Posted by Matra on Fri, 29 Sep 2006 22:41 | #

This is not the first reburial in Russia. Last year Anton Denikin, a White Russian general who fought the Bolsheviks, was reburied with the support of Vladimir Putin and, apparently, the Russian people. The Russian state’s rehabilitation of the Whites is long overdue.

It’s interesting to note that the former communist nations (not states) are in better shape than we are in the prosperous West. They might have been brutally oppressed at times but they don’t appear to have been systematically indoctrinated with the self-hating elements of socialism. The soft totalitarianism the West has gradually succumbed to is looking more destructive to me than the brutish Soviet kind.

Posted by Nick Tamiroff on Sat, 30 Sep 2006 04:38 | #

Gw-A heartwarming post to me.My family left Russia during the1905 Revolution and emigrated to Katowice Poland.They were old breed Tsarists,and despised Karensky,and later Lenin and Stalin,though as many Russians of the times,thought Stalin was nations answer as did many Germans revere Hitler.Having immigrated here in the early 30’s,my father returned to Poland just after my birth[Oct’39],being a natural born citizen and Reserve Officer in the militia.Seven years later,his name appeared in the list of dead in Katyn,and another 15 years to establish he was killed by his former countrymen.During the war years,until the height of the “cold war”,I had a 2’x3’picture of Stalin on my bedroom wall!!Hell,I might have been considered a Liberal then.Anyway,just a little more bio as to who and what I am-not necessarily a raving former Marine lunitic with a M-60[though I could be in defense of my family,Republic,or friends] Cheers and Semper FI

Posted by Amalek on Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:05 | #

Many Russians believe that the martyrdom of the royal family, guarantors of Orthodox Christianity, placed a curse on Holy Russia which has to be expiated by such ceremonies as this. A favourite slogan during the anti-Soviet demonstrations of Gorbachev’s last days was ‘1918- the crime; 1989- the punishment’.

Nor has it been forgotten that the commandant of the murder squad at Ekaterinburg was this person:

or that the city’s royal name was subsequently changed to honour this person:

There are many of these unfortunate coincidences in the early history of the USSR, giving rise to the lowest conspiracist suspicions on the part of some hateful bigots.

Posted by Rnl on Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:35 | #

Alex Zeka wrote:

The men in Red were often, if not for their ideology, perfectly acceptable conservatives ...

You’re giving the Bolsheviks credit for not being liberal multiracialists. That’s like complimenting someone for not being insane.

It’s true that Stalin & Co. would have been surprised and likely appalled by homosexual marriage. Stalin was in that respect a social conservative, but only because social insanity in our era has been normalized.

Stalin also wasn’t a multiculturalist. He didn’t think it was a good idea for majority-White nations to import millions of unassimilable aliens. He didn’t think the Soviet Union should be defined by its various cultural differences, the weirder the better, and that an important task of the Marxist state was to seek out weird racial groups from across the globe and encourage hordes of them to move to Moscow. He wasn’t insane. Or if he was insane, his insanity didn’t take that particular form, which is unique to our era.

If a substantial portion of the current inhabitants of the West began drinking a bottle of turpentine at breakfast, everyone in the past who didn’t drink a bottle of turpentine at breakfast would appear comparatively rational. Ted Bundy would become a nutritional conservative by contrast, not because he was good or smart or notably health conscious, but only because he was executed before daily turpentine consumption became common. His normality would be a product only of the dangerous abnormality that followed his death.

In short, we shouldn’t applaud the Bolsheviks for not being liberal multiracialists. They don’t deserve our applause, and it obscures an important truth. Almost no one from our past—and no one who was sane—would have supported the bizarre social experiment that much of the West has recently embarked on.

St. Pete’s name was changed to honour Trotsky? Are you quite sure?

Ekaterinburg, where the Tsar and his family were executed, was renamed to Sverdlovsk in honor of Yakov Sverdlov (Yankel Solomon), the first Communist head of state, who ordered the murders. It returned to its Russian name back in the early 1990s.

There may still be a statue of Sverdlov in the city. I know it was still standing about a decade ago, which infuriated Russian nationalists, who would often gather to demand that it be demolished.

Posted by Rnl on Sun, 01 Oct 2006 00:38 | #

My point above about the unprecedented social experiment that multiculturalism represents is both true and obvious. But I neglected some important facts.

One device for suppressing national loyalties within the Soviet multiethnic empire was starvation. Multiculturalists today don’t favor that method. But transferring members of one Soviet ethnic group into the territory of another Soviet ethnic group was of course another Stalinist device for weakening national loyalties. The Chinese policy of moving ethnic Chinese into Tibet in order to destroy Tibetan nationhood offers a current example. Third World immigration into Western nations serves the same anti-national purpose, as some of its advocates openly acknowledge. 

So I suppose Stalin’s anti-nationalism does have some similarities with modern multiculturalism, at least in terms of the methods employed.

Posted by Boris on Sun, 01 Oct 2006 03:16 | #

So long as we are(USA) economically dependant on China, Russia should do allright. To this day I still don’t know why we’ve made such an alliance. But the cash the Chinese get from trade with us is used to buy detroyers, submarines and planes from Russia.
Here’s an example of our gov. double standards.
1-If the Chinese as they often do, get caught selling military equipment to Iran, our response to that is often vociferous but nothing more than that.
2-If the Russians get caught selling military equipment to Iran, they get action from our gov. effectively barring guilty companies from doing business with US gov.
Why do we cover the Chineses ass? The Russians are more a friend to us, yet our gov. stirrs us away from them.
BTW one of the reasons Putin told the IM(Wolfowitz) to stick it where the sun don’t shine is ‘cause, the IM wanted Moscow to let more immigranst in. Hey Wolfie why don’t you send that crap to Israel, or China or Japan for that matter?