Counter-Currents
Russian Culture as Pseudomorphosis
And the Russian Crusade Against the West
Cemil Kerimoglu
6,331 words
Western historians and analysts have always failed to comprehend Russia. Among many other things, its imperial nature has been puzzling to Westerners. For obvious reasons, there has been a tendency to compare it to Western colonial empires. As a prominent historian of Russia, Richard Pipes, once noted, unlike Western colonial empires which first became nation-states before embarking on imperial expansion, Russia was an empire from its inception.
This lack of understanding arises from our persistent adherence to a linear view of history and the assumption of a unified humanity progressing along a single path. However, such perspectives are fundamentally flawed. To truly grasp historical processes – particularly when it comes to understanding Russia – we must adopt a cyclical and modular view of history, as articulated by Oswald Spengler. This approach recognizes that different cultural/civilizational realms operate according to their own unique rhythms and internal logics. By embracing this perspective, we can gain deeper insights into Russia’s historical trajectory and, crucially, make more accurate predictions about its future.
The current unfolding of world events, particularly Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and more generally its stance in the global arena, present a fascinating test case for historical and cultural analysis. In this context, the theories of Oswald Spengler, a profound philosopher and historian, offer a unique lens through which we can view and understand these dynamics. Spengler’s magnum opus, The Decline of the West, posits a cyclical theory of civilizations, arguing that each civilization has its own distinct inner workings and lifecycle, akin to biological organisms. According to this theory, each civilization goes through equivalent stages in its lifecycle, akin to the life stages of an organism – birth, flourishing, maturity, stagnation and decline. In other words, each civilization acts as an independent module. They do, of course, interact with each other, like different organisms interact with each other during their lifetimes, but their life trajectories, like those of each individual organism are self-contained.
Which brings us again to the topic that had perplexed Richard Pipes and other Western historians of Russia. The confusion from comparing Imperial Russia to Western colonial empires arises from assuming a linear progression of history for the whole humanity.
Understanding however, that Russia finds itself in a phase of its lifecycle, which is not equivalent to the phase of the Western Civilization being compared to will resolve the confusion.
Spengler concentrates mainly on three cultural realms in his comparative analysis of civilizations; (i) Classical Graeco-Roman which he calls Apollonian, (ii) Middle Eastern which he calls Magian and (iii) Western Civilization which he calls Faustian. Separately, he touches upon Russia too, which he correctly believes is a cultural realm distinct from the West, with its distinct inner soul that differs from that of the Faustian Civilization.
Oswald Spengler, in his analysis of historical patterns, equates the Merovingian era in Western Civilization to the period extending from Ivan III’s reign to the Time of Troubles in Muscovy/Russia. He perceives these epochs as pre-cultural – i.e., the precursors to the upcoming development of their respective cultural realms, the eras in which the unique world-feelings of the cultures do not yet manifest themselves. Accordingly, the following period of Romanov Dynasty in Russia is equivalent to the Carolingian era in Europe. Therefore, the 20th-21st centuries of Russian history encompassing the Soviet era up to the present-day Putin’s Russia represent the post-Carolingian age in Europe that transitioned into the Ottonian era and later the Age of Crusades. The corresponding 10th-12th centuries marked the birth of the Faustian Culture in Europe, a period where the distinctive Faustian world-feeling began to manifest itself, setting the stage for the whole trajectory of the Western Civilization that followed. At the same time, that was the period when the future European nations began to form – the process initiated by the division of the Carolingian realm into East Francia (predecessor of Germany) and West Francia (predecessor of France).
Through this lens, the enigmatic nature of Russia’s imperial character from its very inception begins to make sense. It is as if one were puzzled by why European (Faustian) Civilization emerged as an empire, exemplified by the Carolingian Empire. However, this analogy reveals a deeper truth: “Russian” is not analogous to “German”, “French”, or “English.” Russia is not a nation-state but an entire cultural and civilizational realm – a realm that is in the early, formative stages of its lifecycle, comparable to post-Carolingian/Ottonian Europe. Thus, Russia as a cultural entity is more akin to Europe as a whole rather than to any single European nation. Just as Europe eventually gave birth to distinct nations like Germany, France, and England, so too must the Russian realm undergo its own process of nation-formation. The future might see the emergence of distinct identities within this realm – perhaps Uralians, Siberians, Ingrians, or Novgorodians – each as a unique national unit within the broader Russian civilization. This perspective not only clarifies Russia’s historical trajectory but also suggests the potential paths it may follow in the future.
To more accurately trace Russia’s historical path to its present state and to forecast its future, we must delve into another key concept in Spengler’s philosophy: Pseudomorphosis.
Cultural Pseudomorphosis
Quite presciently and to the point, Oswald Spengler saw Russia’s attachment to Europe initiated by Peter I (in fact, the process began even earlier during the reign of his father, Tsar Aleksey Mikhailovich) as artificially imposed and European culture as totally alien to ordinary Russians. He termed such cultural amalgamation where a certain cultural realm is forced to express itself under alien cultural forms imported or imposed from elsewhere as Pseudomorphosis. Oswald Spengler thus predicted a century earlier that Russia will be moving away from the European (Faustian) Civilization and asserting its own unique identity.
One vivid example of historical Pseudomorphosis is the pre-Islamic Middle East, which Spengler called Magian Culture, being dominated by Rome and hence forced to express itself through the forms of Graeco-Roman (Apollonian) Culture, which was entirely alien to it. Only with the advent of Islam did the Magian Culture free itself from Graeco-Roman influence and could express itself organically in line with its own nature.
It is therefore quite likely that Russia is undergoing a process similar to that which the Middle East underwent in the 6th and 7th centuries, when with the rise of Islam, it emphatically asserted its own nature. As a matter of fact, throughout the centuries of Roman rule and domination of the Classical cultural norms the Middle East was seething with apocalyptic hatred towards Rome and everything Roman. In this regard, Islam can be viewed as the consummate form of expression of the deepest longings of the Magian world. At the same time, it was the medium through which the ressentiment towards the Graeco-Roman culture manifested itself. The intensity of that ressentiment was huge due to centuries of cultural suppression under Rome and being forced into the mould of the forms of Apollonian Culture, which were unnatural to the Magian Culture.
This explains the enmity the Islamic (i.e. Magian) world today manifests towards the West, which is represented by Christianity and which they view as the continuation of Rome. The Magian world, in a sense, projects to Christianity and the West its deeply ingrained and centuries-old hatred towards Rome. If Russia is undergoing a similar process, it means that the Russian realm will also be imbued with deep apocalyptic hatred towards the West in the same way that the Magian world hated Rome.
Apart from the cases of Magian world being under the shadow of Graeco-Roman (Apollonian) Culture and Russia being under the shadow of Western (Faustian) Culture, another historical example of Pseudomorphosis is the Carolingian era, when the Carolingian kings, most notoriously Charlemagne, imposed Roman-Byzantine architectural traditions, cultural and religious norms on a population which still existed in its pre-cultural phase and to whom those cultural impositions were alien and felt unnatural. And this particular example of historical Pseudomorphosis is indeed more similar to the Russian experience.
Later historians came to refer to that period, spanning the 8th and 9th centuries in Europe, as the “Carolingian Renaissance”. However, such a term, which is used to define that epoch, is in reality a misnomer. Rather than embodying a true cultural awakening it was a fleeting and artificially imposed intellectual flicker, limited only to a handful of educated elite. Instead of representing a new cultural phenomenon, the period was more an attempt to recreate the older Roman-Byzantine culture. This cultural revival did not penetrate deep into Carolingian society and soon after all its effects were gone by the 10th century. In the words of the Benedictine monk Walahfrid Strabo (808 – 849):
Charlemagne was able to offer the cultureless and, I might say, almost completely unenlightened territory of the realm which God had entrusted to him, a new enthusiasm for all human knowledge. In its earlier state of barbarousness, his kingdom had been hardly touched at all by any such zeal, but now it opened its eyes to God’s illumination. In our own time the thirst for knowledge is disappearing again: the light of wisdom is less and less sought after and is now becoming rare again in most men’s minds.
In a related historical parallel, the Petrine period in Russia during the 18th and 19th centuries mirrors this phenomenon. When the term “Russian Culture” is invoked, it often conjures the artistic and intellectual feats of this era. Yet, this celebrated “Russian Culture” bears a striking resemblance to the ephemeral “Carolingian Renaissance”. Like in the latter, the cultural achievements of the former were external impositions completely alien to the indigenous populace. They flourished transiently among European settlers and a small, Europeanized elite in St. Petersburg. And similarly, like the effects of the “Carolingian Renaissance” were neutered by the early 10th century, the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia marked the beginning of a rejection of European cultural impositions. Putin’s Russia, in essence, is but a continuation of this cultural ebb, a natural gravitation away from Western (Faustian) cultural influences.
The 10th century in Europe, following the decline of the Carolingians, was a period of cultural interregnum. It was a time when the Byzantine-Roman influences had receded, yet the region had not yet cultivated its own distinctive cultural identity – an identity that would later emerge in the 11th and 12th centuries with the advent of Romanesque architecture that transitioned into Gothic architecture and formation of a new Germanized Christianity – the first true manifestations of the Faustian spirit.
