In reality, the main emphasis of the KGB is not in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion … only about 15 percent of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85 percent is [engaged in] a slow process which we call … ideological subversion or active measures…. What it basically means is, to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent, that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves….

Yuri Bezmenov [i]

…the great majority of Americans could be said to represent a refutation on a large scale of the Cartesian principle, ‘Cogito ergo sum’; they ‘do not think and are.’ Better yet, in many cases they are dangerous individuals and in several instances their primitivism goes way beyond the Slavic primitivism of ‘homo sovieticus.’

Julius Evola [ii]

Anti-Americanism includes more than hatred of the American elite. It includes hatred of the American people as a whole. The reason for paying attention to enemies – to the superior minds in an enemy camp – is to know ourselves through the eyes of that enemy. Having an enemy, or a friend, is an unappreciated spiritual gift. We always have something to learn about ourselves from friends and enemies; from those who hate us, and those who love us; for hatred will always find our faults, as love will find our virtues. In America’s case there is a particularly dangerous fault crying out for correction. That fault is the superficiality of our intellectual culture, particularly our strategic culture.

Revolver News recently published a lecture given by a Finnish intelligence colonel on how Russians think.[iii] The first comment on the video, below the margin, was from Dave B, who wrote: “Maybe we could do articles on why NATO and the West think the way they do. I guess to everyone’s surprise Russia called your bluff.” This comment, from an American right-winger, is just as baffling as Kari’s lecture (but for different reasons). In fact, Russia did not call the West’s bluff as Dave B suggested because the West was not bluffing. Rather, it was the other way around. For those who recall, Russia warned of dire consequences if NATO sent weapons to Ukraine. Russia even hinted at nuclear war. Yet the West has sent weapons anyway (because of its cultural programming). Against every expectation, despite itself, despite being infiltrated by its enemies, the West now opposes Russia in Ukraine. This reaction has occurred because of a longstanding anti-leftist prejudice built into the Russian strategy of subversion, described in detail by KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov. The idealistic leftist, said Bezmenov, is useful in demoralizing his society. But as the communist takeover progresses to its final stage, his usefulness wanes – so much so that the leftist is the first to be executed by the Marxist-Leninists. Experience long ago taught Moscow that non-communist leftists are, ultimately, Moscow’s most bitter potential enemies. And so, as Russia has stumbled in Ukraine while trying to reassemble the USSR, we see the political left rallying to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the rising pro-Russian narrative is coming from the right. How do we explain this? How would the KGB defector Bezmenov explain it? Here is what he said:

My KGB instructors specifically made the point: Never bother with leftists. Forget about these political prostitutes. Aim higher. This was my instruction. Try to get into large circulation, establishment, conservative media. Reach filthy rich movie makers, intellectuals, so-called academic circles. [Find] cynical egocentric people who can look into your eyes with an angelic expression and tell you a lie. These are the most recruitable people. People who lack moral principles; who are either too greedy or suffer from self-importance. They feel that they matter a lot. [iv]

Is it possible that these same people, who “matter a lot,” are the influencers of Dave B and his cohort? When we think of “large circulation, establishment, conservative media,” who comes to mind? Would Tucker Carlson, chatting with Tulsi Gabbard about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, fit Bezmenov’s description? Of course, Dave B would probably never agree that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is an invasion. Imitating the Russian style of enforced speech, Dave would probably call it a “special operation,” dismissing Ukraine as an instrument of the “New World Order” conspiracy. In terms of rightwing ideology, Dave B probably believes the Ukrainian people deserve to be absorbed into Russia. Even if lamentable, their enslavement is certainly acceptable. Ask Tucker Carlson. It is none of our business, anyway. We are merely the only country in the world able to check Russian and Chinese (i.e., communist bloc) military aggression. But the rightwing message is – “we really shouldn’t interfere with the restoration of the USSR.” Therefore, say goodbye to Europe. There is no occasion, here or anywhere, to enhance our own security by joining with other nations. As every isolationist knows, having allies is a burden that adds nothing to our security.[v] Right? And then there is the question of sensitivity to Russia’s needs. If Russia has eleven time zones, why not let them have twelve, or twenty-three! Let them have Mexico if they want, or Canada. What business is it of ours?  

Of course, it is our business. The West’s strategic position is rapidly eroding away. Saudi Arabia is joining the BRICS alliance. South America has almost entirely fallen to the communist bloc. Most of Africa, and its mineral storehouse, has fallen. Therefore, Dave B and the anti-Ukrainians appear to be cheer-leading for the absorption of Europe by the bloc, starting with Ukraine. Does anyone remember Gorbachev’s idea of the “one common European home,” which Putin also advocates as a transcontinental union from Lisbon to Vladivostok?[vi] In that event, Europe would suffer the fate of South America and Africa; for Russia is a crypto-communist country, masking its true ideology and intentions. Russia is clearly aligned with the world’s other communist powers, North Korea, China, and Cuba. Russia is supporting communist countries and movements in Africa and Latin America. Pick up any newspaper and read. Russian troops are authorized to enter communist Nicaragua.[vii] Russia troops are already in communist Venezuela.[viii] But hey, what business is it of ours? Let them encircle America. Let them cut us off. Let them bribe our leaders, infiltrate our government. We don’t deserve to live.

Seriously? Why would a patriotic American willfully substitute deceptive Russian language for plain English, preferring the term “special operation” to the word invasion? Forgive me, but it is like Evola said about Americans, “they do not think and [yet they] are.” But, for how much longer? 

On the Revolver site, in response to Dave B’s comment we find the following addenda: “The globalist lackeys deserve our utmost contempt.” And then, “Utmost contempt coupled with ACTION against them.” A more sensible comment from Jason Ledd, who wrote, “Both sides, left and right, are being played by same group. Klaus Schwab already bragged that Putin works for the globalists and was trained in his global leaders’ school. Like all other leaders, Putin is just another puppet who decides nothing but is told what to do, like Biden, Trump, Trudeau, a.k.a., Castro, Merkel, Boris [Johnson], Horse Face in New Zealand, and the rest. All the world is a stage with actors.”

Jason Ledd is closer to the truth, but still off target. You cannot defeat an enemy with imprecise formulations of this kind. To prevail strategically, you must discern the true relations between people and objects. By inverting the rank order of the players, Jason has taken Klaus Schwab’s ego-aggrandizing statements at face value. Never, never, never, take a fool’s statements at face value. And Klaus Schwab is a fool. A Russian head of state is never going to take orders from a private citizen in Switzerland. Why would he? Putin was trained by the KGB to manipulate foreigners, not to be manipulated by them. It is too ridiculous. Of all the people Putin could bow down to, why bow down to a mountebank like Klaus Schwab? The idea is risible.

Rather than being Putin’s boss, Schwab is almost certainly one of Moscow’s intelligence assets. While Schwab was being interviewed some months ago, viewers could see a bust of Vladimir Lenin behind him, on his bookshelf. Unless we assume that Schwab is a witless buffoon who does things without good reason, we ought to take this signaling of his allegiance into account. Schwab is clearly in the socialist camp. Consider, if you will, his praise for Merkel, Trudeau, and Putin. Are we incapable of seeing the common denominator that links all these characters together? All three have advanced the cause of socialism in their respective countries. The “former” East German communist, Merkel, kept Germany on a path of energy subservience to the Kremlin. At the same time, the supposed son of Castro, as Canadian Prime Minister, is moving Canada closer and closer to the Cuban socialist model. And granting direction to the whole, Putin is attempting to bring back the USSR by conquering Ukraine and allying with communist China. One either sees the connections here, or one is blind.

Communism did not disappear in 1991. It merely changed its formation, its outward appearances, its tactics, and its strategic direction. Having transformed itself, communism also became a word nobody was allowed to pronounce (except in an obituary). And yet, we hear communist code words all around us – in universities, in government, in entertainment. We hear these code words on the left and the right. We hear resentment toward the rich, distrust of the market, opposition to Ukraine’s war of independence from Moscow. Figures like Douglas Macgregor and Tulsi Gabbard and Tucker Carlson denounce America as an imperialist power. They warn that America is bankrupting itself by supporting Ukraine. Such are the lies of the hour. So far, this year, the federal government plans to spend 7.76 trillion. Of that amount, Ukraine has supposedly received $68 billion in aid – less than one percent of all U.S. federal spending. This miniscule sum, they say, is bankrupting us. And once again, with Evola I am forced to conclude, they “do not think and [yet they] are.” But, for how much longer?

The American inability to think, on the most fundamental level, limits and defines us. We no longer seem to register anything that contradicts the slogans of the hour. And so, when Dave B watched Putin’s mobilization speech a month ago, he missed Putin’s most memorable line: “I am not bluffing,” said the Russian dictator.[ix] From first to last, despite Dave B’s claim, NATO simply supported Ukraine while Russia huffed and puffed and bluffed. Over the weekend Russia’s Ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Antonov, said during an interview with Rossiya-24 TV, that America had crossed every one of Russia’s red lines.[x] So why isn’t Washington a smoking hole in the ground? After all, Russia promised. In consequence there are many disappointed readers at Revolver News.

Am I being too hard on the likes of Dave B & company? They are not, after all, the end-all and be-all of American thought. They are merely representative, perhaps derivative, of a broken educational system. In fact, those higher up on the intellectual ladder have made more serious blunders. Returning to the lecture of Finnish intelligence officer, Col. M.J. Kari, we find the error of all errors – front and center. Kari wanted to know why Russians think so differently. He said, “when I started writing my Ph.D. here at the University, I discovered the theory of strategic culture, [and] that theory opened up how to rationalize and think about why Russians do things differently than we do.” According to Kari, the theory of strategic culture is an American export. It came out of the Vietnam War. Analysts from the United States wanted to know how a superpower like America could lose a war against a small communist country like North Vietnam. The key to the theory of strategic culture, said Kari, is that “everything is not … a zero-sum game.”

“Everything is not…” a proper way to introduce a subject! To peel back this obfuscation is to open a can of worms – wriggly and squirmy, and full of mischief! Here, again, is the scandal of those who “do not think and are.” We must admit, of course, that everything is not a zero-sum game because everything is not one thing. All verbal trickery aside, zero-sum games exist. And strategic culture, in delivering either victory or defeat, is all about zero-sum games. To be perfectly clear, if one side wins the other side loses. For example, in war and in politics, in military conflicts and elections. Yet the liberal capitalist mindset prefers win-win solutions that eschew the logic of the zero-sum game. This is the kind of thinking America is locked into. All solutions tend to be economic solutions. Man is here reduced to a homo economicus. Taking economics to be primary over all other human activities, the liberal mindset defers to the free market. Everything, therefore, is subject to negotiation and trade. All differences can be ameliorated through economic transactions. Let market forces rule and war should disappear. War is therefore seen as the opposite of the market. By creeping inference, war is then judged as immoral, irrational. It is the negation of material values (which are regarded as ultimate values). Here is the liberal utopia, in a nutshell. All will be friends under capitalism. Trade brings nations closer, after all. Enter Francis Fukuyama….

Whatever truth there is in such views, the whole history of war has been omitted. Liberal ideology sees war as a kind of scandal. And here is the problem: Human beings do not exist as liberal abstractions. Every man belongs to a family, speaks the language of that family, bears the thoughts of that language, carries the history and fables of that language. Even if he does not recognize his tribal nature, he is nonetheless tribal. Even for the liberal or the socialist who opposes “nationalism,” a fundamental irony remains. The abstractions of liberalism and socialism come wrapped in tribal identities. Thus, Mao was the founder of “communism with Chinese characteristics.” Stalin was a communist who fought the “Great Patriotic War.” Even the most fanatical internationalists have bent the knee to nationalism, to tribal identity; so much so that leftist politics today is identity politics.

Taking the Pax Americana for granted, Western liberals and businessman have forgotten on which side their bread is buttered. Therefore, they have opened their countries’ respective borders to mass immigration by alien tribes. These tribes provided business with cheap labor. At the same time, allowing their own domestic work force to suffer attrition through legalized abortion, they stupidly disorganized their own national states – undoing liberalism. Add to this another sin: Western liberals and businessmen have spent trillions building up enemy economies in China, Russia, Vietnam, etc. Thinking only in economic terms, they have said to themselves that “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Imagining that conflict originates in economic disparity, they have sought to bring equality to all and sundry. What they have engendered, however, is a war of all against all. They have made love to their own downfall. And now they are about to crash down, hard.

