefits outweigh the costs. Russia and China are here to stay, whether we in the West like it or not.
3. Seeing as military conquest and subordination of Russia and China is not possible or desirable, what then, can we do to effectively protect ourselves from these (real or perceived) hostile threats? I see two strategies, and unfortunately, I sense great hostility within Ethnonationalist *and* White Nationalist spheres to these two proposals:
A. We develop a foreign policy and a military order premised on a sort of Reaganite vision of “Fortress America,” which in this case would also be Fortress Europe. Simply put: We make sure that we have all the most advanced fighter jets, missiles, tanks, warships, and of course, a massive standing number of combat ready troops. An armed forces capable of fully resisting all would be invaders. Russia, China, and India will never fuck around and find out so long as we in the West are fully militarized and ready to defend ourselves. Power respects power, and sorry, but all these liberal fantasies – from Normie shitlibs to naive ethnonats to delusional, aggrieved WigNats – about “demilitarization” is, at best, a lame reaction to the failures of Conservatism (particularly as it pertains to foreign policy) and, at worst, indicative of an agenda – whether that be Nazi style “Domination” or 1967 San Francisco style “Pacifism” – that would objectively make the White Race worse off in the world. I don’t want to hear it about making Globohomo work for us. If anything, we should make the Military Industrial Complex work for us.
B. The other way to contain the Eastern powers and keep them at bay is engaging in friendly, mutually beneficial, mutually agreed upon global trade. Russia and China are already ahead of the curve on this, as Russia has opened up natural gas trade with Europe – especially Germany – while China has made trade alliances throughout Africa. Even if we assume that Russia and China secretly want their trade partners to “rely” on them in an exploitative way, I’m sorry, but its the responsibility of the exploited nations not to be duped, like Russia did to Europe by funding useless “Green Energy” projects that stopped nations like Germany and France from developing their own natural resources. If Green, shitlib ideologues didn’t exist, the Kremlin would have nothing to fund. Once again, Social Liberalism, Wokeness, and their entire agenda – including environmentalism – are harmful to Western interests and Western peoples.
In summary, we don’t need to make globalism or globohomo work for us. We need to make Reaganism work for us. We need to have the mentality of an impenetrable fortress that will fuck you up if you fuck with us. We should make friendly overtures to Russia and China on the economic sphere to show them and the world that the White Race is no longer playing the dick measuring game of colonial empires. If Russia and China persist with any sort of hostile motives, we immediately revert from Dr. Jekyl to Mr. Hyde at the negotiating table and remind them that we share this world, and we will wage global war before they subordinate us or subjugate us.
Furthermore, the Dominators and Pacifists within the White Race are a cancer that must be marginalized from society and removed from all levers of power and cultural influence. No, we shouldn’t dominate the entire world, and no, demilitarization will not reciprocated. Sure enough, both these camps are on Ukraine’s side. The only interests that benefit from Ukraine joining NATO and the EU is George Soros and the globohomo gang, the same gang that imposed Covid tyranny and took away the rights of the Canadien truckers. You’re not going to convince me that Putin or Xi Jinpang are bigger threats then Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden. China and Russia will forever be neutral powers on the other side of the world so long as the West has its own house in order.
One last point: Thanks to Social Liberalism and Globohomo – thanks *exclusively* to those forces – the West is dying from within. Worse yet – and this is an existential horror I challenge all Ethnonats and Conservatives to come to grips with before they mindlessly saber rattle against China – we might be staring down a situation where Whiteness has become Wokeness and Wokeness has become Whiteness. Wokeness supports Ukraine in this conflict, and therefore, I support Russia subduing Ukraine and partioning it into an Eastern, Pro-Russian half (including Kiev), and a Western, EU-aligned half.
