20th Century was no stranger to tragedies. There were the two great World Wars. There was the mass killings of Armenians, the Shoah, Nanking Massacre, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Rwandan Genocide, the Killing Fields of Cambodia, Mao’s famines and campaign against culture, wars in Vietnam and Algeria, and many more. But perhaps one that has been overlooked could broadly be called the Slavocaust, or Slavic-Holocaust. Now, the tragedies that fall into this category have been studied and discussed — the Great Famine in Ukraine under Bolshevism is one of the most well-known example — as individual events, but perhaps what we need is a more comprehensive overview of a pattern of events that could be summed up as a War on Slavs. When we ponder the entire forest than fixate on individual trees, a pattern emerges. One such pattern may explain the particularly tragic history of the Slavs, especially Russians/Ukrainians. And in a very real way, the animus behind Slavocaust of the 20th century is still with us, especially as so much of the world is under the hegemony of the Empire of Judea or EOJ. Jewish hatred of Slavs is now near-genocidal.
The main pattern that emerges from Eastern Europe and Russia in the 20th century concerns the Jewish(Semitic) and Germanic(Aryan) Wars of Enslavement and Extermination against the Slavic Peoples. Why did Germans and Jews play key roles in this? This seems all the odder considering that, especially from 1933 to 1945, the Semites and Aryans were the fiercest enemies in the world. To be sure, there was a supporting cast of characters in the Slavocaust by Anglos, British and American. And to a lesser extent, Japan that was used, prior to WWII and during the Cold War, as an collaborator against Russia.
Now, I don’t mean to suggest that Slavs have been some pure-as-snow saints of history. As we all know, Slavic history is filled with warriors, conquerors, ruthless tyrants, imperialists, and lunatics. Russia got so big because it conquered other peoples, and it’s understandable why many peoples, including non-Russian Slavs, developed hostilities toward Russians as overbearing invaders and despoilers. People are people, and Slavs could be as good or bad as anyone(though perhaps Negroes are one race that defies imagination in terms of morality; DNA tells us that all of humanity could roughly be divided between Sub-Saharan Africans and Everyone Else).
That said, geography condemned the Slavs(especially those further to the East) to a rather troubled place in history. Like Southern Europe — Balkans and Spain, Italy, & Portugal — , the Slavic territories were exposed to non-European invaders. Spain came under Moorish rule for several centuries. Parts of the Balkans came under Turkish rule(though some may include Turkey as part of Europe). As Slavic peoples lived in the Eastern territories, they were the first Europeans to be ravaged when the Mongols moved westward from the Gobi steppes. And Russians were constantly at war with the Turkic Muslim peoples. For nearly three centuries, Russians lived under the Mongol yoke. And with the Muslims of Turkic regions and Central Asia, the Russian gave as good as they got(but they ‘got’ a lot). According to Andrei Tarkovsky in THE MIRROR, Russia played a christ-like role in European history. If not for Russia as sacrificial bulwark, the West could have been flooded with the Mongol Horde, and then, who knows what the history of Christendom and Europe might have been. Weakened by threats from North Africa, Turkic peoples, and Mongols, maybe the European pageant would have been quashed... like the glory of Greece was lost long ago when invasions upon invasions left only skeletons of Hellenic glory.
And yet, it was precisely because Russia underwent that ‘christ-like’ sacrificial role that it came to be despised than appreciated by the West. Instead of gratitude toward Slavs for serving as the demographic brunt against the Mongols, many in the West came to see them as whites tainted with Asiatic blood and poisoned with Oriental Despotism. They were seen as the lesser Europeans, if European at all.
