Voices from Russia

Thursday, 11 November 2010

A View from Moscow by Valentin Zorin… How Much Did the Elections in the USA Cost?

This is Mitch McConnell and John Boehner… they’ll enjoy the coverage of the Congressional “socialistic” healthcare plan… and deny you access to an analogue. SUCKER…


This year, every seat on Capitol Hill cost the winner around 4 million dollars (122.703 million Roubles 2.926 million Euros 2.48 million UK Pounds). Clearly, Republican candidates didn’t suffer from a shortage of funds. National elections in the USA ended in a serious defeat for the Democratic Party, as they lost control of the House of Representatives, and their control of the Senate was reduced to an irreducible minimum. Whilst the past elections are technically called “midterms”, their result for the Obama administration will not be transitory. Programmes and plans proposed some two years ago by the ruling Democratic Party now face serious difficulties. Yet, to talk about a total victory, as the leaders of the Republican Party do now, is not something that I find myself in agreement with. This victory was more arithmetical than political in nature. Yes, the number of Republicans on Capitol Hill is markedly greater. However, the Republican leaders don’t offer any coherent strategy to deal with the difficult problems that the country is facing. We can reduce their political course over the most recent past to a single word… “No”.” “No” to the propositions of the Democratic administration, and “No” to Barack Obama, who is an outsider to the traditional Washington élites.

One can’t see any constructive submissions in the Republican agenda, and, for the first time in many years, they don’t have a strong and authoritative leader on the national level. Do you think that some media outlets can impose such twisted figures as Sarah Palin, the hapless and barely literate governor of Alaska, or, the media mogul and billionaire Donald Trump, a frequenter of fashionable hangouts, rather more a denizen of glitzy precincts than the political world, as the Republican candidate in the next presidential election? The lack of a recognised leader [in the Republican Party] is directly related to their lack of specific and clearly articulated proposals to deal with the serious problems facing America today. The defeat of the Democratic Party in the past midterm elections isn’t a new wrinkle in American political history. For many decades, in the midterm elections, the ruling party, it didn’t matter if it were the Republicans or the Democrats, lost a significant portion of the voters who had supported it in the previous presidential election. Unfulfilled promises made during the last campaign always cause disappointment amongst the voters.

This time, the main discontent affecting Americans who came to the polls was the burden of economic hardship laid on their shoulders by the current crisis. The Democratic administration couldn’t overcome the economic crisis, which was a legacy of the previous Republican government. This crisis, which crowned the presidency of George W Bush, was, from the very beginning, an unfavourable backdrop for all the actions of the Obama administration. It had to pay other people’s bills. The Obama administration’s attempt to regulate the financial sector, which provoked the onset of the crisis in the autumn of 2008, provoked distinct dissatisfaction in both the Republican leadership and corporate interests. When President Obama signed the Banking Regulation Act into law, it became a red flag causing outrage on Wall Street and its environs.

The current election campaign cost an unprecedented four billion dollars (122.703 billion Roubles 2.926 billion Euros 2.48 billion UK Pounds). This year, every seat on Capitol Hill cost the winner around 4 million dollars (122.703 million Roubles 2.926 million Euros 2.48 million UK Pounds). Clearly, Republican candidates didn’t suffer from a shortage of funds. Answering the eternal question, “Where did the money come from?” President Obama stated, “It may have been the oil companies, it may have been the insurance industry, it could have been Wall Street. We don’t know. They close their mouths, but they open the hatches for the cash”. No one in Washington is speaking openly. Billions of these hatches undoubtedly played a significant role in the results of the past American election campaign. The defeat of the Democratic Party in the midterm election puts the Obama administration in a difficult situation. To push many of his programmes through Congress in its altered composition will not be easy. Will he continue to be a success? Time will tell.