Again, I will admit, of course, that economic considerations have their place. It would be unreasonable to say otherwise. But when all is said and done, economics should not have first place. Our highest values are transcendental, not material. Money has no value excepting what we assign to it. It is a tool, a means to an end. The idea that everyone lives for the sake of money is one of those absurdities akin to saying that we live to eat. Rather, we eat to live. And when it comes to what we die for, nobody has yet hoisted a flag made up of dollar bills. Iwo Jima and Normandy beach were not stormed by soldiers of fortune. Killing for money is morally repugnant. There must always be something more to it. More frequently, wars are fought over principles of right and wrong. Does some territory justly belong to this tribe or to that one? Do certain people hold sovereignty or not? Have agreements been violated? Has one side broken its word? Is there a question of honor at stake?

– And what is honor?

“Honor, n., 1. Esteem due or paid to worth; high estimation; manifestation of respect or reverence; hence, fame; credit; good name; reputation. A prophet is not without honor, save in his own country. Matt, xiii. 57. 2. That to which esteem is paid; distinguished position. I have given thee … both riches, and honor. 1 Kings iii. 12. 3. A token of esteem paid to worth; as: a. A mark of respect, as a title of dignity confirmed. b. Obs. A bow; a curtsy. c. A ceremonial sign of consideration; as, civil honors. “Funderal honors.” Dryden. d. pl. Social courtesies rendered by a host; as, to the honors of the table. 4. a A title applied to the holders of certain honorable civil offices; as, His Honor the Mayor….

5. a that which rightfully attracts esteem, respect, or consideration, as dignity, courage, fidelity; esp. excellence of character; high moral worth; nobleness; specif. in men, integrity; uprightness; trustworthiness; in women, purity; chastity. From the conception of virtue that of honor is chiefly distinguished as connoting the virtues especially associated with rank, station or profession; thus, “military honor” denotes courage and fidelity, “business honor” denotes honesty and trustworthiness. Honor thus carries with it the notion of social obligation, and in societies having a caste organization, as in feudal societies, it often implies primarily a strict observance of caste obligation and in particular the obligation not to bring disgrace upon persons of the same caste. Doubtless its association with feudal militarism developed the conception that a lapse from honor is to be atoned only by death or by duel….” [xi]

Here is where the American emphasis on economics falls flat. There is this thing which stands far above money. It is the root of more than money, more than kingdoms and republics. It is the root of all sovereignty. And yes, that thing is honor. Always and forever, honor. How paltry a thing money is, next to this. Anyone with real sensibility need not be reminded how disgusting it is to crawl on one’s knees toward money, covering ones cravenness from head to toe with the mock-slogan of “peace.” Even a villain like Hitler was not so base as to commence his wars of aggression for the sake of money, though his enemies failed to prepare their defenses out of concern for money (i.e., see, esp., the U.K. governments under Stanley Baldwin and Neville Chamberlin).

When the British conquered Quebec and India during the Seven Years’ War, the driving motive was not profit. It was national honor. Imperialism has its economic side, to be sure; but anti-capitalist propaganda has made too much of this. Imperialism, argued Joseph Schumpeter, is essentially profitless.[xii] Imperialism was, in the case of nineteenth century Europe, a playground for the increasingly idle warrior aristocracies of Europe. When economic logic, as in America, got the upper hand in Europe, war became an export carried into Africa and Asia by the second and third sons or cousins who – for want of primogeniture – carried their traditions abroad. Winston Churchill was one of these. An argument should then be advanced that imperialism was not, as Lenin claimed, the last gasp of capitalism. Rather, it was the last gasp of European feudalism.

There is an important set of distinctions our leaders and our masses fail to make note of today. Warriors are not tradesmen. There is the thought process of the warrior and the thought process of the merchant. When the latter becomes dominant, the former loses social standing. Jacob Burckhardt observed this development in ancient Phoenicia. Ultimately, the Phoenicians did not care who was militarily dominant if business could be conducted as usual. This attitude was anything but “noble,” since the focus was on money rather than on honor. Those city states that harbored such convictions inevitably lost their independence if not their existence. Such city states, animated by the thought process of the merchant, would find themselves at the mercy of enemies who cared more for honor than money. And if, as it sometimes happened, these enemies lost the virtue of justice, the society’s extinction followed inevitably. In the case of Carthage, itself a Phoenician colony, the end came nearly half a century after the departure of Hannibal to the court of Antiochus the Great. Against the more noble traditions of Rome, the total destruction of Carthage was advocated by Marcus Porcius Cato the Elder, who ended his speeches by saying, “Furthermore, I consider that Carthage must be destroyed.”

As a veteran of the Second Punic War, Cato had visited Carthage. He found this famous money-loving city, having given up its army and navy, prospering as never before. So successful was Carthage, that the city had easily paid its war indemnity. Defeat had been a lucky stroke, it seemed. Carthage was now Rome’s protected ally in good standing. How baffling it was to the Roman farmer, who enjoyed few luxuries while his defeated enemy enjoyed so many. Look what these enterprising Carthaginians had made of their defeat in the Second Punic War! Cato was shocked and asked himself if this great wealth could be turned against Rome. It was a question laced with envy. The answer, of course, was that Carthage had no motive for war. Wealth and comfort had become the city’s dream – from which the Carthaginians would not awaken in time. Instead, Carthage would follow its native (i.e., Phoenician) predisposition to the end, neglecting its own defenses until Roman jealousy was camped outside its walls – legions, siege equipment, and a blockading fleet. Polybius tells us that his friend, Scipio Africanus the Younger, wept openly for Carthage when he was ordered to destroy that magnificent city. The last of the truly noble Romans, the last hope for restraint and reform under the Republic, was not free to make the generous peace of his namesake.[xiii]

Such was the fate of Carthage, a city that valued money above honor. Such also was the fate of Rome once she had tasted too much plunder, sinking disgracefully into subjection under a series of vicious Caesars. It is worth asking, then, whether this same disease has not come to America; for America, in many respects, has come to resemble Carthage. This resemblance has been exhaustively commented on by the Russian propagandist, Alexander Dugin.

And so, returning to our Finnish intelligence expert, Col. Kari, we see the intellectual disgrace, as W.H. Auden poetized, that “stares from every human face.” In his lecture, Col. Kari stepped on the very first intellectual land mine he might have stepped on. He unthinkingly absorbed American economism as a point of departure for judging the Russians. Turning to the primacy of economics, Kari’s entire lecture tumbles into the abyss of rotten American pragmatism.  

The strategic misunderstandings attaching to American economism have not, so far, led to a “Carthaginian peace” for America. But that is the direction in which Americans are headed. It took Carthage more than half a century to get there. We may take a little longer. Our Carthaginian moment did not arise out of defeat in a war. It arose out of supposed victory in the Cold War. This occasioned our infamous “peace dividend.” Fattened with prosperity, a country like the United States might limp along for one hundred years before succumbing. (On the other hand, our flabby economism could get us nuked tomorrow). In terms of dangers now pressing in on us, the majority of Americans – educated and uneducated — have embraced strategic error, strategic misconception, strategic absurdity. All of these are daily paraded in front of us by policymakers and respected pundits from both sides of the aisle. Each half of America’s erroneous strategic culture forms a perfect whole. In terms of our smartest intellectuals, better is worse. One example should suffice: the libertarian economist and former Russian advisor to Putin, Andrei Illarionov, falsely predicted there would be no Russian invasion of Ukraine last February. He assured everyone that Putin would not invade, because Putin was neither insane nor stupid. After all, only an insane or stupid leader would start a big war.

Illarionov’s analysis was focused on economic motivations, omitting every consideration of honor. Consequently, his prediction was wrong. In a radio interview with Frank Gaffney of Secure Freedom Radio, we hear Illarionov reiterate his prediction: “I keep saying, there will be no big war from the Russian side against Ukraine.”[xiv] In an article published on February 15 of this year, Illarionov and Michael Waller saw Putin’s invasion threat as an economic maneuver, noting, “For the price of fuel for the mobilization, setting aside the Russian military’s fixed costs, Putin was able to leverage Biden [into scaring everyone] to tank Ukraine’s struggling economy in weeks.” Illarionov and Waller also assured readers that there would be no World War III. How did Illarionov and Waller know all this? Because U.S. intelligence is always wrong, Putin did not conceal his troop movements, concentrating troops on a border does not mean they are poised to invade, deployment maps of Russian troops concentrations are propaganda, no real international alarm has been raised, etc. One might have said, in response, that even a broken watch is right twice a day, large troops movements cannot be concealed, concentrating troops on a border is exactly what is meant by “poised to invade,” and deployment maps – if read properly – show exactly what kind of maneuver is in the offing. But, of course, Illarionov is an economist, not a military strategist.

Let us give discredit where discredit is due. On his side, Mr. Putin is not an economist. His interest in Ukraine is anything but financial. It is worth noting that Illarionov is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Here is an almost ironic juxtaposition of the name “Cato,” masking the Institute’s witless abjuration of Roman antiquity. Of course, the Cato Institute was not named after Cato the Elder, but after a series of British essays penned under the name of “Cato,” written in the early eighteenth century by radical Whig writers, John Trenchard and Thomas Gordon. These writers were defenders of liberty against political corruption and tyranny. Yet they were not without considerations of honor. Cato letter no. 1, for example, was titled, “Reasons to prove that we are in no Danger of losing Gibraltar.” The author, Mr. Thomas Gordon, berates those “who go about coffee-houses to drop … stupid and villainous reasons for giving” Gibraltar up. He wrote, “I defy those, who for vile ends, or to make good vile bargains, would gladly have it surrendered….” The pilfering of these writers by the Cato Institute is doubly ironic, since the Cato Institute was founded by Ed Crane, Murray Rothbard and Charles Koch. These were precisely the sort of men who would have haunted coffee houses in the early nineteenth century, offering “vile bargains” to surrender Gibraltar.

The following question should be asked the libertarians, leading to a proper judgment of their ideology: “And where comes this marvelous free market, Mr. Laissez-Faire? Out of which dream cloud does it drop? Mr. Laissez-Faire stares blankly at the camera…. He cannot grasp that the free market is not free. He cannot understand something above and beyond supply and demand. He does not know that liberal institutions need illiberal supports. He cannot grasp that blood is above money, that consumer values are not ultimate values because they cannot stand alone. In order for markets to be possible one must look higher, to the warrior who protects markets, and who sheds his blood in the struggle of empires. On hearing all of this Mr. Laissez-Faire grins slyly, rolls his eyes and says, ‘My blood is too valuable to spill. That is why I am for the volunteer army.’ And then he adds, ‘My money, somebody else’s blood.’”[xv]

Such an idea could not be further from the thinking of America’s Founders. Consider the fate of those who signed the Declaration of Independence. Did they imagine great wealth coming to them out of that declaration? Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration, five were captured by the British and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes plundered and burned. Nine died from wounds or the hardships of war.[xvi] Therefore, we should remember, that America was not orignally this rotten pragmatist thing it has become – where everyone looks to be paid.

Having tasted of peace and prosperity for many decades, considerations of honor have apparently faded from America’s national character. Not altogether, of course, but to an alarming degree. It is probably an understatement to say that Americans were annoyed by the interruption of their domestic life at the end of 1941, when Pearl Harbor was bombed. After Japan surrendered in 1945, Richard Weaver wrote, “The war of unlimited objectives which the democracies waged at the end may, in fact, be explained by the rage they felt over having their comfort disrupted and the contingent nature of their world exposed.”[xvii] Weaver, of course, was a champion of chivalry over and against economism. He distrusted American prosperity, and thought it was “an egregious mistake” to suppose that “unconditional surrender” was a means “of doing away with all war.” He darkly suspected such thinking indicated unfitness for future wars.

Economics has its place, as I have said before. I can quote Ludwig von Mises with the best of them. But economics should never be the primary lens through which we view strategy. And that is where our strategic culture has gone wrong. Therefore, our generals have come to think and talk like businessmen. These are the folks who refuse to see strategy as a zero-sum game. The business of America, after all, is business; and the businessmen have taught us all that everyone can win. Social interactions need not include zero-sum games. But the old-fashioned strategist, thinking on Carl von Clausewitz’s writings, recalls that war “is a duel on a tremendous scale.” And duels are fought for honor, not for money. Surveying the landscape of politics and war, the soldier knows that destruction is also a power; that killing and leveling can remove players from the game – which follows the inevitable logic of a zero-sum equation. Those who are strategically eliminated from history are the losers. Those who take control of man’s destiny are the winners. Those who vindicate their honor, who show their virtue, who attain sovereign power, rule over the rest.

