Things in the Ukraine are moving at a fast rate. By this time next week, who knows where we'll be. This tremendous pace of events is only to be expected from a country that hasn't had a chance to have its own history, and which, in recent weeks, seems to have been going through every phase of history that it has missed out, on from medieval sieges and battles involving the Roman tetsudo formation, to the hippy protest camps of the 1960s.
One concern for those of us who oppose the Evil Empire of Western Unipolarity is that a victory for the pro-Western forces in the Ukraine will be a serious blow to Russia, a state that is increasingly the brightest hope for traditionalists and nationalists in the World. A defeat for Russia may even lead to other parts of Putin's empire getting up the courage to break away. If so, there is a fear that Russia will be cut down to size. As someone said, with Ukraine, Russia is an empire, but without it, it is merely a country.
On the surface there is much to be said for these fears, but underlying them there is a number of assumptions. Let’s deal with these one by one.
(1) The situation is a zero-sum game. The Ukraine moving away from Russia and closer to the EU will strengthen the latter at the expense of the former.
Things might look this way to some, but it also important to remember the many problems that are brewing within the EU. It is tied to a malfunctioning currency, has great economic inequalities, and faces growing national and cultural divisions. The probable results of the EU parliamentary elections in May will also greatly exacerbate these problems – so too would the Ukraine becoming more dependent on the EU.
The real weakness of the EU is that it is part of the unipolarity of the West without being the centre. It therefore does not enjoy the full benefits of Western global hegemony, as America does with its ability to create a near endless supply of free money.
Added to this general off-centrism is the off-centrism of the majority of the EU, especially peripheral states like Greece and the Ukraine, if it ever enters the embrace of the Ring of Stars.
Countries outside the EU's central Franco-German Axis will always be second-class citizens of what is in fact a second-class system in the American-dominated global matrix. This means that such nations will be subjected to various forms of economic exploitation and be at the back of the queue when it comes to benefits.
Right now optimism is driving the enthusiasm for the EU, but this is unlikely to survive prolonged contact with actual reality.
(2) The economic success of the EU will strengthen the EU and the states that it draws into its orbit.
There is of course the possibility that the EU will hang together and overcome most of its serious economic problems and contradictions, and that the impact of the May elections can be deflected in some way. An economically successful EU would therefore be in a position to pork barrel its way out of problems like Greece or the high expectations of the Ukraine turning up on its doorstep, cap in hand.
The problem with this assumption is that it conflates materialism and consumerism with real strength, when in fact it is quite the opposite. This is the main thing that the rulers of Russia have to bear in mind, especially as they are often inclined to compete with the West on its own terms.
An economically successful EU, including the Ukraine, would simply be one of increasingly fat and bloated populations, beset by gender confusion, ever lower birth rates (except among immigrants), the need to import ever more of these to do the dirty jobs as the earlier waves find their way onto welfare, and a deep sense of self-loathing and guilt.
After a couple of decades of such benefits of EU membership, the brave fighters of the Maidan, who heroically threw themselves against the police and caused the state to tremble, would be fumbling for the remote control and potato chips, to be told how wonderful 'diversity' was while the local Muslims 'groomed' their daughters for gang rape.
(3) We are engaged in something like the board game "Risk"
No we're not. Space or territory is important but, as the Russians showed in 1812 and 1941-42, it is not the be-all-and-end-all. It is a resource that should be willingly sacrificed to preserve the much more important assets of the race and the national spirit. The real struggle that has to take place is not a reassuring one of neat and tidy maps, which, I notice, are starting to proliferate in discussions of the Ukraine, but a multi-dimensional one beyond maps, which are essentially useless in this struggle.
Look at the map of Europe. Is there any line showing a secure border or one that a multinational company can't effortlessly step across? Do these maps show any really important information?
Look at France, as big as it was after WWI. But does the map show the hundreds of "Zones Urbaines Sensibles" that have sprung up there in recent decades? No, that would give the mapmaker a headache, especially because the borders of those enclaves are sure to change and grow.
Look at the maps of Norway and Sweden. Do they pinpoint the locations of the thousands of rapes by which "refugees" (overwhelmingly male and young) assert their dominance over the sheepish local population?
Do your maps show the concentration of feminists, the inundation of porn, the building of mosques, the colonization of maternity wards, and the employment statistics of nursing homes, where immigrants are increasingly employed to help the indigenous shuffle off their mortal coil?
Russia may lose the battle for the Ukraine, but the real battle is the one that has to be fought inside every country – the rejection of all the destructive values that Western unipolarity stands for.
Recent weeks have shown how tough the Ukrainian people are, how they can fight. The Russians too, we know, are tough. But it is the keeping of this toughness that is the key to survival.
If Russia was richer and could offer the Ukrainians a better deal, it might well have defeated the EU’s march on Kiev, but if it had been rich enough to do that it would probably have been as corrupt and enervated as the West now is, and therefore ultimately doomed.