And even in the Modern Era, Russian aristocrats came to regard their people in a condescending, even contemptuous, manner. If Russian rulers like Ivan the Terrible were infected with the virus of 'Oriental Despotism' and ruled like a ‘Khan’, the later Russian rulers held themselves aloof from the Slavic rabble; they took special pride in their ‘western' cultivation. The famed Catherine the Great was actually a German. And Russian elites who modeled themselves on Western attitudes and manners snubbed their own national folk. Given that only a sliver of privileged Russians had the means to be educated in the West, it led to a widening divide between the elites and the masses. Russian royalty married with non-Russians, especially the Germans. Many preferred to speak French than Russian, considered as a barbarian tongue. These elites weren't ‘oriental despotist’ but despotic just the same because they turned up their noses at Russian commoners as semi-barbarian louts and boors munching on raw potatoes and mired in superstition. So, whether Russian elites followed the Oriental model or the Western model, they generally disdained their folks. In Oriental Despotic mode, the masses were seen as obedient cattle. In Western Enlightenment mode, the masses were seen as ignorant dummies. Peter the Great was a westernizing modernizer, but he treated his people as chattel in the building of St. Petersburg. Catherine the Great patronized Western artists and thinkers but only reinforced the institution of serfdom. Enlightenment was for the washed and perfumed.
Looking further back into history, we find more reasons as to why the West generally came to disdain the Slavs. Christianity spread to Western and Northern Europe before it moved deep into Slavic territory. So, the Christian West once regarded Slavic peoples as unredeemed pagans. For this reason, the Christian West's prohibition of slavery(among Christians) didn't apply to pagan Slavs who were regarded as lowly heathens. The fact that the term ‘slave’ derives from ‘Slav’ is sure indication of the massive scale of the slave trade involving Slavs. Christian West and Jews sold millions of Slavs to North Africa and Near East. For much of Western and Central European history, the Slavs were regarded as barbarians, the last ones to be civilized and converted to Christianity. Western Europeans looked upon Slavs like the English once regarded the Scottish or how today’s urban yuppie elites feel about rural white folks in the South. (It’s no wonder that Andrei Konchalovsky had such rapport with the subject of rural white folks in SHY PEOPLE set in Louisiana.)
Furthermore, Russian Slavs always seemed to bet on the wrong horse. When Russians finally adopted Christianity, they chose the Eastern Orthodox Faith than Catholicism. (Certain Slavic groups became Catholics, drawing them closer to the more advanced West.) At the time, the two great centers of Christianity were Rome and Constantinople. Russians bet on the everlasting glory of Constantinople, but it would fall into decline and eventually fall to the Turks whereas the Roman Church would grow bigger and stronger, until it was confronted with the ‘heresy’ of Protestantism. Even though the wars between the Catholics and Protestants were many times more violent than anything between Catholics and Orthodox, the two great Western Churches arrived at a way to tolerate and even cooperate with one another. Besides, even if in opposition, Protestantism was a direct outgrowth of Catholicism. It was all-in-the-family. In contrast, the Orthodox Church evolved in a universe all its own. So, even though Western Europe and Russia were both Christian, there was a cultural-spiritual gulf that could never be closed.
In a way, the prelude to the Slavocaust of the 20th Century was the Napoleonic invasion of Russia. Not only did it lead to the deaths of millions of Russians under an emperor who emerged from the French Revolution but it led to resentment against Russia among radicals and progressives in the coming years.
In one way, Russia was appreciated as the savior that finally broke the back of the increasingly aggressive and arrogant French Empire. Defeat of France meant liberation all across Europe. And yet, in yrs to come, many radicals came to revere Napoleon as a romantic figure who'd once nearly united all of Europe under Enlightenment values. So, from this viewpoint, Russia was not so much the savior of Europe from French domination but the reactionary ditch that destroyed the wheels of revolution. After all, following the downfall of the Napoleonic Order, most of Europe came under aristocratic rule for the next hundred years before it all came tumbling down in the catastrophe of World War I.
In the wake of Napoleon’s defeat, the kings and aristocrats swiftly regained control in nearly all of Europe, France included. Especially because Russia was the most backward part of Europe — it still had serfdom — , its role as the molder of the post-Napoleonic Order didn’t bode well with idealists restless for change. Then, it is understandable why there was a special fury against the Russian order from radicals both within and outside Russia. Russia was seen by radicals as the haystack that broke the camel’s back of the revolution. When the October Revolution happened in 1917, it was the sweetest revenge to finally witness the most backward part of Europe undergo the most radical transformation. The element of revenge against Russia wasn’t only with Jews. It was with radicals and revolutionaries all across Europe. (Jews, along with Mongols, are the only people who conquered Russia. Jews did it again in the 1990s and are planning another Slavocaust.)
