Skip to comments.Modern-Day Russian “Dupes”
Posted on 06/14/2014 11:16:42 AM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
There is absolutely no evidence, aside from rhetoric, to suggest that Russia in general and Putin in particular have been converted to Christianity. Instead, what we are witnessing is a massive Russian active measures campaign that has ensnared many American conservatives, convincing them that Putin is somehow a legitimate alternative to President Obamas decadent worldview. It is troubling to see some of these conservatives endorse Russias invasion and occupation of Ukraine.
The term active measures refers to influence operations that use agents of influence, disinformation and propaganda. ....
Rather than embrace Christianity, the evidence shows Russia has embraced the Russian Orthodox Church, always a tool of Soviet intelligence. As we noted in an AIM Report back in 1984, John Barrons authoritative book, KGB, said that the KGBs Directorate 5 is assigned to clandestinely control religion in the Soviet Union and to insure that the Russian Orthodox Church and all other churches serve as instruments of Soviet policy. Barron added, The directorate placed KGB officers within the Russian Orthodox Church hierarchy and recruits bonafide clergymen as agents. Much of its work is accomplished through the Council on Religious Affairs, which is heavily staffed with retired and disabled KGB officers.
Nothing has really changed. In fact, the Russian Orthodox Church is even closer to the regime these days, and is still so morally bankrupt that it published a 2014 calendar in honor of Soviet mass murderer Joseph Stalin. Former KGB officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky has called it Putins Espionage Church, and devotes a major portion of his book, KGB/FSBs New Trojan Horse, to its use by the Russian intelligence service.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
I won’t take issue with your premise. But I would just like to point out that I know of no evidence that Barack Obama has really converted to Christianity either.
Lenin’s useful idiots to a man.
Obama hates America, Putin loves Russia.
Obama wants all of our efforts to fail, Putin wants all of Russia's efforts to succeed.
Obama is a confirmed Islamic terrorist, Putin fights and hates Islamic terrorists.
Obama has caused all or most of our allies to question us, some to leave us, while Putin has gained allies.
Obama wants Communism, Putin wants a government-friendly Capitalism.
They also share some very negative traits: Obama and Putin want no free speech. Obama and Putin both maneuver to rule forever. Obama and Putin will gladly kill citizens to achieve nefarious goals.
The main flaw in (Pat) Buchanans argument is the lack of any real evidence that Russia has come to grips withand disavowedits Soviet past. To the contrary, Putin laments the passing of the USSR and has put the former KGB, now the FSB, in charge of the power centers in Russia. He celebrates Russian spying on America.And he continues to rehabilitate Stalin.
I’m freakin’ good, I am.
I also think that there is an expectation in Russia that leaders will be authoritarian....They simply don’t have the same DNA as Americans when it comes to politics. Our system of government isn’t for everyone.
There is that. The Russian people I have met (when I was in Russia, as a CIA Station Chief) don't really understand freedom, and don't know what to do with it.
A very good case could be made that Russia was never really Communist. It just used Communism as a subterfuge to create a totalitarian regime run by the lucky few.
The Tzars used Russian Orthodoxy much the same way as the Soviets used Communist Orthodoxy.
That Putin has gone back to using Russian Orthodoxy as a mask for his totalitarian ambitions is no surprise given that very few people believe in the Communist dream.
Most liberals believe is some form of highly regulated and taxed market economy. Of course if the only "news" you get is from FR threads then you won't have found this out. You'll most likely believe in the nonsense that Gramsci's ghost still walks among us or that all of the liberals meet in secret to figure out exactly how fast they can move us toward a communist future without the mass of people figuring it out.
O the horrors!
Putin does fight Muslim terrorists on what he currently regards as his soil, but openly aids them off his soil, especially Iran, the biggest sponsor of Islamic terror in the world.
Putin is as “capitalism-friendly” as Red Chinaall key industries on Russian soil are state-owned, as is the media nowadays, which means his capitalism (like Red China) is a means to an end.
