Monday, September 22, 2014
In the mind of the American Conservative, Russia is Portrayed as a Threat to Their Global Hegemony.
Just when you think columns comparing Putin to Hitler had reached its maximum, George Will, possibly writing the article which must surpass all others:
"The Islamic State is a terrible problem that can be remedied if its neighbors, backed by the United States decide to do so. Fascist revival of Vladimir Putin is a crisis that tests the decision-making capacity of the West.
The essence of Putin's anger. It is an amalgam of burning resentment (the humiliation of Russia due to the collapse of the Soviet Union), revanchist ambitions (with regard to former Soviet territories and spheres of influence), cultural contempt (pluralism of open societies) and ethnic chauvinism that presages the "ethnic cleansing" of non-Russian parts of Russia in Putin's expansion.
This is not merely a fascist mind; their ethnic-racial component component makes Hitler. Thus, Putin is unpredictable only to those who are not familiar with the 30s With regard to resentment and revenge, remember where Hitler insisted that France capitulated in 1940 - in a railway depot, near the town of Compiegne, where the Germany signed the armistice of 1918 ". 
This was not the first record  from a conservative voice to assert that Russia is becoming a Fascist evil empire under the masking views of Vladimir Putin. Most conservatives seem to embrace the idea that Russia is becoming the enemy of the United States again, and they now return to propagandize against a white rather than a darker enemy. It should not surprise us that he uses the Islamic State to preface his argument that America and want to focus on the Russian Bear instead of turning to Islamic militants.
In the mind of the American Conservative, the Putin regime is now some kind of sinister authoritarian state, racial nationalist, suitable for the perfect enemy for the game Call of Duty . Meanwhile, our friends from Counter-Currents produced several articles that should be sent to Will and his friends to reassure them that Putin is no evil fascist. But they go much further and venture into Russophobia. Instead of giving conservative tantrums as a Russia that was becoming on a Third Reich, Counter-Currents paints Russia as a liberal regime, controlled by Jews, anti-white and falsely Traditionalist. Incidentally, Russians apparently are also not white white .
Here's the latest article from Counter-Currents on the Russian evil:
"The conservative nationalism, blind to the racial question, philo-Semitic and civic Putin is actually the worst scenario for whites, since it rests essentially anti-white system on firmer economic and political foundations, which will allow their anti-white and ethnocidal inclinations continue to act more efficiently until the white population of Russia is biologically beyond recovery. But Putin does not think so, since he is not a 'fascist', that is, a racial nationalist - not even an implicit type.
Thus, when Putin says that he is fighting against fascism and anti-Semitism in Ukraine, he means just that. And, as a 'fascist' and an anti-Semite ', Strom needs to consider his words. Vladimir Putin is not our 'secret friend' ". 
And the same applies to Alexander Dugin. You know that guy who, according to conservatives, is a neo-Nazi mystic who wants to destroy every freedom ? It is, then, he is also now an anti-white, a fake anti-liberal and traditionalist:
"It is noteworthy that Dugin also avoids any criticism of egalitarianism. Insofar as opposition to egalitarianism is the essence of true right, it means debasing the true differences between left and right to fully focus on attack on 'liberalism liberalism 'The concept of.' - left intentionally ambiguous, referring sometimes to the capitalist economic individualism, sometimes the moral individualism of gay activists and secularists rights - should act as a central hub of opposition that will artificially unify in a front single, cohesive groups which are otherwise mixed.
It is crucial to understand that Dugin, who calls a crusade against the West ', is not opposed to liberalism because it is leading to the destruction of the white race. Instead, he often identifies the 'West' with the white race (since he does not see the Russians as white, as will be explained below). Its stated main objective is to destroy liberalism, even if it means destroying the white race ('European humanity') along with it. "
The last series  of articles aimed to attack a turnaround Dugin is depressing as there are only a year ago Counter-Currents published interviews with both the man and articles praising his work. Since he supports the Putin regime and the invasion of Ukraine, now anything he writes can have value and we have to condemn his work.
Fantastic article by Lucian Tudor, "The Real Dugin" , should answer your questions about the controversial aspects (for identity, not the neocons) on the bearded philosopher and his ideas are as relevant to our cause.
What is most troublesome about Counter-Currents and many within the right identity in this twist on Russia is almost like they are echoing the concerns of the American right and left. We are constantly inundated with stories lamenting about how bad Russia is and how we need to take a strong stance against it. This is perfectly aligned with the current foreign policy of the United States sees Russia as a threat to their global hegemony.
With that in mind, I think the identity need to have a realistic point of view on Russia. Putin is not one of ours, and Russia has some questionable policies. They are not great ethno-Eastern State and we should not slavishly and blindly worship the Russian power. I personally believe that many of the articles that Counter-Currents published earlier this year on Russia were very insightful and gave a necessary cold water bath in some fantasies about Russia. But now many of our environment are moving from mere skepticism about Putin for unbridled Russophobia.
What we need, instead of Russophobia or russofilia, is a balanced view of the Fatherland. We all need to agree that Putin is not an ethno-nationalist who hides their positions. We also need to agree that Russia, as a global power, it is generally a positive force (they alone prevented the bombing of the Assad regime and would have prevented intervention in Libya if Putin was president). They have some good policies and some bad policies, but assume that they are an anti-white state is going too far. On the other hand, the United States is specifically an anti-white state and its global power is a negative force.
Finally, we should not put all the work of Dugin blacklisted for him to take a strong position in a conflict involving his country. If we disagree with Dugin, he, unlike Putin, is (philosophically) of us. He is a traditionalist, he writes amazing critiques of liberal society and he is sympathetic to ethno-nationalism. If you want file-you for having atypical positions regarding race, you can also think about playing outside Spengler, Yockey and a whole host of other revolutionary conservatives who had similar visions.
The Ukrainian conflict has created unnecessary divisions within our ranks - and he is not even an event in which we have no power to influence or bind us in any way. Not our fight to fight. Still it should be said that the war between Ukraine and Russia is a depressing reminder of how difficult it is to unite white people, this is why we should remain neutral in what concerns him since neither side represents our interests. The Ukrainian civil war should not be waged between Western identity that must unite to preserve our own existence.
In the meantime, we should take a realistic view of Russia and not succumb to the siren song of Russophobia (courtesy of the United States Department of State).