As the movie NICHOLAS AND ALEXANDRA finely illustrated, Russia was both a great power and weak power. Immense and limitless in raw materials with a population bigger than any other European country yet burdened by that very size. Also, ruling over so many ethnic groups meant the Russian core would come under constant assault by radical elements of every one of them, from Latvians to Georgians. Also, the concentration of power in the Tsar meant that the fall of that one edifice would throw all of the empire into turmoil, leading to civil war and chaos until a new regime took control with an iron grip.
Even though Russians are racially closer to Anglos and Germans than to Mongols, Turks, or Mexicans, the national character of Russians(and some other Slavs as well) was closer to that of Mexicans: Deficient in spark, initiative, and drive. Mexico was once immense, almost as big as the United States. So, why did it lose the SW territories? Because while Anglos swiftly moved westward to settle new lands and build enterprise, most Mexicans remained in their villages and eat tacos. If Mexicans had had the drive of Anglos, they would have developed the SW territories and turned Mexico into a great power. (The great migration of Mexicans into the US since the 1960s hasn’t been about initiative and spark but the opposite. Because Mexicans can’t do much on their own, they want to come to the US to just work for ‘gringo’.) Russians, to be sure, were far bolder than Mexicans in territorial ambition. They took all of Siberia and even claimed Alaska before stupidly selling it to the US. Still, Russians were far less good in developing than in merely conquering new lands. Look what a handful of Anglos did with Canada compared with what Russians did with all the territory they conquered.
Because Russia was both a great power and a weak power, both a strong man and a sick man, it was seen as predator by some, prey by others. Or as both predator and prey. To the Chinese whose star had fallen in the 19th century, Russia was just another predatory power scrambling to grab parts of North Asia. The Ottomans, also in decline, regarded Russia with growing fear. The British lion both despised and worried about the Russian bear. The Brits, the rulers of the greatest empire in the world in the late 19th century, knew Russia was backward in industry and technology. But the Brits also knew that Russians had embarked on industrialization on a massive scale to catch up with the West. Also, able Germans ran many Russian institutions and industries. Also, the sheer size of Russia intimidated the Brits. British Empire was huge but vulnerable because small numbers of British overlords ruled over increasingly restless natives. The British dominated the seas, but water wasn't as firm as land. British hostility against Russia grew to such intensity that the UK once sided with the Turks against Russia. And the UK also sided with Japan against Russia in the early 20th century. But the real tragedy that would befall the Slavs in the 20th century had to do with Jews and Germans, for reasons different and similar.
Upon German unification under the Prussian helm, the mentality of the Germans began to change. Though a capable people over the centuries, the Germans were too fragmented to be a great power. But the fact that Prussians, though limited in number and territory, could gain a vital foothold in Continental politics was a harbinger of things to come. If tiny Prussia could assert itself as a major player in Europe, what would happen if the German folks were to unite as one? Soon after the unification of German peoples, the new nation overshadowed France, traditionally the great land power in Europe. German victory against France that opposed further unification of Germany was so overwhelming that the French never fully recovered their pride. (Even though France won WWI, it was due to the grand alliance with UK, Russia, and US.) With such power, the Germans began to think in terms of their ‘place in the sun’. It was no longer enough to be part of a good nation, rich nation, or strong nation. Germany had to be a great power, even a world power. But the world was already taken. Brits and French had grabbed much of Africa, Middle East, and Asia. The New World was also colonized and taken. Plenty of Germans settled in the US, but they were losing their links to Germany. So, in order for Germany to become a world power, it had to move eastward and grab territory from vast Russia. And Germans felt justified in this for the same reason Anglo-Americans did in taking the SW territories. Anglos figured, "Mexicans are such useless, clueless, and uninspired bunch of bums, so we proud and tireless Anglos with work ethic should make something of the land." Germans felt the same way. They felt that Russians were too lazy, stupid, and drunk to deserve all that land. Germans could do so much more with it. Why let Russians have all that land and make nothing of it? If Germans took it, they could it up and become a great power. Now, such feelings weren’t necessarily genocidal, just like the Anglo-American conquest of SW territories was really just a land-grab. It was not a racial war on the Mexicans, and indeed, Anglos and Mexicans learned to co-exist in many communities, like we see in PAT GARRETT & BILLY THE KID.
But overtime, certain radical-racist elements of the German Population came to develop a racial rationale for invading and dominating over the Slavs. In their eyes, Slavs(especially Russians) weren’t merely lazy and underachieving whites but ‘untermensch’ whose lot was to serve as helots as Germans or be gradually eliminated to make way for German settlers. Even though the ‘Aryan’ vision of German-ruled Russia was frightening, there was a certain cold logic to it. A people who rule but come to rely on the labor of another people will eventually fall. White Americans in the North and Zionists both understood this. White Americans in the South made a huge mistake by bringing black slave labor from Africa. It made for profits in the short-term but losses in the long-term. Same happened to whites in South Africa who came to rely on black labor. In contrast, whites in the American North and Zionists in Palestine/Israel understood that a people must both rule and do the labor. This is why Jews are safe in Israel whereas whites are all but finished in South Africa. Spartans also failed in the long run because they relied on non-Spartan helots to do most of the work.
Anyway, even though the National Socialists were correct about their ethno-theory-of-management-and-labor, its implementation in Russia would have been ghastly. In order for Russia to be converted into a world of German ownership and labor, the native populations would have to be eliminated by the tens of millions. So, the ethno-theory-of-management-and-labor is morally applicable only in one’s own nation, not in other lands as it'd necessitate either genocide or mass expulsion. For Israel to become a Jewish state, the existing Palestinian population(700,000 of them) had to be removed by massive pogroms and ‘ethnic cleansing’. But at least, the Zionists didn’t kill too many people.
The Nazis, in contrast, had diabolical plans in the East. Even though the Nazis eventually lost the war and suffered horrible war crimes themselves, their Lebensraum plan was partially implemented in conquered areas, and the results were horrific. Even Slavs who had initially greeted the Germans as liberators from Godless communism came to fear the ruthless Germans more than the Soviets. Even though the Nazi Slavocaust ultimately failed, the Russian and other Slavic died in the millions by execution, starvation, and retaliation. To the extent that the Nazi Aryans weren’t merely out to grab some territory — something Europeans have been doing to one another since time immemorial — but carrying out a racial ideology of enslavement and extermination, it was indeed an act of genocide. Thus, the term ‘Slavocaust’ is most appropriate. Even though the brunt of Slavocaust fell on Slavs of the Soviet Union, the Nazis also acted brutally in Poland, vacillating between treating Poles as fellow second-rate Aryans or Slavic scum. And even though Nazi violence against Czechs was far less than toward Poles and Russians, there’s no telling what the long-term plan would have been. Germans, especially of Austrian background, hated Czechs because of bad blood between the two communities in the eras prior to WWI and immediate thereafter when German minorities in Czech-controlled territories were mistreated.
If the Nazi Slavocaust against Russians was blatant enough — the Nazis wore their radical-racist ideology on their sleeve — , it was more complicated with the Jews. Indeed, it could be argued that because Jewish Bolsheviks acted out of ‘social justice’, their war on the Slavosphere wasn’t really genocidal in nature. And it is true enough that Jews didn’t mean to wipe out entire populations of Slavs and replace them with another population. Still, despite all the egalitarian rhetoric, the fact is many Jews were motivated by a powerful animus against Russia. Partly, it was revenge for Russian 'oppression' of Jews. Even though the Jewish victims of the periodic pogroms weren’t exceedingly high(compared to 20th century horrors), Jews knew things were much better for their kind in Western Europe. On the basis of such contrasts, Russia seemed like an especial hell. It seemed even more so when Jews began to move to America. Suddenly, Jews compared Jews-over-here with Jews-over-there, and they concluded Russia as the worst place for Jews.
But there was also the long-existing Jewish view of goyim, especially Christians. Jews hated Christians as the people who stole their religion, their God. Also, Jews, who became adept in business and learning, came to regard the vast majority of Russians as dumb, lazy, and childish morons. Jews hated Russian elites as pompous a**holes and loathed Russian masses as ignorant, stupid, and boorish. So, even though Jewish Semites didn’t have an ideology of enslavement and extermination against the Slavs like the Nazi Aryans did, their radical cause wasn’t merely fueled by idealism and vision of justice. It was driven by animus, hatred, contempt, arrogance, and revanchism.
Jewish Bolsheviks were clever in cloaking their bilious impulses with prophetic promise of a better tomorrow. But in the end, a person is more about what he feels than what he says. If a person hates you, it doesn’t matter how he rationalizes his actions toward you in the name of goodwill and camaraderie. His gut instinct is out to get you. It’s like Jewish supremacists in the US always talk about curing white people of their ‘sins’ of ‘racism’, ‘white supremacism’, and etc. Jews talk like they’re doing whites a favor. But in truth, they are driven by ethnic animus, paranoia, and supremacism. They want to take over as the superior group and simply cannot abide by any goy group that says NO to the Jewish agenda.
If Jews feel contempt for Russian Slavs for being too stupid and lazy, they fear Anglos and Germanics for being too capable. In both cases, Jews act like Bad Faith Doctors who say they’re offering medicine when it’s really poison. Even though some Bolsheviks, Jewish or non-Jewish, were sincere in their hopes for a better world, there were too many nasty, vicious, sadistic, and psychopathic Jews among them who took up the cause because it opened the door to power and control. And in the guise of moral progress, they could wipe out entire classes of enemies. When certain farmers wouldn’t hand over the grain, they were classified as ‘kulaks’ and were eliminated without mercy.
Granted, Jews didn’t do this alone. They worked with the Georgian Stalin who regarded people as pawns. Jews weren’t the only ones with blood-soaked hands, but they were the main drivers. And in the early period of Soviet history, they were the most determined ethnic players at the elite level. (Also, once the ball got rolling, there was no turning back. The Bolshevik terror was so extreme that is the Bolsheviks were to fall, they'd surely be torn limb from limb. Just like it was a zero-sum-game of win everything or lose everything for the Germans when they invaded Russia in WWII, Jewish Bolsheviks knew it was win or lose with nothing in between when Russia fell into the throes of Civil War. So, Jewish Bolsheviks doubled down on the terror with no show of mercy. We see the same psychological pattern among Jews today. They've pushed anti-white and anti-Christian PC so far that they fear it's win or lose; there is no more middle ground. Jews went all in for the jackpot. Jews sure can be degenerate gamblers.)
If history has taught us anything, Jews are the people with the deepest, bitterest hatred. With a nomadic-merchant ‘parasitic’ mentality, Jews have developed this ethno-megalomania that everything exists to be claimed and owned by them. If most people get upset when others try to take their stuff, Jews get upset when others won’t let Jews take their stuff. Granted, there is a partial justification as to why Jews may feel this way. Unlike Vikings and Mongols, Jews generally didn’t just plunder stuff outright. Rather, they came to non-Jewish places and set up businesses or services that expanded economic activity. So, Jews felt the bulk of the wealth should belong to them. This makes some sense, even good sense. If Jews in Russia build up businesses and generate revenue, why shouldn’t they keep most of the profits after taxes? The problem is Jews went further. Since Jews are adept at making money off the land(by means fair or foul), they began to feel that the land itself should belong to them.
For example, since Jews are the best businessmen in Russia, they should have the primary claim to Russia itself. It sounds crazy to us, but it sounds totally logical and justified to Jews. And in some nations, Jews have convinced the native population of the justness of such attitude. Jews did this by promoting the Shoah and presenting Jews as the most tragic, wise, wonderful, funny, endearing, and lovable people. So, many goyim in US and UK want to go out on a limb to help the Jews to take over more and more. It's like fans want their celebrity idols to become richer and richer, even at their own expense. For many cucky goyim, it's not enough to make Jews the richest people in the US and UK. Jews must have de facto ownership of US and UK so that THEY get to decide the national policy. So, if Jews say "America is a nation of immigrants" and that tons of non-whites must come and replace white people, it must be so because Jews are such a wise people, a sacred people, a wonderful people, a genius people. Many white Christians believe that their main mission in life is to appease and serve the noble, tragic, and wise Jews. In their eyes, there is nothing alarming about Jews, as the 2% of the population, controlling over 90% of the media. it only seems right. For white progs, there is nothing wrong with Jews replacing Christianity with Homomania. There is nothing wrong with Jews turning the US from a white nation into a ‘brown’ nation. Jews know best, and they should be allowed to call the shots. If you disagree, you are a ‘white supremacist’ or ‘nazi’. Jew-worship is so ingrained in the hearts and minds of Americans that even after Jewish oligarchs moved in concert to de-platform him, Alex Jones is full of praise of Jews and blaming the censorship on the ‘Chicoms’ or Chinese-Communists. (For some reason, attacking China is not considered a ‘hate speech’ by the Establishment because Jews find it useful to distract people from Jewish Power by making them babble about Yellow Peril.)
Anyway, the communist revolution in Russia(spearheaded by many Jews) led to the deaths of millions of lives by starvation, execution, or hard labor. Many innocents were tortured. Much of arts and culture was ransacked, plundered, stolen, or sold to foreigners. Tens of thousands of Churches were smashed. Slavs came to live in fear. To be sure, plenty of Slavs took part in the Revolution, and they also carried out bloody purges and killed people left and right. But it’s possible that the ‘Russian’ Revolution might not have turned out so extreme if not for the ethnic animus of Jewish Bolsheviks for whom the conflict was a matter of total victory or total defeat. (Ironically, the main threat to Jews came from within the Revolution in the figure of Stalin.) After all, the Kerensky regime after the Tsar’s abdication in February was also socialist, but it was closer to social-democracy than radical communism. It was patriotic, not anti-Russian. And when an election was held in the new Soviet Union, the great majority of the people voted for agro-socialist parties, but the results were nullified by the Bolsheviks who created a vast secret-police apparatus to terrorize and/or kill anyone who might pose a threat to the regime. Even though Stalin the Georgian took it to new heights, we need to keep in mind that Stalin came to power with the help of Jews.
Indeed, Jews miscalculated Josef Stalin, just like the German conservative elites underestimated Adolf Hitler. Jews thought they could manipulate Stalin, and the German conservatives thought they could keep Hitler on a leash. As it turned out, both men were of immense will-to-power and deviousness. In time, both Stalin and Hitler made their allies know who was boss in the grand scheme of things. That said, many Jews played a crucial role in the Soviet system all throughout Stalin’s rule. And Stalin also appointed lots of Jews to rule Eastern European nations that came into Soviet orbit at the end of World War II.
All in all, many Slavs and Eastern Europeans felt the brunt of both Jewish radical-socialism and German radical-racism. In the aftermath of WWI, countless Slavs in Russia and Ukraine were destroyed through the meat-grinder of the Revolution that even went so far as to kill all of the Tsar’s family. It is estimated that at least 3.5 million died in the Great Famine in Ukraine. Stalin wasn’t the only heartless bastard. Jewish Bolsheviks shed no tears for all the dead. And Jews in the West never called on the world to save Slavic Christians from Communism and Jewish mass-killers. (It’s like few Jews cared about the 100,000s of Iraqi women and children killed by Jewish-controlled US sanctions. And Jews sure don’t care about the 500,000 Syrians who died in the recent war due to Jewish machinations with US foreign policy.) Eric Hobsbawm the Jewish historian never expressed any moral outrage over the millions crushed by communism. Like what Madeleine Albright said of all those dead Iraqi kids, Hobsbawn's attitude was "It was worth it."
Jews endlessly bitch about how the world didn’t care when Nazis were killing members of the Tribe, but most Jews around the world were utterly indifferent to millions of Slavs being killed by Stalin and the Jews. Even capitalist Jews in the US and Europe felt closer to Communist Jews in the USSR than with ‘capitalist-kulak’ victims. Even Leon Trotsky, the dearly beloved god-hero of Neocons, didn’t protest Stalin’s forced collectivization program. At the height of the tragedy, Trotsky’s only criticism was it wasn’t radical enough.
