Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Welcome Information Connoisseurs

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Stephen Cohen’s Defense of Vladimir Putin

Stephen Cohen’s Defense of Vladimir Putin

By Michael Hoffman

In Prof. Stephen Cohen’s speech last December (available on video), defending Russian leader Vladimir Putin, he makes the case that the New York Times, Washington Post and other “prestigious” legacy media are guilty of publishing fake news. Cohen’s speech is a serious deflation of the legacy media's hypocritical hot air balloon accusing its Internet business rivals, such as YouTube and Twitter, of purveying fake news. 

Putin, speaking about the US, declared, “They don’t want to humiliate us, they want to subjugate us. They want to solve their problems at our expense, they want to subordinate us to their influence“. Putin then added, “nobody in history has ever succeeded in doing this and nobody will ever succeed."

He realizes what absolute disaster, a cataclysm of truly cosmic proportions the break-up of the Soviet Union represented for all the people of the former USSR and what an absolute nightmare it was for Russia to live a full decade as a subservient colony of Uncle Sam. 

This is where various right-wingers and assorted Alt-Righters completely “lose” Putin: he told an assembly of Orthodox Jews that 80-85% of Bolshevik leaders were Jews...Putin ignored the hysterics of Netanyahu about the Russian role in Syria...Jews and Russians are forever joined in their common memory of the horrors of WWII....Russia has very strong ties to the Russian-speaking Jewish communities worldwide.

...Putin is acutely aware of the dangers of nationalism, just as much as he is aware of the dangers of imperialism, and he said so many times: Russia cannot afford any more nationalistic conflicts as they almost completely destroyed Russia in the 1990s. Just look at modern Ukraine and you will see what a Russia torn apart by nationalist ideologies could have looked like, had Putin not cracked down hard on various nationalists (including and mostly Russian ones). 

Far from catering to (an admittedly powerful) Jewish lobby in Russia, Putin is, in fact, trying to assemble as many different peoples and minorities as possible to his project of a New Russia; and that project includes Russian Jews, not only for the sake of these Jews, but mainly for the sake of Russia. The same goes for another crucial minority in Russia – Muslims. They also very much form a key part of the project Putin has for Russia. Of course, racists, nationalists and other less than bright folks in Russia will still dream about expelling all Jews (or Muslims) from Russia. Simply put – that ain’t happening (for one thing this would be physically impossible) and Putin and those who support him will fight such projects with every legal tool at their disposal. Here again, you could say that Putin is a patriotic internationalist. 

End quote from "Saker. 
(It's worth taking the time to read his entire essay).

Of course Putin certainly is catering" to the Israeli and Chabad Lubavitch lobby in Russia. 

Putin is a student of Von Clausewitz, Metternich, Machiavelli and Solzhenitsyn all rolled into one riddle wrapped in the enigma that is the Russian powerhouse, which no one detailed better than Dostoyevsky, and as Napoleon and Hitler discovered to their eternal regret.

Anyone who believes the Renaissance papal Church has even one leg to stand on in terms of authentic representation of Christ's ecclesia on earth (and we do not), in our opinion can't object to Putin's statecraft  because in many ways the papist Machiavellian influence is his strongest influence.

Second, neo-Nazis are still fighting World War II and view Putin and Russia solely through that 1940s prism. They have seldom demonstrated the ability to grasp that Hitlerism was understood in Russia as a campaign to eliminate the Slavic people as an independent historical force on the world stage.

 Hitler was viewed as a fool who spared his beloved Britain an invasion by opening a second front in the East in a war he should have known he could not possibly win  as a result he became the biggest loser of the 20th century, along with his prime victims, the German people. 

Russians share one trait with Americans: they can't abide a loser. "Assorted Alt-Righters" can't comprehend the Russian perspective on Hitler: that he almost succeeded in having the German people wiped off the face of the earth.

It was in Communist East Germany in the 1950s-1990s that Germans were preserved from 3rd World immigration, miscegenation, pornography, drugs and other "benefits of the capitalist Western democracies. To this day it is the former East European Communist nations   now free to practice the Christianity which the Soviets had forbidden   that are mounting the only organized government resistance to open borders in all of Europe.

This writer is an anti-communist as well as an anti-usury-capitalist, who notes the failure of the Alt-Right to appreciate that the place of the white race in the world will only be secured by equating our race with peace and justice, not conquest and extrusion. 