Putin loves the USSR, not Russia; and as has been noted in this thread (and myriad others on FR), regards the fall of the USSR as the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the last century (belittling the tragedy of WWII and elevating the Cold War) and has actively rehabilitated Djughashvili.
It’s only the hard leftists that claim that none of the monoliths of the Second World were “truly communist”.
And if Putin is “not communist”, then the only alternative is fascist.
Like any good KGB Agent, he considers them assets. The second they are not useful, he will attempt to destroy them. You cannot deny he is anti-Islam.
Putin is as capitalism-friendly as Red Chinaall key industries on Russian soil are state-owned, as is the media nowadays, which means his capitalism (like Red China) is a means to an end.
I did mention 'government friendly'. His is more of a fascist capitalism arrangement. Now that I think of it more, I suppose I need to remove this one from the list, since Obama is the same.
Putin loves the USSR, not Russia
So? It still speaks to my point. Putin loves his country. Obama hates his.
When many commentators across the political spectrum doubt that Russia was ever truly communist it is more from a belief that the Soviet leaders were behaving as cynically as all authoritarian leaders do.
For example, we have someone in the Whitehouse now who claims to be a believer in America and all her great traditions while running an administration for himself, by himself in secrecy and in complete violation of the word and spirit of our Constitution.
Just like the Soviets paid lip service to Marx, Obama is paying lip service to Lincoln and Washington.
No, Putin does not love his country. He loves the USSR, which means his love is divided.
And if Putin were truly “anti-Islam”, he would be fighting all Islamic terrorism.
Putin wants Russia to succeed at what? Resurrecting the totalitarian Soviet EVIL EMPIRE?
Putin does not love Russia , he loves the Soviet Union, the EVIL EMPIRE.
Putin fights islamic terrorists by sending muslim Chechens into Georgia and Ukraine to slaughter Christians? By arming Sudan? By supplying the ayatollahs with enriched uranium?
Putin has gained allies? Whom? The Chi-coms? Daniel Ortega? Nauru?
Putin wants capitalism by nationalizing oil companies, the entire media and all banking?
Putin is the tyrant Obama only dreams of being. Should we wish for Obama to show us the same kind of “love” as Putin shows Russia? I sure don't.
Either way, the steps taken by the Second World “governments” (loosely termed) did mirror the ten steps to communism as outlined in the second chapter of the Communist Manifesto. That is not mere “lip service to Marx” and shows how inherently totalitarian that path is.
Obama and the Democratic Party (and of course the RINOs) are following the Fabian (non-revolutionary) path to socialism, which is by progressive “reform” rather than violent revolution.
While the motivations of both are suspect, one at least says the right things, the other is busy promoting homosexuality across the world.
I don't have the time nor the desire to try to make the obsessed see things differently, nor would I be successful, anyways.
Just know that you are just as bad as your ideological opponents, and the Abyss gazed back into you.
Nevertheless, at a recent sports event at Easter, half the stadium roared out to the other half, “Christ is risen!”; and the other side roared back (the traditional reponse), “He is risen indeed!”
Not only wouldn’t that have happened in the old USSR, but I doubt it would happen today at an NFL game (or even be allowed).
Russians are discovering Christianity almost as something new (and yet an old part of their culture).
We are abandoning Christianity as something old (and yet an old part of our culture).
Putin is anti-islam because his muslim Tatar mistress sired him two illegitimate muslim Tatar children?
Don't put your faith in governments or their leaders.
Still all black to you both. I get it. Have a good day.
These -- like the form of Christianity that existed before the Reformation -- are all enemies of liberty.
I call the people named in my post "commies" because: it rankles them, for the sake of easy identification, and because the appellation is still pejorative -- at least in the benighted darkness of Free Republic, where you think you're shining some great illumination. [Protip: a post that ends with "O The horrors!" is pretentious and silly.]
The only difference between the communism of Stalin and the totalitarianism of the Czars is that Bolsheviks imagined the novel angle of exporting the religion of state terror via Marxist mumbojumbo. [Not very different from any other organized religion in that regard, nor in the desire to completely control the minds, sinew, and money of its duped followers.]
