The Good Guys

Check out this infographic that I discovered…

Where is the lie actually? Did not the EU and affiliated groups pump money into destabilizing Ukraine in 2013-2014? If the EU did not provide support for what is happening in Ukraine, nothing would happen in Ukraine. The sanctions enacted by the West literally are governments shooting business into the foot with the hope that it will hurt the Russians. The Russians meanwhile found non-European (in many cases domestic) alternatives, and Crimea still belongs to Russia. Have the sanctions influenced anything?

Yes they actually did. In many areas where Russia depended on Western resources and services, Russia began a search for substitutions. Even in areas which were not sanctioned, that is because the threat of sanctions is in itself a sufficient motivating factor. In any case, the loser here is Western business.

I am glad there are still sensible politicians here in Europe.

The infographic comes from a fancy Ukrainian effort (probably Western funded) to combat Russian disinformation.

There was Probably an Organized Effort Throughout Social Media Platforms to Censor Information Critical of Alexey Navalny

From Bloomberg:

Facebook Inc. removed a network of more than 500 Instagram accounts that originated in Russia and targeted audiences in support of anti-corruption activist Alexey Navalny, according to a new report from the social media company.

The campaign relied on fake accounts to post critical or irrelevant content with hashtags associated with protests in January that backed the imprisoned opposition leader, a phenomenon known as hashtag poisoning, said Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook’s head of cybersecurity policy. The process involves posting irrelevant or critical content to drown out relevant information and redirect the conversation. In some cases, fake users posted memes suggesting protesters got Covid-19.

Facebook’s automatic systems often detected and removed the fake accounts, prompting the bad actors to create new ones, so there were never 500 accounts in operation at the same time, Gleicher said.

The social media campaign targeted domestic audiences throughout demonstrations attended by tens of thousands of protesters in dozens of cities over the weekends of Jan. 23 and 31. The protests provoked a violent response from authorities, who accuse Navalny of working with foreign governments to try to destabilize the regime.

A video on my YouTube channel showing a violent protester of North Caucasus origin fighting the police was removed on grounds that violence is not allowed on the website. However, my channel contains other videos that could be interpreted as violent, why was this chosen? Maybe because it was posted shortly after the protests and would conflict with the Western media narrative of the protesters being “mostly peaceful.” My Twitter account was suspended because I criticized Navalny. And this leads me to believe that there was a command from somewhere to censor any critical content related to Alexey Navalny.

Why do We Need the EU to Determine What Medicines to use?

The major objection of Russophobes towards Sputnik V, the Russian anti-Covid vaccine, is that it first needs to go through approval of the EU Medicines Agency before their respective countries accept it. Acting unilaterally like we have seen in Hungary or Slovakia brings out indignation…

The question nobody asks is why do we need another EU organ to determine what is safe and good? Why can’t we do it here and now? This dear readers is how the EU works, by undermining in people the faith in national institutions and replacing those with transnational bodies that are said to be more trustworthy than the local governments. This is why many would gladly delegate their decision making to organs in Brussels, where decisions are made in the ideologically proper manner.

So, when a bunch of leftists from Italy, Spain, France and Germany in the EU parliament decide the Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary must help their countries alleviate the burden of letting in hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants, what are the people that cannot even make a decision on a vaccine going to say then? I personally hope they will fear the wrath of the populations they represent. But meanwhile, I urge you all to vote right-wing parties that want good policies, and FUCK THE EU in 2021…

Russophobes in Hysteria, Slovakia buys Sputnik V

It looks like the Slovak government obtained anti-COVID vaccine from Russia…

And there is some sort of political crisis going on.

“Vice Premier Remišová says she will not wouldn’t allow herself to be vaccinated with Sputnik, not her relatives and the people.” Even a smallest squabble in a government of an EU country will please the one in the East and the shipment fulfills its goals.

Who in the East? The Darkest One? This is Harry Potter language. Also, check this meme they are trying to peddle. Sputnik V is there to divide us. Anything from Russia is divisive if we choose to think this way. The author of the above tweet is from the director of Kremlin Watch, a project of the European Values. His name is Roman Máca.

The above is one of his profiles that he dedicates to peddling Russophobia and newly also Sinofobia with the Chinese virus conspiracy.