Now, all these Jews who took part in the bloodbath justified themselves as agents of History; and if they got carried away, it was due to excessive enthusiasm for Justice. Over-zealous maybe but for noble ends. But, the communist horror was too grim for such self-serving excuses. And the sheer lack of reflection and remorse shown by the Jewish Community suggests a deep animus, arrogance, and contempt for Slavs. (Jews insist all Germans til the end of time must share in the Shoah Guilt, but they treat the Jewish Slavocaust as a tissue to blow their noses with and toss away.) Even though Jewish Bolsheviks didn’t have an explicit program for the extermination of Slavs, their attitude was one of megalomania and contempt. As such, Christian Slavs were seen as expendable cannon-fodder for the Revolution, laying the groundwork for radical policies that would lead to mass terror and deaths. The Slavs were seen as so many guinea pigs to be experimented by all-knowing Jews.
If Russia and Ukraine had majority Jewish populations, would Jewish Bolsheviks have been so reckless in their social experiments? Of course not. Jews hold Jewish lives as precious. They acted the way they did because they saw Slavs as hammer-and-sickle than flesh-and-blood. A people to be molded anyway the Jewish Bolsheviks deemed fit regardless of the human cost. Whether it’s George Soros pushing for Open Borders(and all the chaos that ensues) or Neocons calling for Wars for Israel, Jews don’t care about their consequences to goy lives. Jewish ‘leftists’ may believe in ‘justice’ and ‘equality’ in the abstract, but their emotions are driven by animus, arrogance, hatred, and contempt when dealing with goyim.
One thing for sure, Jewish globo-capitalists didn’t care how many Russians were destroyed by the Jewish looting of the economy in the 1990s. Jews never cared about the Zionism’s impact on Palestinians. Jews don’t care about the effect of Neocon policies on Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, or any other country.
As it happened, it was in Russia that Jews first got the chance to run riot and do as they please. Even though Jewish elites had gained immense fortunes and privileges in certain European nations, it was only with the ‘Russian’ Revolution that a bunch of Jews were flush with near-total power over a nation and could do as they pleased(at least for a time). The result was tragic, indeed catastrophic, leading to cultural destruction and deaths of millions. Back then and even now, Jews feel ZERO accountability for what they did. Jewish moral outrage only concerns the plight of Jews. Of course, on occasion, Jews will prop up some other group as deserving of special victim status, but it is purely strategic. The ONLY reason why Jews make a fuss about Black Slavery and Apartheid is because they are useful in baiting and paralyzing whites with ‘white guilt’. (Never mind Jews played a key role in the slave trade, and never mind Jews were the biggest exploiters of diamond mines and black labor in South Africa. Never mind Israel was the #1 ally of South Africa during Apartheid years, and never mind Mandela had the deepest admiration for Arafat and the PLO. Jews, with their media monopoly and whore-politicians in their pockets, rewrite history as they see it.) That is why Jews keep bringing up Emmit Till over and over but ignore all those dead Palestinians as statistics or faceless victims to be forgotten like yesterday’s papers.
Tragically, the Jewish Slavocaust mentality is still going like the Energizer Bunny. Not only are Jews unrepentant of what they’d done in Russia in the 1990s, they are calling on the US and EU to apply more sanctions on Russia(on cooked up charges) no matter how many people might suffer. As far as Jews are concerned, because the majority of Russians support Vladimir Putin(the New Hitler), they must all be made to suffer and brought to heel. Jews love to play God. They think they should have the right to smite any people and play the game of "Jews giveth, Jews taketh away".
The Slavic peoples suffered greatly in the 20th century due to Slavocaust coming from two directions: Radical Semites and Radical Aryans. Radical Semites thought they knew everything and everything must conform to their agenda. Even though they adopted a 'universal' ideology, it was used to serve their tribal supremacist ambition against Slavs-as-cattle, just like the pigs in George Orwell’s ANIMAL FARM talk a good game about ‘equality’ but lord over the other animals.
