Ukraine, Russia and the Post-Soviet Civil War

If Yugoslavia was an example of an army let loose after the collapse of a communist regime, the Soviet Union exemplified a disintegrating police state. The type of anarchy that follows from these two scenarios is different. Instead of open civil war as in Yugoslavia, in Russia the civil war is covert.

Wisła Suraska

The brilliance of Wisła Suraska’s book, How the Soviet Union Disappeared, and the brilliance of Anatoliy Golitsyn’s book, New Lies for Old, leave us with two equally important yet incompatible accounts of Soviet collapse. Suraska’s sociological approach, with its deep political science and insights into the weaknesses of the Soviet system, serve as an indispensable guide. At the same time, Golitsyn’s understanding of Soviet counterintelligence, with its controlled opposition and extensive agents networks, helps to explain why the Evil Empire continues under V. Putin.

Read more

Hamlet’s Truth

Give me that man that is not passion’s slave, and I will wear him in my heart’s core, ay, in my heart of heart.

Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 2

On 10 June 1859, at the Royal Princess’s Theatre in London, Charles Kean played the lead role in Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. He wrote a laudatory preface for the play, characterizing it as “the most stupendous monument of Shakespeare’s genius, standing as a beacon to command the wonder and admiration of the world….” It constituted, according to Kean, “the perfection of tragic art — the grand, the pitiful, and the terrible.” Kean interpreted the play as “a history of mind — a tragedy of thought” containing “the deepest philosophy, the most profound wisdom; yet speaks the language of the heart….”

Read more

Politics as the Negation of Science: The Case Against Anthony Fauci

…the annihilating recognition of our complete ignorance came down upon me like a sledge hammer….

HERTHA VON DECHEND
HAMLET’S MILL

⭐️

Without an admission of ignorance, nothing can be learnt or discovered. But modern science, which has become an adjunct of the state, cannot admit its ignorance. Such an admission would destroy the authority of the “scientist” as state official. Therefore, when confronted with a new problem for which he is ill-equipped, the science bureaucrat pretends to be knowledgeable, and concocts a plausible discourse. (He has even been known to concoct “scientific” results that are anything but scientific.)

Read more