The shipment…

Some politicians in Slovakia are not happy with the government unilaterally importing the Russian vaccine and think this needs an approval of the EU. It is however their choice to reject Russian vaccine and appeal to EU standards. Putin didn’t make them, and if he did, he has extraordinary powers.

The President of Azerbaijan Says Iskander Missiles Weren’t Used Against Azeri Military

The president of Azerbaijan, Il’kham Aliev said the Azeri Militari did not register the use of Iskander missiles. Earlier the president of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan criticized the Russian made weapons system, saying their accuracy was around 10%. This has caused indignation among the Armenian military, who called for Pashinyan’s resignation. This story is some comedy…

These Shitheads Still Believe That Ukraine Will Have Some Influence Over Russia?

Browsing Twitter for mentions of my website I encountered this…

I thought the Western commentariat is now over such comments. It ain’t 2014 now and 6 years have passed to assess Ukraine’s success. These people must have their head so up the ass they do not see how good their post-Maidan Ukraine has faired.

  1. Ukraine is competing with Moldova for the title of the most impoverished country in Europe. Good luck getting anyone in Russia to want the same.
  2. Repression against the Russian cultural element by the government are rife making the country repulsive to any true Russian out there. Do you honestly think that a country that bans the Russian language would have any influence over Russia?
  3. Political opponents of the current regime are being literally killed. Oles’ Buzyna, an author, who advocated good relationship with Russia was killed outside his home by Neonazis one day after his address was leaked by Myrotvorets, a database run by the Ukrainian Secret Service.
  4. Neonazis, who are under control of the Ministry of Interior attack political opponents of the government, who are allegedly (according to fabricated evidence) pro-Russian.
  5. Nazi collaborators are being given monuments throughout Ukraine, as documented by Eduard Dolinsky. I understand that in the West, the propaganda tells us Neonazis in Ukraine are a fiction but the Russians are not exposed to such obscurantism.
  6. Ukraine has been part of several provocations against Russia, for instance they downed the MH17 (yes, I believe they did) plane to frame Russia. You honestly think such a gangster state that killed 300 people to frame rebels in Eastern Ukraine that are fighting against a regime that glorifies Nazis would inspire anyone in Russia?
  7. Also, statements about successful Ukraine having influence on Russia are never made by Ukrainian nationalists, who do not want Ukraine to be some kind of alter-Russia.

Honestly, the Russians ought make a quick process of anyone, who wants this kind of democratization in their home country. It is not even clear to me why Russia is deemed less democratic than Ukraine?

There isn’t any Space for Holodomor Propaganda in Russian Donbas

So I ventured to the Atlantic Council and found an article discussing a recent forum held in Donetsk called Russian Donbas, where the head of RT, Margarita Simonyan called for Donbas to be reintegrated with Russia…

There some Lithuanian Russophobe discusses the doctrine of the Russian Donbas, which is the intellectual blueprint for the aims of the Donbas republics, which is the reintegration with the motherland. There he writes:

The Russian Donbas doctrine is the latest example of the Kremlin’s enthusiasm for rewriting history in order to suit its contemporary political requirements. This tendency to distort the past has been central to the information war that has accompanied Russian aggression against Ukraine.

Well, OK…

When Russian forces first seized Crimea in spring 2014, Moscow propagandists were quick to declare that the Ukrainian peninsula had “always been Russian.” In reality, Crimea is an ancient land with a recorded history stretching back almost three thousand years that includes extended periods as part of the Byzantine Empire, Golden Horde, and Ottoman Empire. Meanwhile, Russia’s involvement in Crimea began comparatively recently in the late eighteenth century. Clearly, it is nonsensical to claim that this highly cosmopolitan geopolitical crossroads has “always been Russian.”

Please show me any academic Russian historian that made the claim that Crimea was always Russian. If anything, Crimea was a territory transferred from the RSFSR to Ukraine by the Bolsheviks, who have created Ukraine as we know it. I understand that in the Atlantic Council they prefer narratives that would derusify the Russian history of Crimea.

