214 words / 2:03:30
Greg Johnson, David Zsutty, and Angelo Plume (aka Pox Populi: Telegram, YouTube) convened on the latest broadcast of Counter-Currents Radio to discuss Tucker Carlson’s controversial interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin last week, and also answered listener questions. It is now available for download and online listening. See also Angelo’s “Interview with a Vladpire” and David Zsutty’s “In Tucker vs. Putin, Nationalism Wins.”
Topics discussed include:
00:02:55 Was this a win or a lose for Vladimir Putin?
00:21:06 Putin is rather autistic
00:23:39 Putin hates Russophiles
00:26:35 Putin’s denazification argument
00:32:44 Ethnonationalists are persecuted in Russia
00:34:27 Russia wants a weak America
00:36:30 Russia Today‘s agitprop
00:38:31 Russia’s alliances with the Third World
00:42:01 Both Russia and the West are corrupt
00:49:29 America has lost its power and authority
00:53:34 On Intermarium
00:55:10 Who actually says that Putin is our guy?
01:00:34 Angelo has to leave the chat
01:00:57 Question about Socrates
01:02:14 Question about blacks in the United States
01:09:24 Comment on James Corbett’s coverage of Putin
01:09:50 Greg on honor and heroism
01:24:30 Is Nick Fuentes a plant?
01:31:29 How Fuentes distorts both religion and politics
01:33:52 How Fuentes repels even Christians
01:41:25 Question about Giambattista Vico and Simone Weil’s reading of Homer
01:51:29 Question about Friedrich Nietzsche’s Antichrist
01:55:34 Final thoughts about the Putin interview
To listen in a player, click here or below. To download, right-click the link and click “save as.”
19 comments
I enjoyed the Carlson/Putin interview much more than this discussion about it, which I found boring and which involved two hours I’ll never regain.
I found the Carlson/Putin interview very interesting and not only because Putin is obviously an intelligent man who can stay awake for 2 hours of serious discussion while our own president can barely last for 5 minutes before being escorted off the stage by handlers.
Putin’s version of history, conveniently ignoring the war mongering of the USSR, its invasions of Poland, Finland, Persia, the Baltic Countries, the GULAGS, and brutal subjugation of Eastern Europe during the post war period, as well as his weird ranting about “Nazism”, blah, blah, blah, is nevertheless useful. It gave useful, informative info about the efforts of the US and Britain to sabotage peace efforts. Of course he is not our “savior.” He is a political leader and his country has different interests, probably adverse to mine. But Putin is supporting Syria in its struggle for survival against Amero-Israeli aggression and that should mean something to people who claim to believe so strongly in nationalism and sovereignty.
One of the panelists said Putin frequently relies on long historical digressions in speaking in his own country. How refreshing! A world leader who feels it is in his interest to come off as well read and intelligent instead of using some phony Negro accent and talking like an idiot in order to appeal to the black vote the way our leaders do…e.g. Hillary Clinton, Obama and Biden? Even if it’s an act, it says alot when a leader tries to achieve support by appearing to be intelligent rather than by appearing to be a fool by spouting threadbare slogans with a phony contrived accent.
I’ve read hundreds of comments on you tube and other places and most are overwhelmingly positive about this interview. Most believe Tucker is an honest seeker of truth and were shocked to learn of the efforts of British and Americans to sabotage peace negotiations. There is a sense, quite correct, that our leaders and media have lied to us from the beginning about this war. This interview is a wonderful antidote to all the war mongering and harping about “democracy.” If this interview undermines political support for this disastrous war it will have achieved a great deal. If Russian occupation of Ukraine will keep the Jewish vultures from coming in and buying it for pennies on the dollar, that’s a good thing.
Does anyone seriously believe that Putin decided to withdraw troops from Kiev as a gesture of good will during the peace negotiations? Ludicrous is the word for that.
Yeah Putin wanted peace when he had occupied a significant part of his neighbor’s land and realized that he wouldn’t get any further. “Let’s end the game now while I am still in the lead”. How noble of him.
Why shouldn’t Ukraine have tried to take back its lost territory once they had chased the enemy out of the capital? They retook large portions including the city Kherson during the summer/autumn of 2022 so these were no useless efforts. If they had been given all weapons which they anyway have received now immediately in the summer 2022 they would most probably have reconquered the Azov coast and the war would more or less have been won for them. The West’s half-hearted support is the reason for the situation we have today.
Please!
It is for the Ukrainians to fight their own battles and to achieve their own independence, not for me or other Americans to do so, whether financially or by military intervention.