There is one more point to be made. Col. Kari’s false American key to the “theory of strategic culture,” which we have been examining, contradicts the only clear definition of the political we have ever had; namely, that “The specific political distinction to which political [i.e., strategic] actions and motives can be reduced is that between friend and enemy.”[xviii] As Carl Schmitt explained, “Each participant is in a position to judge whether the adversary intends to negate his opponent’s way of life and therefore must be repulsed or fought in order to preserve one’s own form of existence.”[xix]

In respect of this: Imagine our American strategic theorists, attempting to understand their defeat in the Vietnam War as a failure to see the win-win possibilities of peace. Enter, Henry Kissinger. Enter, Richard Nixon and all the American presidents who sat down to do business with the mass murderers of the Chinese Communist Party. Fast forward. It is 2022. China is now militarily opposing us. China is talking war. Did our win-win theory of “strategic culture” play a role in building China into a military superpower?

Why are we such cowards before the truth that we must continually lie to ourselves about all this? Going into business with our enemies was not a path to peace. It was an evasion. And the reason for that evasion is not far to find. Naturally, we do not want to accept the inevitability of war. We would rather slander the warrior spirit and turn everything into a business proposition. And one of our slanders is that war is stupid. Another slander is that war is insane. What should we say, then? – That hurricanes are stupid? That Earthquakes are mentally ill? God save us from our own demented reasoning! War is not insane. Even nuclear war is not insane. Why? Because somebody might know how to win such a war by destroying all the other side’s weapons. In that case, the winner says to the loser, “Your society must surrender – or we shall start bombing cities tomorrow.” To say there will be no survivors in such a war is to misunderstand how future nuclear wars may be rationally strategized. As Soviet military theorist Makhmut Al. Gareev wrote, “The assertion that nuclear war will not be a continuation of politics is completely fallacious.”[xx] Another Soviet theorist, A.S. Milovidov wrote, “There is profound error and harm in the disoriented claims of bourgeois ideologues that there will be no victor in a thermonuclear war.” According to Milovidov, opposition to thermonuclear war is a subjective ideal characteristic of anti-war movements in the bourgeois world. “It expresses mere protest against nuclear war.”[xxi]

America and the West have nuclear-armed enemies. We cannot close our eyes and wish them away. “The political is the most extreme antagonism,” wrote Carl Schmitt, “and every concrete antagonism becomes that much more political the closer it approaches the most extreme point, that of the friend-enemy grouping.” Think hard, now about the muted Leninist messaging of Russia’s political leaders, their preference for communist China, for communist Cuba, for communist Nicaragua, for communist North Korea, etc. The explanation for the ongoing revival of communist power is not cultural. It goes deeper than that. This is taking place within the spiritual and intellectual vacuum of our materialist economism (i.e., our rotten pragmatism). You can accept whatever excuses for the Russian invasion of Ukraine you please. Russia is not a continuation of the Roman Empire, as Col. Kari thoughtlessly suggested in his lecture. Russia is not responsible for protecting the other Slavic peoples (who would rather see Russia minding its own business). And Russia is not genetically or historically programmed to perpetuate the Mongol Empire. Cultural myth may be piled upon myth, but Putin is no Tsar enforcing his divine right. The statues that went up in Ukrainian towns taken by Russian troops were Lenin statues. And there is a system in Russia, derived from the old Soviet system, trying to revive the old USSR. Thankfully, due to the Ukrainian people, this attempted revival is failing.   

Leaving Col. Kari and his American-derived theories of Russian motivation in our rearview mirror, let us remember one thing: An enemy is an enemy, no matter how sympathetic you want to make him. You can parade him about as a partner, as someone to “do business with,” but in the end he will show his colors. He will assail your strategic position. The choice will be, defend or surrender. Give up one country after another or stop the aggressor before he becomes too strong to stop.

It is tiring, indeed, to recite all the nonsense that is now passing for strategic insight. Most Americans are, as Yuri Bezmenov explained, unable to come to “sensible conclusions” about national defense. We always accept some lie or other, throwing us off the truth. Evola’s insult against the “great majority” of Americans was, perhaps, a little unfair. What “great majority” can be said to “think” in any country? Of course, there is this stereotype about Americans. And who holds to such stereotypes more than the Russians? The late Vladimir Bukovsky, before his death, told me that he could not live in America. The people there, he complained, were too stupid. They rarely think for themselves or cultivate good conversation, he added. Better to live in an uncomfortable country like the United Kingdom, where people are more intelligent. Yet another Russian, who also left America for Europe, once told me that “America is simply a prairie”; that is, an empty geographic space filled with primitives and a few surviving bison.

I am a bit worried these Russians have a point. Adding injury to insult, Evola wrote of Americans, “even in minor matters, whether it be prohibitionism or the feminist, pacifist, or environmental propaganda, we always find the same spirit, the same leveling and standardizing will and the petulant intrusion of the collective and the social dimension in the individual sphere.” This old enemy of America stuck his weapon in deeper, “Nothing is further from the truth than the claim that the American soul is ‘open-minded’ and unbiased; on the contrary, it is ridden with countless taboos of which people are sometimes not aware.”[xxii]

What better way to learn about oneself than from an enemy? But in defense of my countrymen I might ask, which nations are open-minded? The Russians? The Arabs? The French?! Why shouldn’t a common people share a common mode of thought? The only problem now, as I see it, is that the American point of view is against America. That is what troubles me. On the left, we are ready to destroy our country to save the planet. On the right, Putin is our savior against the New World Order. Is anyone thinking of how to preserve the United States?

I fear we have come to believe in our enemy’s arguments – adopting these arguments, adding to them. Surely, in war, a fool is more dangerous than an enemy; for an enemy may sometimes preserve you out of fear for himself; but a fool will sink the ship and all hands without knowing what he does. Worse even than the fools who abound on every side are those who parade about as professional patriots: tingling with ambition, wrapped in Old Glory, always laying traps for themselves.

With so much emptiness, and anxiety, and foolishness, it is no wonder that America finds itself at the mercy of its enemy’s slogans. Here the dying land reaches for its Golden Calf, its political god, as “the supplication of a dead man’s hand under the twinkle of a fading star.”[xxiii] For the hand that moves the system now, is pale with death. Its image is graven even as its worshippers are pagans who falsely suppose themselves otherwise. Of course, as Evola said, they do not think. Being manipulated by enemies is the fate of such people. Filled with blind self-righteousness, they end up as the Devil’s rag babies.

Links and Notes

[i] – See 1:08 minute mark.

[ii] Julius Evola translated by Guido Stucco, Revolt of Against the Modern World (Rochester Vermont: Inner Traditions International, 1995), p. 355.


[iv] – see 57 minute mark.

[v] Luke 12:48 says, “Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.”






[xi] From Webster’s New International Dictionary, 1943.


[xiii] Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus the Elder, main architect of Rome’s victory in the Second Punic (i.e., Hannibalic) War, negotiated generous peace terms with Hannibal and the Carthaginian Senate. This was resented by Cato and many others who thought Carthage should have been razed to the ground.


[xv] J.R. Nyquist, Origins of the Fourth World War (Chula Vista CA: Black Forest Press, 1999), p. 162.


[xvii] Richard Weaver, Ideas Have Consequences (Kindle Edition), p. 121.

[xviii] Carl Schmitt translated by George Schwab, The Concept of the Political (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007), p. 26.

[xix] Ibid, p. 27.

[xx] Makhmut Al. Gareev, M.V. Frunze – Military Theorist, p. 24.

[xxi] Milovidev as quoted by Joseph D. Douglass and Amoretta M. Hoeber in their book, The Soviet Strategy for Nuclear War (Hoover Institution Press, 1979), p. 7.

[xxii] Evola, p. 354.

[xxiii] See the poem by T.S. Eliot, “The Hollow Men,” Section III.


Quarterly Subscription (to support the site)


190 thoughts on “Strategic Culture and the Art of Seeing

  1. “The idealistic leftist, said Bezmenov, is useful in demoralizing his society. But as the communist takeover progresses to its final stage, his usefulness wanes – so much so that the leftist is the first to be executed by the Marxist-Leninists.”

    This is partly true, they for sure will have to be dealt with after a proletarian revolution, but most of those unpatriotic leftists are not useful idiots, they are willingly cosmopolitans. Often the same kind of traitors outside the imperial core is glorified in this site and by JR Nyquist.

    1. Jeff, wondered if you followed this twitter account which has incredible footage of what’s going on inside China and particularly the construction of Covid camps, forced detainments, and lockdowns. The footage is incredible, worth following this account. I wonder… do you think Covid is being used as a cover for the building of these internment camps, while their actual purpose will be something else… POWs, or future bio-weapon/pathogen coming? These measures for COVID seem so over the top, I think something else is up here.

      1. China is mobilizing for war. They need to get rid of anyone who will not obey the system. Also, they might have to re-educate Taiwanese and other conquered people. So it is difficult to say who all this is for.

  2. Frankly, I think the US, and much of the west, are dead men walking. Honor is a thing of the past in the political elite. All they care about is enriching themselves. I’m glad one faction is willing to support Ukraine to the extent they do, but the rest are thinking only of the immediate effects that Putin’s agitprop tells them, and not the wider picture that would tell them they are deluded.

  3. I think the left already knows they are obsolete, expendable, to be removed, and this drives further radicalism, anti-Americanism, perversion, lawlessness, sympathy for the criminal class and illegals as well as contemp for Americanism. Like a competition for worthiness, or achieving ever greater goals of anti-Christianism, extremism, perversion, humiliation, and anti-humanism.

  4. Bezmenov said it takes upward of fifteen to twenty years to reeducate. We have sixty years of that under our belt to our destruction. I rather doubt we have twenty years left to turn the tide. There are too many entrenched differences unable to coexist. You and others of like mind are only preaching to the choir. Anyone with the truth is blackballed, spit on, heckled and made an enemy of the state. Their livelihood is canceled. They are arrested and pilloried, fined and jailed. The leaders and influencers and judicial system are beyond corrupt. They are irredeemably evil. Nothing short of a thorough cleansing will suffice. I believe you think otherwise. However, there are many on the right who see no other option.

      1. I agree with you that China and RU will not be able to colonize USA. But hundreds of millions of deaths seem likely.

    1. The alliance between China and Russia is already showing friction and fractures. Despite decades of partnership and planning, they cannot trust each other or truly ally with one another as theirs is simply a marriage of convenience- once they have achieved their mutual goals they will turn on each other, as two great dominating powers with their ideology cannot coexist at the top together. This will be ultimately be their undoing and America’s opportunity for redemption and saving grace.

      1. The Russian/Chinese alliance is not a marriage of convenience. As Marina Kalashnikova, the Russian historian, told me more than a decade ago, the leadership of both countries is communist. They hold to scientific socialism as their true faith. It is the reason they do what they do. It is the reason they are building communist strongholds in Latin America. Communism is not dead. Lenin has not been buried. North Korea is sending artillery shells to Russia’s Army. China is sending mortar rounds. This is not a “marriage of convenience,” this is solidarity.

  5. Mr. Nyquist, in a recent segment of the John Moore Show, you mentioned in passing that Mr. Wang of Lude Media had revised his predictions regarding China’s planned moves in the Pacific. Something to the effect of China feeling the need for additional preparation, especially in light of Russia’s difficulties in Ukraine. And possibly waiting for an additional conflict to begin (or rather, reignite) between North Korea and South Korea to divert America’s attention. Could you share any further thoughts or details on this matter?

    1. If I understand Mr. Wang’s latest: Supposedly, North Korea will use nuclear weapons before China does. Russia supposedly will use them before North Korea. This past part I am dubious about.

      1. I would treat Nork nuclear weapon capability as nothing but a Russian/Chinese “deployment” and make sure they knew that was my position and it was not going to change!

    2. Thanks for info on recent interviews – anyone have the date for the recent John Moore interview? (I’m not seeing guests listed on Moore’s most recent program titles….)

    1. Forgot to add: interview with Mr. Nyquist hosted by Nevin Gussack on Populist Patriot.

      Populist Roundtable Episode 31: J.R. Nyquist (10/23/2022):

  6. You’ve captured the symptoms of the disease accurately, and the historical patterns that would warn us if our mandarins weren’t so busy pursuing money. But I’m not sure supporting the Ukrainian regime is the strategic step, but rather the color revolution was a misstep. Europe’s malaise and elite corruption is perhaps worse than ours – more degraded and more perverted by degrees. What has surprised me is to see how our bordering countries, Canada and Mexico, (many will downplay this observation) have become captured and we are now surrounded by hostile governments, as we have sought to surround China and Russia with our “allies.” My gravest concern is/was the penetration of our schools by the communists. What nation can there be if the younger generation isn’t capable of embracing and perpetuating it? I do believe that some department has been deeply involved in strategic 4D chess, how it unfolds is the mystery of the unknown unknowns. I always enjoy your articles and the thought provoking arguments you present. Thank you.

