|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Russia Sets Its Course Lev Navrozov Before 1917, the form of government in Russia was a classic monarchy, which had been absolutist under Nicholas I, who reigned from 1825 to 1855, after the failed "Decembrists' Uprising" of 1825, which aimed at constitutionalism. The absolutism of Nicholas I is represented by all Soviet as well as many Western historians as the ultimate tyranny. However, living throughout this ultimate tyranny was a poet named Nekrasov (1821-1878), who owned a magazine and published this kind of poetry:
How dismal — no happiness, no freedom! Will a tempest strike? The cup of patience is brimming! And unsteady is every dyke! Under Russian "tsarism," Russia created poetry that I consider second to none in the world, music that The New York Times station of classical music values more than I do, and works of prose, still read all over the world as classics. Between 1917 and 1933, Lenin's and Stalin's "Soviet power" destroyed this unique Russian culture and replaced it with ubiquitous propaganda. A propaganda poet from a "Soviet Eastern republic" wrote about Stalin, a savage who spoke broken and heavily accented Russian:
When the Sun rises in the East, All stars melt like bits of ice, The greatest men compared with what you have done Are like bits of ice compared with the rising Sun.
The Communist Party of Germany was expected to come to power, and we as children were learning a German march that contained the following two lines: "The two worlds are clashing in a battle to death — Our slogan: the Soviet Union of the Earth!"
However, this Soviet Union of the Earth was thwarted by Hitler's advent to power in 1933, promising a World Third Reich, instead of the Soviet Union of the Earth.
Story Continues Below
You can imagine how the Soviet propaganda pounced on what it called "Fascism," for the Soviet propaganda had insisted that Nazism had come from "Fascist Italy." But Stalin knew better after his vision of Soviet Germany as part of the World Soviet Union had died. Why should not he, Stalin, and Hitler create, instead, the World Nazi-Soviet State? All Soviet "anti-Fascism" was, cut short.
Stalin invited Hitler to send the German army across the Soviet territory to seize India. And, of course, Soviet trains kept carrying to Germany all the natural resources necessary for the building of weapons.
Stalin's spies reported to him that Hitler was developing a plan ("Barbarossa") to attack Stalin's Russia. But Stalin assumed that this was the disinformation planted by Churchill in order to provoke Hitler into the war with Stalin's Russia and thus to take Hitler's pressure off Britain. Stalin's order was not to respond to "Churchill's provocations," aimed at splitting him and Hitler. As a Russian friend of mine quipped: "Stalin trusted no one, except Hitler."
When Hitler was a soldier in World War I he was so brave that he was awarded decorations intended for officers only. Hitler loved war, with all its risks. On the other hand, Stalin hated war—he loved to subjugate without risks, let alone dangers for himself. Stalin never attacked any militarily strong country. Why attack Germany if he and Hitler can subjugate the world without the risks and dangers of war to themselves? When Hitler invaded Stalin's Russia at dawn, Stalin was awake watching the attack. As it became clear that the invasion was not just "a Churchill's provocation," Stalin fell into psychoneurosis and was able to announce the beginning of the war by radio only days later.
In 1991 the last Soviet dictator, Gorbachev had fallen. But his successor Yeltsin failed to create in Russia Western democracy and constitutionalism. Why?
For the same reason, the United States organized excellent general elections (universal suffrage!) in Afghanistan, but when a Christian Bible was found in the home of an Afghani, he was to be executed.
Constitutionalism requires a minimum of political education. I proposed to Yeltsin a national television program, offering such a minimum. My written proposal was approved. But the television stations wanted sufficient commercials, Russian and/or foreign. While these were being collected, Yeltsin resigned.
Two huge parties under Yeltsin were a Communist Party and a Nazi Party, both under fanciful names. Yeltsin could not cope with them and passed the country to Putin, whom he supposed to be, as a former KGB Lt. Colonel, a strong disciplinarian, able to preserve the order. In his interview to a magazine ("Kommersant Daily") Putin praised the KGB. That meant back to dictatorship.
However, the methodology of suppression was different compared with Stalin's. I had been writing for the Russian periodicals under Yeltsin's freedom of the press. When Putin gave his interview, I was a columnist of "Moscow Provda" (had nothing to do with "Pravda," which remained Stalinist).
Naturally, I wrote a column about Putin's interview! Under Stalin, if the editor of a newspaper published such a column, he would have been shot. But "Moscow Pravda" did not publish my column about Putin's interview and stopped publishing me altogether, without notifying me. The newspaper continued to receive my columns from New York as though the newspaper kept publishing them and nothing had happened. Self-censorship is so much safer than Stalin's censorship!
If Stalin trusted Hitler, and if Putin publicly praised his KGB, why cannot Putin believe in the Sino-Russian alliance to establish a joint world domination?
What about the West?
The West has been engaged in protection of the East-European countries like Poland against Putin's Russia.
Once upon a time, Poles put on the Russian throne a Russian Catholic, who married an aristocratic Polish beauty, Maryna Mniszek. In the 19th century the course was reversed, and the Russians seized Warsaw by storm, which impelled Chopin to leave Poland and write his tragic piece of genius, "On the Seizure of Warsaw."
At the close of World War II, Stalin seized "peacefully" Eastern Europe, including Poland. The British parliament was enraged, and in my first article published in the West in Commentary magazine, I quoted Churchill, rising in parliament and saying that he would not allow to speak in his presence so disrespectfully about "Marshall Stalin."
Up to Hitler's attack in 1941, Stalin had been supplying the dictatorship of Germany with natural resources. Putin supplies the dictatorship of China with the scientific knowledge, necessary for the development of post-nuclear super weapons.
In terms of the population, China is eight times larger than Russia, which has lost non-Russian areas that had been conquered and annexed by the absolutism, both tsarist and Soviet.
Now, Putin's Russia's and the West's squabble about how Eastern Europe and independent non-Russian areas should be defended against Putin's Russia drives Putin closer to the dictatorship of China, which is, in a prevalent Western view, an important trade partner. Thus, the democratic-constitutional West and Russia — both court the dictatorship of China — the situation Hitler could not have dreamed of after 1939.
As usual, the U.S. presidents have been paying no attention to the Sino-Russian alliance. The American who sounded the alarm was Christopher Ruddy, in his article I found in the Internet: "Russia and China Prepare for War" (http://www.tldm.org). The article consists of eight parts. Part 7 is subtitled: "United States is Unprepared for War" and Part 8: "Why Are Most Americans Oblivious to These Terrifying Facts?"
You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.
Editor's note:
Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2009 NewsMax.Com |