Russia, in its current state, is traversing a similar path. The phenomenon once celebrated as “Russian Culture” is undergoing a process of negation. The country has drifted towards a less cultured state, where the norms of the prison and the thug increasingly overshadow the refined and the elegant, where cultural creativity is almost non-existent and traces of that “Russian Culture” have all but disappeared. In a sense, Russia is returning to its natural self – to the barbarous state of pre-Romanov Muscovy, shedding the last bits of Petrine Pseudomorphosis. The words of Walahfrid Strabo are also perfectly applicable to the present-day Russia: “the thirst for knowledge is disappearing again: the light of wisdom is less and less sought after and is now becoming rare again in most men’s minds”.
Parallels Between Carolingian Era in Europe & Romanov Era in Russia
The comparative analysis of the Carolingian epoch in Europe and the Romanov era in Muscovy/Russia reveals striking parallels, not only in their temporal location at equivalent phases of the lifecycle of their respective cultural realms, but even in the specifics of the events that came to define their rule.
The Carolingian ascent began amidst the fractured landscape of the Frankish Kingdom, torn by civil strife at the cusp of the 7th and 8th centuries. Here, the Carolingians, initially serving as mayors of the palace under the Merovingian kings, began to cement their influence. The position, initially a service role, morphed into a hereditary seat of power under their stewardship, subtly underlining their burgeoning authority. Yet, their dominion was initially restricted to only parts of the Frankish realm. The waning of the Merovingian dynasty presented an opportune moment for the Carolingians. It was during this period of decline that they engaged in a decisive struggle against rival aristocratic families. Their victory was epitomized in the figure of notorious Charles Martel, who, by 718, had established himself as the de facto ruler of the entire kingdom.
Mirroring this historical pattern, the rise of the Romanov Dynasty in Muscovy unfolded under similar circumstances. The turn of the 16th and 17th centuries in Muscovy was a period marred by political crisis that came to be known as the Time of Troubles by later historians, a turbulent epoch following the end of the Rurikid dynasty’s longstanding rule. This era was characterized by political instability, power struggles, and a void in leadership. It is here that Boris Godunov, once the mayor of the palace akin to Charles Martel, emerged as a key figure. Before ascending to the throne himself, Godunov played a pivotal role at the court of the last Rurikid tsar – Feodor I. However, unlike his Carolingian counterpart, Godunov’s ambition to establish a lasting dynasty was thwarted. The murder of his only son plunged Muscovy into deeper chaos, paving the way for the Romanovs to ascend as the new ruling dynasty amidst the upheaval.
The existential crises that engulfed the Frankish Kingdom and Muscovy during their respective periods of upheaval also bear striking resemblances, each marked by external threats in addition to internal turmoil. In Francia, the encroaching Arabs, having already seized Spain, were inching further northward. This surge was dramatically halted at the Battle of Poitiers in 732 by Charles Martel. This decisive victory not only stemmed the Arab advance but also safeguarded the nascent Faustian Culture of Europe from subjugation by an alien civilization. This moment in history was pivotal, as it averted a potential Pseudomorphosis similar to that which had overtaken the nascent Magian Culture under Roman dominion centuries earlier.
In a parallel historical vein, Muscovy during the Time of Troubles teetered on the brink of conquest by the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Such a subjugation would have ensnared Muscovy under the shadow of Faustian Culture, echoing the Roman influence over the Middle East. However, history repeated its act of defiance as the Muscovites, akin to the Franks in 732, repelled the foreign assault, preserving their independence. The Battle of Moscow in 1612 can stand in Muscovy’s annals as the Battle of Poitiers does in Europe’s. Moreover, Dmitry Pozharsky can be regarded as the Russian “Charles Martel”.
Yet, the aftermath of these watershed battles unveils an intriguing historical irony. In both the Frankish and Muscovite realms, the dynasties that ascended in the wake of military triumph – the Carolingians and the Romanovs, respectively – embarked on endeavors that seemingly contradicted their forebears’ struggles. Rather than fortifying their unique cultural identities, they initiated the imposition of the very foreign cultural elements their predecessors had militarily resisted. This led to the emergence of cultural Pseudomorphoses within their realms. What sets these instances apart from the Pseudomorphosis in the Magian world is the manner of their inception: while the Magian world was subjugated and transformed through physical conquest, Francia and Muscovy voluntarily embraced these foreign cultural impositions after having successfully repelled foreign invasions.
In the annals of history, the Carolingian era in Francia and the Romanov period in Muscovy/Russia thus emerge as mirror images of one another, particularly in their ambitious projects to infuse foreign cultural norms into their realms.
Both Francia and Muscovy grappled with similar challenges: a widespread lack of literacy among the populace, and more critically, among the clergy. This illiteracy was compounded by the clergy’s deficiencies in moral conduct, discipline, and knowledge. Addressing these issues was crucial. Charlemagne, a figurehead of this era in Europe, pioneered the establishment of numerous cathedral and monastery schools. These institutions were not only for future monks and clergy but also for the laity, fostering a culture of education and enlightenment.
Both the Carolingians and the Romanovs launched extensive initiatives to rectify moral conduct, restore ecclesiastical discipline, and restructure the church hierarchy. Moreover, a pivotal issue in both realms was the reliability of religious texts, which had deteriorated over time. Therefore their efforts also encompassed the correction of religious texts and the alignment of rituals with canonical law. In Muscovy, such efforts culminated in the 17th-century religious schism initiated by Patriarch Nikon’s reforms. These reforms, aimed at aligning Muscovite rituals and religious texts with those of the Greek Orthodox Church, led to the emergence of the “Old Believers”, who adhered to the traditional Muscovite customs and rituals.
Charlemagne and Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich of the Romanov dynasty shared a profound interest in reforming the church and maintaining unified practices. Charlemagne, upon discovering discrepancies between Frankish and Roman liturgical practices, sought guidance from Pope Hadrian, leading to the adoption of the Dionysio-Hadriana, an authoritative book on canon law which served as the main source for ecclesiastical legislation. Similarly, during the reign of Alexei Mikhailovich in Muscovy, Patriarch Nikon engaged extensively with the ecumenical patriarch and Greek clergy in Constantinople, aiming to harmonize Muscovite Orthodox liturgy with its Greek counterpart.
In both realms, foreign missionaries and theologians played instrumental roles. Irish monks in the Frankish Kingdom, akin to Ukrainian theologians under the Romanovs, were the chief educators and reformers. The Irish missionaries were pivotal in establishing Medieval Latin for church and literature and in developing the Carolingian minuscule writing style, which became the standard in medieval Europe and is the direct ancestor of modern-day Latin script. They were instrumental in unifying church practices and correcting religious texts. Similarly, in Muscovy, Ukrainian influence was profound in shaping literary Russian and Church Slavonic, and Ukrainian theologians were key in the reforms that aligned Muscovite Orthodoxy with Greek practices.
It is noteworthy that beyond religious and educational reforms, both Charlemagne and Peter I sought to transform the very fabric of their societies, extending their influence to the private lives and mindsets of their subjects. Peter I’s insistence on Western attire and grooming for Russian state officials exemplifies this. Charlemagne’s capitularies, the most famous and extensive of which is Admonitio Generalis, is an equivalent example from the Carolingian realm. Through them Charlemagne sought not only legal reform but also what in his mind constituted moral and religious rectitude among his subjects.
What unites Charlemagne and Peter I is the fervor and a sense of higher purpose with which they imposed the reforms, and with them alien cultural norms, on their subjects who were unwilling to accept them. This of course was also accompanied by extreme brutality. Especially the reign of Peter I was defined by widespread persecution and cruel coercion on par with what is usually associated with Stalin’s rule in Russian history. Likewise, Charlemagne’s methods of wresting the old pagan practices out of his subjects and introduce Christianity into his realm were also notable for their cruelty and uncompromising intensity.
One is reminded of the Saxon Wars (772-804) as one of the most notable instances of Charlemagne’s forceful spread of Christianity. A particularly brutal episode was the Massacre of Verden, in which Charlemagne ordered the execution of thousands of Saxons. This event was not only a political act of suppression but also a grim message about the consequences of resisting Christianization. Earlier, in his campaign to suppress Saxon paganism, as a symbolic act, Charlemagne had cut down Irminsul, a sacred tree which Saxons revered.
Cutting down of Irminsul: Charlemagne forces Chrisitanity upon Saxons.
Imposition of Greek liturgical practices and European social norms in Russia during the 17-18th centuries was also accompanied by brutal coercion. One is reminded of the persecution the “Old Believers” faced after they refused to accept Nikonian reforms in 1654. The most outspoken of them were sent to the stake, others to the furthest corners of the Tsardom, often never to return. An episode notable for its brutality was the massacre of the Solovetsky Monastery in 1676 that occurred after seven years of siege in response to the monks’ steadfast refusal to accept the modified liturgical practices and texts. Moreover, out of desperation the “Old Believers” resorted to the most dramatic form of protest imaginable – i.e., self-immolation. The old Muscovite period of Russian history literally ended in flames.
The protest during this period was not merely against religious changes, however, but represented a broader defiance against the imposition of foreign European cultural norms that were deeply alien to Muscovy. The “Old Belief” became the symbol of this defiance, representing a fight to preserve the very essence of Muscovite identity. The struggle against Europeanization – i.e., Pseudomorphosis, found its most dramatic expressions in the social upheavals of the time, such as Stepan Razin’s Rebellion (1670-1671) and Pugachev’s Rebellion (1773-1775), both brutally crushed by the state. Among those who clung to the old Muscovite ways, there was a growing sense of loss – an awareness that something fundamental to their identity, something intrinsic to their very soul, was being forcibly stripped away. The desperation of this cultural and spiritual struggle is poignantly captured in the words of Archpriest Avvakum, the spiritual leader of the “Old Believers,” who pleaded with Patriarch Nikon, his nemesis: “You are Russian! Why do you need these Greek manners?” This cry of anguish encapsulates the deep-rooted tension between preserving a unique cultural identity and the pressures of imposed change, a tension that defined the era of Pseudomorphosis in Muscovite/Russian history.
Patriarch Nikon introducing the Church reforms.
In essence then, the Carolingian and Romanov periods are historical parallels that unraveled in different centuries and locations, yet at the equivalent stages of the lifecycles of their respective civilizations. Each dynasty, in its quest to uplift and transform its society, embarked on a comprehensive journey of cultural, educational, and religious reform, which subjugated their respective realms to alien cultural forms.
The Muscovite/Russian Pseudomorphosis therefore bears a closer resemblance to the Carolingian experience than to the Middle Eastern one. Unlike the Magian realm, which was compelled to develop under the influence of the alien Apollonian Culture due to physical conquest – first by Alexander the Great and later by Rome – Russia was never subjected to such direct domination by a Western power. Similarly, Carolingian Europe was never physically conquered by Byzantium or the Arab Empire. In the case of the Magian realm, the imposition of alien cultural forms was enforced by a conquering force, making it an externally driven transformation. In contrast, both Muscovy/Russia and Carolingian Europe experienced a form of cultural Pseudomorphosis that, while influenced by external forces, was ultimately an internal decision, shaped by their own historical circumstances and choices.
Liberation from Pseudomorphosis and the Age of Ressentiment
The end of the Carolingian era in Europe, which was followed by the rise of Ottonians in East Francia and later of Capetians in West Francia, marked the liberation of the Western (Faustian) spirit from alien cultural forms imposed on it earlier. The newly born Faustian Culture began developing its own natural forms of expression. The Romanesque that later transitioned into Gothic architecture and the accompanying emergence of a new Germanized Christianity, which starkly differed from Graeco-Byzantine Christianity, were the first manifestations of this newly liberated Faustian spirit, reflecting a uniquely Western (Faustian) world-feeling.
This liberation from the imposed Greek-Byzantine cultural forms imposed by Carolingians was also symbolized by acts of historical defiance. A striking example is the veneration of the Saxon chieftain Widukind, who fiercely resisted Charlemagne’s brutal Christianization campaign during the Saxon Wars. Although Widukind was ultimately forced to submit to Charlemagne’s rule and accept baptism in 785, marking the formal subjugation of the Saxons, he later became a symbol of Saxon resistance and independence in the post-Carolingian era. Revered as a hero in the Faustian world freed from the stifling influence of the Carolingian-imposed Pseudomorphosis, Widukind’s legacy lived on through the Immedinger family, a powerful clan in early medieval Europe that traced its roots back to him. Remarkably, this defiant leader who once stood against Christianization was later canonized by the very institution he had opposed – the Catholic Church. This ironic twist reveals a profound truth: the Christianity that emerged in post-Carolingian Europe was not merely a continuation of the religion imposed by Charlemagne. Instead, it had been transformed and Germanized, reflecting the liberated Faustian spirit and a distinctly Western world-feeling. Widukind’s canonization, therefore, was a symbol of the triumph of a new cultural identity – a Germanized Christianity that honored its heroes according to its own values and worldview, free from the constraints of its earlier Pseudomorphosis.
The Saxon chieftain Widukind, who resisted Charlemagne.
The distinctiveness of this new Germanized Christianity became increasingly evident in the mounting tensions between the Western Latin rite and the Eastern Byzantine rite during the 9th to 11th centuries, ultimately leading to the Great Schism of 1054. This schism, which formally separated Eastern Orthodoxy and Western Catholicism, was far more than a mere disagreement over rituals or doctrinal nuances. It marked the culmination of a profound cultural rift – a clash between two fundamentally different world-feelings. The schism represented the revolt of the emerging Faustian spirit against the foreign Greek-Byzantine influence that had previously constrained it. This was not just a religious split but a declaration of cultural independence, as the nascent Western (Faustian) Culture asserted its distinct identity against an imposed heritage that never truly resonated with its nature.
Importantly, the liberation of an emerging culture from the grip of Pseudomorphosis often unleashes a deep-seated hatred and ressentiment toward the dominant culture that once suppressed it. This phenomenon can be observed across various historical contexts. During the Roman rule, the entire Middle Eastern realm, subdued under Roman authority, was suffused with an apocalyptic hatred for Classical Civilization and all that Rome represented. The rise of Islam, with its ethos of Jihad, was the Magian soul’s violent response to this subjugation – a dramatic act of cultural self-liberation from the bonds of Graeco-Roman influence. The enduring animosity that Islam harbors toward Christianity, even today, is rooted in this ancient trauma of Pseudomorphosis. By directing its hatred toward Christianity, Islam sublimates its deeper resentment toward the Graeco-Roman Civilization, which it perceives as embodied in the Christian faith. The rapid spread of Islam across the Roman Middle East – from North Africa and Egypt to the Levant – was fueled, in part, by this deep-seated ressentiment. For instance, the Monophysite Christians of Egypt, later known as Coptic Christians, who harbored a profound resentment toward Roman-Byzantine rule, welcomed the Arab invaders with open arms, eager to throw off the yoke of their former oppressors.
Similarly, the Crusades, which coincided with the Great Schism, can be viewed as an outpouring of the Germanic world’s ressentiment toward both Islam and the Byzantine Empire – two forces representing the East (i.e., the Magian world) under whose shadow the Faustian spirit had long been stifled. In fact, in the Germanic Europe of the time, the Byzantine world was despised nearly as intensely as the Muslim world. This animosity was starkly illustrated by the Fourth Crusade, which was directed not against Muslim lands, but against the Byzantine Empire itself, culminating in the brutal sack of Constantinople by the Crusaders. The Crusades can therefore be seen as the Faustian world’s emphatic rejection of the Eastern cultural dominance that had constrained it for centuries, marking a decisive moment in the assertion of Western identity and independence.
The Russian Crusade Against the Faustian West
Russia, after shedding its European veneer with the Bolshevik Revolution, has entered its own Age of Crusades or Jihad, driven by a profound sense of gloating, revenge, and apocalyptic hatred toward Western (Faustian) Civilization. This Jihad mindset originates from the emphatic liberation of a young culture from the shadow of an older, alien culture – i.e., from the mental suppression of Pseudomorphosis.
In fact, one could argue that Russia declared its Jihad against the West as early as the Bolshevik Revolution, with the declared struggle against “Capitalism” being a symbolic rallying cry for a broader crusade. For the Russians, “Capitalism” was a euphemism for Western Civilization itself. By counterposing “Communism” against “Capitalism,” they were, at a deeper level, counterposing Russia against the West. This crusade initially employed covert means, such as supporting and financing revolutionary movements aimed at destabilizing Europe through the Comintern. It is also during the Soviet period that Russia becomes the vanguard of the Third Worldist ressentiment and loathing against Western Civilization, peddling the “anti-colonialist” narrative, which in reality is an explicitly anti-western and anti-white narrative aimed at harming the West.
The Second World War, known in Russia as The Great Patriotic War, can be seen as the first overt Crusade against the “infidel” West, albeit under a different guise. Many in the West are still perplexed by why Russia, which “fought against Nazism” and helped “defeat it,” now employs similar, if not worse, tactics in Ukraine. The reality is that Russians view the Second World War through a completely different lens. For Westerners, it was a battle against an internal phenomenon that organically emerged within the Faustian Civilization. For Russians, however, WWII and the “fight against Nazism” represented a broader struggle against the West itself. This is the context in which the cult of victory in The Great Patriotic War must be understood in Russia: it is essentially a religious cult of Crusades, a Jihad against the Faustian West.
Moreover, present-day Russian critiques of Western phenomena – such as liberalism, the LGBT movement, and woke culture under Vladimir Putin – are a continuation of this civilizational conflict. While some Westerners may interpret Russian criticisms as aligning with traditional European values, the reality is that these phenomena are viewed by Russians as emblematic of European culture itself – a culture they regard with deep-seated animosity. This perspective conflates disparate Western phenomena, from Nazism to LGBT rights, into a single category of European-originated ills, reflecting a fundamental difference in interpretation between Russia and the West. For Europeans, these are clearly separate and starkly opposed phenomena, but for Russians, who view them from the outside, they are all manifestations of a singular, alien European culture, which they deeply loathe.
Russians do not despise Western “decadence” out of empathy for the West; they despise these phenomena precisely because they are European. If Europe were traditionalist, they would loathe and criticize European traditions and customs just as they did during the Soviet era. Back then, the main rallying cry against the hated Faustian World was not its decadence, as the West had yet to manifest the phenomena it does today, but rather “Capitalism.” In Soviet rhetoric, “Capitalists” was synonymous with “Westerners.” Today, they label Westerners as “gays,” for example, but the essence remains unchanged.
Putin’s era should therefore be seen as the continuation of Russia’s “Crusade” or “Jihad” against the West, marked by an apocalyptic hatred against Faustian Civilization, as it frees itself from the last remnants of European Pseudomorphosis. The invasion of Ukraine must be understood in this light, as part of a broader historical process. The Russians’ enmity toward Ukrainians is akin to the hatred of heretics who have abandoned the “Russian World”, which, deep inside, for Russians is a euphemism for a distinct Muscovite-Russian Culture that counterposes itself against the Faustian Culture and is involved in a deadly struggle with it. Various Russian political commentators, Russian clerics and the entire Russian Orthodox Church indeed explicitly frame this war as a “Holy War” and a confrontation with the West. Putin himself has called the war against Ukraine, and by extension the Western coalition that supports it, a civilizational struggle against the West.
Russian society today exhibits many characteristics reminiscent of the Crusader spirit that dominated early medieval Europe. In those times, crusaders were granted extraordinary privileges: their lands were protected in their absence, and they received absolution for past crimes and violence, making joining the Crusades an appealing option for many knights and princes. Similarly, in modern Russia, former convicts who join mercenary groups like Wagner, or the Russian army itself, receive preferential treatment. Upon enlisting in the war against Ukraine – framed as a modern-day crusade – they are pardoned for their crimes and, upon returning, are promised advantages such as priority in university admissions or job placements. This preferential treatment mirrors the incentives that once drew European crusaders into battle, underscoring, yet again, the presence of the militant, crusading mindset in Russia’s ongoing battle against the West.
This militant mindset is also deeply intertwined with the role of religion in Russian society, particularly the Orthodox Church’s justification of militarism. Many in the West, and even in Ukraine, are shocked by how the Russian Orthodox Church not only endorses the war but also goes so far as to bless soldiers and consecrate nuclear weapons. A striking example is the recently built Main Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces, which is dedicated to the military – a concept utterly alien and appalling to Western and Orthodox Christians alike. Equally perplexing is the veneration of Stalin among devout Russian Orthodox believers. Despite Stalin’s brutal persecution of the Church during his reign, where priests were tortured and killed, he is now honored, with some even creating icons of him – one of the greatest persecutors of religion, and Orthodox Christianity in particular.
Main Cathedral of the Russian Armed Forces. Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons
However, when we step back from a linear view of history and adopt a cyclical and modular perspective, these seeming contradictions begin to make sense. In this phase of its cultural lifecycle, Russia’s approach to religion mirrors that of other nascent cultures during similar stages of their development. Just as the Catholic Church once incited believers to join the Crusades and Islam called its followers to Jihad, the Russian Orthodox Church now plays a similar role in rallying support for Russia’s own “holy war.” The veneration of Stalin, too, aligns with this pattern and instead of being contradictory, in fact, makes perfect sense. He is seen not simply as a political leader, but rather as a symbolic figure – a personification of the Russian soul who, through his brutal measures, tore away the vestiges of European Pseudomorphosis. In this light, Stalin’s reverence within the Church echoes the veneration and canonization of Widukind in post-Carolingian/Ottonian Germany, a leader who in his lifetime had fiercely resisted Charlemagne’s Christianization efforts. Deep inside for Russians, Stalin represents a pivotal force in their cultural history, a figure who embodies their defiance against the much-hated Faustian Civilization and, more importantly, who realized their deepest desire – i.e., revenge against the West fueled by an apocalyptic hatred against it.
All this suggests that the next stage, and possibly the consummate stage, of Russia’s shedding away its Pseudomorphosis will be the emergence of a uniquely Russian form of Christianity – a Russian “Gothic Christianity” of sorts, one that is organically suited to the Russian soul. While it is difficult to predict the exact contours this new religious expression will take, a close study of the “Old Believers” could provide some clues. Their practices and beliefs, rooted in a pre-Petrine, pre-Westernized Russia, may offer a glimpse into what a truly indigenous Russian Christianity might look like.
This evolution of Russian Christianity will eventually trigger a schism within the broader Eastern Orthodox Christianity, comparable in its historical significance and intensity only to the Great Schism of 1054. And the catalyst to this will likely be the granting of autocephaly to the Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) in 2019 by the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople. The Russian Orthodox Church’s refusal to recognize this autocephaly has already led to tension with the Ecumenical Patriarchate and other Orthodox Churches in Europe. While Russia may accuse Ukraine of schism, it is, in fact, Russia that will be eventually separating itself from the broader Eastern Orthodox Christianity. As Ukraine moves closer to Europe, reaffirming its connection to the Greek Orthodox tradition, Russia may be on the path to developing a distinct form of Christianity, one that is uniquely Russian and resonates more deeply with its cultural essence.
Conclusion
Russia has long been a source of bewilderment for Western observers, its behavior often confounding those who view it through the lens of a linear historical narrative and the concept of a unified humanity. Much of this confusion arises from our adherence to this flawed perspective. In contrast, Oswald Spengler’s cyclical and modular view of history, which posits that civilizations are self-contained entities with their own unique inner workings and equivalent phases of development that are separated temporally and locally, yet are morphologically equivalent (i.e., birth, flourishing, maturity, stagnation and decline) – much like autonomous organisms – offers a more illuminating framework for understanding Russia, its societal mindset, historical trajectory, and its fraught relationship with the West.
The Western perception of Russia has largely been shaped by the artificially “Europeanized” version of the realm that emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries. However, this European veneer was a superficial imposition on a populace whose cultural roots were fundamentally different. History has shown that such imposed identities are unsustainable, and it was only a matter of time before Russia began to shed this facade and revert to its natural, pre-Romanov self.
This process has been unfolding over the past century. The Bolshevik Revolution marked the beginning of Russia’s gradual liberation from European Pseudomorphosis, a process that continues today under Vladimir Putin. In a broader historical context, Putin’s Russia is simply advancing the path initiated by the Bolsheviks in 1917, as that cultural realm turns its back on the West and reclaims its unique civilizational identity. This Russian path, distinct and resolute, is inevitably marked by a fierce civilizational confrontation with the West, driven by an emotional intensity comparable to that of Jihad or the Crusades. It is a reality that Western nations must come to terms with in their interactions with Russia.
Oswald Spengler’s insights and his cyclical view of history are crucial for us to understand the deep-seated longings and motives of an adversary that has long waged a “holy war” against the West, manifesting in various forms over the past century. By adopting this perspective, we can better grasp the nature of the challenge we face and, ultimately, devise a more effective response to prevail in the deadly confrontation that lies ahead.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
64 comments
1. What is the genetic makeup of ethnic Russians today?
2. What was the genetic makeup of ethnic Russians before 1917?
3. What was the genetic makeup of ethnic Russians before the Mongol Invasions?
Ignore 2 & 3 if there aren’t any differences.
On 1.: Whichever the verdict; Does it matter? And how so?
What was the genetic makeup of ethnic Russians before the Mongol Invasions?
Nobody knows, because there were no ethnic Russians before the “Mongol” invasions. There were also no Ukrainians, Belarussians, etc. yet. There were many very different tribes, Slavic, Iranoaryan, Uralic, Eastern Finns, Türks, etc. The rulers were so called Varyagians (and nobody also knows who they were by ethnical origin), and they sold their enslaved subjects to the whole Europe and Meditteranean through the so called Rahdonytes, international Persian-Jewish merchants and slave traders.
“Russians do not despise Western “decadence” out of empathy for the West; they despise these phenomena precisely because they are European”
This is a bit of a stretch. It’s true that Russian intellectuals, especially during 19th century, were critical of Western Europe just because apparently they were anti-Western, but to say that Russians resistance against degenerate “Western values” is out of sheer resentment is missing the point. These “values” should be rejected whenever a healthy nation encounters them.
Regardless of historical animosities and rivalries, the Russian people are a European people and nothing a Turkish author or even Spengler himself (whose Decline I have read with immense please) could say can dispute this fact! It’s time the European peoples set aside their grievances and focus on the (((common enemy))).
Thank you for this overview of the history of Russia as it pertains to Europe, C.K. I was in Saint Petersburg, the fourth largest European city, with my current wife, in 2003. It was its 300th anniversary and commonly known as Russia’s “window into Europe.” Tsar Peter the Great built the port city on what was formerly Swedish land, mostly swamp, and it’s said up to a million conscripts died in the process.
Rez: September 25, 2024 The Russian people are a European people and nothing a Turkish author or even Spengler himself (whose Decline I have read with immense please) could say can dispute this fact! It’s time the European peoples set aside their grievances and focus on the (((common enemy))).
—
Agreed.
##Reactionary## asks about the genetic makeup of ethnic Russians. I won’t begin to answer that, but in my travels to Russia I was welcomed and found at home among them, other than the language barrier, that in a little time is no barrier at all.
However, Russian National Alliance member and experienced ethnic Russian nationalist has been discussing this and other related topics at length for four years in a subforum dedicated to him: “(180) Words of Wolf Stoner” at WhiteBiocentrism.com. Fascinating reading for anyone interested in firsthand reports from Russia by one of us. Much on the disastrous brothers war and the Jew hand behind both sides. In an email I received from Wolf today was included this:
…There is some hope that the war comes to a standstill. Both sides are exhausted. It is similar to the 1953 Korea situation. Therefore, chances for a ceasefire are increasing. If the government proclaims overall mobilization… I have no desire to serve in Putin’s army… It is the worst-case scenario but it has to be considered. The level of insanity of the Kremlin’s rulers is unfathomable… The best-case scenario would be for the Putin regime to collapse and some kind of normalcy in international relations restored. But the situation is extremely volatile and unpredictable. “All options are on the table” as many American politicians like to say…
focus on the (((common enemy)))
How could they, if the Chinese lobby has so much power in Russia, in America, in Europe, in Australia, and everywhere. The common enemy has already WON, and without any war, just like their great military philosopher Sun Tzu taught.
Lol …please do obfuscate…
Ask the Democratic Party who financed them since Clinton, maybe you will surprised to know that these are neither Jews, nor Russians.
How do you square Russia hating the West with the fact that anyone whose anyone in Russia has expensive property in the West and their families living in the West? Thats an elephant in the room that can’t be ignored in good faith. The Russian oligarchy who aren’t even ethnic Russians usually live in the best traditions of Western rootless Cosmopolitans. Normal Russians hate the oligarchy and tend to deeply distrust the Kremlin and Russias liberal Westernophile urban class but than normal Russians dont run Russia anymore than normal Europeans and Americans control their own countries. The best that can be said I suppose is that the people who run Russia are hypocrites for sending their kids to Western Universities and buying Tuscan Villas and London penthouses while they hate the West. But again the people who run Russia aren’t ethnic Russians anyway by in large and this essay was supposed to be about how normal Russians want to wage a jihad against the West out of nothing more than pure resentment. Because they are mean nasty people in other words.
I feel like that isn’t born out by recent historical events at all. In the 90s and late Soviet period normal Russians were utterly infatuated with everything Western. Western clothes were huge status symbols, coca cola and McDonald’s were everywhere. To this day American music is popular in Russia. I guess the author would just say “well yeah Russians are nasty hypocrites because they aren’t Faustian” but that strikes me as very lazy and weak. A much more plausible and straightforward explanation is that normal Russians see that the people running Russia are Westophiles and normal Russians hate the people running Russia. They perceive that the non Russian ruling class are more loyal to their yachts, Italian villas, and offshored bank accounts than to Russia. They perceive that the ruling class is more loyal to WHO, IMF and Tel Aviv than to Russia. All these objects, countries and institutions are associated with “the West” in the minds of normal Russians and especially patriotic Russians.
Normal Russians are anti Western for the same reason many Western dissidents are anti globohomo. Normal Russians aren’t calling for banning Beethoven and Mozart for God’s sake. They aren’t calling for banning the study of Shakespeare and Nietzsche. They just aren’t big on gays for real. If the association of their hated ruling class with the West in a general sense is unfair than okay fine. But the authors psychoanalysis is unnecessary for understanding why normal Russians arent big on the West. Unlike the people who actually run Russia. The authors total failure to address the Westernophilia of the current Russian ruling class is a huge weakness in the article. The war in Ukraine is absolutely no proof that the Russian ruling class actually secret hates the West. If that were true their kids wouldn’t be living there full stop. Your heart is where your property and families are and with the Russian elite that is Europe, Dubai and Israel. What Western dissidents class as globohomo normal Russians class as the modern West. Not complicated.
This was a helpful comment. Something about this article’s thesis sounds very contrived and overly cerebral, but I didn’t know how to critique it.
I think the first thing all Western nations, not countries, but nations have to put all of their energy into combatting are our detached, global cosmopolitan ruling class. First thing we must do is lose the word elite. They are not elite. Even the high functioning ones who are skilled and successful and their success is merited. The dumbest guy in the world could be one of the richest and the smartest guy in the world could be one of the poorest. Merchant led orders, despite their self flattery, do not cultivate true elites.
Words matter. Those who would rally to our banners may never if they want to cozy to power and we call these powerful the elite. They are a rabble.
In any case, our issue are the traitors of our own kind who have either turned against their own civilization and people as some symbol of status and novelty. Then there are the outsiders they have invited in who know they are weak and see an easy path to our total dispossession.
The GAE is a classic example. America was destroyed by those who pursued a global empire. They were and are so bent on this empire that they threw their own civilization and people under the bus in order to outbid Soviet egalitarian-imperialism with their own version of it. They gave away everything we love horse trading with petty third world leaders. An elite would never have done that.
To the extent we are involved in any extra-national politics it should be focused on creating a pan-European identity and brotherhood. Our homelands are being given away with our pensions that they claim the colonizers are here to save. Again, an elite would never do that much less conceive of such a stupid contradiction. This is about us strengthening ourselves in our embattled homelands. We are beseiged by traitors amongst us. We will need external help at some point in our struggle. Better that it be from our pan-European brotherhood than a Russia or a China who will demand their pound of flesh. In the end whatever we have to do to survive we must do just to live to fight another day.
For now, we are 850 million so we have ample to work with even if only 30% are awake enough to begin this struggle. We look within ourselves, then our family, then our temple, then our town then our province then our entire nation within our collapsing countries/states. Then we build these pan-European bonds and identity. We are a single people sharing the same existential struggle.
Take it from an American, focusing on Soviet Russia not only did us no good, it fostered a hostile ruling class that destroyed us from within. We must focus on our friends.
How do you square Russia hating the West with the fact that anyone whose anyone in Russia has expensive property in the West and their families living in the West
The answer is simple. Russian elites are alien, anti-Russian, and colonialist. They exploit Russia, Russian resources and Russian and non-Russian people, as cheap labor and cheap cannon fodder, and get money from the West. They use the anti-Western hate of common Russians to maintain their power. But common Russians hate both the West and their own “Russian” elites, which they correctly see as hostile to Russia and Russian interests.
the ruling class is more loyal to WHO, IMF and Tel Aviv than to Russia
London not mentioned? Why omit the real puppet masters of Russia since at least 1801 and maybe until now when it is slowly coming under Chinese vassalage?
Quite a thought-provoking essay. Several of the conclusions feel like stretching too much to fit a grand theory for me (a criticism I have of Spengler too), but I think it’s valuable for at least understanding the public theatre aspect of the present war.
More critically, I don’t see where this supposed foundation of an alternative cultural pattern comes from. Russians are ethnically and linguistically related to the rest of Europe, the experiences of their cold environment or the historical influence of violent asiatic neighbours are also shared by other European groups, and Bolshevism is, as we know, a Jewish movement not a Russian one. Moreover Putin’s enthusiasm has been directed at Islam as much as any new Christianity. One questions how much this Russian culture is really Russian at all.
Notably, in the Tver region of Russia the anti-terrorism wing of the government banned the “bull coast” festival a reconstruction of Old Rus traditions and culture. All the while Tajik cultural centers are being opened and encouraged.
Russian anti-Imperialist nationalists were and are exiled, some are killed (mostly masked as suicides or “natural deaths”) and some sent to camps.
This article is brilliant.
Sorry but no, this article is incredibly dim (or deceptive), in that it pretends the (((Bolshevik))) revolution and subsequent attempts to spread (((Communism))), was an organic, natural (and even sympathetic) evolution of Russia.
Clever writer, interesting ideas, and complete shipwreck on the rock of jew-blindness.
Perhaps writer could have saved the argument by acknowledging and steering around that (((rock))), but he didn’t even try.
Another way to look at the current conflict in Ukraine would be to call it “weapons testing” for American and Russian military industrial complexes, respectively.
In the broader outlook it is just the proxy war of the West against China. Ukrainians are the cannon fodder of the British and in a smaller scale, of another Westerns, and Russians – of the Chinese.
An excellent article, for which we can only thank the author, çok teşekkürler.
But I would add a few small clarifications.
First of all, the culture of pre-Petrine Muscovy and even of pre-Romanov Muscovy was largely Asian. After the conquests of Batu Kağan in the thirteenth century, the Russians fell into vassal dependence on the Türkic-Mongol Great Ulus, which later and inaccurately began to be called the Golden Horde. (During its existence, the Golden Horde never called itself as Altyn Orda). Thus, the Russians acquired the traditions of authoritarian Chinese statehood brought from China, conquered by the Türkic-Mongolian Yuan dynasty, in which an individual does not mean anything at all, and only the community and the state matter.
Even the beliefs of the Muscovites before Nikon’s reforms can only be conditionally called Christian. There were elements of an extremely simplified Christianity, elements of Islam (Russians did not drink alcohol at all for a long time, but ate pork), and many relics of pre-Christian beliefs, remnants of Slavic, East Finnish and Türkic “paganisms”.
Although the first Russian princes were Varangians, i.e. Europeans (no one knows whether they were Scandinavians or Western Slavs, far related to the Poles and German Sorbs, but they were definitely Europeans), their political and social system was based on the traditions of despotic Byzantine Orthodoxy and the traditions of Chinese totalitarianism brought in by the Tatars.
Secondly, Peter the Great was considered by many in Russia to be the Tsar-Antichrist. The version of his substitution and replacement by a certain Dutch adventurer named Jaan Moesch appeared during Peter’s lifetime and exists to this day. There is a number of serious proofs for this version and it cannot be simply dismissed as another one historical conspiracy theory.
Thirdly, the author correctly emphasized the Russian character of Bolshevism. Although there were very many Jews, Poles, Latvians, Armenians, Georgians, Germans, etc. among the first Bolshevik leaders, their power would never have been maintained so long without the support of the majority of the Russian people, especially in the so-called non-black earth lands with their traditions of serfdom and communalism (obshchinnost). Where there was no communalism, the Russians actively fought the Bolsheviks (Siberians, Uralians, Cossacks), and the non-Russian peoples of the former empire fought the Bolsheviks in the same way.
Fourthly, the author is right about the attitude of Russians to Europe and Europeans. For a long time now, the word “European” has been used by Russians as a contemptuous euphemism for the words “faggot” or “degenerate”. Russians generally do not like being called Europeans. The Russians are of course white and they are a great people, but they do not belong to the Western civilization (Abendländischer Kulturkreis) and did not and do not want to be brought in.
Fifthly, I do not quite agree with the author when he talks about Ukrainians. Yes, Western Ukrainians are mostly Europeans and belong to the European civilization, even if they are lesser Europeans than Poles and Chechs, because of Byzantine Orthodoxy beliefs. With Eastern Ukrainians, who are predominantly Slavicized and Christianized descendants of Türkic steppe nomads, as well as settlers from Russia, the situation is someway different. Many of them are sincere patriots of Ukraine, because they do not want to live in Putin’s Russia with its despotic neo-feudalism, but mentally they are closer to the Russian world than to Europe.
Thank you for your comment and your additional valuable insights, especially the one regarding Peter I being seen as an Antichrist precisely for his Europeanization efforts in Russia, which sat uneasily on ordinary Russians.
Yes, much more could have been added to strengthen my points, but it would have been too much for an already very long article.
Russians are White and Russians are our brothers and sisters. As pro-Whites we should agree on this.
We are in the predicament of White genocide partly because our ancestors were fools who thought, if we kill enough Frenchmen everything will be all right, if we kill enough Germans everything will be all right, if we kill enough Englishmen everything will be all right, and so on. In reality we were killing our brothers and sisters, which is to say we Whites as a group were killing ourselves, and storing up the material for more hatreds.
When we hate each other, when we despise each other, when we define each other as the enemy, we encourage more of this mutual hatred and destruction which we cannot afford.
Let’s not be such fools any more.
Excellent comment.
This assessment of Russia makes a compelling case. It leads one to wonder if we can now revision American history.
Assuming we are a distinct culture originally peopled from Europe but a new culture entity nonetheless, could America now be in a state of pseudomorphosis? There was an expelling of those products of the Magian culture from pre-Bolshevik Russia by way of emigration. Spengler considered the talmudists as such. Large numbers of Jews landed in NYC. Then there was another later and smaller but influential wave of their cousins from National Socialist Germany as the West attempted a desperate return to its root. Not a few Jews wound up among the Frankfurt School in their new land.
Most here would agree that the “new” cultural life-form of America has been subverted into another entity better to be called Amerika in recognition of it becoming kosher.
All this leads me to wonder if an Americana version of the shedding of our pseudomorphosis is possible as Russia is in the midst of performing. Could the Q-Anon phenomenon be a precursor or cultural wish?
Even if we must continue to view Russia as a rival at least we can take inspiration and hope from their example. The question is will there be enough of legacy America left to accomplish anything like a shedding of the warped form we are living under.
Everybody should make a distinction between the Russians as people and Russia as a state and an Empire.
Yes, many normal Russians do support Putin and the imperial project. However, many do not. Russians as individuals are mostly nice and normal people, very similar to Finns or Estonians or Italians. Great cuisine, music, literature. It´s a beautiful country with onion churches and sweet babushkas, and wild muzhiks and friendly devushkas. But the Russian state is a mafia state, a coldhearted beast if there ever was one.
How come such a nice people have created such a miserable and sosiopathic state? It is a country of contradictions.
Russian State is an ANTI-RUSSIAN State, it is alien colonial administration. Russian nationalist writers like Shiropayev or Prof. Khomyakov (he dies in Putin’s camp) wrote about this very detailed. Of course, this State is also an enemy of non-Russian peoples of Russia, but that’s another story.
I agree with your vision. You understand the internal Russian situation very well; much better than the author of the article. This article has both positive and negative sides. The positive side is that the author suggests an idea that the present-day Russia must eventually split apart into different countries. He correctly notices the dominant criminal mentality among modern Russians. What I strongly disapprove is the insinuation that Russia in its present form is some kind of nascent new civilization that has great prospect of becoming something like Germany, Britain and France. Especially disgusting is comparison of Polish-Lithuanian expansion to the east in 14-16th centuries to Arab invasion of Europe. There is absolutely nothing in common between those historical events. The main source of Polish-Lithuanian expansion were the Russian lands that sought salvation from Mongol empire. The local princes were happy to accept European protection in order not to fall under the ruthless rule of the Asian horde. Yet one very important fault of the article is the supposition that Russian Federation is a direct descendant of Ancient Rus and Russian empire (the false Putin’s narrative; the fairy tale for Tucker Carlson and his blockhead audience). It is not the case; neither factually nor legally. Bolsheviks had rejected legal continuity with the past state; afterward they remodeled Russian society into something exceptionally ugly and venomous. It is the “Russian” society that you have to deal with now. It has not more in common with the historical Russia/Rus than modern Greece has with Ancient Greece. The present day Russians are dying-out people ridden with all imaginable vices. The level of alcoholism, drug-abuse, prostitution, abortions, sexually transmitted deceases is much higher here than anywhere in the “decadent” West.
The author is, obviously, a scholar of history and tends to adhere to schematics; he tries to put everything in some kind of convenient table. His endeavor to compare Russia with any events and epochs in Western Europe is an insult to Europe and European identity. Russians of all times were only a peripheral borderland part of the overall European community. Any attempt to find some kind of separate path for Russians always failed. There is no alternative for genetically-European Russians except as asserting and following their White European identity. The only alternative for this is melting away into Asian mass. But this is precisely what the Putin’s state chose to do with Russia.
All those people who value their European identity must do everything possible in order to undermine and destroy Putin’s state. It isn’t a matter of politics but of social hygiene. The Putin’s mafia state is harmful for everyone, including for the great mass of brainwashed multitude of mainstream Russians who support Putin’s policies. This mafia government has no way back and intent on sacrificing as many millions of people as necessary in order to preserve its power. In essence, the Kremlin gangsters hijacked the whole country as a hostage and threaten to blow up the world if their demands are not fulfilled. I am not as scholarly as the author; therefore, prefer more realistic view of the problems. I am Russian and my hatred and jihad-like feelings are directed not against Europe but against Putinist state.
Polish-Lithuanian expansion
And those Lithuanians were mostly even not Balts, but Slavs, ancestors of modern Belarussians.
Thank you for your comments. I agree with most of what you said and am certainly not at all sympathetic towards Russia, nor to Putin’s regime in particular.
“Yet one very important fault of the article is the supposition that Russian Federation is a direct descendant of Ancient Rus and Russian empire (the false Putin’s narrative; the fairy tale for Tucker Carlson and his blockhead audience).”
Frankly, I am surprised how you could figure this from my article. I never claimed nor insinuated any such thing. The predecessor of the Russian state is obviously the Grand Duchy of Moscow (Muscovy), not Kyivan Rus.
Nor do I morally equate the eastward expansion of Lithuania to Arab invasion of Europe. I simply draw parallels between a narrow period of Russian history in the 17th century – the Time of Troubles, with the turmoil in Francia in the 8th century and the concomitant Arab invasion.
The predecessor of the Russian state is obviously the Grand Duchy of Moscow (Muscovy), not Kyivan Rus.
Lev Gumilyov always stressed this fact in his works: Russia has not much in common with the so-called Kievan Rus, it is much younger and has its roots in Muscovy and in the Great Ulus (Altyn Orda).
It is important to agree about the key idea: the imperialist Russia must cease to exist. It is toxic and dangerous for all; for ethnic Russians first of all (in the same way as Austro-Hungary was harmful for German ethnic interests). All other minor disagreements are normal parts of intellectual discussion on any issue. I appreciate very much your wide scope of historical knowledge.
Eventually, Russians must relinquish their hold on Crimea and North Caucasus. The main focus of Russian interests must be kept on Central Russia, which becomes ever more non-Russian. All borderlands are of no importance if the core land is lost.
“very similar to Finns or Estonians or Italians”.
One of those is not like the others.
Is not. Just like northern and southern Russians do not look alike each other.
But northern Russians, who are mostly slavized Eastern Finns, do look like Finns, and the southern Russians, who are slavized Türks, do look like Italians.
J Webb: September 25, 2024 … I know there are many on this site who cannot stop going on about anything Jewish (not recognizing there are a lot of hard right leaning Jews). But strong stances on that issue have been nothing but trouble for white (sic) identity movements. And not only that, it has been ineffective…
—
Pray tell, J, who are these “hard right leaning Jews”?
As a racial nationalist and racial separatist group thinker, I look at our cause as biological. I am not in any so-called “hard right identity movement” that includes any association or compromise with racial Jews (including Ron Unz and Brother Nathanial, etc.), all of whom oppose serious White nationalist separatists. So, count me as being “ineffective,” if you wish, thanks.
We pro-Whites want actual biological survival for our race.
Subordinating our racial struggle for survival to some rhetorical piffle about “leaning” “left,” “right,” “center,” “hard,” “soft,” “far,” “near” and so on is unacceptable.
I do not know much about American Jews, but in Germany former Soviet Jews are mostly right and many of them are for AfD. Just as Volksdeutsche Spaetaussiedler from the former SU are. If you have lived under the real Socialism you never would be Left anymore.
I know that many, and maybe majority of the ex-Soviet Jews in the US are for Trump. At least, all whom I know personally in the US, are for Trump.
Russians have blonde hair, blue eyes, and pale skin.
They are Christian and they speak a Slavic language.
They are our White brothers, full stop.
