Is Russia Becoming a Theocracy?

THIS is what HH is REALLY up to. The West hates him for that. That speaks volumes…

______________________________

Editor’s Foreword:

Caveat lector! The author of this piece is a neoliberal pro-Western fanatic who graduated from Harvard. Its chock fulla shit, but you need to know what’s out there. Don’t just read what pleases you… that’s what the Rush Limboob Fan Club droolers do. Always attend to reality… or, reality WILL deal with you.

BMD

******

This weekend, the MP held its Archpastoral Council at the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow. In his speech to the assembly, President Putin said that, of course, Russia isn’t a theocracy, but, “We’re a secular state of course, and can’t allow state life and Church life to merge, but at the same time, we must avoid too, a vulgar and primitive interpretation of what being secular means. Traditional values, believers’ religious feelings, and people’s rights, freedoms, and dignity must all be protected by both the power of public opinion and the power of the law” (emphasis in the original).

He also said that the Orthodox Church and other traditional Russian religions must be involved in “important fields as the support of family and motherhood, the upbringing and education of children and youth, social development, and the strengthening of the patriotic spirit of the armed forces” (emphasis in the original). The social conservatism inherent in having the Church play a greater role in family life (with “fathers” notably absent from the equation), schooling, and, somewhat counter-intuitively perhaps, the war machine, is nothing new. However, whilst the Russian state has actively promoted the Church since the early Yeltsin years, perhaps the most interesting aspect of the statement was the legal element.

Putin’s statement confirmed that some of the most bizarre parts of the prosecution’s case against the members of Pussy Riot… namely, that their actions contravened medieval Church law… may not have been the surreal aberration they seemed at the time. In fact, the following day, Patriarch Kirill Gundyaev also spoke in favour of giving legal weight to religious doctrines. Russian news sources reported that Kirill “backed the idea of criminal prosecution for blasphemy similar the Pussy Riot’s punk performance in Cathedral of Christ the Saviour”; he was quoted as saying, “The law must protect not only symbols of secular importance, but also objects with sacred meaning for the believers and guard their religious feelings from insults”.

The Orthodox Church has been in the news these days. Last weekend, the Financial Times published a long profile of Fr Tikhon Shevkunov, who’s said to be Putin’s personal confessor; whilst the latest issue of The Economist reviews a new history of religion after the fall of communism. The FT noted the paradox that, whilst “only a small minority of Russians attend church regularly” the MP has become one of the country’s most trusted institutions. Geraldine Fegan, author of the book reviewed in The Economist, was quoted as saying, “Putin wants to capitalise on Orthodoxy’s image of permanence, even as his own legitimacy crumbles”.

Certainly, there’s an intimate relationship between the Church, the Kremlin, and big money. After all, Yeltsin financed the Church, in part, by granting it the right to import and sell tax free cigarettes, whilst the most avid sponsors of new houses of worship over the past 20 years have been oligarchs. Many senior members of the Church hierarchy have themselves become quasi-oligarchs, driving expensive supercars, wearing Swiss watches, and living in multimillion dollar apartments. Today, it’s become very fashionable among the megarich to have their own personal confessors… the latest badge of élite status. However, whilst we know that the church, state, and army have refashioned the old tsarist three-legged stool, it’s much harder to see which of them wields the most power in the equation.

In short, is Putin using the church, or is the church using Putin? As the embrace between them becomes ever closer, the key power struggle to come may no longer be between the Kremlin and the liberals, but rather Putin and his Patriarchate.

3 February 2013

Vadim Nikitin

Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/2013/02/03/is-russia-becoming-a-theocracy/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=is-russia-becoming-a-theocracy

Editor’s Afterword:

This is what the crapitalist crowd in the West truly believes… and Orthodox swine like Lyonyo Kishkovsky, Victor Potapov, James Paffhausen, and Alexander Webster nourish their delusions by feeding them crank and bogus intel (in short, they give the Westerners what they want to hear, receiving attaboys and material rewards in return). Do remember how Jordanville lied about its non-existent ties to a putative “catacomb church” during the Cold War to receive Langley’s shilling… the main enablers of that were Basil Rodzianko and Victor Potapov… and how Schmemann worked for the American propaganda machine (how much Langley money did SVS get for that? Perspirin’ minds wanna know… there’s been no OCA analogue of Alexander Lebedeff (a First Family apparatchik, but an honest man when it comes to Church history) to tell the truth).

