Counter-Currents
2,825 words
“We are determined that nothing shall stop us from sharing with you all that we have . . . Generations unborn will owe a great measure of freedom to the unconquerable power of the Soviet people.”[1] — Harry Hopkins, Advisor to FDR, “Madison Square Garden Speech,” June 22, 1942
“Stalin gives the impression of a strong mind which is composed and wise. His grown eyes are exceedingly kind and gentle. A child would like to sit on his lap and a dog would sidle up to him. . . . A wonderful and stimulating experiment is taking place in the Soviet Union… The Soviet Union is doing wonderful things . . .”[2] — Joseph Davies, U. S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union, appointed by FDR
“Henry Wallace is a pacifist, a dreamer who wants to disband our armed forces, give Russia our atomic secrets, and trust a bunch of adventurers in the Kremlin Politburo.”[3] — Harry Truman on Henry Wallace, Vice President 1941-1945
Franklin Delano Roosevelt died of a hemorrhagic stroke 77 years ago, two months after returning from his grueling journey to Yalta. The state of his health — dead-man-walking — was concealed from the electorate during the 1944 presidential election campaign. He was in the late stages of congestive heart failure: according to those close to him, seriously flagging in every aspect of daily life, including cognitive functions. To his dying breath his loyalty was solely to his ambition.
With sorrow and reprobation, one contemplates the famous photographs of a grey and gaunt FDR sitting between Churchill and Stalin, staring back at the camera with ghostly eyes, sunken and lost, a dark cloak wrapped around his frail body. Captured on film is a spent man, leaning on death’s door, doing exactly what? Negotiating the fate of millions of people with one of the twentieth century’s most cunning, deceitful, and brutal personalities — who, incidentally, had bugs planted in FDR’s suite of rooms. Off to the side and out of camera range, providing counsel and support for exactly whom (?) was . . . Alger Hiss.
FDR is the closest thing Americans have to a modern, secular saint. He is the man who is credited for guiding America through the Great Depression and saving the world from Adolf Hitler. Good arguments abound that his policies prolonged the Depression,[4] and his preference for Stalin over Hitler? The triumphalist court historians like Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. don’t touch that question, as an exploration of it would impinge on his sainthood. Pursuing that question would also expose the extreme German-hatred of FDR crony and Treasury Secretary, Henry Morgenthau, Jr. His plan for post-war, defeated Germany – which was embraced for a time by FDR — was to turn it into an at-the-brink-of-starvation land of subsistence farmers.
FDR’s halo shines particularly bright for Democrats for whom there is no higher praise in the political arena than to be likened in any way to the 32nd President of the United States. Shortly after the 2008 election, Time magazine’s cover featured an eye-popping photoshopped picture of President-Elect Barack Obama accoutered in a signature FDR pose, teeth clenching the cigarette holder at a jaunty angle punctuating a broad, confident grin, head topped with the well-recognized fedora, perched casually behind the wheel of an open 1930s convertible ready, so to speak, to steer America out of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Under the picture was the caption, “The New New Deal.”
The vapors of Obama-mania have long since dissipated. “Hope and Change” morphed into “racism in our DNA,” Ferguson, Missouri looted and burned, and Black Lives Matter thugs with carte blanche to riot.
FDR’s reputation, however, is guarded by an impenetrable protective halo, the greatness and heroism of his presidency forever guaranteed. To speak disparagingly of FDR puts one on the fringe. The awe and reverence for Franklin Roosevelt remains entrenched. Behind Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, he ranks number three in the 2021 Presidential Historians Survey.
With the availability of primary source material in the form of declassified official US documents and material from the former Soviet Union’s archives, FDR’s formulation and conduct of American foreign policy up to and including the Second World War must be judged as nothing less than a monumental disaster. For starters, he lied to the American people during his 1940 presidential campaign when he promised to keep the country out of the European war.
From an October 30, 1940 campaign speech in Boston:
And while I am talking to you mothers and fathers, I give you one more assurance. I have said this before, but I shall say it again and again and again: Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars.
All the while, he was conniving with Winston Churchill to get us into the fray.[5] His terrible judgment and decisions in dealing with Stalin and the Soviet Union condemned tens of millions of people to decades of servitude and tyranny.
The premises for making this case can be stated in two simple sentences; their truth, well documented and indisputable.
- Joseph Stalin is one of history’s most brutal, lethal dictators.
- FDR, along with Churchill, embraced Stalin and gave his teetering dictatorship massive material and moral support.
Once the god of the Communist world was finally and safely dead in March 1953, even his own protégés denounced him — after a respectable time — and evicted him from the mausoleum on Red Square. Thanks to the great pioneering work of historians like Robert Conquest, later confirmed by the opening of the Soviet archives, we all know that Stalin was one of the most prolific mass-murderers in history. Stalin’s terror-command state spawned lethal emulators like Mao, Kim Il Sung, and Pol Pot. Stalin is long dead. Stalinism is alive, transplanted and in full throttle in North America.
You can buy Stephen Paul Foster’s new novel When Harry Met Sally here.
FDR’s government, considerably influenced by the scurrilous, lying New York Times journalist Walter Duranty, gave diplomatic recognition to the Soviet Union in 1933. This was at the time when Stalin’s cadres were forcibly extracting grain en masse from the farmers in Ukraine. Stalin needed hard currency in order to capitalize Soviet industries through grain sales on the international markets. The result was mass starvation — a terror-famine, as Conquest called it, which killed millions of Ukrainians, including women and children. Driven to insanity by their savage hunger, the Ukrainians began eating grass, bark, dirt, and finally each other. Country roadsides were littered with wasted corpses while the Communist-guarded granaries were filled and readied for export.[6]
At that time there were a few outsider witnesses to the Holodomor, the Ukrainian word for the Stalin-made holocaust. Truth-tellers like Gareth Jones and Malcolm Muggeridge observed the starvation first-hand and tried to tell the world, but the “blind eye” was FDR’s preferred modus vivendi for the Soviet Union with the assist of organs like the New York Times. Even worse were his close personal advisors who assiduously enabled the President’s view of Stalin as a tough but trustworthy sort of guy who only wanted the best for his own people.
In 1943 William Bullitt, the first US Ambassador to the Soviet Union (1933-1936), a man who had had extensive first-hand experience with Soviet diplomacy and all of its duplicity and treachery, tried to disabuse FDR of his benign view of Stalin. According to Bullitt’s memoirs, FDR’s response was:
Bill, I don’t dispute the logic of your reasoning. I have a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he’s not and that he doesn’t want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won’t try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace.[7]
One could not imagine a more stunning and jaw-dropping revelation of an utterly willful, delusional mind infected with utopian grandiosity. “Democracy and peace” for the whole world, no less. Well, we can see how that worked out. A “hunch” that trumped more than a decade of evidence of systematic tyranny and perfidy on an unprecedented scale. The “Harry” in this retort was, of course, ex-social worker Harry Hopkins, who was FDR’s White House live-in chief foreign policy advisor during the Second World War, and was very close to the fellow-traveling First Lady, Eleanor. It is difficult to know with complete certainty if Hopkins was a Soviet agent or merely a dupe. In her book American Betrayal, Diana West makes a strong and compelling case for the former.
In any case, Hopkins’ approach to Stalin, which also became FDR’s, was open-ended, obliging, obsequious, and even admiring. Hopkins encouraged FDR to open wide the spigots of Lend Lease, and . . . to ask in return? Not much. At least this is how the President seemed inclined to be. In return, so the astonishing “reasoning” went, Stalin would like him.
Fixing your alliances with the Rogers & Hammerstein approach:
Getting to know you, getting know all about you.
Getting to like you, getting to hope you like me.
Whether or not Stalin liked anyone, we know for a fact that close proximity to him was frequently lethal, as his second wife Nadezhda Alliluyeva, Nikolai Bukharin, and many of his old Bolshevik colleagues discovered.
The Studebaker trucks, heavy machinery, and materials that FDR sent to the Soviets to help them fight the Germans were also deployed in Stalin’s Gulag system, to transport and maintain the slave labor.