I reject any notion or thesis that the Bolsheviks were a Russian reaction to Europeanization. Bolshevism is Judaic in nature through and through, based on the turgid philosophy of a German Jew. Further, Lenin hated Russians and Russian culture and spoke of them/it in the most disparaging terms. What of the Russian Slavophiles? What of the Union of the Russian People (black hundreds)? They were brutally suppressed by Lenin and his Jewish-led Cheka during and after the civil war, a war in which many anti-communist Russians perished. As for any latter-day veneration of Stalin by Russian Orthodox believers, it is perplexing and concerning. I do not know how common it is, but I suspect not very. Certainly all of the Russians I know in the Russian Orthodox Church in exile loathe Stalin.
Russian Orthodox church in exile and Russian Orthodox Church in Russia (created by Stalin during the Great Patriotic war) are different things.
I am well aware of that.
Polish historiosopher F. Koneczny classified Russia as a Turanian civilization. What may be surprising is that he classified the Prussian part of Germany as a Byzantine civilization. Regarding the article, its basic thesis, which is the statement that the history of Russia follows its own historical rhythm, different from the Western one, is correct.
The most important event in the history of Russia was the so-called Tatar yoke after which Byzantine Russia represented by Kiev, and Western Russia represented by Veliky Novgorod ceased to exist.
In terms of ethnicity, Russians are Indo-European Slavs, the same as we Poles. Koneczny defined civilization as a “method of collective life”, as a Polish nationalist I often met with Russian comrades, I noticed real differences between our nations. When our contacts concerned the private sphere, we were one family. When politics begins, Russians become Tatars. I also saw this while living in Germany. while the Poles were very quickly Germanized, which was immediately visible, all the Russians were occupied as if they had been in the Soviet Union all along.
As for the war in Ukraine, apart from the fact that it is a proxy type, because Russia mistakenly used the Nevsky variant, there is a civilizational background there. In contrast to Novgorod the Great, which as a different civilizational variant of Russia is dead, Ukraine is a living state and at the same time, territorially and ethnically, its northern part symbolizes a more original Byzantine version of Russia. Therefore, it must be destroyed. This is an existential issue for Moscow
The population of Novgorod and Pskov (Pleskov) were western Slavs, Slovenians, much more related to Poles, than to Russians. The Pskovichy, inhabitant of Pskov, even in the 19th century said always “cto” instead of “chto”, just like Polish “co”. Well, and they were Holocaustized by Muscovite princes. The descendandts of exiled Slovenians are Pomory, Slav people in the Northern part of European Russia. Great Russian scientist, scholar and poet Lomonosov was one of Pomors.
The most important event in the history of Russia was the so-called Tatar yoke after which Byzantine Russia represented by Kiev, and Western Russia represented by Veliky Novgorod ceased to exist.
Russian Euroasianists (evraziytsy), from Prince Trubetskoy and Prof. Savitskzyi and till Lev Gumilyov (sorry, I would not add here Dugin, because it would be shame for Euroasianists to be associated with him) looked at Tatar “yoke” as a positive phenomenon, liberation of Rus from the Western Varyagian yoke and the finding of its own way of life. The theory of Great Tartary, which is popular in Russia today, belongs to the same way of thinking. For Euroasianists Peter I and his successors were ultimately “bad”, because they destroyed Russian way of life and violently westernized Russian people.
Thank you very much for mentioning Veliky Novgorod within this whole context. In fact, the current civilizational confrontation between Ukraine and Russia shares a lot of historical parallels with the confrontation that transpired between Novgorod and Muscovy in the 15th century. I wrote about it extensively here:
https://cemilk.substack.com/p/novgorod-against-muscovy
To anybody who reads Russian I would suggest to read articles and books of Russian anti-Imperialist nationalists like Alexey Shiropayev, Vadim Shtepa, Prof. Pyotr Khomyakov or Lev Prosorov (two last are dead, Khomyakov died in Putin’s Gulag in June, 2014). Russian nationalism and Russian imperialism are not only different phenomena, they are hostile to each other.
Yes. And in fact, the future of “Russian” nationalism is in the regionalism – i.e., the emergence of different national/regional identities and the corresponding national units within the Russian realm currently known as the Russian Federation.
I have read this article and also other your articles there. They are interesting, but I think you have a little too idealized view on Ukraine, and when you write about the Russian-Ukrainian War, you do not mention the Chinese factor. Red China stays behind the “Russian” regime, so as it stays also behind Iran.
If the author reads comments here, I would ask him to write an article about Nihal Atsiz. It would be good supplement to the series about “Artists of the Right”, which was restricted to the Anglosphere + some Italians and one Japanese (Mishima). A good article about Nihal Atsiz, this great Türkish poet and Nationalist, written not from Leftist or Arab or Armenian outlook could be very interesting and informative.
Thank you for your suggestion. But I have to admit, to my shame, that I never heard of Nihal Atsiz. In fact, I am not really well-versed in Turkish literature. I guess as a person I am a representative of Pseudomorphosis myself.
That’s a pity. There are no good articles about N.A. in English, written from Türkish Nationalist point of view. The article of Cenk Saraçoğlu Nihal Atsız’s World-View and Its Influences on the Shared Symbols, Rituals, Myths and Practices of the Ülkücü Movement is mostly left-liberal and too much critical about Atsiz, Bozkurtlar and the 3rd May.
Dear readers, I would suggest to read books of Russian nationalists like Alexander Sevastianov (Александр Севастьянов) and Igor Shafarevich (Игорь Шафаревич).
Wolf Stoner is false Russian nationalist some kind of. His hatred of Russia and his pro-Ukrainian position are absolutely Jewish in spirit and form.
Victor: October 4, 2024 Dear readers… Wolf Stoner is false Russian nationalist some kind of. His hatred of Russia and his pro-Ukrainian position are absolutely Jewish in spirit and form.
—
Wolf is a bona fide ethnic Russian, but first is an Aryan racial nationalist.
Your dear readers would do well to read Wolf’s firsthand observations on the Ukraine/Russia conflict to see that he supports neither side in this disastrous brothers’ war, while naming the Jews behind both Zelensky and Putin. Wolf’s essays are featured at nationalvanguard.org. Any true racial nationalist who spends time reading the section, “Words of Wolf Stoner” at whitebiocentrism.com (WB) will not come away from there saying that he’s a “false Russian nationalist some kind of.”
Wolf has disabused many pro-White Americans from thinking that Vlad Putin is some kind of Great White Hope. I first noticed Wolf’s unique views more than four years ago. and featured this piece then, below, in his own section at WB. Victor, perhaps you saw this and accuse Wolf of being a “false Russian nationalist” because you are first a Christian, so disagree with him? Am I correct?
Amazingly, how Mr. [Kevin] Strom’s ideas resonate with my vision of the matter. It is as if we read from the same invisible book. Yes, we should purge out all attempts to subvert our ideas. Christians have too many channels to express their views. We do not have any obligation to provide them with another one.
Christianity is the core of all European problems; not any doubts about it. It is precisely Christian ideology that rotted the healthy tribal spirit of European nations by its universalist poison and vile ideas about united paradise without national and gender barriers. In essence, what is going on now in the USA is the logical fulfillment of biblical insane ideology. It is disgusting and awful, but in some sense it is for good, because it allows to see the actual implementation of the original Christian ideas. We should reject Christian ideology without reservations. But at the same time, we should preserve and uphold the natural European inclination to religiosity. We are religious people. We are more religious than any Christian or Muslim. Our faith is much deeper and wider and is based on natural foundations instead of empty whimsical revelations of some half-imagined weirdos of the distant past. We are actual and factual.
Our ideas are in full accord with our genetics. For tens of thousands of years we evolved into something very special. It is the deepest mystery of the world. No one can fully explain this matter, but we have a deeply ingrained understanding of what it is. This internal subconscious understanding of special mission and special set of responsibilities constitute the basis of our natural religion.
We are far apart from all other tribes of the world. It doesn’t mean that we are enemies, but only that we should be as far from them as possible. We should have a state of our own and we will have it. Nature is on our side and everything else is of no importance. All those seemingly mighty enemies with all their billions of money, police and militaries will disappear when the time comes. The ultimate winners will be those who have the highest spiritual stature. The true Natural aristocracy of the world will take over what is theirs by birthright. -Wolf Stoner via NV.org
Wolf is describing Cosmotheism there. He joined the National Alliance and has promoted the organization as ” the template for all racial nationalist groups worldwide” ever since. He and we in NA expect such criticism from those like you, Victor, who disagree with us and call us “false.” That’s OK; we have our way, and you have Yahweh.
Nature is on our side and everything else is of no importance.
The Russian media war against the western society is much more successful than Putin’s army’s slogging in Eastern Ukraine. In the informational sphere Kremlin was able to impose its dominance. The false Kremlin’s narratives are not only allowed in western society but very often creep into the language of high state officials.
This media war that was waged since at least 2007, has established favorable ground for the big invasion of 2022. The western societies were led astray as to the true intentions and mindset of the Kremlin’s rulers. The simple fact that Putin and his gang are continuation of the same KGB clan somehow slipped public attention, especially among conservatives. Instead, they started to see in this neo-Bolshevik state some kind of conservative paradise or even a model ethnic state. The reality is opposite. The modern Russian society is not more conservative than New-York city, Paris or London. The Hollywood pop-culture dominates the mainstream mentality. Yes, Russians are much poorer; therefore, they consume mostly cheap alcohol instead of Columbian cocaine.