Putin fights and hates the Islamic terrorists who threaten his regime, and enables and supports those who threaten ours. That's not quite the same thing.
As the pro-Russia propagandists do their work here, Finland, which probably knows the truth a little better, is so fearful of the monster that they will probably join NATO.
Putin is even making Sweden fearful enough that they are discussing it.
Never mind aiding terrorists that attack Israel.
Russia certainly has many issues, but why classify them as an opponent? Are they threatening any vital US interests? Are they seeking to do us economic or military harm? Additionally, why is it our responsibility to defend nations that were once part of the USSR? I don’t want them taken over against their will, but what part do they play in their own defense? (I suppose you could say the same thing about the Iraqis. When are they responsible for defending themselves?)
Maybe I’m naive, but how come America has always claimed a sphere of control, aka the Monroe doctrine. Yet, we keep meddling in Russia’s business? We almost went to nuclear war over their meddling in Cuba, but we think it’s OK for us to make threatening alliances with Russia’s own neighboring states?
Additionally, I don’t see the USA as some great virtuous nation anymore. We’re pushing a lot of evil stuff on other countries. We act like a big, pushy bully, so I don’t think we have a lot of room to complain about how Russia treats other nations.
You should tell it to Netanyahu, perhaps.
Putin does appear to back “Muslims” like Bashar Hafez al-Assad, but is Assad/Syria really a threat to the USA? Sorry, but America seems to be playing on the wrong side. We supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the rebels in Libya, and we wanted to support the Islamist rebellion in Syria. Putin, on the other hand, seems to be far more pragmatic, playing the game much like we used to. In other words, he supports regimes that help keep the radical, head choppers in check. We used to do the same, because dictators and strong men who can keep the nut jobs down are in our own (and Russia’s) best interest.
Economic harm, certainly, what with their doing business with Red China in yuan rather than dollars and throwing US businesses out in favor of nationalization of certain industries.
There was only one reason for putting missiles in Cuba, and that was to attack the USA with nukes. AFAIAC, Eisenhower failed big time by failing to support Bautista against Castro, too.
The conservatives of the USA always have the high ground as far as criticizing the Eurasian Union (no longer just Russia, remember).
Why are you calling the liberals in the USA “we”?
For all the talk about Putin wanting to create a new USSR, why hasn’t he simply invaded the Ukraine? He certainly has the military power to do so, and he’s already paying the political and economic price for Crimea. What more sanctions would the world’s nations impose on Russia for a full scale invasion of the Ukraine? Certainly Putin doesn’t think NATO would go to war over it, and Obama would probably do little more then send another sternly written letter.
Exaggerated and simplistic in the extreme. Try to look for similarities, not just assume they’re polar opposites.
The USSR did not “simply invade” any of the Iron Curtain nations before the outbreak of WWII either.
What gives us the right to tell Russia they need to do business in dollars? If I was Russian, I certainly wouldn’t want to be forced to use dollars either. Also, what business is it of ours how they run their own country? You see, I see America as some arrogant busybody these days. We don’t respect other sovereign nations to do what they want so long as it isn’t a direct threat to our own national interests. Yet, we’re so arrogant these days that we think we need to meddle in everything everywhere. Even worse, what are we pushing on everyone else? Moral depravity!
We’re the world’s remaining superpower you know... Sorry, but that’s not what America was ever meant to be.
What gives them the right to do what they’re doing?
If you see “America” (funny you didn’t say “the USA”) as “some arrogant busybody”, then you must be liberal.
I’m not really including conservatives in the “we” that’s creating a mess of US foreign policy, but the liberals are representing/leading America right now. That’s what other nations have to deal with.
“Never mind aiding terrorists that attack Israel.”
But... don’t we also do that?
No, the liberals do. Which is why we’re trying to get liberals out of power here.
That is certainly correct.
And it is the liberals calling the USA “America” (especially Obama), diluting its identity.
“What gives them the right to do what theyre doing?”
Um, the same right that allows us to meddle in Egypt, Libya, and Syria I suppose...