Even today, notice how Jews really operate on the basis of "Is it good for the Jews?" but mask their tribal agenda with talk of ‘social justice’. Funny how this 'social justice' only makes Jews richer and more powerful at the expense of everyone else. If Jews really care for equal justice, who does Israel get showered with billions in aid while Iran is hit with sanctions? Doesn’t Israel have 300 illegal nukes while Iran has none? Why favor Israel over Iran? It makes no sense to waste goodwill on Jews. Jews simply feel, "We are smarter, we are better, we are holier, and we should rule over you, and you exist to serve us and obey us and believe everything we tell you. If not, you’re an ‘anti-Semite’ and ‘Nazi’." In the US, Jews force all of us to support their mass tyranny over Palestinians. Jews, who are only 2% of the population, get to control over 90% of media and virtually all internet platforms. Yet, we never hear of Jewish supremacism or Jewish privilege. Instead, Jews cover up their immense power by making people fixate and foam at the mouth over ‘White Privilege’.
In other words, Jews have learned NOTHING from the Slavocaust. Of course, Jews remember the Holocaust and remind us to erect more monuments and watch more Holocaust movies and weep for Jews and die for Jews and worship Jews. But Jews, by and large, feel zero accountability for their role in the Slavocaust. Also, they would rather not ponder the perverse irony that both Jews and Nazi Aryans took part in the Slavocaust. Jews did it from the ‘far left’ and Nazis did it from the ‘far right’. But then, to the extent that Jewish Bolsheviks felt profoundly Jewish despite their universalist and egalitarian ideology, they were subconsciously motivated by ‘far right’ ultra-tribal passions: "Is it good for the Jews?"
Well, if Jews learned nothing from the Slavocaust, did the Germans learn something? No. Even though Germans endlessly kvetch about their boo-hoo-hoo guilt for the Holocaust, they now feel NOTHING about what they did to Slavs in Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Russia. Germans feel nothing about the millions of Slavs they'd slaughtered in WWII and, furthermore, now work in concert with George Soros to push massive invading armies of Muslims and Africans into Eastern Europe. And Germany is fully on-board with the Jewish-controlled US to ‘punish’ Russia no matter how many people may be direly affected. Even though Germans no longer feel a murderous zeal for Slavocaust(as Jews still do), they feel no conscience or guilt for all the horrors they’d visited on Poles, Czechs, Ukrainians, and Russians during WWII. If Aryans and Semites had one thing in common in the 21st Century, it was their supremacist contempt for Slavs as Inferiors. Aryans chose extermination but failed in WWII. Semites slaughtered millions of Slavs in the name of 'progress'.
We must remember the Slavocaust and make sure it doesn’t happen again. To prevent another such tragedy, we must call out on the depraved evil that has become of Jewish Power.
"Over the last few years, many outside observers have noted a seemingly very odd political situation in Ukraine. That unfortunate country possesses powerful militant groups, whose public symbols, stated ideology, and political ancestry all unmistakably mark them as Neo-Nazis. Yet those violent Neo-Nazi elements are all being bankrolled and controlled by a Jewish Oligarch who holds dual Israeli citizenship. Furthermore, that peculiar alliance had been mid-wifed and blessed by some of America’s leading Jewish Neocon figures, such as Victoria Nuland, who have successfully used their media influence to keep such explosive facts away from the American public.
At first glance, a close relationship between Jewish Israelis and European Neo-Nazis seems as grotesque and bizarre a misalliance as one could imagine, but after recently reading Brenner’s fascinating book, my perspective quickly shifted. Indeed, the main difference between then and now is that during the 1930s, Zionist factions represented a very insignificant junior partner to a powerful Third Reich, while these days it is the Nazis who occupy the role of eager suppliants to the formidable power of International Zionism, which now so heavily dominates the American political system and through it, much of the world."
The gulf between US and Russia owes to just one thing: The Jewish factor.
Since the end of the Cold War, the US has become more servile to Jewish power with each passing year.
Meanwhile, since 2000, Russia has become less servile to Jewish power with each passing year.
So, it’s not really about US vs Russia. It’s about Servility to Jewish Globo-Homo Supremacism vs Independence(relatively speaking) from Jewish Globo-Homo Supremacism.
IF not for the Jewish ethno-supremacist hatred for Russia, I don’t think US-Russian relations would be so bad. It wouldn’t be close but it would be cordial and respectful. It is Jewish Hysteria that is so afraid that white gentiles make takes cues from Russia and throw off the Jewish Globo-Homo yoke. That’s about it.