In addition to those moral afflictions, the imperialist madness inherited since Soviet times, continues to hold public mind in its iron grip. The imperialist ideas perceived by majority of Russians as something holy and immutable. The Stalinist mindset was fully restored. Hundreds of thousands denunciations are made each year. The state promotes snitching in all forms. People are encouraged by financial rewards and social promotion to denounce anyone for slightest sign of disloyalty.
The level of Russian collective insanity could be easily evaluated by watching Solovyov’s show. The excerpts from it are widely available in English.
Besides its own mental deviation in Russian society, there is even more potent factor of China. China uses Russia as a ram against the West. China provides Russia with all necessities. It is the only reason why Russian economy does relatively well even in the third year of the war.
The situation is far more serious than American conservative block-heads tend to believe. The end of the war doesn’t depend on Putin’s or Zelensky’s desires. Both sides are driven by more powerful forces. The West can’t allow Ukraine to lose and China can’t allow Russia to fail. It is the first stage of the World War between China and the West. Even if the short respite will be given though temporary freezing of the Ukrainian frontline, the war is sure to start anew in a few years’ time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUY7nj3Uyy4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hysCL5ZC9Ig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHCzQXaG6Go
Russian translation is here
https://vk.com/doc240227308_677280344
There is only one comment from Russophobe Wolf Stoner in this translation.
Shafarevich was a great scholar and a gifted writer, but he was more a patriot than a nationalist. For antinational states like Russia, the USA or Red China there is a big difference between those two terms.
What about Alexander Sevastianov?
What about Dugin or Tulayev or Platonov? Just one more Putinist. Real nationalists are exiled, inprisoned, exiled or killed. Or they just keep silence.
Your personal opinion on Dr. Alexandr Sevastianov and his works?
“Putinists” – what kind of species are they? Who of the “real” ethnic Russian nationalists ended up in exile and where?
The real Russian nationalists are fighting against Neo-Bolshevik regime. Do you want to see a putinist? Look in the mirror. Putinists are all those Soviet cowardly skunks who in any way support Putin’s genocidal war against Europe and who celebrate their “Great victory against Fascism”.
The Putinist under alias “Victor” tries his best to push the nefarious Kremlin’s agenda here. It makes sense if he does it for money. If he does it for free, he is simply a fool. No one sensible man would believe all this informational trash that is spewed from Kremlin’s media.
A few words about a supposed “nationalist” Sevastianov. I know this man since early 2000es when he and his followers tried to create a mighty all-Russia nationalist party (Национально-Державная Партия России – NDPR) that would unite all existing minor parties and movements. The ideology of this party was as incoherent as the crowd of followers of this party. Obviously, the best elements of the Russian NS movement rejected this silly project with disdain. They have seen it at once as an attempt of adroit Moscow patriotic intelligentsia to use nationalist sentiments of Russian society in order to advance their own social positions. Sevastianov seriously hoped to gain foothold in a State Duma.
At this time I participated in one of the NS groups engaged in real struggle. One of the emissaries of NDPR had contacted us in 2002 with suggestion of working for this party. The essence of their offer was to use us as enforcers without any say on political matters. Certainly, we have rejected this proposal outright.
The ambitious NDPR project has miserably failed in 2003. The real nationalists continued their struggle against the authoritarian Putinist regime; the self-appointed “nationalist elite” like Sevastianov, eventually, preferred to work for the system and parrot its vile imperialist propaganda.
The ideology of Sevastianov is a hodgepodge from imperial Russia, Stalinism and Orthodoxy; nothing original or new. Presumptuous emptiness; the lesser brother of Dugin.
It is enough to say that Sevastianov is an ardent supporter of the genocidal war against Ukraine and even now he calls for capture of Odessa and Kharkov at any cost.
For his faithful service Sevastianov was awarded by Russian government a medal “For liberation of Crimea and Sevastopol”.
Wolf Stoner: October 10, 2024 The Putinist under alias “Victor” tries his best to push the nefarious Kremlin’s agenda here. It makes sense if he does it for money. If he does it for free, he is simply a fool. No one sensible man would believe all this informational trash that is spewed from Kremlin’s media…
—
Thanks for the firsthand clarification and warning, Wolf.
So, there’s no use for C-C readers to waste their time reading this Mr. Sevastianov, as “Nick” recommends.
7 – Ideologue of neo-Nazi Terror: Aleksandr
Sevastianov and Russia’s ‘Partisan’ Insurgency
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 May 2021
By Robert Horvath
… This chapter examines the career of the most outspoken ideologue of this tendency, Aleksandr Sevastianov. A prolific author and a leading representative of racist ethno-nationalism, Sevastianov achieved prominence first as leader of a major nationalist party and then as a propagandist of revolutionary violence…
Despite his prominence, Sevastianov’s relationship to ultranationalist violence has attracted little academic attention. Most scholarly references to his career revolve around his contributions to anti-Semitism, white supremacist ideology and the pseudo-science of rasologiia (‘raciology’). By comparison with the extensive corpus of scholarship dedicated to the neo-Eurasianism of Aleksandr Dugin, Sevastianov is a neglected figure. There is no systematic study of his public career or his revolutionary project. This oversight has been reinforced by the fact that analyses of the rise of Russian skinheads and neo-Nazi youth have paid little attention to the influence of the public intellectuals who have incited and justified racist violence.
Ideologue of neo-Nazi Terror: Aleksandr Sevastianov and Russia’s ‘Partisan’ Insurgency (Chapter 7) – Russia Before and After Crimea (cambridge.org)
This likely Jew, Horvath, an alleged specialist in Russian politics, seems to agree with you, Wolf. He wrote this in 2022:
Putin is not Russia. He is a despot on borrowed time (smh.com.au)
[T]he Putin regime relies upon its massive apparatus of repression, propaganda and disinformation to support its aggressive foreign policy.
It exploits the political talk shows of Kremlin-aligned television, which employ illiberal intellectuals, including civilisational nationalists, ethno-imperialists, neo-Stalinists and Eurasianists, to inflate and inflame the image of the Western enemy. On the internet, the impact of this hate speech is magnified by trolling factories, by the blocking of websites, and by a war of attrition against the independent media and critical voices.
Dr Robert Horvath, a specialist on Russian politics, is a senior lecturer at La Trobe University. His most recent book is Putin’s Fascists: Russkii Obraz and the Politics of Managed Nationalism in Russia.
The substantial part of former Russian nationalists was coopted by the Kremlin’s security services for its nefarious tasks.
The problem with Sevatianov and his ilk is not even in their believes and political programs but in the fact that these are the kind of people who want to be clean themselves but urge others to do the dirty work. The typical mindset of Moscow-city upper-class.
The trademark of Sevastianov was his outspoken criticism of Jews. But he did it in such a way as to ridicule this whole issue. He blamed all Russian problems and misfortunes on Jews. This kind of “anti-Semites” are the most unproductive and harmful for our work. Instead of dealing with real issues they create a fairy-tale image of some superhuman community of villains whose only purpose in life is to harm all other humans. But in real life Sevastianov has happily cooperated with and supported Putin’s Jews. The outspoken “anti-Semitism” of such people is fake and, maybe, even financed by Jews themselves in order to stimulate their own brethren. Sevastianov’s “anti-Semitism” is an equivalent of “Hollywood Nazi” phenomenon. Such people are more useful than dangerous for the system and Jewish oligarchy that runs Russian economy.
The sum total of Sevastianov’s “nationalism” is the call to physically annihilate all Ukrainians, Baltic peoples and other Europeans. The same that was proposed by other “Russian nationalist” Ilya Ehrenburg back in 1940es.
Mr. Williams, why Dr. Alexander Sevastianov isn’t in prison as a terrorist? In fact he is honest Russian ethnical nationalist. And Dr. Sevastianov is “simply a fool” by Wolf Stoner, because he defends Russian interests for free many years.
Please see slavlandchronicles.substack.com to knew better a current situation in Russia.
And “Putinists” – what kind of beasts are they?
Victor: October 13, 2024 Mr. Williams, why Dr. Alexander Sevastianov isn’t in prison as a terrorist?
—
Thanks for the question, “Victor.” To answer your question with my own question: Why would the Kremlin imprison the neo-Bolshevist that is doing its bidding?
You may be a valuable, trusted C-C commenter. I don’t know. However, I trust my honest friend Wolf Stoner and what he has written here about your fellow Putinist hero, Alexander Sevastianov.
We will eventually see who is telling the truth in this matter, you or Wolf.
—
…Dr. Sevastianov is “simply a fool” by Wolf Stoner, because he defends Russian interests for free many years.
—
CORRECTION: Wolf wrote that you are the fool, “Victor,” not Sevastianov.
“The Putinist under alias ‘Victor’ tries his best to push the nefarious Kremlin’s agenda here. It makes sense if he does it for money. If he does it for free, he is simply a fool. No one sensible man would believe all this informational trash that is spewed from Kremlin’s media.”
—
Please see slavlandchronicles.substack.com to knew better a current situation in Russia. And “Putinists” – what kind of beasts are they?
—
I don’t do social media to learn what is going on in Russia, thanks — especially at a medium you recommend.
Find a mirror to get a good look at a Putinist, “Victor.”
You made a big mistake coming on C-C on 4 October with your accusation, “Wolf Stoner is false Russian nationalist some kind of.” Meine Ehre Heisst Treue.
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.