I think it’s safe to say pretty much none of us (Americans) agree with your take. To a revanchist Finn or Ukrainian, this article will appeal emotionally at the expense of a greater picture. I laud your writing ability and effort. Aside from that, the argument threads above go nowhere. Scandinavia is effete, and as it’s incapable of deciding this conflict’s outcome, debate is vain. World powers almost never reach conclusions that explicitly favor the chauvinism of quaint, somewhat imaginary states. Considering the rump status of Ukraine, how it’s incurred on freely by larger forces, the virtually non-existent upside of escalation, and how stupid it would be to care what Finns think, entertaining any outcome other than neutralization – to Russia’s benefit – is against our interest.
The U.S./Western Europeans are all Liberal-Democrats. It’s easy to see the non-enlighten Russians (Slavs unless hey accept the Enlightement and liberal democracy ), Arabs, Asians as an enemy.
The true Nationalism opposes Imperialism, and supports the right for the Nation-States to design their own path in accordance with their own tradition and lived history. We aren’t all developing at the same pace, and forcing us to adopt your views of the world, that is unique to your tribe is nothing but Imperialism.
Sad to see Counter-Currents get this issue so fantastically WRONG.
First, I assume you have watched all of Colonel Macgregor’s appearances, watched John Mearsheimer’s 2015 lecture, and watched President Putin’s speech at the outset of the crisis. If you haven’t done that, then you should. If you watch those appearances and STILL think that President Putin should not have acted as he has, then I can’t help you.
Let’s address some problems with this article.
To begin with, the author has obviously been raised with a strong anti-Russian bias his entire life. So that clouds his judgment. It’s understandable, but it must be acknowledged. He seems to think that his proximity to the situation gives him greater clarity and objectivity, when in fact the opposite is true.
“Some prominent American nationalists support Russia in their war with Ukraine, while among European nationalists, especially in Eastern Europe, there is widespread support for Ukraine.”
I support Russia. I also support Ukraine. I am anti-Zelensky and anti-NATO. Every time this author said ‘supports Ukraine’ or ‘opposes Ukraine’ what he means is ‘supports Zelensky and NATO’ or ‘opposes Zelensky and NATO.’ If brainwashed Ukrainians weren’t foolish enough to commit suicide to defend an anti-Christian, globalist puppet regime (whose leader is hiding in Poland while doing everything he can to incite a nuclear war) this conflict would end immediately. If Russia invaded Canada (my nation) with the stated goal of overthrowing the tyrannical globalist anti-Christian Trudeau regime, and installing a neutral, non-globalist government, would I volunteer to get myself killed to protect Trudeau? Of course not, because I am not a suicidal, brainwashed imbecile.
“This means that in Russia’s eyes, we are a hostile state.” No, this means that by any objective analysis you are a hostile state.
“Losing the ability to control one’s national destiny is not something that any nationalist could accept.” You lost that ability decades ago.
“They are an old-fashioned imperial state and are only interested in expanding their own power and sphere of influence.” What great nation isn’t? My gosh you are naive. But Ukraine and the Donbass isn’t about EXPANDING their own power and sphere of influence, it is about PRESERVING their own power and sphere of influence.
“Russia itself is not even a real nation-state, but rather a multiethnic empire.” There are nations WITHIN the Russian federation and they are not discouraged from preserving their own cultures, languages and honoring their ancestors. There was an amazing Russian Hell March on YouTube called Russian Army – The Best Hell March HD that has been taken down that puts the lie to what is implied by the ‘multiethnic empire’ claim. If you can find it, or any video of a Russian Hell March it will open your eyes to the truth.
This author got fooled by a psyop. Just like many nationalists WITHIN Ukraine. The rest of us shouldn’t be so easily fooled.
Please watch Mearsheimer and Ray McGovern talk about the origins of this war and what they think will happen in the future. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppD_bhWODDc
Mearshiemer wrote the “Israel Lobby” and has a realist geopolitical view.
Whichever way this goes, white people lose.
“You must understand. Leading Bolsheviks who took over Russia were not Russians. They hated Russians. They hated Christians. Driven by ethnic hatred they tortured & slaughtered millions of Russians without a shred of human remorse.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn
The fact conveniently never mentioned.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment