Adunai
11mo ago
A few updates. The bloggers in question are Strateg Divannogo Legiona (aka Sofa Legion Strategist) on YouTube, also NeoFeudal Review and Slavland Chronicles (aka Rolo Slavskiy / Rurik Skywalker) on Substack.
Mind you, what Stateg is saying (Dnieper bridges, Donbass assaults) is overall a widely accepted truth in Russia (judging by such personalities as Igor Strelkov and Maxim Kalashnikov, probably others). But it's completely absent from the Anglosphere because America has a total information blackout, with both parties serving the same centre (liberals saying Putin is satan, and paid CIA shills saying Putin is a Russian patriot angelic Christian warrior). There are some differences with Strelkov conceding that Putin may be a rusty nail - rotten but the only thing keeping Russia from a bloody civil war. Whereas Strateg says Putin is intentionally disarming Russia for a NATO invasion.
All in all, if the war is fake theatrics to a significant extent, it puts in question the entire presuppositions about the currently existing civilisations. Maybe it's being used as a bogeyman to scare the EU into rearming. Maybe it's used to genocide the Slavs. Maybe America intends to capture the Russian nuclear arsenal intact to use against China. Maybe America wants to destroy Russia because Russia is China's nuclear shield (and China for whatever reason isn't increasing its own stockpile).
Adunai
11mo ago
I'm sorry, is my post breaking any rules? Or is it merely still held for moderation?
Adunai
11mo ago
Era of total intel agency control (CIA over America)? [schizo warning]
I'm a follower of one Russian youtuber whose ideas are apparently like this. In the feudal age, the elite was changing itself in constantly bloodletting of civil strife. In the absolutist age, the remaining nobility could still kill the king/emperor, and eventually in the French and Russian revolutions the entire class was exterminated. This has led to what is today a democratic system where the president and ministers are superficially interchangeable but decide nothing because they're all controlled by intel services from behind the scenes with pedophile porn blackmail on every statesman.
What would your thoughts be on such a model? For the evidence, he points to how brutal the war in the Ukraine is, but Putin and Trump are both chums with each other. And how Russia could easily destroy the Dnieper bridges in the Ukraine, but chooses not to - apparently forbidden by the CIA/KGB intel service to disarm Russia for a NATO invasion.
Other cases of collusion between different statesmen for the sole purpose of advancing the interests of the compromised and cancer-ridden American state would be:
- Yugoslavia's Miloshevich who signed the Dayton agreement in 1995 leading to a surrender in 1999;
- Syria's Assad with the Astana accords in 2021 with deescalation zones for the rebels which allowed them to regroup and strike back in 2024;
- Iran's ayatollah who allowed both the Hamas and Hezbollah to be destroyed peacemeal without helping them;
- Russia's Putin who has only ever attacked in the only fortified region of the front for 3.5 years and is now trying to sign another rotten peace deal.
I'm likely sounding really silly right now, I'm downgrading myself to the Russian parts of my brain when talking about this. In English, it would likely be called "conspiracy theory"? But isn't the role of the CIA kinda common knowledge these days? And my question is about how WIAH never ever mentions it. Of course, there's another question as to how much any elite can control (and/or engineer?) a society without it breaking apart. According to some, the fall of the USSR was a controlled demolition, too.
Another aspect of his ideas is that America infected with the CIA finds China its enemy because China lacks the intelligence agencies and mercilessly culls its elite preventing corruption and is thus impervious to being infected itself. This is why America needs to start a nuclear war with China, but before that destroy the Russian nuclear arsenal - which is exactly what Putin is doing (alongside useless projects such as Poseidon, Avangard and Oreshnik or nuclear icebreakers).
Another blogger whom I follow has said that the Krokus terror attack involved a Russian policeman cutting off a terrorist's ear, and that it happened on Purim where cookies are baked in the form of ears (oznei haman), thus linking to a ritualistic significance. This line of thinking would view the Ukraine war not as disarming Russia but more in the way of religious slaughter (because again, destroying the Dnieper bridges or going around Donbass are never even considered by the Russians).
Again, apologies for copious schizo, but nothing of this can even be found in the Anglosphere. All you have is either the liberals saying Trump is Putin's slave, or the Z-anon bloggers such as MacGregor, Ritter, Napolitano, Mearsheimer or Jeffrey Sachs claiming Putin is playing 4D chess. Russians overall are at least diverse in their views, but I don't see any critique of their models.