The foremost Nazis and Stalinists today are in "Israel" and ISIS. Zionism and Saudi "Wahhabist" Islam are both predicated on mass murder and extrusion of whole populations. 

All politicians deserving of that sordid name, including Mr. Putin, believe that compromise and deceit are virtues in politics. In the sixteenth century, Pope Pius V was ruling an empire of priestcraft, sodomy, usury and Kabbalistic diabolism, yet he helped to organize the naval forces that spectacularly stopped the Ottoman Turk invasion force at the Battle of Lepanto. If the nature of his Renaissance Church is any guide, this pontiff was not a follower of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  God used him nevertheless to save Europe in that era. How do we explain this head-spinning fact? It surely does not signify that we should share in the pope's transgressions by being yoked to the sainthood brand appropriated for him by his Neoplatonic, Hermetic, Kabbalistic Church (2 Corinthians 6:14-17).

God's ways are not our ways. Whether we are dealing with Putin or Pius V, we are encountering men who we, as Christian believers, cannot personally follow. But neither should we close our eyes to how God may have in the past  or may be now  deploying them. The Bible offers numerous examples of ungodly persons used by Yahweh for some good (for instance, Joshua 2: 1-3; 6: 17-25).  This is a mystery.

If the Old Testament contains mysteries beyond human comprehension, what of our human politics and history? 

A prime example is ancient Rome under the Caesars.  It was none other than this "abomination of desolation that was utilized by God to fulfill the prophecy of His Divine Son:

"And Jesus went out from the temple, and was going on his way; and his disciples came to him to show him the buildings of the temple. But he answered and said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down...When therefore ye see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let him that readeth understand),  then let them that are in Judaea flee unto the mountains..." (Matthew 24: 1-2; 15-16).

The Roman Army that marched on Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was God's army. Go figure. The general who commanded that invincible force, Titus, is, in the pages of the Talmud of Babylon, second only to Jesus Christ in terms of the hatred directed against him in that most sacred of all rabbinic volumes. 

We are not asserting by any means that Pius V or Vladimir Putin were, or are, types of Titus. No one has the authority, much less the competence, to make such a declaration. 

We ought to however, temper our judgments concerning history and politics with a humble cognizance of the mysterious ways of Divine Providence.

Michael Hoffman is the editor of the periodical, Revisionist History® and the author of nine books. The continuation of his work is dependent on the charity of truth-seekers and the sale of his writings and recordings.  


Jeff Masters- San Francisco said...

"If the Old Testament contains mysteries beyond human comprehension, what of our human politics and history?

We ought to however, temper our judgments concerning history and politics with a humble cognizance of the mysterious ways of Divine Providence."

One thing is certain. The Russians will not lift a finger to protect Syrian, Iranian or Hezbollah personnel or civilians from Israeli and Pentagon bombing and missile strikes.

Unknown said...

In what way would you say that Putin is a student of Machiavelli. I thought that Prof. Cohen said there was now evidence Mr. Putin was behind the murders of the opposite politicians.

Thank You

Michael Hoffman said...

(In Alex K.’s comment above, substitute the word “no" for the word “now” in his second sentence).

Mr. K:

A Machiavellian need not be a murderer. A Machiavellian believes that bad means can be used to achieve good ends; those ends need not be homicidal.

Unknown said...

Dear Michael,
Sorry for the typo.
What deeds of Mr. Putin would lead you to believe that he is a Machiavellian?

Thank You

JMoore said...

It’s really fascinating to contemplate how God can use various people to do his work who are maybe not exactly his greatest subjects. In retrospect it looks downright miraculous that Trump could win this election with all the forces of “deep state” Weimerica aligned against him. Recently E. Michael Jones suggested that God had raised up Trump to destroy the US empire. It’s hard to imagine a greater gift or miracle from God than the end of what The Saker calls the “Anglo-Zio empire.

Unknown said...

Dear JMoore,
How would Donald Trump be used of God for the world's good when he aligned the entire world against the US? What he can do is bankrupt the entire nation due to military spending just like the USSR. If that is his basic thesis maybe he has a point but am not sure.
Donald Trump in my opinion cannot be used to cleanse the world of sin.
President Putin looks firm and strong to do the Job of ''Punisher'' if Hoffman is correct.
It is true though that President Putin is not interested in ultimate Truth and let the Russians die in the Kursk accident in the hope of not revealing the secrets of the Shkval.

Brian D said...

Writer F William Engdahl has a theory about Trump, in that Trump’s purpose, as given by the oligarchs, is to rebuild the US war infrastructure for the next global war. Much of the war infrastructure will be built or renovated under the guise of commercial infrastructure improvements, thus keeping the American public in the dark its actual goal. He is unsure if Trump will be at the helm, but believes there will most likely be another person “elected” who will lead during the war.

Sometime ago I was listening to Brother Nathanael Kapner on the Jeff Rense Show, and he questioned the sudden celebrity status of “The Saker.” I thought the same thing when I first heard him speak a few months earlier on the KPFA radio show “Guns and Butter.” Where did this guy come from to suddenly to be this expert in the geo-political realm?

The alt-right has a fairly nuance opinion of Hitler. While there are those that look to Nazi Germany with a misguided nostalgia, most of these folks are young and new to the movement. The majority are looking to something that is new. However I would say that since I came to study the alt-right for close to three years now, my belief is that what they desire in a culture is reminiscent of the Middle Ages Christendom, without Christianity, but I don’t think as a whole most grasp this intuitively. For some it appears to be a longing for a Tolkien-like world.

Mr. Hoffman would you disclose your religious affiliation? I would like to know just out of curiosity. I have assumed for some time that you are Orthodox.

On another point in regards to a review of your current book, which I have not read, only the reviews; a reviewer was critical of your position toward the Roman Catholic Church. While I am Roman Catholic I have read three of your books, one of which was “Usury in Christendom,” I thought you were completely balanced and objective, and I found no bias nor animus in your writing. I can say you won me over to your thesis concerning usury. I will buy your latest book soon.

Unknown said...

Mr. Hoffman is a very intelligent man, I personally do not need to know his affiliation to see he is a hard lover of the Truth.

I do thing it would be a good idea to write something on the topic of Eastern Orthodox Christianity since many people are converting to it just because they see the failure of the Roman Church.
Particularly it would be interesting to cover the topic of Peter's Primacy since the Eastern Orthodox Christians do not believe he is the head of the church and say that Peter's confession of faith is that rock in Matthew. In other words, the confession itself is the rock. My personal experience is that when an eastern christian is told that Peter is the rock they understand it as Peter having replaced Christ. According to their language that is what it means since slavic and greek are somewhat exclusive languages. For example if one were to say that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son that would mean in greek the the Holy Ghosts proceeds separately from the Father and separately from the Son. That indeed would be heretical in their point of view.
Also, when they mean that the Bishop of Rome has a primacy of honor, they would understand it as because of the honor attributed to him; he was given the primacy. For them, the term as a ruler to the Bishop of Rome would be inappropriate since ruler would mean Dictator in their language. That is why they prefer term like Guide or Leader or someone showing them the way.

Do you think Michael this is an interesting topic for you? I think so.

Brian D said...

Alex K, You might want to read some the writings of Rev. Fr. Francis Dvornik. He was expert on Slavic and Byzantine history, and as a Roman, very sympathetic to the Eastern Orthodox Rites in his writings. "Byzantium and the Roman Primacy." New York: Fordham University Press, 1966, is a very good book and still in print.

Unknown said...

Thank you Brian D.
I read the summary from catholicculture.org
I found some inconsistencies. For example in greek first does not necessarily mean head of the church; that is the author's conclusion.
My feeling is that the Eastern Church sees Peter as an elder brother and not a boss; the structure is diagonal upwards and not vertical.
He would be seen as of higher influence but not the boss.
The greek language or slavic language is extremely precise.
The latin is not. This is just fact.
I would be interesting to know about Justinian's confession acknowledging the Pope as head of the Church since I couldn't find it online.
Dvornik acknowledges that the Church superiority over the State did play role in the Schism.
The Byzantines were right in the Symphony theory which is what Dante argued about how the Pope should not interfere in the affairs of State and vice versa. I don't know exactly what Dante had in mind but Symphony would mean both Church and State working hand in hand and neither subordinate to the other. Dante argued for separation which might not be an exact definition. That is my personal opinion.
Also, Dvornik admits that the Pope yes has the power to reopen any case where there is a justifiable reason. But in no way would I see this a justification for direct jurisdiction over the entire Church. I simply do not understand how this can be used and I believe it is just papist perversion of history. His rule should in my opinion be direct in Vatican City but throughout the world indirect and only when there is reason to believe a bishop was wrongly accused.