    1. Some news anchors/reporters are, whether intentionally or unintentionally, peddling Russian propaganda; or, they are simply spreading grave misunderstandings about what Russia really is.

      1. Carlson pedals intentionally. Hateway Pundit publishes Larry Johnson, a CIA refugee who has been entirely wrong about what is going on in Ukraine. Russian agitprop is neatly packaged for the weak minded who refuse to engage in critical thinking.

  7. Wow, what an article Mr Nyquist ! You really are ahead of each and every one of us, and your works are a blessing for the West and its preservation against its many enemies.
    Here is a little quote from a french writer that you may appreciate : “Islamists may try to kill us but they will fail because we are more dead than they are.” Philippe Muray

  8. Jeff, following up on Anthony’s comment, regarding The Liberty Man John Moore’s show, the 3rd hour of the Oct 26 you were speaking with a regular caller “Thomas from Germany” who always has good questions and thoughts. You mentioned you are on the Committee on the Present Danger: China

    I perused this site and found a webinar section with a segment back in May with Roger Robinson speaking to the issue of federal government employees and military retirement accounts via TSP and the Chinese military companies that are being invested in with US civilian and military personal savings. This is alarming information for some of us.
    Here is what he had to say:

    American investment firms (such as Black Rock, Vanguard, Fidelity) are putting our retirement funds into “bad actor” Chinese companies…companies that 1) help the PLA construct advanced weapon systems designed to be used against the US and its military forces, 2) engage in slave labor, 3) help in maintaining concentration camps of religious minorities

    35 Chinese companies have been inserted into the international fund of TSP in spite of the Trump administration’s efforts.

    Now, there is an effort to structure a “mutual fund window initiative”.
    5000 mutual funds that would be available for up to 25% of the savings of TSP savings plan participants that have a $10,000 buy-in. Point is, they (normal participants, employees) aren’t compelled to invest in such mutual funds that contain these bad actor Chinese companies BUT they have no way of knowing if they’re there or not. No diligence (care or caution) is performed.
    The Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (looks after the TSP) has made plain in publicly available minutes that they have no intention of performing such diligence. They claim it’s too costly, involves too many resources, and there’s too many of them (funds).
    This could be pushed through by early June (2022).

    Is there any updates to this information that Roger shared back in May?

  9. I have spent quite a bit of time pondering on why Conservatives are so anti-Ukraine and pro-Kremlin. I’ve come to a couple conclusion. First, is that virtually all Americans have a narcissist God-complex. Republicans manifest this as viewing everything happening abroad as an extension of their own wants. There are no separate Ukrainian people with their own unique wants and needs… they need to stop fighting Russia because that’s what we want. Further, there can’t possibly be a problem in Ukraine that wasn’t caused by USA, because we are all powerful, we are the cause behind everything happening in the world. Why and how this complex developed!?! I have no idea. The second point I am starting to strongly believe is that Ukranians hold up a mirror to Conservatives and Conservatives don’t like what they see. Ukrainians are actually fighting for self-sovereignty and free elections. Whereas Republicans refuse to fight. They really want continued co-existence as long as possible to continue a comfortable life. So deep down, on some level, when they see Ukranians actually taking risks, accepting sacrifice, to fight for what Conservatives talk about, I’m guessing it hurts.

    1. I disagree with your assessment. First, I would not refer to a particular group of right wingers as, what you would call, conservatives per se. There is a faction that is strongly aligned with the Constitution and Bill of Rights as envisioned by the founders of this country. While they are conservative by nature and hardworking and self-sufficient, they see what has happened over the past decades and fault both the leaders and themselves – the leaders for being stupid, money grabbing, socialists hell bent on deliberately destroying both the country and humanity and themselves for having been too busy minding their own business while trying to hold a job and raise a family. They view our world police actions as being nothing more than economic and banker wars that have nothing to do with spreading democracy while sacrificing thousands of lives on both sides. They resent the loss of our manufacturing base, the government controlled education system, the propaganda media, the corrupt legal system, the politicized and corrupt medical profession, the government inspired and supported black-shirt, stasi thus, the lack of accountability of left wing criminals and the persecution of all who try to right the wrongs facing the country. They realize that voting does not solve the problems for myriad reasons not the least of which corruption in general. They are maligned for wanting to solve the problems we are facing and are looking for an opportunity to do so. They realize the only course of action is catastrophic and, for that reason, will require a catalyst to implement appropriate action. Such an event might come in the form of martial law, foreign invasion, a nuke or a door smashed in the middle of the night. These are only a few things. They know the government is hell bent on eradicating most of the population both here and abroad. I can’t even begin to describe what I’m trying to say. Suffice to say, we are considered the enemy of the state simply because this is the only country able to stop communism and TPTB know it. The patriot may be confused on certain issues but he is American first and foremost and loves his country enough to die saving it.

    2. Americans tend to be very poorly informed about what is going on in the world. Chuck Missler, while a CEO of a California company noted that their London offices knew more of what was going on in California than the California offices did.

      I lived in Germany during Prague spring and well remember the preps we made sure of were in place so we could bug out as soon as were notified to leave. After I go to San Antonio, I tried to discuss current events with some of my high school faculty and class mates and found they knew next to nothing about Prague Spring. That has long been typical of Americans.

    3. It’s real simple. Getting in Russia’s face is a bad, idea. That’s why we’ve never done that before. Biden is Putin’s lackey. Biden gives Putin justification to nuke the US. Conservatives think that’s a bad idea. Progressives such as Antifa are Communists, yet they are against Russia. They say that Trump supports Russia. If you support the war in Ukraine, you are not Conservative. I don’t know what you are, other than enraged by hate. No matter how much you hate Putin and/or Russians, it doesn’t make you wise or effective.

      1. Now you’re suggesting that we hate the Russian people? You have so little credibility here, Lanyard. 🤦

      2. Quite frankly, the fact that Trump condemned Putin’s invasion should have been a big hint that if anything, Trump was AGAINST Russia, so those fake Conservatives who are shilling for Putin should just drop it. Trump was NEVER for Putin.

      3. A conservative most certainly CAN support the Ukrainians in their efforts to defend against Putin’s invasion. One does not have to hate Russians to support the Ukrainians. Supporting the Ukrainians is the right thing to do.

  10. You have mentioned in a recent video, I forgot which one of them it was, that the Ukrainian Maidan revolution is accused of being a USA/CIA backed coup based on a call of diplomats talking about how things went after they happened, this gave me a big deja vu feeling, this is almost the verbatim excuse for calling the Brazilian 1964 military revolution a CIA backed coup. It was labeled a CIA coup based on a brief communication between the US ambassador in Brazil Lincoln Gordon and Lyndon Johnson, with the former saying something to the effect: “sir, the military put tanks in the streets, what should I do?” and LBJ replied that he should keep him informed, the exchange proves that the diplomat was caught by surprise with what happened, but the Communists try to interpret things in the most warped way as possible as that was proof positive it was orchestrated by the CIA, when the call clearly indicates otherwise.

    The whole accusing what was a genuinely popular movement against a Communist president as a CIA backed operation is the exact same Communist script, it’s quite bizarre how they are hitting the exact same beats just switching the names of the countries and the name of the people involved.

    Later on the StB agent overseeing the Soviet operations in Brazil, Ladislav Bittman, would admit in his book “The KGB and Soviet Disinformation” that the whole CIA coup narrative came from the Communist bloc, also said that many Brazilian journalists were on the KGB payroll.

    1. The Ukrainian coup story was generated in the Kremlin. The weak minded have bought into the story, and the rest of Putin’s agitprop with no critical thought involved. It is sad to see the commentariat at places like Hateway Pundit and other places, show how little they think. One commenter said the Ukrainians have suffered nearly 400,000 combat deaths. If that had been even close to the truth, the Ukrainian Army would have ceased to exist.

      Faux-conservatives simply aren’t thinking.

      1. Journalists are ready made for anything they’ve been paid for. Mr. Nyquist, I am thinking that a certain perspective is missing, that of the person who is not an end times dispensationalist, a Fatima roman catholic, a pro Ukrainian ultra nationalist, and the like. I say what I think, and to the Devil with mincing words, because life is too short for nonsense. What you have in the post Soviet space at the top is just more Western thinking, that is all. It is the last hurrah of the Petrinism of the past 400 years. Still, even a bad man can do good even if they do not intend it, and even were pushed into it. We will take back everything, and resist the Zapadniki Satanism. Poland can have the Galician Uniate, and then they are your problem. Evola and Schmidt were right in a manner so to speak, so they can have the war they want, the one that has been waged since the Livonian War, waged to break apart and extinguish Russia. Or even further, war waged since Creation right up to now, the 7531st year of the World. The war against Orthodox Christianity. You will get the Europe you want, and I Russia free of the West, what is being determined now are new borders of civilization.

      2. Vladimir: Things will probably take a direction none of us expect. I do not see a future for Russia under Putin. How can Russia become sincerely Orthodox? Events are impending, I think, that will give a new direction to everything. Why do I say this? Because the present dispensation cannot continue indefinitely in the way it has. The thing must break down at some point — in the East and in the West.

      3. Shortly before Covid was unleashed, Putin said something similar to ‘new borders of civilization are being established’.

      4. Vladimir, are you saying that the, Galician Uniate, are the Zapadniki, you allude to as Satanists? If so, are they knowingly Satanist, or is it that you simply view them as such by their fruits?

      5. Too bad for you Vlad. You’re pushing nonsense. Russia is not a Christian nation anymore than the US is. Russia is self destructing, and a war that it could not afford is just one reason. Putin is an idiot that allied himself with organized crime and is the chief corruptocrat. He tries to project a good picture of himself, but anyone paying attention knows is just a Potemkin picture.

        What you think is “free of the west,” is the same sewer that the Bolsheviks ruled over. If you like that, then you can only be regarded as insane.

      6. Petunia, Most Eastern Orthodox do not regard the Uniates as Christian. They recognize the authority of the Roman Papacy, and that has not sat well with the Orthodox since the great Schism.

        Vlad’s evaluation, however, is typical of Putinists and their emotional ravings about Ukraine, which is an Orthodox country, although they allow religious liberty, unlike Putin’s neo-Soviet state.

  11. Anthony Lu and BRCC66 refer, above, to Jeff’s appearance on the 10/26/22 edition of the John Moore Show. This is not very easy to locate, so some might find the following information useful.

    Here is a link to the show:

    and since the show is lengthy and Jeff isn’t the sole guest, I should also mention that his portion begins at 1:28:40.

  12. Great article. Love this comparison highlighting the difference between honor and money. It’s so true. Americans have confused capitalism as a good legal system and gone on to decide money is the highest value. I was reading my 9 year old son some of this article. He didn’t understand most of it course but he got some of the ideas. He says he likes it 🙂

  13. It has baffled me to see leftists on twitter (except the communists) being universally against Russia and China now, even talking like cold warriors. Think I even saw Golitsyn get quoted.

    Then I go to Free Republic, a conservative website, and I see some stupid SOB posting videos from a You Tube channel that is so hardcore communist that the creator even makes videos defending the North Korean government. And other posters openly defend even China and claim Chinese’s crimes against humanity are Globalist lies.

      1. Mr. Nyquist, speaking of ” flipping the script” I wanted to respond to your reply on what I wrote, and for time’s sake, indirectly reply to others. Russia has had a history of over 1000 years, and Putin is one mortal man. Not only this, but he is not one to love or hate, nobody is, as I’ve said before. Russia will still be around after Putin. We are in the equivalent of a second ” Time of Troubles ” , and so history does provide me with a sense of equilibrium if nothing else. Consider the Tsardom from my perspective for example if you would: The February Revolution of 1917 came before the October Revolution. And so it happened that most of the White officers who were defeated in the Civil War, happened also to have been faithless to the oath made to their sovereign Tsar. All accounts will be squared, and one finds that in reading de Maistre and Julius Evola war is the perfect divine instrument of seeing that done. The Elites change in any case Mr. Nyquist, and make themselves equal to the task of their calling. Right now one might be forgiven in thinking all greatness has been exiled from history. We must be careful what we wish for though if the Great Men do not match their excellence with their virtues, virtues provided only by the spiritual charismata from above, not because an Atilla or Ghenghis Khan is so bad necessarily, so much as us common people are so often rightly chastised caught up in their wake. Bezmenov does not provide enough an explanation, being a modern grey functionary himself. The explanation lies rather in the ending of the Modern era itself. Do you see an Alexander cutting the useless Gordian knot of Modernity for us, cutting through the unsustainable complexities of today’s world? Such an Alexander is in obscurity to this day, but not likely tomorrow

      2. “God punishes people with bad rulers. We have bad rulers in almost every country now.”