The ambassador who replaced William Bullitt in Moscow was none other than the lightweight Joseph Davies who, shortly after his arrival, observed the first of three major Stalin-choreographed show trials. To the amazement of his own staff, including George Kennan, he put his imprimatur on the farce.[8] Much was made in the international press coverage of the high American diplomatic presence at the trial, a legitimizing touch greatly appreciated by Stalin. Davies spent the three years of his ambassadorial assignment fawning over and patronizing Stalin, who was at the same time conducting a reign of terror that decimated the leadership of his own party and killed hundreds of thousands of people he simply didn’t like. Davies’ wife, heiress Marjorie Merriweather Post, years after her return to the US reported hearing the screams of the victims being carried off late at night by the NKVD from the windows of her Moscow apartment.[9]
The Merriweather Post-Hillwood Museum in northwest Washington, DC today holds a treasure trove of Russian artwork that Ambassador Davies and his wife, cozying up to the Soviets, were able to acquire during their stay, taking advantage of the discounts offered them.
Post’s interest in Russian art began as soon as she arrived in Moscow with her third husband, Joseph E. Davies, then ambassador to the Soviet Union, and she began collecting the art of Russia’s powerful imperial rulers . . . She was in Moscow at just the right time, when Stalin and his government were selling objects for hard currency to build up armaments . . .
At this same time, a heartbeat away from the Presidency was another Stalin-o-phile, Vice President Henry Wallace. Wallace’s contribution to US-Soviet foreign policy and to FDR’s fantasy view of Stalin was to trek through the Gulag and render high praise for healthy, hardy “pioneers” mining the gold and cutting the timber in Siberia. “There are no more similar countries in the world than the Soviet Union and the United States of America,” enthused Wallace (a statement which, if uttered in 2022, would be painfully true). “Free people, born on free expanses, can never live in slavery.”[10]
After his NKVD-managed 25-day tour of the vast Gulag slave colony, Wallace sent an open letter addressed to Comrade J. V. Stalin to convey his “deep gratitude for the splendid cordial hospitality shown to me.”[11] Stalin was nothing if not cordial and hospitable, especially to gullible, hear-no-evil, see-no-evil American politicians who would wildly rave about their Potemkin excursions and tell everyone back home how swell things were for the lunch-pail gang in the Socialist Workers’ Paradise.
The Hollywood movie studios, by the way, pitched in with pro-Soviet cinema fare.
We now remember Stalin for his masterminding and executing of three monumental works of mass murder and slavery. He launched the terror-famine that claimed millions of victims. His terror-purge of 1936-38 killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people. The Gulag was Stalin’s slave-empire, a hellish, murderous prison system purposely designed and operated so as to subject his own people by the millions to maximum suffering and degradation, and to forcibly extract as much labor from them as possible while simultaneously turning them into corpses.
But we should also remember that in these efforts, Stalin had the support and assistance of a triumvirate of stooges: Hopkins, Davies and Wallace, men who looked the other way, men who worked to provide American aid and assistance to Stalin far beyond what he needed to fight off his former partner in depredation, Hitler. Wallace journeyed though the Gulag and managed to remain tenaciously oblivious to its reality. Davies sat in a front-row seat in the Hall of Mirrors observing the Show Trials, yet somehow, like Wallace trooping through Kolyma, missed its obvious features and purpose. Hopkins shuttled back and forth between Stalin and FDR, working tirelessly to give Stalin everything he wanted, eyes tightly closed to the many scenes and ample evidence of some of the worst atrocities in modern times.
It is long past time to take FDR down from the pedestal and drop the reverence, and time to look long and hard at the fools and Quislings he installed in high places and trusted. Let’s find a group of “Presidential Historians” of a non-Pravda mentality who will assign FDR his rightful place in American history: a conniving, despotically-inclined politician who became one of Stalin’s most reliable stooges in the Western world and who sold out millions of people to decades of servitude.
It is also time to write history that speaks forthrightly to his determined, invincible ignorance with regard to the despotism of the man he so desperately sought to please. In the face of overwhelming evidence of Soviet fingerprints on the 1940 Katyn massacre of 22,000 Polish officers in Smolensk, FDR preferred to echo Stalin’s version. “[T]his is entirely German propaganda and a German plot. I am absolutely convinced that the Russians did not do this.”[12]
FDR claimed to be “absolutely convinced” of many things that turned out to be the opposite of the way they actually were, which means that either his judgment was deeply flawed or that he was lying.