This is what the American Establishment believes… and there are traitorous Russians, both in the Rodina and in the diaspora, who sell out to them for filthy lucre and personal gain (after all, Potapov DID (or DOES) suck directly on the US government tit). The truth is that HH is a supporter of fundamental social justice, and he argues that it’s imperative for the state to provide a broad palette of social services (INCLUDING universal access to state-provided single-payer healthcare)… and the people that I named do NOT. Where is HH on every major holiday? He’s out in the hospitals and orphanages visiting sick and orphaned kids, that’s where (he also runs the niftiest Yolka in Moscow)… I’d remind you that James Paffhausen did NOT do that… which one of those two is god-pleasing? I’d say that it was HH… and Paffhausen was a gibbering and posturing poseur. Think on that…

BMD

28 October 2012. You Can’t Make Shit Like This Up… The new Putinism: Nationalism Fused with Conservative Christianity

______________________________

Editor’s Foreword:

Here’s a load of utter crapola from the Washington Post crowd. Oh, yes… Potapov (a Cold War-era Langley propagandist), Mattingly (a semi-converted Southern Baptist), Dreher (a Catholic retread who makes himself out to be an Orthodox expert), Freddie M-G (her thoughts are so precious that you have to pay her 25 bucks a throw just to hear them), and Paffhausen (the obsequious disciple of a man deposed for nasty doings) suck up to this lot… not as badly as they do to the Moonies at the Washington Times or to the rightwing nutters on K Street… but they do suck up to this bunch, and they don’t contradict them (they might lose entrée to the right parties and seminars, then, kids). Again, you have to know what the haters of the Orthosphere say. They do want to cut out our heart and soul and replace it with American consumerism (that’s why you shouldn’t trust the “Orthodox” I named… they’re all drooling supporters of the “Me First” Republican Party). It’s rancid… but it’s a necessary read…

BMD

******

Two recent stories offer a revealing… and, to some, unsettling… view of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s emerging state ideology. The new Putinism, you might call it, seems to be a fusion of two older Russian ideas… nationalism, sometimes with an anti-Western tinge, and conservative interpretations of Orthodox Christianity. Both stories portray the coalescing, Kremlin-pushed ideology as a response to rising dissent and, more broadly, an effort to fill an ideological vacuum that has, remained to some extent, since the collapse of the USSR two decades ago. The Financial Times’ Charles Clover chronicles the new ideology’s emergence in the typically vibrant city of St Petersburg, “long regarded as Russia’s liberal window to the West”, but now “the testing ground for a new wave of conservative, Orthodox church-going, pro-Kremlin patriotism that has gripped much of Russian officialdom”. Clover cites recent censorship of classic Russian works by Vladimir Nabokov and Sergei Rachmaninoff, as well as new law that forbids “yelping” and “stomping” at night, possibly aimed at curbing protests.

Through the previous twelve years of his hegemony, Mr Putin observed a balance between liberals and conservatives in the ranks of the elite, catering to each group in an effort to play one off against the other. Today, that balance appears to have been jettisoned after liberals deserted him, with protesters taking to the streets last December and high-ranking figures… such as his Finance Minister… joining the dissenters. The Kremlin has turned to the more conservative elements of society. More rural, older, and less educated, they respond well to Mr Putin’s nationalist and slightly paranoid rhetoric as defender of the Orthodox faith from blasphemers and protector of the nation against foreign plots.

In Moscow, Claire Bigg of Radio Free Europe finds indications of a Kremlin effort to institutionalise the new emphasis on nationalism… an entirely new government agency for “promoting patriotism” and safeguarding “the spiritual and moral foundations of Russian society”. It’s hard not to be reminded of Iran’s infamous censorship body, the “Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance”, although Russia’s Directorate for Social Projects appears more about cultivating friendly public sentiments than blocking outlawed ones. Bigg and analysts she spoke with portrayed the agency as an outgrowth of Putin’s “deepening hostility” toward foreign organisations, even comparing it to the Soviet-era propaganda department. However, the most significant link to the Soviet era may have to do with the national pride many Russians felt during their country’s height of power. Nonetheless, the initiative is likely to strike a chord with many Russians nostalgic for their country’s lost global clout. Advocates say the new agency could prove instrumental in both filling the ideological vacuum left by the Soviet collapse and rejuvenating the notion of patriotism, still almost exclusively tied to the USSR’s role in World War II.