In 1852 there was a lot of gnashing of of teeth and lots of breathless, hyperbolic platitudes about “freedom” and “Liberty” in connection with Russia’s domination of Hungary. The Hungarian patriot Kossuth visited the US and was a sensation with lots of rallies, op-ed pieces proclaiming pro-intervention sentiment. Thank God cooler heads prevailed. Henry Clay, that grand old statesman, among others, pointed out that a continental war with Russia on the other side of the world would not only be a reckless departure from traditional American principles of noninvolvement in the affairs of foreign nations, but would be a military disaster because America did not have the shipping, the men or the will to finance such an ill considered undertaking. What happened to Napoleon’s Grand Armee when he, as the leader of Europe’s premier power, crossed a few borders and invaded Russian, which was only a comparative stone’s throw away from France? It met with a disastrous end.
Ukraine is important to the US Government today for the same reason Czechoslovkia was important to the British in 1938. David Irving has revealed that British politicians were piling up nice bribes under the table from the Czech government and advocating Czech interests over British interests for that reason. Today the US arms industries and many in power are growing rich off the cash cow that is the war in Ukraine. It’s time to put an end to this disaster, to cut off aid to Ukraine and end this pointless war.
I don’t care about Ukrainian territory or democracy in that country. I care about the unopposed invasion of my own country over an undefended border and the suppression of free speech here and the massive election fraud that has made a mockery of the word “democracy.” Zelinsky is a Jew and so are the other vultures who want to swoop in and buy that country for pennies on the dollar. Enriching powerful Jews is the main point of this war, not fighting for freedom or liberty.
Today the US arms industries
US arms industries, when work, give jobs to white men (and some white women), also maybe for some Asians, also the armament race is economically good for the whites, like it was under Reagan.
***
Thank God cooler heads prevailed.
It would be better to say that the United States should not have intervened in the First and Second World Wars, aka the Anglo-German War of 1914-1945, especially not to intervene in these wars ON THE WRONG SIDE, as it was.
***
What happened to Napoleon’s Grand Armee when he, as the leader of Europe’s premier power, crossed a few borders and invaded Russian
Well, for Napoleon this was a pre-emptive strike, because “Russians” (under German “Russian” Tsar and for British money, of course) were ready to attack French forces in Prussia and Prussian Poland. The French invasion was not a unprovoked aggression, as Russian and British propaganda claimed then and someway also now.
Terms of the ceasefire agreement reached by Ukraine and Russia in Istanbul, March 2022. (That is, a few weeks after the start of the war.)
Russia keeps the Crimea. Ukraine keeps the Donbas, with autonomy and language rights to Russian speakers. Ukraine may join the EU, but stays out of NATO.
It was a good deal.
By all accounts Ukraine walked away from this deal under pressure from US & UK.
Americans are incomprehensible.
I do not believe that Russia would give to Ukraine Donbass, but I am sure that the population of Donbass, on both sides of the frontline does not want to live in Ukraine. Also the question is who would guarantee that the Russians hold their word.
On the other hand, I am glad that one more Russian imperialistic SoB and pro-Western puppet recently died in Putin’s Gulag. One more “good Russian”.
What fantasy peace offer are you talking about? Ukraine has never been offered to get back the Donbass territories. And it would have been pretty weird since these regions just had been recognized as independent states and RF’s intervention on their behalf served as the main pretext for the invasion. I think you are mixing this up with talks that were conducted after the 2014 occupation of Donbass and Crimea. Then there were such proposals about making Donetsk and Lugansk autonomous regions within Ukraine. Putin thereby intended to influence and control Ukrainian decision making through these regions. By 2022 his aims had expanded.
You can also see that in the newly occupied territories in Kherson and Zaporizhia the Russification policies started from day 1 and they began to plan immediately for fake referendums to annex those regions into RF. And RF officials has since then repeatedly declared that conditions for peace include Ukraine recognizing “new territorial realities”. They are not giving back anything in exchange for some neutrality. It’s very obvious that your Mr P is conducting a war of conquest.
The March 2022 deal was that they agree to disagree about the status of the Donbas, and parts, but not all of the territory will be under the protection of the international peacekeeping coalition.
In plain language: Re-roll to Minsk, let Zelensky try the political route again.
The security guaranties given to Ukraine would have been stronger than NATO’s Article 5, e.g. closure of airspace is specifically mentioned.
Consider the opinions on the Old Testament in the podcast. Now, Israel Shahak referred to the Talmud as an evil gloss on a mostly humanistic book, namely, the old testament. Let that percolate.
of course, I too have opinions on Homer, not just on homer Simpson. I believe that the Iliad is basically an antiwar poem, with Weil. I had to re-read the Weil essay just to make sure that she doesn’t reiterate these things, and I think my points are congruent with hers. The poet in general brings a humanistic tint to his material and strives to elevate human nature. The stories of the Iliad and odyssey are part of a Legendarium, which preexists homer. He was merely the greatest poet to turn his attention to the material. Other poets of antiquity, now mostly lost, treat other versions of this story, and of adjacent stories, as well-known. Typically the accepted or canonistic version of a story will be that of the greatest poet who turned his attention to it. For example, there are other versions of the fall of Troy besides that in Virgil, but we know his.