FDR and Winston Churchill aligned themselves with Stalin and saved his dictatorship from destruction by Hitler. They allegedly did this to advance the cause of freedom and democracy. And, how did that work out for the millions of souls in Eastern and Central Europe?
More than 70 years later, our treacherous ruling class is still at it. It’s selling out its own people to the same old tune of bringing “freedom and democracy” to people in faraway places to save them from yet another Hitler.
Hitler is back in 2022. He shaved his mustache, speaks Russian as well as German, and he’s attacking his neighbor, Ukraine, this time, not Poland. For the ruling class, Bill Murray-like, locked into “Groundhog Day” 1939, that means that Hitler must be stopped at the cost of billions of American taxpayer dollars, and at the risk of starting World War III. The Gretas and Jurgens will be freezing this winter. America is headed for depression. But who cares? We’re talking about Hitler.
It’s a safe wager that no matter which way the war in Ukraine goes, its people will experience neither freedom nor democracy — not unlike the fate of the Poles after 1945. It is also too obvious that with the Third World pouring unimpeded across our own border, and our ruling class waging a domestic war against its white citizens, “freedom and democracy” is the punchline of a cruel joke repeated in a continuous loop to distract the American people from the daily depredations of the people in charge.
Woodrow Wilson gave us a war to make the “world safe for democracy.” FDR pitched the Second World War as a war to guarantee his “Four Freedoms.” I’d settle now for just “freedom from fear.” Now Joe Biden is pushing a war for “freedom and democracy in Ukraine.” Wilson, FDR, Biden, 100 years, and the reality of “democracy” as it looks wherever and whenever they are finished.
What happens now? As they say in the birthplace of modern democracy: “Sauve qui peut” — It’s every man for himself.
* * *
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.
- Third, Paywall members have the ability to edit their comments.
- Fourth, Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
- Fifth, Paywall members will have access to the Counter-Currents Telegram group.
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.
Notes
[1] Quoted from Tim Tzouliadis, The Forsaken: An America Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia, Penguin, 2008, 284.
[2] Ibid., 142.
[3] Ibid., 279.
[4] See John T. Flynn, The Roosevelt Myth, 50th Anniversary Edition.
[5] See William Stevenson, A Man Called Intrepid: The Incredible WWII Narrative Of The Hero Whose Spy Network And Secret Diplomacy Changed The Course Of History.
[6] Robert Conquest, Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine, Oxford, 1986.
[7] Quoted from Diana West, American Betrayal, the Secret Assault on our Nation’s Character, St. Martins, 2013, 199, 212.
[8] Tim Tzouliadis, The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia, Penguin, 2008.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Diana West, American Betrayal.
36 comments
In Stalin’s War Sean McMeekin writes that that by the late 1930s there were hundreds of paid Soviet Agents working for in the U.S. Government (either 221 according to Soviet records or 329 according to the Venona de-crypts). These agents worked in the Departments of Agriculture, State, and Treasury, and in the U.S. Army. Yet on Sunday Ken Burns and PBS will tell us that it was America and National Socialist Germany that were tied at the hip.
Harry Dexter White was number 2 at Treasury under Morgenthau and a Soviet agent. He drafted the details of the infamous “Morgenthau Carthagenian Peace plan for Germany
White has provoked the Japanese to attack Americans in Pearl Harbour.
Yes, he got his marching orders at a Washington DC restaurant from his Soviet handler–to submit a memorandum giving outrageous ultimatums to Japan, by mid 1941 the ideas embodied in this paper were American policy.
Yes, his handler was Vitaliy Pavlov, future Lt. General, big chief in Soviet Intelligence. Some years before his death Pavlov (who is also well-known, or notorious, in connection with the famous Soviet defector Guzenko in Canada) has openly told this story about White in his memoirs “Operation SNOW”.
Fine quick review of the wretched Franklin. Especially useful is the discussion of the supporting cast, Wallace, Hopkins… the Black Hole of FDR is so huge we tend to forget the others.