The war to fight is not with bricks and Molotovs on the streets of Kiev, backed up by Facebook links to stories revealing which State Department insider said what. The battle to be fought is the much longer and deeper one of retaining spiritual energy and moral power through an adherence to the eternal verities of traditionalism and nationalism.
One concern for those of us who oppose the Evil Empire of Western Unipolarity is that a victory for the pro-Western forces in the Ukraine will be a serious blow to Russia, a state that is increasingly the brightest hope for traditionalists and nationalists in the World. A defeat for Russia may even lead to other parts of Putin's empire getting up the courage to break away. If so, there is a fear that Russia will be cut down to size. As someone said, with Ukraine, Russia is an empire, but without it, it is merely a country.
On the surface there is much to be said for these fears, but underlying them there is a number of assumptions. Let’s deal with these one by one.
(1) The situation is a zero-sum game. The Ukraine moving away from Russia and closer to the EU will strengthen the latter at the expense of the former.
Things might look this way to some, but it also important to remember the many problems that are brewing within the EU. It is tied to a malfunctioning currency, has great economic inequalities, and faces growing national and cultural divisions. The probable results of the EU parliamentary elections in May will also greatly exacerbate these problems – so too would the Ukraine becoming more dependent on the EU.
The real weakness of the EU is that it is part of the unipolarity of the West without being the centre. It therefore does not enjoy the full benefits of Western global hegemony, as America does with its ability to create a near endless supply of free money.
Added to this general off-centrism is the off-centrism of the majority of the EU, especially peripheral states like Greece and the Ukraine, if it ever enters the embrace of the Ring of Stars.
Countries outside the EU's central Franco-German Axis will always be second-class citizens of what is in fact a second-class system in the American-dominated global matrix. This means that such nations will be subjected to various forms of economic exploitation and be at the back of the queue when it comes to benefits.
Right now optimism is driving the enthusiasm for the EU, but this is unlikely to survive prolonged contact with actual reality.
(2) The economic success of the EU will strengthen the EU and the states that it draws into its orbit.
There is of course the possibility that the EU will hang together and overcome most of its serious economic problems and contradictions, and that the impact of the May elections can be deflected in some way. An economically successful EU would therefore be in a position to pork barrel its way out of problems like Greece or the high expectations of the Ukraine turning up on its doorstep, cap in hand.
The problem with this assumption is that it conflates materialism and consumerism with real strength, when in fact it is quite the opposite. This is the main thing that the rulers of Russia have to bear in mind, especially as they are often inclined to compete with the West on its own terms.
An economically successful EU, including the Ukraine, would simply be one of increasingly fat and bloated populations, beset by gender confusion, ever lower birth rates (except among immigrants), the need to import ever more of these to do the dirty jobs as the earlier waves find their way onto welfare, and a deep sense of self-loathing and guilt.
After a couple of decades of such benefits of EU membership, the brave fighters of the Maidan, who heroically threw themselves against the police and caused the state to tremble, would be fumbling for the remote control and potato chips, to be told how wonderful 'diversity' was while the local Muslims 'groomed' their daughters for gang rape.
(3) We are engaged in something like the board game "Risk"
No we're not. Space or territory is important but, as the Russians showed in 1812 and 1941-42, it is not the be-all-and-end-all. It is a resource that should be willingly sacrificed to preserve the much more important assets of the race and the national spirit. The real struggle that has to take place is not a reassuring one of neat and tidy maps, which, I notice, are starting to proliferate in discussions of the Ukraine, but a multi-dimensional one beyond maps, which are essentially useless in this struggle.
Look at the map of Europe. Is there any line showing a secure border or one that a multinational company can't effortlessly step across? Do these maps show any really important information?
Look at France, as big as it was after WWI. But does the map show the hundreds of "Zones Urbaines Sensibles" that have sprung up there in recent decades? No, that would give the mapmaker a headache, especially because the borders of those enclaves are sure to change and grow.
Look at the maps of Norway and Sweden. Do they pinpoint the locations of the thousands of rapes by which "refugees" (overwhelmingly male and young) assert their dominance over the sheepish local population?
Do your maps show the concentration of feminists, the inundation of porn, the building of mosques, the colonization of maternity wards, and the employment statistics of nursing homes, where immigrants are increasingly employed to help the indigenous shuffle off their mortal coil?
*************
Russia may lose the battle for the Ukraine, but the real battle is the one that has to be fought inside every country – the rejection of all the destructive values that Western unipolarity stands for.
Recent weeks have shown how tough the Ukrainian people are, how they can fight. The Russians too, we know, are tough. But it is the keeping of this toughness that is the key to survival.
If Russia was richer and could offer the Ukrainians a better deal, it might well have defeated the EU’s march on Kiev, but if it had been rich enough to do that it would probably have been as corrupt and enervated as the West now is, and therefore ultimately doomed.
The war to fight is not with bricks and Molotovs on the streets of Kiev, backed up by Facebook links to stories revealing which State Department insider said what. The battle to be fought is the much longer and deeper one of retaining spiritual energy and moral power through an adherence to the eternal verities of traditionalism and nationalism.