To what extent are Russians correct in calling modern liberal America and Europe "genocidal Nazis preparing to launch Nuclear Barbarossa"? © Adûnâi (2026-07-08)
As you may know, since 2014 Russia and the West have ever increasingly been on a collision course to war. The modern cultural perception of the West in Russia is colored by a number of things - including old Bolshevik third-worldist propaganda about "evil White colonisers", coupled with ancient Stalinist conflation of the Anglo-French with the German Hitlerians (Molotov-Ribbentrop apologia to prevent an Anglo-German alliance to kill all Slavs), and now with the Ukrainian ethnic cleansing (Balkan style petty ethnic nationalism against Russians in the Ukraine).
Now, what are the actual arguments, pro and con?
Pro 1 - German tanks are literally invading Russia. Anglo-French missiles are raining on Russian cities. There's effectively been a state of war between Russia and the West for years at this point, Russia is simply too degenerate to respond. This is a huge point, culturally speaking - Germany was never forced to apologise for genociding 30 million Russians and Poles, only the 6 million Jews, Roma, homosexualists and disabled persons. So the German vehicles invading Russia are equivalent to Germany reconstituting the Auschwitz death camp and burning Jews alive in the ovens once more - with the civilised Western world turning a blind eye to it.
Pro 2 - the West is supporting the Ukrainian state which is notoriously brutal, committing many war crimes, supporting terrorism around the world (Moscow, Monaco, Mali), abducting and torturing its own citizens in broad daylight in the streets of Kiev, Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk, Kharkhov, even Lemberg - this ought to revivify the old imagery of Nazis deporting Jews to death camps, yet the Western media are totally silent on this. (Ukrainians also famously throw Hitler salutes, although not sure why as they are ruled by a Jewish president.)
Pro 3 - the West has gone on a massive rearmament campaign for its whole European part, German industry, Polish armed forces, German forces in Lithuania, nuclear sharing with Finland; the conventional supremacy of Europe over Russia alone is many times over, thus clearly noting the West's readiness to turn this war nuclear since day 1.
Now, these are all quite obvoius and steel-manned arguments for the Russian side. Yet numerous objections exist, too. Let's have a look.
Con 1 - Nazi Germany was an explicitly pro-White ethnostate with materialistic goals in acquiring Russian land and genociding its inhabitants; the West is the opposite - anti-White, anti-materialistic, it has no interest in settling virgin soil with sturdy peasants, it never talks about the good of its ethnic comrades, or living space, or blood and soil, absolutely nothing.
Con 2 - the West remains fanatical in its "White man's burden" raison d'être to increasing the quality of life, bringing peace and prosperity to the whole non-Western world, unlike Hitler's Germany which was focused on its own well-being at terrible cost to its neighbours.
Con 3 - Hitler's Germany was a European project that explicitly banned "entartete Kunst" such as jazz music, it was anti-feminist in removing women from the places of learning, and it was pagan in valuing beautiful animals above ugly humans; the modern West is exactly the opposite - the Ukrainians uglify their own folk songs with metal rock covers, they kill their men but women walk around like queens, and animal welfare is completely outside the political/religious sphere.
Granted, Russians overall call everyone "Nazi" who's genocidal - especially those who want to genocide Russia. So they don't care if they are being slaughtered by LGBT rights or by Nordic supremacists, as the Russians turn into corpses all the same. But the crux of the matter is that the Westerners themselves in this cyberspace barely conceive of their empire as such - as capable of burning alive tens of millions of Russians this decade in an invasion surpassing the mythical Operation Barbarossa when Adolf Hitler launched his continental War of Extermination (Vernichtungskrieg) in 1941 CE. Just how come such a massive Baurdillard-esque parallel reality is possible? Is it because the brain-washing power of Western propaganda is so total, and the death of the anti-war pacifist movement so complete? Or are the Westerners truly "Nazi" under their veneer of civilisation, and they secretly yearn for it?
The visions of Nuclear Barbarossa fascinate my mind, with hundreds of nukes launched from the submarines onto the Russian silos and storage facilities, and thousands of Polish tanks blitzing through Belarus, precipitating Moscow's fall... And yet nobody else in the world is gripped by it? Maybe not Nazi per se, but still the largest genocide since Tojo.
More options
Context Copy link