Douglas MacArthur summed it up well enough: “Roosevelt is dead: a man who would never tell the truth when a lie would serve him just as well.”
And I can’t recommend highly enough my first introduction to FDR, “The Roosevelt Myth” by the sadly neglected patriot John T. Flynn. Flynn was the founder of the original America First Committee and an incredibly brave soul: He was calling out the truth about Pearl Harbor while WWII was still going on.
Flynn’s book on FDR is a masterpiece of truth-telling as a counter to the official FDR hagiography. He also pulls no punches with Eleanor, the prototype of hare-brained, lefty-women activists.
What a great article. FDR really needs to be brought down many, many pegs. This was just the thing.
Did you happen to see the recent movie Mr. Jones, about Gareth Jones? It portrayed Duranty as a real degenerate. Is there any truth to this?
Yes, Walter Duranty was a lying, degenerate scum. His Pulitzer still has not been revoked.
I didn’t see the movie — but thanks for the mention. I would very much like to see it,
Excellent article Mr. Foster. I agree with every sentence. I am curious as to what you think US foreign policy should have been during the European phase of WWII. Should we have stayed out completely or should we have come in on the side of Hitler? I have not made up my mind on this question although I think I lean toward the former. That would be in line with Washington, Jefferson, Quincy Adams and my favorite 20th century hero Charles Lindbergh.
My view is that that the U.S. should have stayed out of WWII. That said, the whole WWII mess was set up by Woodrow Wilson’s American intervention in WWI. Without the U.S., the two sides would have had a negotiated peace: No Versailles treaty, no Hitler, probably no Lenin…. and no WWII. Wilson’s lunacy, “making the world safe for democracy” in my view, made him our worst President.
I am agree with you. Both Pershing and Ike should better stay home. Both the Germans and the French, against and for whom the Americans allegedly fought in both World Wars, have not been grateful (maybe they did not have to be at all) and they still despise and hate all American. If Europeans want to kill each other, and they like to do it since Neanderthalers and Cro-Magnons, they just should do it and that is nobody´s else matter.
Germans have been ungrateful to the US? Why should Germans be grateful to the Americans at all? If the USA (plus France and Britain) had left them alone during the late 1930s and into the 1940s, they almost certainly would have conquered the Soviet Union clear to the Ural Mountains, and repopulated it with Germans (our racial blood brothers). To say the least, they would have had no need of a US security umbrella against a Soviet Union that would not have existed since they themselves would have destroyed it.
The USA should not intervene in 1917.
Good article, however such books as AMERICAN BETRAYAL by Diana West, SACRED SECRETS by Leona and Jerrold Schecter, WILLING ACCOMPLICES by Kent Clizbe, and STALIN´s SECRET AGENTS by Romerstein and Evans, among other, would give more additional informations, with names and facts. And also, of course, FROM THE DIARIES OF MAJOR JORDAN, where it is openly said, that the US legally has given the Soviets the A-Bomb technology. And Antony Sutton´s books.
The short and someway generalized conclusion is that the Soviet Union was created, supported and maintained by the West in general, and by the USA specifically, during all its history, and the Cold War was only an imitation game.
***
The starvation of 1932-33 was not limited in the Ukraine. It was also in the Northern Caucasus, in the Cossack lands on the Don/Ten and Kuban/Qoban, in the Central Asia (many Özbeks died), but the most brutal it was in Qazaqstan.
Wikipedia wtites: 1.5 million people died in the Kazakh Autonomous Socialist Soviet Republic, then part of the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic in the Soviet Union, of whom 1.3 million were ethnic Kazakhs. An estimated 38 to 42 percent of all Kazakhs died, the highest percentage of any ethnic group killed by the Soviet famine of 1930–1933. Other sources state that as many as 2.0 to 2.3 million died.
Of course Western MSM compare Putin with Hitler, because for stupid Westerners only Hitler is an incarnation of evil. (Mao Zedong killed 60 Millions Chinese, but the Westerners were and still are marching with his portraits and using his slogans.) In reality Putin is much nearer to Stalin, than to Hitler. And, yes, alike the SU was created and supported by the West, Putin´s Russia was created and supported by the West (and the “Russian” Empire before was too).