        What baffles me is why we had to be punished right now? I was under the impression that we were getting back to God under President Trump by restoring relations with Israel and making huge strides in the pro-Life movement, including installing justices that ultimately helped overturn Roe v. Wade and gave an actual fighting chance towards having the states making abortion illegal.

      3. Re:
        [ OTNESSE says:
        OCTOBER 31, 2022 AT 6:33 AM

        “What baffles me is why we had to be punished right now? ]

        Do you feel that we weren’t being punished prior to the overturn of Roe?
        Jesus described that in the end days that there would be tribulation, leading up to the Great Tribulation.

      4. Otnesse: It’s not only the leaders who count, the people also need to do right. Even under Trump, the people kept getting worse.

      5. “Otnesse: It’s not only the leaders who count, the people also need to do right. Even under Trump, the people kept getting worse.”

        How? We managed to undo a lot of the radical elements of Obama’s agenda (not all of them unfortunately, certain portions were sabotaged by John McCain on his deathbed), we reinstituted ties with Israel, and we even were making huge swaths in stopping the pro-Abortion camp, even ignoring Trump’s Justice nominees. That to me sounds like we WERE getting better, not worse.

      6. Otnesse: you look at a few political events, I look at the spiritual and social life of the country. What I saw was increases in sexual immorality, violence, theft and other moral ills during Trump’s administration. The overturning of Roe v. Wade was a good action, but women are still murdering their babies in abortions. Trump himself did tremendous damage to this country through his “Operation Warp Speed”. I don’t see net progress to the better during Trump’s administration.

        I see Biden and his enablers working to destroy this country.

      7. “Otnesse: you look at a few political events, I look at the spiritual and social life of the country. What I saw was increases in sexual immorality, violence, theft and other moral ills during Trump’s administration. The overturning of Roe v. Wade was a good action, but women are still murdering their babies in abortions. Trump himself did tremendous damage to this country through his “Operation Warp Speed”. I don’t see net progress to the better during Trump’s administration.”

        I’d argue the major pro-Life victories that were occurring during those four years under Trump were not just Political victories, but spiritual as well (heck, our church constantly tried to get Roe v. Wade overturned as well, and has repeatedly made clear that abortion is a huge moral failing.). Maybe also reconnecting with Israel as well, though that’s a gray area admittedly (since that’s more of a Protestant bit). As far as sexual immorality, the most I saw of that was stuff like the CW’s actions post-2016 where Greg Berlanti went out of his way to make everyone gay like himself, and that if anything seemed to massively backfire on him as it was causing the ratings to collapse for his shows, and ultimately managed to result in the CW’s destruction later on. And Violence and Theft has unfortunately been going on even during the founding of America (heck, around the time the French Revolution was going on, we had intense Christian persecutions to such an extent that most Christians at universities were even having to meet in secret as if caught, their bibles were burnt, and Tom Paine taking quite a bit of pleasure stoking those fires, even saying Christendom is going to be extinct.).

        As far as Operation Warp Speed, to be fair, there’s also plenty of evidence that Trump WAS trying to make sure a vaccine was going to be made, and also repeatedly implied nearing the end of the election cycle that he would fire Fauci once he was reelected. In fact, there’s actually a story out there of how a Trump official tried to hire someone to oversee the CDC and try to set them straight regarding how to handle the crisis, but the CDC constantly ignored the person they installed, even made it clear that, if anything, they viewed themselves as above the President in authority.

      8. Otenese, what you cite is not “getting back to God.” Moralism, and associated philosophies, are not what it means to be a Christian. Christians are moral, but that is because they have been born again and follow the teachings of scripture as the Holy Spirit guides.

        Moralism is not better than being a rank sinner.

  14. This article shows a clarity of thinking not common today. Yet, with all that is said in the article and the comments, it seems to come down to this: How can we right the ship, or rebuild after it is sunk? Either option requires honor and clear thinking, but as anyone who has a modicum of common sense left can observe, there’s not much common sense, clarity or honor going around these days and it all seems to be slipping away rapidly. What kind of hope for the future can anybody out there suggest? Are the religious doom sayers going to turn out to be the only truth tellers in our day?

    1. Christians are not doom sayers. They’ve read the end of the story already and know who wins. What we are seeing is an increasing division between those who have accepted the delusions Satan spreads from those that accept the truths of scripture. The end result is will lead to Satan’s NWO which is being pushed by diverse people like Schwab and the WEF, Putin, Xi, US Democrats, and many others.

      Satan will get his NWO, and the guy who runs it for him will be far worse than any dictator who has ever lived before him.

      Yes, Christians are the only ones telling the truth.

      1. Great article by Mr.Nyquist who I follow closely. The comments are always interesting. I possibly share your theological views. I recently read a book which cleared up my thinking on the Book of Revelation. You may find it of interest. It’s written by Fred Harding & titled “The Apocalypse Deception: The Book of Revelation is not what it claims to be”.

      2. Andrew Milner: the book of Revelation is what IT claims to be. The problem, and this goes back to ancient times, is that so many people don’t take it at its word.

      3. The problem is that the words of the book are very hard to understand. A great deal of symbolism, even numerology, is used in the book. The meaning of these things is not readily decipherable.

      4. Jeff: “The problem is that the words of the book are very hard to understand. A great deal of symbolism, even numerology, is used in the book. The meaning of these things is not readily decipherable.”

        You are correct. It is written with the presupposition of knowledge of the Old Testament and the symbolism used there. The problem today is that almost nobody knows the Old Testament. Without that knowledge, much of Revelation cannot be understood.

      5. If the Book of Revelation is a con job, then the rest of scripture must also be so classed. John was alive after the book was written and it was distributed to Churches other then the one he attended, in Smyrna, I think. Were it a con job, then it would have been rejected then, in the 1st century.

        Revelation in within the flow of scripture that starts in Genesis and completes the canon. Consequently, both the start and the end are known to those that will pick up the Bible and read it for it is.

        I’ve read a number of essays on what Revelation purports to be, by liberal theologians, particularly those that have bought into the errors of Origen and Augustine. All have face planted as they carry on with allegorizing large swaths of scripture in an attempt to make it fit their favored foolishness. The book of Revelation is quite important, and can be understood by those that try to understand it. It is the only book that makes a promise to those who read it and keep the words of the Prophecy.

    1. This was meant as a response to @OhEngineer’s reply to my comment above. WordPress has again inexplicably, and frustratingly, shoved my reply to the end of the thread.

    2. Whether or not he is a dupe is irrelevant. He is still pedaling lies that if he exercised a modicum of critical thought, he would see they are lies. His regurgitation of Putin’s lies must, therefore, be classed as intentional.

      1. As I’ve said earlier, it’s strange that Carlson takes this point of view. His viewership is huge and was huge even before this war started, there is no need for him to do this. Maybe he is a paid dupe.

      2. Good point. It’s a wast of time trying to guess hidden agendas. Just nuke them back to the stone age.

  15. Thank you for your analyses. You are a great researcher and thinker, and a Christian. As a thinker and Christian you didn’t realize the role of Khazars (who consider themselves to be the 13th tribe (whereas Prophet Jacob (peace be upon him) only had 12 sons, thus the 12 tribes)).

    The Khazars, who accepted Judaism in 740 AD in Khazaria, are crypto-Jews (who hijacked Judaism) were the War Revolutionary Movement that brought communism (Bolshevik Revolution) to Russia which was an Orthodox Christian nation.

    In 1949 they brought communism to China, and now they are going to bring communism to the entire world after WWIII, to install their Master (The AntiChrist) as the global ruler, if God Almighty permits them.

    They the international bankers who brought pseudo-capitalism which is nothing other than central planning of money, versus communism which is central planning of production and distribution without property rights…thus WEF Agenda 2030…you won’t own anything and you will be happy.

    If you include this angle of analysis then everything becomes clear as to where we are headed for a number of years (only God Almighty knows best) of tribulations before the return of The Messiah (peace be upon him) who will set things right and rule with Divine Justice, God-Willing.

      1. Yes, an Orthodox Muslim who believes in One God, all the Prophets from Adam, Noah, Enoch, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad (peace be upon them all) and 18 other Prophets (pbuta) mentioned in The Noble Koran. I believe in all the revealed books, The Psalms, The Torah, The Bible and The Noble Koran.

        Not a Wahhabi militant sect in Islam created by MI6 and ibn Saud collaboration, which is a deviation to defame the lasting religion from Prophets Adam to Muhammad (pbuta) and finally, when The Messiah (pbuh) return

        Likewise, Shi’aism is a deviation from Orthodoxy that have many anomalies, and they have communist education and leanings which is not acceptable in Islam.

        Islam stands for Ultimate Justice even against our own kith and kin, which most of us Muslim have fallen short for over 300 years. That’s why the world hasn’t seen demonstration of true, unbiased justice, so the Western world’s middle-class misunderstands Islam and Muslims and confuses with Middle-Eastern culture…are which we Muslims are to be blamed.

        That is the only reason why/how the Western people were hijacked by the international Banksters, their neocons lobbies and bribed politicians to wage war on Muslim lands, and indebt the US taxpayers with $8 trillion dent since 911.

        We Muslims can’t blame anyone but ourselves for not living upto the Godly standard of Universal Justice, as prescribed in this verse of The Noble Koran:

        Koran: Chapter 4, Verse 135:

        “O you who believe, be ever champions of justice, giving complete and accurate testimony for the sake of Allah, even against yourselves, or parents and closest family. Whether the defendant be a rich man or poor, Allah is fitter than you to show them due regards: So follow not mere headstrong impulse from being absolutely fair. And should you twist your testimony, or avoid giving it – Truly was Allah ever well-aware of all you do.”

        Nothing happens in a vacuum and without the permission of Almighty God. When God’s commandments are not adhered to then there are consequences.

        We Muslims have been going through severe tribulations/purification for the past 43 years, since Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. I understand it as a purification for a people who have been given the completed revelation, The Noble Koran, to implement in order to establish Universal Justice for all, so that whoever is not a Muslim but living in a Muslim land shall have his day in a fair court.

        I pray that God Almighty preserve me through the coming Four Horsemen of Apocalypse to see the day when The Messiah (peace be upon him) Rules the World with Divine Universal Justice. God-Willing!

        May God Almighty make the people of this Earth a more compassionate, merciful, generous and moral united humans through the process of tribulations and cleansing for promoting Godly causes of Universal Justice and wealth distribution for taking care of the poor, the indigent, the wayfarer, the widows and orphans, Ameen!

        God Bless you my Christian brother for your efforts in shedding light on the menace of Communism!

    1. I do not believe the bankers can change what is about to happen. Caesarism breaks the dictature of money, as Oswald Spengler noted. And I am not a fan of Caesarism, either.

      1. The ‘Bankers’ CAUSED, what is happening, and have made sure that it’s irreversible.

      2. It merely is, mr Nyquist. Caesarism cannot be avoided I think, Bonapartism anyway. Nor is it truly a restoration of Monarchy, otherwise Napoleon and Cromwell are Monarchs. In any case, it at least shows the limits of Money.

  16. It was at that point that I realized something about the voice in my ear. It was not don Juan’s, although it sounded very much like his voice. Also, the voice was right. The instigator of that seeing was the nagual Juan Matus. It was his technique and his power that was making me see God. He said it was not God, but the mold of man; I knew that he was right. Yet I could not admit that, not out of annoyance or stubbornness, but simply out of a sense of ultimate loyalty to and love for the divinity that was in front of me.
    Carlos Castaneda: The Fire from Within

      1. Casteneda wrote much about the, Art Of Seeing. He wasn’t married. A group of women who were his students, seemed to have had him under their thumb, and after he died, if not burned from the fire from within, the women wrote all kinds of nonsense. UCLA awarded Casteneda a doctorate for his first book which originally was a dissertation.

      2. Spiritual delusion: ” Prelest”. The clowns and apes of God and His Saints proceed Him and the Saints in their action: King Saul was before the prophet and psalmist King St. David. In reply then to what you said to me last Mr. Nyquist about rolling back the materialism so anointed kings can arrive, I’ll say that just as in the Russian awaiting of the Tsar, the people will have to earn it.