9 November 2010

Valentin Zorin

Voice of Russia World Service


Editor’s Note:

Note well that John Boehner (R-OH), the putative Speaker of the House, has already stated that his objective is to abrogate healthcare reform and financial market regulation. Given the divided nature of the Congress, that’s impossible. Considering that exit polls showed that at least half of the electorate favours healthcare reform (or an even stronger version), Boehner’s stance is lunatic and without foundation. It means that he’s beholden to the banks, insurance companies, and HMOs… let the public be damned.

I have a “modest proposal”… let’s extend to the entire American population the same healthcare coverage as exists for US congressmen. That’s FAIR… after all, how can such a plan be socialistic if such “conservative” Solons as Boehner and McConnell benefit from it and find it not only useful, but also necessary! Am I being catty if I mention that Mr McConnell had heart bypass surgery in 2003, at Bethesda Naval Medical Centre, a classic example of “socialised health care”, if there ever was one. If we were to enjoy Congress’ healthcare coverage, it would be MORE generous than the Obama plan… makes you wonder about those lying POS Republicans, doesn’t it? They want a “socialist” healthcare plan for themselves and their families, yet, they won’t let you have the same benefits and coverage!

2012 bids fair to be interesting…




Myths of the First World War

Russian War Loan poster of the First World War


In Western history textbooks, the Russian Empire is often not mentioned amongst the combatants of the First World War…

The First World War, in which 38 countries were involved, changed the course of history. It claimed millions of lives, and it was the first war to show the deadliness of advanced technological combat. The war lasted more than four years, and ended on 11 November 1918, when Germany and the Entente states signed an armistice agreement at Compiègne. Today, Western history textbooks don’t even list Russia as being amongst the participants of the war, even though it lost at least 3 million soldiers on the various fighting fronts.


Members of the Russian Expeditionary Force in France, 1916


Yelena Rudaya, a leading researcher at the Institute of Russian History of the RAN, said, “Until now, there’s been many myths surrounding the First World War, they’re simply unfair to the Russian contribution to the war, for Russia paid for the victory of the Entente with the blood of its soldiers. That’s because the decisive battles took place in the East or, as they called it, the German Front, for the fighting was between the Russian and German forces. This was the main fighting front for Russian troops and divisions, for the Russian army. Russian society greeted the news of the beginning of World War I with unanimous patriotism. Indeed, back in 1914, it was called the Second Fatherland War, in memory of the First Great Patriotic War in 1812 against Napoleon, some one hundred years earlier”.


Map of the Eastern Front in 1917… the Imperial Army had kept the Germans out of the Russian heartland… a fact glossed over in the West today…


In 1914, the impact of two Russian offensives on the Eastern Front rescued Paris from being overrun by the Germans. In 1916, the Russian forces inflicted a crushing blow on the Austro-Hungarian army. For three years, Russia’s strength was sapped by its selfless performance of its treaty obligations. There were tragic consequences for the country; a revolution broke out, resulting in a fratricidal civil war. Winston Churchill, at the time, the First Lord of the British Admiralty, once remarked that Russia received a raw deal from an unjust fate, saying, “Having victory within its grasp, she suddenly fell to the ground, eaten alive by worms”. Because of the separate peace signed at Brest-Litovsk between the Bolsheviks and Germany in February 1918, Soviet Russia wasn’t invited to the Versailles Conference, where, in 1919, the victors of the war redrew the map of the world. For that matter, representatives of the defeated German side weren’t invited, either.


Russian Army vets of  the Great War and their families in San Francisco CA in 1939


Many historians consider the Treaty of Versailles an unfair document. The Entente states absolved themselves of all responsibility for the war, when, in fact, it was a pan-European tragedy, and the blame for it lay on all the sides involved. An overly large assessment of reparations upon Germany led to hyperinflation and the impoverishment of the German population. Historians believe that the punitive provisions of Versailles Treaty enabled the rise of the Hitler régime, which put forward a relentless mantra of revenge, and, then, started the Second World War. In the West, the First World War gave rise to the literature of so-called “lost generation”, Richard Aldington in England, Ernest Hemingway in the USA, and Erich Maria Remarque in Germany. Hundreds of scholarly monographs are devoted to the period. However, Russian historians believe that an objective history of the First World War is yet to be written.