Achilles is the last of the great Greek heroes, the semi divine heroes, in the tradition of Hercules, Perseus, etc. etc. In a manner of speaking, his is the voice of God on earth. Like a prophet, so to speak. There are two possible Fates prophesized for Achilles. He can live a long life unknown in peace, or he can go to the Trojan war, where he is doomed to die, but have a great fame and honor. The story of the Iliad is basically a psychic struggle of Achilles against Agamemnon, but really within the Greek soul. Achilles decides that fame, heretofore the most important thing a warrior can obtain, according to the ancient Indo-European warrior precept, “ the fame of a dead man’s deeds,” may not be what it’s cracked up to be. But after the taking of Briseus, Achilles ponders, he says “well what good is fame and all this if it can really just be taken from you.” Maybe war is not so hot. This sentiment is restated in Odysseus’s encounter with Achilles in the underworld in the odyssey, of course. But of course, narrative necessity insists that Achilles dies in the Trojan war. All the Greeks know and expect this. Hence, Achilles must go to kill Hector, and so this is accomplished by the madness of Achilles. War is a kind of madness.
The final message from the gods is the shield of Achilles, created by a Hephaestus, which shows scenes of peace, contrasted with those of war. And it shows the lions attacking the sheep, saying something bad about war. It’s a final plea to Achilles to turn back from the fate of death in the Trojan war, to choose peace over war. The iliad and the odyssey, in my mind represent a transformation of the Greek spirit from the ancient warrior ethos to that of the market dominant minority, the wily Odysseus, buffeted by powers beyond his control and flexible.
those are my thoughts, basically similar in conclusion to Weil, but using different argumentation.
And the market dominant minority can be just as malicious, and as destructive as the ancient (and the modern) warrior ethos can be (When their are insufficient guides or intelligence involved in their control). The devil wears many faces.
Great analogy of this historic literature and its authors moral, thanks for sharing
“I believe that the Iliad is basically an antiwar poem”
Great art is not pro or anti something. It’s just about what life is like.
Example: Afghan war era antiwar songs by Viktor Tsoi, sung on both sides of the war in Ukraine.
The most famous one, Gruppa Krovi (Blood Type).
But also, a militaristic version.
My favourite one is Zvezda Po Imeni Solntse (The Star Called Sun). It’s such a perfect concentrate of steppe Slav culture. You can find an (almost) good translation in the comments.
I don’t mean to be reductive about it—there’s a lot else there, the Iliad is far from a simple piece of propaganda–but an artist, or group of artists in the case of Homer possibly, has a point of view which is imprinted on his work.
The Steppe culture has nothing common with “Slav(e)s”. If you want to listen to some modern songs reflecting the Steppe culture, you should listen Arslanbek Sultanbekov, Maya Ismailova, or Islam Satyrov, etc..
In the Iliad the point of view is so high it’s even above the gods. Everybody has their own truth, their perfectly understandable motivations, every action is defined by character and circumstances. Events unfold in an inevitable way. Everything has cosmic significance.
In the Odyssey the point of view is human — we need a home, stability, order, justice, love. As opposed to the gods, who are free-floating, constantly feuding (sometimes just for good sport), always busy with their own self-aggrandizement. Even the more approachable ones, like Athena, keep their humans as we keep circus animals. Apart from their occasional lusting after beautiful mortals, they are aliens.
There is more warmth in the Odyssey — it’s human warmth. Calling it “the ethos of the market dominant minority” is baffling.
The Iliad is a computer game, where the Gods are users, and humans their expendable units.
It’s insane how much the opinions about this “great revealing interview” differ. As with Trump, the personality cult around Putin is a major letdown and shows that right-wing people are not smarter than lefties or normies.
I’ve never understood what attracts the Western nationalists and right-wingers in Putin.
I kind of thought Putin was a force for good. The interview showed that Putin is just a former Soviet middle manager dreaming of Soviet revenge against the American empire. Pathetic. Putin is no friend of nationalists. Putin wants to put a cold blanket of suffocation back over many European countries and incorporate them into a multicultural, half-Mongolian and underdeveloped empire. From the interview one can only conclude that Putin is a joke. However, Tucker’s questions were even worse than Putin’s answers.
Dear Mr. Johnson,
I do think your thought on honor and heroism is so crucial that, in my poor opinion, it should be repeated on every Counter-Currents Radio show.
Otherwise, I’m very curious to read your review of the film “Civil War”(April 2024) directed by Alex Garland. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_War_(film)#Release
I think it exemplifies Patrick Buchanan’s prophetic book (“Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?” ) that you chronicled in 2011.
https://counter-currents.com/2011/11/he-told-us-so-patrick-buchanans-suicide-of-a-superpower/
Yours sincerely,
Le Fauconnier.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber 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.