      3. Vladimir shows the Russian Orthodox mindset. THE rightful King will come, at the fullness of time, just as He was originally sent into the world. The world did not “earn” Him in anyway, nor will the world earn Him when he returns to rule. Salvation is by grace alone, bay faith alone, in Christ alone. Salvation can not be earned in any way, and “anointed Kings” are not coming to save anyone. The rulers that will assist the beast of Revelation will destroy, not save, and those are the sort of people you seem to be looking for.

  17. This article reminded me of my college days—people just don’t think. Their thinking is such a mass of unconnected snippets that there’s no way to make any sense of it, nor any way to impart any sense to the subjects. And I’m talking about the cream of the crop, those with 4.0 averages.

    It wasn’t just the students. The introductory biology text for science majors was written by two professors at Harvard—George Gaylord Simpson and William S. Beck—presented the most detailed and thoroughgoing description of what is science of any textbook I’ve seen. They then introduced the Darwinian theory of evolution in such a way that evolution cannot be a scientific theory. By definition.

    Teachers many years ago told me about an “excellent article supporting the theory of Darwinian evolution”—it was 16 short paragraphs pushing eight arguments. Each of the arguments was based on a logical fallacy, not counting the scientific problems.

    What will it take to wake these people up? If people can’t even think logically, what hope is there of their intellectual development? Or understanding? How are they not easy targets for misinformation? It’s not only Americans, when living in Europe I found that many Europeans are equally shallow in their thinking.

    There is a difference between smarts and wisdom—some of the most foolish things I have heard or read emanated from very smart people. And no, being rich is not a sign of being either smart or wise.

    War is not inevitable. War is insane. War is stupid. War is all of these because war is immoral. Because of widespread immorality, war will come. Because of the wickedness of Putin and Xi, they will attack the U.S., the question is when not if. Because of the immorality of many of our “elites”, they will continue to trade with our enemies while they don’t warn nor prepare our people for the danger we’re in.

    I see the biggest problem is one of morality. Because of immorality, we have been betrayed by our elites—politicians, business leaders, journalists, educators, etc.—people know and resent it. People don’t know who to believe. Unfortunately, shallow thinking people are also easily fooled by appearances. The communists are ready with appearances that make them look good, lying that they are the moral actors. We who look beneath appearances know better, but I fear that we won’t be able to wake people to the dangers that surround us, not until after the nukes hit and tens of millions of Americans are dead.

    1. “War is not inevitable.”

      I beg to differ. The only way war will not be inevitable is when Christ returns to rule. Until then, fallen man will fight and people like Putin will wage war if they think they can make war pay.

      1. I’m not Roman Catholic, but certainly agree with the sentiment in that article. One day he will rule, visibly on earth after he crushes the spirit of the age we are enduring now.

  18. Mr. Nyquist, you say in the article: “All solutions tend to be economic solutions. Man is here reduced to a homo economicus.”

    Well, the domain on economics is precisely relative to the domain of the Muslim-like duality (emphatic if relative distinction between exoterism and esoterism). Nothing is more classically and simultaneously as accessible and inaccessible than money/economic goods. That is why Hagar the mother of Ishmael , according to the most important Talmud scholar [Judah ha-Nasi] etc., was discretly the same individual/woman called Keturah who married Abraham and became his second wife. This makes Ishmael the very same person as Midian. Midian corresponds to exoterism, Ishmael to esoterism. And they/their descendents were merchants [economic realm], that is why the brothers of Joseph sell Joseph to Midianites/Ishmaelites (in a passage that even the Encyclopedia Britannica notes suggests there is some confusion or interchageability between the terms “Ishmaelites/Midianites”).

    The very phenomenon you denounce about America, the one by which “all solutions tend to be economic solutions”, if one be allowed to explain it fully, has to do with America’s Muslim-like duality. It occured to me two observations on the approach according to which my talking about this American Muslim-like duality would signal an anti-Protestant resentment: It seems to me Protestantism originally and in a more primitive and ordinary or essential sense, has to do with promoting a comparative non-distinction between dogma and morals (which correspond to, as opposed to coincide with, esoterism and exoterism), by which a distinct profession of Faith takes the role [in an ecompassing way] of what is relative to the former stereotype of what the justification domain is about [moral precepts being abode by]. So, in this sense, I would rather think Protestantism is farther away from Islam than not. This signal I wasn’t trying to be insulting when I made the connection that America’s dualism can be seen in Protestants that happen to be American public commentators.

    Another point in this regard [America’s duality], is that if this Muslim-like quality is relative to the Economic domain (just like the brass thighs of Nebuchadnezzar’s statue [given the Plato similar analogy to social classes]), it follows, long story short, it is also relative to the dialectic discourse (one of the four Aristotle discourses Olavo de Carvalho wrote about); the third discourse in the sequence given by de Carvalho (just as the brass thighs are the third part of the statue). And it so happens Olavo de Carvalho, who was a trained philosopher of history, admitted each discourse is to be associated to a particular epoch. For instance, Homer and Hesiod’s epochs/historical context were associable with potetic discourse. It follows they by that very fact could not be associated with a Muslim-like duality quality in the same way Islam does.

    This further proves or constitutes evidence that it is not a question of simply saying people have different levels of understanding/depth (either exoterism or esoterism related), it is not simply the case that no one time and place should stand out as associated with this emphatic, if relative, distinction/duality.

    1. Pedro: I am very sorry, but, I have no idea what this Muslim-like duality is that you are writing about, or why you think this mysterious duality is shared by Protestantism. “There is one God and his Prophet is Mohammed” is dualistic only in the sense that the formulation contains two assertions. But Protestants cannot reduce their creed to something this simple. So I am at a loss. Every complex thing might be conceived as having two sides, or three sides, or whichever number of sides you like. Why is Islam dualistic? It is monotheistic. And what does this have to do with the esoteric/exoteric distinction? Furthermore, there is no such thing as esoteric Protestantism. Esotericism refers to teachings that are hidden from the profane. Protestantism has no secret teachings. The Gospel is to be preached to all. It seems you have made a very odd comparison. I only ask if your comparison is apt. Or is it so nebulous, so arbitrary, as to be meaningless?

      1. As René Guénon explained Islam is divided into two very different or distinct aspects (exoterism and esoterism, two aspects, hence duality). A simple example of it is that albeit Islam is considered or seen perhaps as the most intolerant religion, outlawing any other outlook as far as possible, the discipline of compared religions is an ordinary discipline for a Muslim scholar, a sheikh as René Guénon spent decades studying things like artistic motifs and symbols from Hindu tradition (a seemingly polytheist religion). These are two sides of the same coin (intolerance and generosity), the latter two qualities (hence duality) correspond to exoterism and esoterism.

        I didn’t say this duality is shared by Protestantism, quite the opposite, I meant to say Protestantism is associable with a comparative burying this distinction in a non-distinction, dogma profession eating away the role formerly attributed to abiding by morals and making dogma in an all-encompassing way melt the distinction between dogma and morals (which pair corresponds to esoterism and exoterism). That is why in Protestantism depth looks surface-like, and vice-versa. Just the opposite of Islam, in which one knows quite well (once explained) what’s the surface and what’s behind it. Despite that, in America the Muslim-like duality approach to things is a common place. One example would be, as I mentioned before, and you yourself admitted I might have a point, the prestige of cultural products which are appreciated precisely because they aren’t quite understood (the Star Wars franchise, which is really a discreet discussion of secularism as a degeneration).

        Despite Protestantism as such not being esoteric, it has historically connected itself to esoterism. One American Protestant who admitted this was Stanley Montieth, the connection of Masonry and Protestantism to him was a reality, albeit unofficial. Olavo de Carvalho also reckoned as much. Thus, it is possible that the American Muslim-like duality influenced and bent Protestantism, especially if the esoteric influences in America (Albert Pike etc.) are last remotely associable to Islam than people might assume.

        And the point of all this is that one has to know one’s enemy and oneself. Sun Tsu 101. You have to understand America is a exoteric/esoteric civilization. I think this is one of the reasons communism attempted to manipulate public opinion the way it did. The independence from nuance and context that the language of political correctness acquired in America is implicitly based on the premise that in America the language one uses doesn’t have and perhaps cannot have a lot of depth and overtness in public circumstances. It would seem to me communism is using it to pull one over on the US.

        I suppose I failed or probably will continue to fail to make this point, I’ll drop it.

      2. I didn’t say Masonry is esoteric Protestantism. I said according to individuals, Stanley Monteith for example (famous [and sincere] Protestant radiohost, author and researcher), there is a historical connection between Masonry and Protestantism. It has nothing to do with doctrinal continuity [a mutual and simple doctrinal prolongation] between masonry and Protestantism (none I am aware of), nor do I have in principle (or given qualifications) a negative view of Masonic doctrine. I accept the view Masonry is ultimately from a Middle Ages fraternity network which had sacred knowledge, I studied some of the symbolism/metaphysics they had (in the book Fundamental Symbols: The Universal Language of Sacred Science) and found the views Freemasonry is based upon quite sound and endowed with universal validity; albeit I think it is likely, as Guénon observed, Freemasonry in his own time and even before was decadent.

        I see you judged I am primarily aiming at “sniping at Protestants”, which means I have lost altogether the power to express myself before you; and thus I won’t attempt to do it hereafter, it would be pointless.

      3. Freemasonry and Protestantism have no connections. The Masons are descended from the Knights Templar, which was a Roman Catholic order. Evangelists such as Finney and Moody left Freemasonry because the cult is not compatible with Christianity. People like Manly Hall and Albert Pike were Luciferians, and the cult is shot through with it, even at the blue lodge level, where things are quite subtle. Even the subtle things are red flags to any informed Christian.

    1. Yes, he “won”, with the same graphics as the 2014 elecition. His election is legitimate as Biden´s. At every corner, the electoral courts always favoured his candidature. But don´t think non-communists would go gentle into that “good red night”.

      1. Yes, the first signs they will not go quietly into that red night:

        “Amir Tsarfati (Telegram, Oct 31 @ 08:54)

        Update from Brazil:
        Many Brazilians do not accept the results of the presidential elections, as they seem fraudulent.
        Truckers are closing highways, and there is a nationwide movement to paralyze activities in the whole country. They are asking for military intervention.”

    2. The biggest city of Bolivia is totally shut down now to demand the government fix the voter roles before the 2025 Presidential election and stop further Communist rigging. Roads blocked and all that stuff. Bolivia and Brazil will lead the way!

      1. Bolsonaro has engaged the military to an audit of the election. He has said he will arrest the judges that prevented free campaigning during the election. I hope he gets down where they live and rips them out by the roots.

  19. Very good Jeff! You are one of the few lucid people in this nation!

    Do you think it would be better to have an open war with China as soon as possible, because that would arouse the patriotic feeling of Americans?

      1. You will note that now there are no women on the major committees of the CCP. And no businessmen either

      2. No women or businessmen on the CCP Central Committee? Unfortunately, there is no honor in the CCP either. It is wholly criminal in its orientation. The absence of two elements of dubious propriety does not grant propriety.

  20. I recently found Peter Zeihan online and he stated that China will eventually collapse under its own weight, especially due to the chip shortage. What are you thoughts on this?
    It seems to me like his outlook is a bit too optimistic.

    1. Zeihan is the ultimate disciple of economism. Everything with him is reduced to economics. He has some interesting analysis, but go back and look at his predictions. How accurate is he, really?

      1. Well, he correctly predicted that Ukraine would be invaded, back in 2015. And he says the rest of Europe is next, as he has been saying since 2015 also. But I agree, too optimistic, too much economics centered, and underestimate constantly the enemy. And doesn’t know Golitsyn.

      2. That guy predicted that Japan will be the next world superpower, a country that imports 95% of its energy needs and 70% of its food calories by sea. In the age of long range anti ship missiles and satellites. Zeihan is a clueless idiot.

      3. Having seen much of Zeihan’s stuff, I have to disagree that he boils every thing down to economics. He says a lot about economics, and a country’s economy determines it’s ability to support a solid military. So it is inescapable as a factor.

      1. I recall that article. I had the same opinion about the man and pointed out other things that were good to know that I did not know. I think MacGregor is far worse than a mere defeatist.

        I had to laugh at his opinion of Lavrov. By MacGregor’s standard, Ribbentrop was a great man.

        MacGregor would be better off if he went back to telling war stories about 73 Easting.