This is not only a great analysis, it is the sad truth, spoken at last. Except the last paragraphs that have a non sequitur look.
The US, and Europe, have yet to recover from the ilness that FDR inflicted. It’s maddening how much our lives are shaped by this colosal trason.
How many men in the US government have been bought by Stalin? This is the question. 800 metric tones of fine gold can do a lot of damage. This is the aproximate mass of the Spanish and Romanian gold stolen by the Russians before WWII. Adding up a similar (at least) quantity of gold stolen from the Russian aristocracy, we can have a picture of what Stalin was able to buy. Including FDR and many others. Hemmingway, Steinbeck, Duranty, GB Shaw, Hollywood itself look like small chips for so much gold.
A harder question is how many Putin has bought in the last 20 years? But we are really shy about it. We criticize “Europe” or “EU” for opening up the gates to Africa and the Muslim world. But never Angela Merkel the Putin’s puppet. We criticize the Queen, because this and that, but never a fabian wolf like Tony Blair. Looks like the current dictator in Moscow have the same long arm with a golden, but also and mortal touch.
Not all Western “agents of influence” were BOUGHT by Stalin. Very many were “useful idiots”, they really thought that the Soviet Union and Communism are good and they should help it. They worked for “The Idea”, not for money. Neither Hiss nor White needed money. They wanted to improve the world and to influence the history in “positive way”, and they thought the Communism is THE ONLY ONE positive way for all peoples. Diana West and Kent Clizbe both have good studied those points in their books.
Modern politicians are of course less “idealistic”, however there were some, of course, like many German “Grünen” or fighters against nuclear weapons (only American cruise missiles and N-bombs were bad, the Soviet ones were good and served the World Peace). I do not know if Catherine Ashton was a paid agent or an “idealist” in delusion. Was another Englishman, Michael Foote, MP, a real agent of KGB or only “confidential contact”? Who knows? Anyway for all problems of the English the Queen was guilty, but not Catherine, not Michael, and not their voters. And many modern politicians also could be blackmailed, because they or their relatives have collaborated with the KGB and/or Stasi, and as all files of the Stasi Foreign Intelligence (Hauptverwaltung Aufklärung) were transferred by Michael Wolf (Onkel Mischa) to Moscow before the Fall of the Wall, they are in Russia and can be used against some Western politicians, journalists, bankers, etc.
Don’t bet on stupidity, bet on cupidity.
Money were always important, but they can come in many ways, like connections, women, love, good press, Nobel prizes, a dacha and some Natashas (as Philby). Others are more modest and work for Putin and Russia for a pension or an allowance (gas money, as that Slovak influence agent caught on tape – probably to the dismay of many the Police found at his house around 80 000 Euro, not bad for an unemployed begging a FSB agent for gas money).
Your post is more than interesting. Many names are unknown for me, but definitely worth to be studied.
I read once again your post and now I think that you should be published by CC. Absolutely.
Thanks, but no. I cannot write long texts in a foreign language, and English is a foreign language to me. Besides I do not think that I can tell much more than what is written in many good books by other much more clever and informed men (and some women like Diana West). For example the books by Romanian General Pacepa were very interesting for me (but I am not agree with his overdriven pro-Semitism and also with his theory about Kennedy and Oswald), and alike many books by students of secret services and intelligence. I do not think I could write something better. The best I can do is to recommend some of such books. Well, maybe I could write or translate something about ancient Türkic, Kipchak and Nogay history and Tengrian mythology, but those topics do not belong here.
Ironically, if they had turned Germany into a de industrialized pastoral state, they would have created the biggest genetic colonization pump in the world, sending wave after wave after wave of Germans seeking a better life out across the world.
Moreover such Germany would be self-sustained and rich AGRARIAN country, more or less independent of the Russian/and not only Russian Oil and Gas and immune to the foreign energetic blackmailing. People always want to eat and so the producers of food always earn their money (and can buy everything which they do not produce themselves). You need bread and meat and you need them everyday. But you do not need a stupid but expensive IPhone, which is spying on you for the NSA.