Regardless of whether the authors were Ukrainian, Russian, or Western, most traditional academic histories of the Donbas have tended to focus on three key aspects of the region’s early development. These accounts typically begin with details of how the Donbas was first colonized by Ukrainian Cossacks and peasants, who moved into the borderland regions previously known as the “Wild Fields” following the gradual retreat of the Crimean Khanate.

Next came waves of colonization from different parts of Europe and beyond. This was followed by an extended period of intensive international involvement that fueled the industrialization of the region throughout the second half of the nineteenth century.

Western investors and industrialists were instrumental in the development of the Donbas, bringing vital capital and technologies to the region. The most famous of these was Welsh businessman John Hughes, who founded Donetsk in 1869. The city was called “Hughezovka” in his honor until 1929, when it was renamed “Stalino” by the Soviet authorities.

The Russian Donbas doctrine outlined in Donetsk on January 28 made barely any mention of these crucial factors in the history of eastern Ukraine. Instead, the discussion focused almost exclusively on Russians who played prominent roles in the region’s growth.

The Ukrainian Cossacks and peasants did not have any notion of being Ukrainian. They thought themselves as Orthodox Russians. The region was always international and Russian was the lingua franca that served the people as means of interethnic communication, and the Russian people are an amalgam of ethnicities united by loyalty to the Russian state and the Russian language. Ukrainians on the other hand are an ethnographic subgroup of Russians that aims to build a separate nation and state.

There was no mention of the systematic Russification policies adopted during both the Czarist and Soviet eras, and no room for an honest exploration of the Holodomor, the artificial famine engineered by the Soviet authorities in the early 1930s that killed millions of Ukrainians and ravaged the region. Other Soviet atrocities were similarly ignored.

However, forum delegates did find time to condemn the Ukrainian authorities for recent efforts to return historical names to towns and cities throughout the Ukrainian-controlled areas of the Donbas. This was portrayed as evidence of the Ukrainian government’s anti-Russian policies.

Kremlin efforts to criticize the Ukrainian authorities for the “Ukrainianization” of Ukraine speak volumes about Russia’s deeply entrenched imperial thinking. This kind of ideology has roots stretching all the way back to the Czarist past, an era when Ukrainians were branded “Little Russians” and their language was suppressed as a mere dialect.

The only systematic nationality policy in Ukraine was Ukrainization under the Soviet union, which was presented in waves because Ukrainization always finds resistance from the people. The Russification of the late Tsarist era also came in waves because it encountered resistance in Central and Western Ukraine but it was much less systemic. Obviously, there is no way a Russian patriot would be interested in some Ukrainian nationalist bleating about how bad Russians Russified Ukraine.

Now, the author does show an absence of knowledge of Ukraine. the region itself was only joined to Ukraine by Lenin. It had nothing to do with any Ukrainian state prior to that and the names of cities all appeared during the Late Tsarist and Soviet eras. They either bear the names of the early settlers, communist revolutionaries, or something unrelated to Ukraine. For instance one village was called Novgorodske, and was given back its old name New York, which was probably a remnant of the early British colonization of the region but was renamed in 1951, right at the start of the Cold War. I don’t know where you see Ukrainization in the decision to give this town its old name, not even Ukrainization in inverted commas.

I am glad that the people of East Donbas are free from Holodomor propaganda because Holodomor is hateful hype of anti-Soviet forces. You see, the famine of the 1930s is a real event but Holodomor is something else, it is a spin on that event. In that interpretation, the famine was engineered by the Soviets to kill Ukrainians, and in the modern interpretation Russians are blamed for it. It first appeared in the press of Nazi Germany, which had a strong community of Ukrainian exiles from the Skoropadsky regime and was coaching Ukrainian nationalists to fights against Poland and the Soviet Union.

The story about the artificial famine was widespread in Western Ukrainian circles before WWII and that is why today, we see more people in Western Ukraine believing in Holodomor than in Eastern Ukraine where it actually happened. When I asked my relatives if my great grandmother, who was a Ukrainian peasant, ever spoke about Holodomor, knowing she was no fan of the Soviet government, I was told that she never did. She only complained about being made to work in a collectivized farm. She was not subjected to Holodomor propaganda. Famine was something that she experienced thrice, during the Civil War, during 1930s, and in the 1940s during WWII. My grandfather had to leave Ukraine and fend for himself after the War, he joined the military and moved across Russia.