What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. How dare we say Russia can’t exert influence on neighboring nation states while we were meddling in those same states ourselves? Have you forgotten that we backed the rebellion in Kiev that overthrew the legal government? Now we dare complain that there’s a counter rebellion against the rebellion?
Quit looking at everything from only America’s perspective. Look at how other nations might perceive us. They certainly have as much right to exist and pursue their interests as we, and just because they don’t use dollars or kowtow to American might doesn’t mean they’re our enemies.
Tell me America isn’t a busybody on the world stage right now. So what if we conservatives don’t want to be like that? The liberals who are running America just can’t avoid sticking their noses in everyone’s business.
“But... dont we also do that?”
I’ll answer that. Yes. We do. We also back the terrorists who are beheading Christians, too.
It’s only the liberals that have “meddled”. And you really have to stop calling the liberals “we”.
You present the most coherent view. A lot of people see the world in black and white, rather than understanding the interests of leaders and their nations, or the histories and cultural differences that shape the policy of those nations.
Is Putin trying to rebuild the USSR? No. Probably not. He lived through the Soviet Union as one of its adherents, but saw what even the ardent members of the Russian Communist Party are aware of. It is just not a viable governing system. Comapared to all the other forms of government in history, communism ranks among the least sustainable. It didn’t even last a century, despite the fact it was engineered by very smart and academic people, much like the Third Reich was.
No, I’d say Putin sees the world through a more hyper-reactionary lens. For all the alarm bells about Dugin, I doubt his influence over Putin is as grand as some claim. This being said, Putin certainly has a backward looking ideology. He prefers the way things worked before the fall of monarchies. He wants to resurrect the Russian Empire, not the Soviet Union.
Obama called Russia a ‘regional power’. Clearly lunacy. Its a world power, but militarily, it is a ‘regional player’. That is, it is concerned primarily with the countries around it. Russia is not about to launch a war in Africa for example.
With regard to Christianity, Orthodoxy is an ancient tradition, as close as you will get to the old Apostolic traditional way of worship. I am not a member of the protestant-supremacy caucus on FR who regard all Catholic and Orthodox countries as ‘not Christian’. Looking at the track record of protestant countries, most of which outside Africa now have open celebration of sodomy among other issues, if this is true then Christianity is in an even more dire state than we realize. Those who criticize the Russian Orthodox Church do so with little knowledge of the church’s history going back to the Imperial and Soviet eras. Were there spies and infiltrators during Soviet times? Yes, but the vast majority of Christians in Russia were persecuted and many were killed, including priests. The communists in Russia absolutely resented the role the church had played in court life during the Czar’s reign.
Now that the Soviet Union has collapsed, the church is re-assuming its centuries old post as part of the state, involved in matters of moral choice. This is not absolute as of yet (Russia still has a long way to go on abortion for example), but as new converts and a growing church-attendance strengthen the power of the Patriarch, the church becomes a competing interest in the political arena.
For those who do not like this, bear in mind that in a much more diffused way, we also had this be the case up until recently. Churches were heavily influential in political life and one’s affiliation was a big political factor. Its why such a huge deal was made out of Kennedy’s Catholicism. Religion only becomes a non-factor in political life when it ceases to exist in any meaningful way.
This is now occurring in Western Europe and our own country, with few exceptions.
Am I interested in defending Ukraine from Russia? I have yet to hear a particularly good reason why I should be.
1) There is no popular appetite for such a thing
2) I can see little threat to America itself here
3) Ukrainians elected in what was deemed to be a fair election, a corrupt leader, they threw him out and elected someone else, but has anything changed? Ukraine is likely to remain as corrupt as ever. Meet the new boss.
4) Historically, Ukraine is a badly drawn country in the first place with regard to ethnic groups.
5) Do I really want to aid the cause of the European Union which is just as dictatorial as Russia yet twice as decadent? Not really
6) I can’t see any improvement in living standards for Ukrainians as a result of turning west. Just a massive population outflow.
When we have a real problem, the actively neo-Marxist Democrat party destroying America one court decision, one executive order, one mandate at a time, are we really expected to be concerned by an imperialist power’s geographic expansion an ocean away? The Founders did warn against such ventures.