  21. Wikileaks has allegedly released a ton of emails “exposing” a lot of people. I have always believed Wikileaks is a Russian operation.

    If this is true, we could be very close to a Russian attack. In “Spetznaz”, Suvorov says right before the attack, they release all info they have on Western government leaders to incite maximum division. This could very well be that. Jeff, what are your thoughts on this theory?

      1. You’re just being sarcastic, right, L? I mean even if Russia plans to leak accounts of American politicians who Russia was unable to recruit as double agents, we still are better off knowing. Of course we already are ready to dump all of them anyway for treason, anyway.

    1. “From: Huma Abedin
      To: H [presumably Hillary]
      Sent: Thu Dec 17 02:05:20 2009
      Subject: This am
      Lavrov not available this morning but they said he does want to talk. Still trying to schedule.”

    2. The 2016 WL “dump” included documents insinuating a role of U.S. government/specific individuals in Ukrainian politics from 2010 onward (Biden, Clinton’s State Dep, McCain). This may have helped solidify the idea among conservatives and the anti-establishment left that the U.S. was meddling. Those are the distrustful groups we see know, who are rightfully critical but misdirected.

      Qanon then pushed Deep State-Ukraine collusion hard during the 2020 impeachment. First, in 2019, seeded the idea that Crowdstrike (the company that the FBI entrusted to inspect the “hacked” DNC server) was run out of Ukraine, and highlighted that Ukrainian oligarchs comprised the single largest donor of the Clinton Foundation year after year including while Clinton was Sec of State. Then in Oct 2020, a “drop” suggested that as VP Biden was bribed to look the other way on U.S. policies toward Ukraine, and thus would be owned and controlled by Ukraine if elected President.

  22. Honor. War. Let us dine at a restaurant table of some elites who have with delight preordered the main course– a human baby boiled alive. And let’s see what other human delicacies can be had on the Dark Web. Our overlords regard us as bugs, human chattel. It would delight them to no end to give us the middle finger and thrust it into our face. Humans who die in war are simply human sacrifices. The battlefield of death reeks of the fetid stench of rot, harbors the screams of those not yet dead, enchants with the blood dripping from the broken bodies, and echoes the cries of those who mourn the fallen. But these are tangible, observable things. What really marks the uncountable (honorable) war dead are sounds that are hidden but tell the true story. Do you hear it? It is the sound of the laughter of demons…of fallen angels and if especially discerning, the singular, raucous, hysterical cackle…of Satan. War. Honor. ?

    1. A cartoon reality, then, as if everyone above a certain rank is evil? You are of that same ilk that said nobody over 30 could be trusted.

    2. They Democrats arrested the top elections integrity expert in the country today, Catherine Engelbrecht. This news must get out. Ms. engelbrecht was the preeminent expert on election fraud. Now she may be sitting in a prison cell on election night. Greg Phillips was also arrested. He was running an information operation, I believe.

      The way they got them is by demanding they reveal a confidential source. They probably knew she wouldn’t divulge it, so it was a fake mechanism to generate the arrest. They got Bannon the same way.

      Pieces are being removed from the chess board. Try to broadcast this news. The Democratic Party is stepping up arrests of their political opposition. The public must be made aware of this. This is political targeting and complete politicization of the government. Ms. Engelbrecht is a brave advocate for election integrity and what has happened to her is a travesty of justice. The timing of this cannot be ignored – days before an election where she may have been called on by Fox News or others to give her opinion and credibility. A dark day for democracy.

      1. “Ever tried decaf” was supposed to be @ Wayne Klinestiver. WordPress, of course, placed it several comments downstream. Perseus’s comment about Catherine Engelbrecht was informative and doesn’t invite me to speculate on his coffee-drinking habits.

  23. Finally you understand that leftist does not equal communist.

    Globalist does not equal internationalist.

    1. Yes, actually, it does. Even Marx acknowledged as much, modeling it after the Left’s favorite historical event, the French Revolution. If anything, it’s you who still doesn’t understand at all.

  24. Satan, fallen angels, and demons are not cartoons. They are very real!
    I wonder how many wars would be fought if the rulers who were so eager for it staked their own lives? A duel to the death (or till one acquiesced) for winner take all? Honor would dictate if they so believed in a war, they would back it up first with THEIR lives showing their commitment and preventing the death and injury to many more human beings. But I doubt such a thought enters into their minds. It is foolish to give up your life and kingdom for power, control, prestige, vanity, pride, jealousy, envy, or whatever if you can have someone else [the sheeple (or the honorable warrior)] fight it for you.

  25. M-r Nyquist, my relative told me recently that in the beginning of the 2000s Putin had a secret army of 8 million hackers under its control. It was told by former GRU member. My relative wasn’t kidding me. I don’t know if it is true and I don’t know the name of this GRU member. That’s why I am asking. I am curious. Those hackers may be positioned not only in Russia. It is without a doubt that the Russian intelligence becomes stronger and more sophisticated (not trying to sound like a Russophile) and it is possible but it still sounds very strange for me that Putin controls 8 million hackers. What do you think about that?

      1. Putin did have the Savushkina operation, but it had no where near 8 million hackers. Most of the people were trolls, and they were quite strong for a few years after the 2014 invasion of Ukraine.

  26. The financial elites today just put neon-flashing targets on their backs all the time. The persistence of many large corporations to be active promoters of left wing agendas is just puzzling and it doesn’t even make financial sense. Some have said that companies bending over backwards for the LGBT activism for example are going for “pink money”, and the ones taking a knee for BLM are trying to cash in on that too but that doesn’t ring true at all since there’s ample evidence that the masses have shown they despise this lecturing about how they’re racists if they don’t take the knee, the NFL’s doings and how the fans started burning the jerseys and the enormous blow-back their shoving so-called “woke” crap down the viewers’ throats caused. The football (soccer) fans outside of the US booing the players who took a knee for BLM prior to the match, isn’t this the epitome of insanity, companies forcing this virtue signaling abroad when the George Floyd thing didn’t happen in the country the agenda is being pushed at and sometimes the phony support is propped up in countries that barely have a black population, such as a push for BLM and solidarity for Goerge Floyd in Ireland. The whole thing just oozes artificiality. Sometimes you have a great juxtaposition of this babbling about this supposed police brutality abroad while certain cops investigate people for “mean tweets” at home, or handcuff a guy for retweeting a meme.

    When it comes to movies pushing feminism, BLM afrocommunism and whatever else it is, there’s also fatigue and financial failures there. Then you have the big tech companies who are more than willing to persecute and shut down anyone on the right for wrongthink, while allowing certain content on their platforms that preaches violence against certain groups, be them Whites or Conservatives or Christians, letting left wing groups such as Antifa not only to preach blatant hatred scot-free but sometimes to organize protests/riots to prevent someone from speaking at a college, it’s very easy to see why so many people on the right have grown to be jaded to the point they wouldn’t mind if the Communists hanged certain Capitalists, because it’s easy to frame them as part of the problem and not the solution. It simply makes no sense for those rich folk in charge of social media to be more than willing to crack down the censorship on the people right of center who are way more aligned with notions of being for a free market, for the State to be in check and not to regulate absolutely everything, turning entrepreneurship into a nightmare, than the Communists who salivate at the thought of slaughtering them all.

    If memory serves me right Nevin and you discussed about this issue and you mentioned that the Capitalists are investing in Russia/China regardless if that made financial sense, that certain types of investment would harm the Russia-China bloc and also make a whole lot of money. So what gives, are there Communist agents constantly whispering in the ears of many millionaire and billionaire frogs that the red scorpion will not sting them? Is the merchant caste inherently self-destructive if not checked by the aristocrats?

  27. Thankyou Jeff. No honor amongst thieves hey. It is earths destiny to have a new monetary system after this current system fails. That which was used in Tartaria which was destroyed due to is virtue. You seem to overlook this part of history.

      1. 25 years ago I met a Grand Master of the Rosicrucian order. He talked of a society in Europe a few hundred years go that had a monetary system unlike ours today. All money lasted three months, expired, and a new colour used for the next three months, and so on. The result of people not accumulating money, it must be spent, was all goods became of the highest quality. He said they destroyed this society as it was so successful. Only very recently did I learn of Tartaria and now it makes sense. Look at the photos of Tartaria groups on Facebook. You may have heard they are saying credits on the CBDC will expire after three months. They know. Its true.

      2. I can find no evidence the place existed. The region claimed does, and still exists. It was, and is, divided between many countries.

  28. Marcello: “Is the merchant caste inherently self-destructive if not checked by the aristocrats?”

    What you have described is why I call many of the big companies, especially those “too-big-to-fail” companies, fascists and not capitalists. They no longer are limited by the market. They have incestuous relations with governments so they can’t fail. That gives them the ability to push causes for political gain, even when they’re unpopular with the public.

    Proverbs 28:2 starts with “In a rebellious land, many are its policemen” referring to those whose task is to enforce the laws. This is not just the merchant class, but everybody. One of the reasons that a strong middle class has not been built up in many countries is because people couldn’t trust others to be honest. This was especially true of merchants.

    For example, in traditional China over the centuries, the merchants were often considered the lowest class. They were often hemmed in by restrictions that limited their ability to do business. Did those restrictions make them honest? Did the aristocrats, who were often dishonest themselves, make the merchants honest?

    The answer, as I see it, is not aristocrats, but morality, in particular the morality found in the Bible. Can our people return to such a morality?

    1. I thought you were lobbying Jeff for a ban on religious comments? Or does that only apply to people whose views you dislike?

  29. From the article:
    “This reaction [Western leftist opposition to Russia’s war] has occurred because of a longstanding anti-leftist prejudice built into the Russian strategy of subversion… The idealistic leftist, said Bezmenov, is useful in demoralizing his society. But as the communist takeover progresses to its final stage, his usefulness wanes – so much so that the leftist is the first to be executed by the Marxist-Leninists. … [We see the political left rallying to Ukraine. Meanwhile, the rising pro-Russian narrative is coming from the right. How do we explain this? How would the KGB defector Bezmenov explain it? Here is what he said:”

    “Never bother with leftists. Forget about these political prostitutes. … Try to get into large circulation, establishment, conservative media. Reach filthy rich movie makers, intellectuals, so-called academic circles. [Find] cynical egocentric people … People who lack moral principles; who are either too greedy or suffer from self-importance. They feel that they matter a lot.”

    Does Bezmenov say anything more about why the true communists view leftists as primarily ‘useful idiots’ and see more kinship with conservatives instead? Even to the point of seeing conservatives as becoming reliable allies in the final phase? On the face of it, history shows that leftists and progressives were for the most part very loyal to the Communist cause/USSR even as the Communists murdered millions of people. Why are the Soviets convinced that the left will ultimately turn on them? Or is it fair to say that the left’s loyalty was not in question when the Soviets had plausible deniability for their crimes, but now things are different? With today’s technology and communications Russia would not be able to pull another Katyn Forest massacre and make the world believe for over 20 years that Nazis were responsible. All the progressive causes that the Soviet Union supported over the decades (class war, feminism, anti-racism, anti-colonialism, environmentalism etc) were just means to an end, a way to undermine society from within, not the ultimate end goal as the Western left thought. Once Russia revealed that their only goal was global hegemony, the non-communist left would oppose Russia to preserve their progressive fiefdoms in the West.

    As for the Bezmenov quote, is he implying that establishment conservative media is predominated by cynical, greedy, egocentric people who lack moral principles or suffer from self-importance? That’s certainly not exclusive to the right, although the arrogance and shallowness of Carlson and everyone downstream of him, when it comes to Russia, seems to fit some of those allegations. Is there a story there on how the right was won?

    Maybe Bezmenov’s writing about the left can be understood to mean that as Western society declines and becomes more shallow and consumerist, Russia’s aggressive martial stance in pursuit of global hegemony, a stance that perversely harkens back to the old ‘warrior aristocracy’ virtues that built the West, will prove an irresistible attraction to conservatives. Unlike the money driven West, conservatives may see Russia as fighting for something higher than itself, fighting for what is right, which is honorable in itself and honor is something that is lacking in the West. Russia is displaying the old warrior ethos, never mind that it is a debased, perverted form that is more bullying than protective, never mind that it is fighting to establish a revolutionary New World Order, not to restore the old one that they helped destroy, so long as the propagandists sound the right notes Russia is in the right. Symbols, traditions and nods to transcendental values matter more in this chivalric caricature view of the world, and no matter how many times Putin whines about the fall of the Soviet Union, this does not shake the picture that many on the right have of Putin faithfully participating in elaborate Orthodox Church rituals. (and for those who are not moved by such things, there is always the cynical, selfish, isolationist flavor of conservatism) That’s more real than anything Putin says, no matter how many times he warns he is “not bluffing”. Liberal, consumerist society cannot exist without illiberal underpinnings, and crypto-communist Russia cannot build a new world order without acknowledging and co-opting said underpinnings. Of course, Russia’s turn to conservatism is as caricaturish and fake as our right’s hagiographic view of Russia. There are many signs that Russia may be collapsing even worse than the West. But for now, incredible as it may seem, the illusion works. Not enough people have the curiosity to dig deeper or the fortitude to risk their cherished illusion being broken by the truth.