Why this pas de deux between Turk Kök Böri and Croat Razvan? Because no one else can relate to the fatal misplacement of blame. This petty Anglonationalist screed absolves Churchill’s indebtedness to Anglo-Jewry as a cause of the war. It also, to paraphrase the former guy, is all “Stalin, Stalin, Stalin”. Stephen Paul Foster should read, digest and cross-reference the following article about the “Deep State” behind Stalin:
https://www.unz.com/lromanoff/stalins-jews
1. Not Croatian, but Romanian.
2. The Deep State behind Stalin had a significant Russian part. I’ve proved that here, with name in connection with the Holodomor. You can’t speak Russian Deep State without Molotov, the Marshals, the NKVD and border troops, the NKVD executioners. Not that the jews had not a very important part.
3. You play smart here, but your country was never under the Russian boot. My country was invaded every 20 years by the Russians in the last 300 years.
4. It was not the Jews that draw the blueprint for the Russian state. It was Nevski and Ivan the Terrible.
4. I think CC is a place for any nationalist of any race, or ethnicity, religion. Nationalist means you love your people and respect other peoples. It doesn’t mean that you have a divine right to invade other peoples, as the Russians seem to believe. Kok Bori is very informed and suffers for his people sent to die in Ukraine in a war that’s not theirs. His people is destroying itself so that the Russians in Moscow can stay on the couch and listen to the Soloviev the Jew as he asks for nuclear war against Europe.
5. Your people suffered greatly due to the Russian manipulations and instigation. Not due to the Germans or British people. But because your trust and naivete. You started an world war due to the Russian manipulations, distroyed Yugoslavia because of your idiot leaders felt important while drinking with Primakov. At dear pacifist Gorby instigations. I know that because my country had almost followed your way.
5. I feel for you, so it is maddening me how you don’t want to see. It’s incredible. You had a great and beautiful country and you wrecked it because the Russians told you so. Damn. But of course, Churchill, the Anglo-Saxons, whatever, but not an word about Primakov. Russia couldn’t keep the Eastern and Central Europe and started wars, left molls and neworks behind, left troops and guns, freezed wars. But only Yugoslavia fall in the trap. Sad. Damn sad.
It’s peculiar that in the long run, Stalin was better for his nation than Frank DelaRoos was. A strong leader is always better than a weak leader, even if both are bad men.
Seems absurd on the face of it.
Good by what standard?
Bad men are less dangerous if they are incompetent.
It’s been said before that the totalitarianism of Stalinist communism preserved Russianism, as if under permafrost, ready to spring forth after the fall of the Soviet machine. The model he transported through means of imperialism to the rest of Eastern Europe did the same for those countries, inoculating much of them against cultural marxism in the present day. I also believe that Stalin, though being a maniac, was preferable to the alternatives – he preserved and even revitalized elements central to Russian culture and art, which “left-Bolsheviks” like Trotsky were chomping at the bit to atomize completely and replace with much of the deconstructionist postmodernist abominations we now see defacing countries all over the West. In fact one of my favorite things to do is call Stalin, and his “Communism in one country” policy, a nationalist, or at least a National Communist, which I think aside from getting a rise out of angry Russophile tankies, is not too far off from reality.
Obviously I am no fan of Communism or Russia, and I’d have taken the Czar or Supreme Ruler Kolchak over any kind of General Secretary. However when we look at the modern USA that FDR partly fathered, and Russia as it exists today, I’d say that – as a nation – Russia will have a greater longevity, in no small part due to the way Stalin handled affairs.
Stalin was an exporter of communism as big as Trotsky. “Communism in only one country” was for the US ears. Go tell a Spaniard how it was with this and how the communism in one country resulted in the robbery of National Bank of Spain of more than 800 tones of fine gold. Of course some Spaniards needed to be skinned alive in the process. Imagine what “communism in one country” meant in the most unfortunate European East.
Obviously the Soviet union continued to subvert and push its ideologies abroad. We had the misfortune of experiencing that all over Europe, from France and Spain to Italy. We can see the fruits of those efforts today, with old pro-Soviet agent provocateurs spearheading the current American ideology of wokeism. America, as hard-headed as it was always portrayed with its John Birch Society and Reaganite posturing, now appeared to have been entirely subverted, and it was a slow-acting poison that might weaken it enough for to collapse in time under the weight of its multiracialism.