11 November 2010

Mikhail Aristov

Voice of Russia World Service


Philaret Denisenko in the USA… Calls for Ukrainian Church “Unity” Under His Aegis

Your tax dollars, in the past, went to support Osama bin Laden and Shamil Basayev… today, they support Philaret Denisenko, Mikhail Saakashvili, and the neo-Nazis in the Baltics. The GOP/Tea Party supports this… so, if you voted for them, you support such support of thugs… there’s no way around it.


Read this:


Note well that Philaret Denisenko spoke on the Voice of America… that means that Denisenko is in the pay of the neocons in Foggy Bottom. Yes sir, he’s taking Uncle Sugar’s shilling, just as Osama bin Laden and Shamil Basayev did (birds of a feather flock together). There are elements in the US State Department and the US special services that are reflexively anti-Russian, and they will use any means to attack Russia, including Islamofacists and anti-Church rebels.

What Orthodox Christians should be aware of is that the Patriarchate of Moscow and all the Russias declared Mr Denisenko anathema. This is VERY rare. I am only aware of three individuals being declared anathema by the MP in somewhat contemporary times… Aleksandr Vvedensky, who was the leading light in the Renovationist Church structure; Philaret Denisenko, who helped organise the so-called “Patriarchate of Kiev”; and Valentin Rusanstsov, who founded the True Russian Orthodox Church. Do you see the common thread running in all of these cases? The Church normally reserves anathema (“excommunication” in English) only for those who set up an organised and formal body against itself.

The konvertsy should stop bandying about the word “excommunication”, as this English word is equivalent in meaning to “anathema” in Russian and Greek. Epitimia is better Englished as “penance”… since I have good sense, I asked a Greek speaker what they felt on the matter (who else would have a valid opinion? Certainly not monoglot konvertsy, that’s for sure). For instance, such people as Gleb Podmoshensky and Diomid Dzyuban weren’t put under anathema… it was sufficient to remove them from the clergy and from a position of influence over the faithful. Mark Stokoe, in particular, should stop speaking of “automatic excommunication”… that’s heresy; he learnt that from Schmemann, who, in turn, learnt it from Sergei Bulgakov.

Parenthetically, both Sergei Bulgakov and Pavel Florensky occupy an ambiguous position in Church history and theology. The MP declared that their teachings were heretical, but it didn’t name them personally anathema. That is, their writings, especially their vapourings on Sophiology, are heresy, and pious Orthodox Christians shouldn’t even read them, but the Church refused to place them outside its ambit. It took a similar stance with Diomid Dzyuban, Nikon Mironov of Yekaterinburg, Gleb Podmoshensky, and those who left the ROCOR after the reconciliation. Anathema (excommunication) is a very serious step, and the Church RARELY uses it (quite unlike the papists). Penance (often mislabelled “excommunication”) doesn’t involve the barring of a person from the Church and its communion… anathema does. Ignoramuses such as Mark Stokoe should stop using the term, as they obviously don’t know how serious it is.

In short, Philaret Denisenko is a rebel outside of the Body of Christ… that is, he’s not a Christian. He’s the same as a JW, Mormon, or Pentecostalist. It’s sad that the Republican Party, in particular, supports such people… if you’re Orthodox, and if you voted for a Tea Party candidate, you voted for the support of Denisenko, full stop. Don’t forget, the godless Sectarians LOVE the Tea Party. I seem to recall that one of the Russian bishops in the ‘90s called such people “Christian Atheists”. If you voted for the Tea Party, you joined yourself to that.

I give my thanks to one of my correspondents, who pointed this article up to me. The news item itself is minor… but it allowed me to make an important point about “excommunication”. I do daresay that some of my best writing has flowed from other people’s ideas… and THAT keeps me (properly) humble. God has His ways, doesn’t He?

Barbara-Marie Drezhlo

Thursday 11 November 2010

Albany NY

Blog at WordPress.com.