    1. “Not enough people have the curiosity to dig deeper or the fortitude to risk their cherished illusion being broken by the truth.”

      That is the potent truth, Laura. I always appreciate your thoughtful comments. The searching out of and love for the truth (no matter how hard or ruthless it may be) and true courage/fortitude are sorely lacking yet. HOWEVER, I see the tide turning, bit by bit, even just in my little personal world. These character strengths are starting to arise afresh in people.

      Also, here is more clarification on Brazil’s election outcome:

    2. Laura – very thought provoking analysis of Bezmenov’s explanations.

      Here’s sort of a simplified schematic I keep in mind in trying to interpret what Bezmenov meant. Instead of just using a right/left, conservative/progressive binary, I see it like this:

      The left is characterized by a utopian, humanist notion that (largely academic) “advances” in society are making the world better, including by “liberating” us from perceived prejudices born from our ignorant past. The stirring energy (embodied by the far left) is a revolutionary spirit to push things along, the angry edge is to crush “old systems” that pose as obstacles. The left is inherently political, because it doesn’t believe in externally-imposed realities or laws, but instead sees human-made “systems” and structures that can and should be dismantled and remade.

      The right is more complicated, in part because it too is affected by humanism – but in general believes in natural laws, inalterable human nature, and self-determinism within those given realities (as opposed to perceiving a moral imperative to reshape them). The stirring energy (embodied by the far right) is maximum individual liberty to pursue God-given rights, translating to a spirit to conserve a natural way of things; the animating morality is Judeo-Christian (including principled Constitutionalists). The angry edge seeks seeks to use authoritarian measures to instill traditional values, risking hypocrisy or at least chaffing with the strong liberty sentiment.

      Both there’s a third:

      From BOTH these orientations, you have huge flanks who sympathize with one side more than the other, but are really more adherent to scientific/technocratic inevitability. They are purely pragmatic, incrementalist, ultimately materialist. The stirring energy is faith in human progress, the dark or angry side is rank nihilism. This group makes up probably 90-95% of the academic, bureaucratic, “professional class,” including large swaths of industry. It is comprised of sympathizers with the left and the right and is normally what we think of as the “moderates.” This group often is called part of the “left” because of the humanist, “progressive” mindset – and that is partly true but not entirely, and creates a category error by failing to appreciate that this class is TRULY different than the revolutionary left. This class love the status quo, because it provides them status and comfort. Also, many republicans and those who identify with the right also fall in this category. An example would be someone like McConnell.

      So, from this context, it’s easy to see why Bezmenov would see the ideological left as easy targets, “useful idiots,” because of the revolutionary energy. But as he notes, they have to shoot them in the end, because the revolutionary energy is destructive toward any power and hierarchy – like a pac-man munching dots. It doesn’t discriminate, it just eats the dots. So once you’ve established power, you have to kill the pac-mans who aren’t useful anymore.

      But both the left and the right are idealists, and idealists can be manipulated with false hope. I believe that is how the communists have set about deceiving the right. Think of the Trump Presidency as an operation in disillusionment. (Or the apex of already growing disillusionment.) Once it seems every institutional power has gathered against a patriotic sitting president, why continue to trust or defend those institutions? Plus the culture war has been driven into high gear. How do you turn conservative energy into revolutionary energy? Convince them there is nothing to defend, and that the enemy is within.

      An enemy can approach the idealistic left and idealistic right in the same way: subversion, demoralization, misdirection – resulting finally in total disorientation and disordered thinking. Bezmenov didn’t say this applies to the idealistic right, but it seems implied in his logic. This is why back in the 1980s, he urged conservatives (who are fundamentally anti-revolutionary) to wise up and see what was going on. To grasp the lesson that limited, illiberal measures were needed to preserve a liberal society. The revolutionary left needed to be defended against, in schools, entertainment/the arts and local government. Likewise, the technocratic class – motivated by nihilistic greed and amoral “progress” – needed to be checked and reigned in. This was back when there were more true conservatives in positions of prominence.

      More about the technocratic class — I believe that THIS is Bezmenov’s “political class,” the self-important, egocentric establishment that he said was the prime target. I think the goal was to populate the political/intellectual/professional class – which once was more genuinely right-leaning or conservative – with amoral, egocentric political prostitutes. The idea is to start a process of self-selection where you fill this “ruling class” with leftists (who already have a revolutionary, subversive spirit) and with “conservatives” whose prevailing sensibility is not truly principled conservatism, but the rank self-interest and weak-mindedness that can be co-opted to aid the enemy in the course of “doing the job.” Now almost forty years later, we’ve seen a lot of self-selection to elevate this type! Most of our technocratic class are mediocre intellectual prostitutes, masquerading as astute rationalists and cool-minded, data-driven realists. The longer it goes, the more transparently dimwitted and depraved this class has become.

      To push the schematic even further – I believe it’s the amoral technocratic class that supports Ukraine against Russia, which is why the idealistic left and idealistic right don’t trust it. It’s not really “the left” that sides with Ukraine. The heart of the left agrees with conservatives that the U.S. should stay out of it. The idealistic left and right do not see a coherent, reasonable strategy (e.g., why are we still stifling our own energy production, where is accountability on money and weapons sent, why is all the rhetoric/justification belligerent instead of reasoned explanation, why are we ignoring the possibility of threat to the homeland, etc.). Frankly I don’t believe many of us here actually trust the technocratic class either – which means we’re in a complicated time. It’s perfectly reasonable to approve of certain actions, even if we remain skeptical of motivations or what else might be going on that we can’t see – and remain critical of some aspects of the strategy, e.g. re energy.

      One slight difference I believe I have, based on how I’ve mapped out this schematic: I see more hope in both the idealistic left and idealistic right, that are still morally motivated, than I do in the technocrats, who happen to be the ones ostensibly siding with Ukraine. I know it’s more than “ostensible” in that we are materially supporting Ukraine’s defense, which is an unqualified good thing. But I do not interpret the support as any sort of conversion among our technocratic class. I’m waiting for other shoes to drop.

      I realize how upside/down and confusing that sounds – but I’m thinking from 40,000 ft – and reversing the process of demoralization/subversion. I think the idealists of all political persuasions are patriotic citizens who’ve largely reached the wrong conclusions, vs. technocrats who are nihilists doing what they’ve always done, following self-interest (and who have been elevated to fill the halls of bureaucracy, academia, politics, etc). I believe we’ve got the latter in power positions due to the process of communist subversion, and the former are being jerked along with deceptions but are still our only hope to right the ship, because there’s still a moral compass. Of course I’m generalizing, and I don’t have immediate hope for the revolutionaries on the left – I mean the “classic liberal” who’s temperament is more anti-authoritarian than revolutionary. We need those classic liberals and principled conservatives to start seeing the enemy, and the threat, clearly. I believe THAT is where we have hope to reverse the subversion. It can happen, and it can happen quickly.

      1. One more thought on left and right idealists: I wrote that they way you turn conservatives into revolutionaries is by convincing them there’s nothing left to defend and the enemy is within; likewise, how do you turn leftist revolutionaries into warriors for the ruling class? Disguise the ruling class agenda as revolution. This describes our current cultural moment IMO.

        Also upon reflection I’ll say our hope isn’t exclusively among the left/right idealists; I guess I’d say there’s hope among all three groups – leftists, conservatives, technocrats – and it’s probably a matter of individuals’ temperament, courage, and sensitivity to truth. When we need solidarity, it’s counter-productive to write off any group. Anyone can change.

      2. The problem is, they have ALL been ideologically subverted. As Bezmenov said, they are all contaminated and none of them can come to a sensible conclusion about their own defense (right, left, center). All the rest of our analysis is unimportant compared with this. Either they can think and arrive at sensible conclusions about defending the country, or they cannot. AND THEY CANNOT.

    3. Laura. Yes. As you say, “Russia’s aggressive martial stance in pursuit of global hegemony, a stance that perversely harkens back to the old ‘warrior aristocracy’ virtues that built the West, will prove an irresistible attraction to conservatives.” This is certainly part of the strategic experiment now underway. They are trying many angles at once, desperately seeking a formula with which to prop themselves up. To answer your first question, I did not take Bezmenov as saying the conservative media is predominantly led by greedy or self-important people. Bezmenov is describing the type of people the KGB wants to recruit. I have heard this same description from other KGB defectors. Please remember that Moscow’s clandestine apparatus does not need everyone on their side. They just need to hold key positions. Furthermore, in the larger context of Global Revolution, Marxist-Leninists who understand the system they are building distrust Marxists who do not grasp the criminal nature of the enterprise. As time goes on, you either become one of the criminals or you stop believing altogether. Thus, the Soviet communists have never trusted most Western socialists even as Lenin discovered that criminals are the most useful people of all. What, then, happens to your idealistic followers when they see criminals emerging from the Revolution on every side? Many idealistic Marxists become disillusioned. For example, John Reed and Benjamin Gitlow, Whittaker Chambers and Luis Budenz. The communist movement has known many talented true-believers who lost their faith and helped to form the anti-communist movement of the early 1950s. Stalin and his successors learned about all this from bitter firsthand experience. In terms of seducing conservative or center-right intellectuals to support Marxism-Leninism, there is an interesting book which won a Noble Prize for literature many decades ago, touching on the communist preference for winning over non-ideological talent. Such people would work for a communist regime because the regime gave them money and position. This Noble Prize-winning book was written by Czeslaw Milosz. Its title was “The Captive Mind.” He wrote about his talented friends who were, usually, right-of-center patriotic Polish young people, or even slightly left of center folks, who lived through the Second World War. These people were not communists and did not usually have communist tendencies. Yet they were recruited to the communist regime and Milosz traces the methods and logic of each recruitment as a case study. He makes a special point of showing that there is a difference between Eastern communists and Western communists. Milosz wrote the following important lines: “There is a great difference, indeed, between the believers in the East and those of the West. The Western Communist needs a vision of a golden age which is ALREADY being realized on earth. The Stalinist of the East does everything in his power to instill this vision in the minds of others, but he never forgets that it is merely a useful lie.” In this regard, Milosz wrote about Russia’s use of nationalism during the Soviet period. The formula was, “National in form, socialist in content.” Small national groups could be exterminated to accomodate Russian nationalism within the Soviet system. Large and problematic ones, like the Ukrainians, could be seduced. According to Milosz, “Pride can be taken in the outstanding success in the Ukraine. More and more young Ukrainian writers move to Moscow and write in Russian. The poets and critics who dreamt of a SEPARATE Ukrainian literature have left this world….” The more things change, the more they stay the same. Only now, Ukraine has openly revolted and Russia is having to use extreme measures to bring the breakaway country back into the Empire. Thus, Russia mobilizes all its agents to help. This is an emergency, and now — as a result — we can see who is whom.

  30. Jeff, We see a lot of news of Russian submarines near internet cables around the world. Do you believe that in the next conflict they intend to cut all communications via the internet? leave the world in the “dark”?

      1. Elon Musk is an entrepreneur, a different animal kind of homo economics. He sees economics as a means, not an end. He generates it as a byproduct of his creativity. However, he does not understand how dangerous China is. Perhaps he will figure it out.

  31. Hi Jeff, Bolsonaro just made a pronouncement. He did not concede but didn’t invoke article 142, either. It was a very ambiguous speech with vague terms. Do you sense he’s going to do something about voter fraud? Many Brazilians were hoping for a military intervention. This reminds me of Trump’s stolen election. He said they could peacefully protest… but I personally think that the people have already played their part- it’s time for Bolsonaro to act. Overall, this is giving me Jan 6 and Q anon flashbacks. Things aren’t looking good…thoughts?

    1. Bolsonaro seems to be taking the temperature of the country before he acts. The military probably won’t act unless the right and left start fighting.

      1. Thanks for your reply. But do you think he’ll do something in the end? Any practical advice for Brazilians with boots on the ground?

Comments are now closed.