Russia’s search for an ideology is a big deal for the populous, ethnically diverse country. This campaign’s propagandistic and anti-liberal overtones aside, it does, at least, seem to address this issue. Nevertheless, nationalism is a powerful force, and in Russia has had a complicated history. As EurasiaNet’s Igor Torbakov warned in February, when Putin appeared to begin his ideological campaign, Russian nationalism has at times carried ethnic overtones. About 80 percent of the country’s citizens are ethnic Russian, and, with birth rates below replacement and the population aging, the Russian economy relies heavily on immigrating minority groups. Widespread harassment of migrant workers is already a problem in Russia. A far-right Russian newspaper editor told the Financial Times, “Putin feels the coming of a catastrophe, of the domination of liberal forces which threaten him with the fate of Muammer Gaddafi. He’s fighting back by restoring the balance between the various ideological groups. In this way, he supports us”.

25 October 2012

Max Fisher

Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/10/25/the-new-putinism-nationalism-fused-with-conservative-christianity/?wprss=rss_world

Editor’s Afterword:

Much of this isn’t even true… but many of the konvertsy eat this shit up. Reflect well on the fact that Paffhausen does, and that Potapov was (or still is) part of the Langley dezinformatsiya machine, as he worked for the BBG, a known Langley front organisation… a fact known to all, it isn’t secret, and I’m unmasking no one. Oh, yes, Basil Rodzianko and Aleksandr Schmemann both took Langley’s shilling willingly, too… did I tell you that Potapov married into the Rodzianko clan (everyone knows how Potapov used the official ROCOR website to pursue a vendetta against a fellow Rodzianko clan-member in public… nice guy)? Fancy that… keeping it all in the family, no? This disgusting pabulum has as much truth in it as the typical Monomakhos post… that is, not much. As one of the Cabinet said about Monomakhos:

The Monomakhos crowd is still dancing around their cauldron… I hope that the hammer falls quickly on them…

This post is shit of the same vintage. However, you must stay informed. READ IT and heed what it means. People are swallowing lies, and that’s never good. The truth WILL set you free, but only if you let it…

BMD

“Bilderbergers” Try to Rally the Troops

______________________________

The heads of the two most powerful financial empires of the world 97-year-old David Rockefeller, and 76-year-old Lord Jacob Rothschild, decided to combine a large portion of their assets. Although the participants of the transaction preferred to operate in an environment far away from publicity, news of it still leaked out to the media. An influential and well-informed source on big business affairs in Britain, The Financial Times, reported that after long negotiations and secret meetings, the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds “seem to have decided to form a fundamental and long-term union, joining their forces”. This is all the more sensational because these two families have keenly competed in global financial markets for nearly 150 years. The fact that age-old enemies formed an alliance demonstrates the anxiety felt by the captains of capitalism, as they realise the depth and seriousness of the current threats to the global economy.

Combining the power of these two powerful financial groups is actually a continuation of a policy that started over half a century ago. In May 1954, the then-heads of the same two families, Edmond de Rothschild and Laurence Rockefeller, met in the Bilderberg Hotel in Amsterdam in an atmosphere of great secrecy. The most influential financiers and politicians conferred on a private agenda. Experts believe that they outlined the basis of the political and economic policies followed by the Western powers in the decades ahead. Since then, these secret gatherings are held annually. This year, the secret meeting of financial and political bigwigs lasted from 31 May to 2 June in Chantilly VA. As always, the deliberations and their outcomes were shrouded in mystery.

Members of the “club” still shun “daylight” and any publicity. We only know that bankers, prime ministers, ex-presidents, and other famous world leaders meet away from prying eyes, usually in expensive hotels and luxury resorts. All come alone, without advisers and translators. Of course, the press isn’t present, since no outsiders know where and when these secret meetings occur. The authoritative Encyclopaedia Britannica stated that these meetings comprise what’s called the “Bilderberg Group”:

The meeting takes place in an informal setting, and those who have an impact on national and international politics discuss important issues. After each meeting, an unofficial “Top Secret” report is distributed to past and current participants, ensuring the continuity of the Group’s policies.

Some politicians, including well-known figures, have called the Bilderberg Group a world government. That’s an exaggeration, but the fact that an informal body, operating on a continuous basis and surrounded by secrecy, determines much of the political and economic direction in the West, we can hardly doubt. A new alliance of the Rockefeller and Rothschild clans… the Founding Fathers of the Bilderberg Group… when a global crisis threatens the foundations of the post-war economic model of the West, is intended, as they say, to “close ranks” and increase the influence of a secret community of Western bankers and politicians in the course of affairs in world economic and political policy.

12 July 2012

Valentin Zorin

Voice of Russia World Service

http://rus.ruvr.ru/2012_07_12/81200461/