Yes, these are all bad. And yes, as I assume you to be Romanian (since I had a cool buzzcut gymrat Romanian coworker who was also named Razvan), it is healthy for you to hate Russia and the imperialism that it seems destined to push. That doesn’t take away what I said about Stalin having been better for Russia in the long run (intentionally or unintentionally) than FDR was for the USA. A hot take for sure but I believe it makes for a decent argument.
By the way. Kolchak was of Romanian origin. He had no chance to rule Russia. He was utterly denationalized, his family lost its estate in Moldavia, moved to Odesa and were allowed to die heroically for the empire.
The Russian civil war premiere motive was that the Russians were discontent that the tsars had to make “concessions” toward “minorities” in order to maintain the empire. The most important minority were the Germans and so they were the most hated. (You can check the names and the origin of the “Russian” emigres). After them came the Poles as the most hated (“Polish spy” was the deadliest accusation during the era). This discontent was exploited by Lenin and the gang. Something like the Russians wanted the cake (the Empire) and eat it too (keep every high ranking position only for themselves). And they become very content with a genocide.
Really? Stalin was good for “his” nation? Yes, the Russians and other Orthodox “Eastern Slavs” would not deny it, they know that the people are STATE PROPERTY, so the word “his” is absolutely correct. But what was Stalin good for? Because he murdered millions of men, women and children, but built modern industry and powerful army (with the help of the West, of course), because he occupied some countries (and those countries with their hostile populations became time bombs. which destroyed the Soviet Union in 1989-1991) and widened the sphere of influence. Those achievements were sure very good for all, whom he and his Bolshevik gang had killed.
Stalin really was very good for a Kazakh dying in the Steppe, over whom the steppe eagle was circling. He was good for an Ukrainian mother who became mad with hunger and so has boiled and eaten her own children. He was good for Karachais and Balkars, for Crimean Tatars and Black Sea Greeks, sent in cold boxcars to certain death in the eastern part of the Steppe.
I am not at all a supporter of Roosevelt, but I have not heard that he deliberately starved the inhabitants of Arkansas and Iowa. Still, one cannot compare crop failures caused by sandstorms with deliberate starvation for the sake of collectivization.
And yes, of course, a strong leader is better than a weak one. But a strong leader who kills his own people for the sake of some strange ideological concepts is much worse than a weak one. A strong leader may well reform his country and make it stronger and richer. He can and sometimes should do it harshly, but he should not do it by mass murder of his citizens. An example of such a strong and positive leader is Atatürk. He was strong. Sometimes he was brutal. But he was not a mass murderer of his own nation.
Stalin perfected and deployed the modern technology for the same purpose as Russia has always had. To exterminate everything on its way to the Atlantic.
So, Stalin put every Eastern European people on its road to extinction. Including the Russian people.
Is this good for you? I this the great hope of the White people?
In the past, the Russian hijacked the Orthodox Christians, the left, the extreme left, the greens, the pacifists, the black nationalists. Putin managed to hijack the right, and the WNs. I read so many aberrations in the last years that I am starting to think that everything is doomed.
Maybe some benevolent AI doing genetic engineering, on a distant planet, and in great secrecy might develop some Whites. Only to understand what went wrong with us.
Orban is clearly a strong leader of his people and the west despises him. They would clearly prefer a puppet tied to Soros dollars and a godless heathen. If only we could have more strong leaders that fight for their own people and nation without the backroom shenanigans with US and others? Then Europe could actually see a rebirth of independence rather than inter-dependence.
Did you know that the vast majority of the billions in lend lease that Stalin received during World War 2 went unpaid ? In the early 1950s after being paid only 2% the US government wrote off the debt. So Stalin’s USSR was not only helped to survive but expand its dominion over half of Europe and on someone else’s dime – the American taxpayer.
http://www.wearswar.com/2022/05/13/review-of-stalins-war-a-new-history-of-world-war-ii/
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.