Sunday, January 15, 2017

Trump and the Putinistas: Not Looking Good

Following on from my last post on Putin and Russia: it amazes me how gullible my nationalist and racialist comrades can be on topics such as Syria, Russia, Ukraine, Iran; they swallow Syrian, Russian and Iranian state propaganda hook, line and sinker. It's often the man in the street - and the 'normie' journalists - who are in possession of more facts and have a more correct view. The more you are exposed to Sputnik and RT (Russia Today), the less you know.

Ordinary conservatives, such as Paul Roderick Gregory for Forbes, write some good things on Russia (see 'Why Russia Cannot Become Our Friend: Memo to President Trump'): he knows more about Little Vladimir Putin, and understands Russia, better than any Alt-Righter. Another journalist, the Jewish writer Leonid Bershidsky, also does a good job when it comes to writing on Putin.

The essence of Bershidsky's recent article, 'Trump's Team Looks Smarter on Russia', is as follows. Trump wishes to follow in the footsteps of Obama and Bush 43 when it comes to Russia: he wants rapprochement, a 'reset'. Like Bush 43, he gives the impression of hopeless naiveté: possibly, after his meeting with Putin in Iceland, he will say that he 'looked in his eyes and saw his soul' and saw the soul of a good man. (Most Alt-Righters don't remember that; to them, the history of the world started eight to ten years ago).

Perhaps Putin will walk over Trump, like Khrushchev did to the inexperienced Kennedy at the 1961 Vienna summit. Who knows. But the Trump appointees recognise Putin, and Russia, for what they are.

Some critics of Trump's views on Russia couldn't believe it.

Tillerson understands - just like Hitler did in the summer of 1940, when Russia annexed Bessarabia and Northern Bukovina - that in the face of Russian aggression, iron resolve backed by the threat of the use of military force is needed. How should the Ukraine have reacted after the annexation of the Crimea?

I support neither the US nor Russia. European and Western nationalism finds itself in the same diplomatic position as the Third Reich in the early months of 1945: Hitler and Ribbentrop desperately hoped that cracks would appear in the US and Russian coalition and that the two countries would soon come to blows - and give Germany the breathing space it needed to survive the war. Alas for Germany - and fascism - that vision didn't come to pass. But there's no reason why a nationalist Europe today couldn't follow a similar strategy: wait for the two Great Satans - Russia and the US - to have a falling out and then seize the opportunity when it does appear, that is, the opportunity to enlarge nationalist Europe's power, or to regain European sovereignty, which is the same thing.

But wait - isn't Trump on our side? He may do a great job on building the wall and deporting the illegals; he may even tighten legal immigration; but on the whole, he doesn't stand what we stand for:

Too bad Trump doesn't stand for the ideals of the original America First.

No comments:

Post a Comment