I have read about 100 impressions and reviews of the interview, and have written some myself. I think Tucker Carlson channels a certain guile-free credulous American, who does not know anything more than presented in mainstream media, but wants some questions answered. He is much smarter than he presents as being. Thanks Tucker.
Some links and excerpts reflecting views and insights:
Tucker Carlson is a ‘traitor’ – Boris Johnson , Boris Johnson has invoked Hitler in denouncing the journalist’s sit-down with the Russian leader as an “unholy charade”
Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson had a mini-meltdown after being exposed during the Tucker Carlson-Vladimir Putin interview for sabotaging the Ukrainian peace deal. During the interview, Putin confirmed reporting that first emerged last year about Johnson’s role in prolonging the war.
David Arahamiya, the leader of Ukraine’s ruling party, revealed that Johnson had scuppered a peace deal that would have put an end to hostilities just a few months after the Russian invasion. Putin reiterated in his interview with Tucker Carlson that Russia supports a negotiated settlement with Ukraine, and plans were very much underway to making that happen before Boris Johnson stopped it.
Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin , whose daughter was killed by Ukrainian assassins, presents a stripped-down analysis: Tucker, Putin, and the Apocalypse
It is not about the content of the interview with Putin. It is the fact that a person like Tucker Carlson is visiting a country like Russia to meet a political figure like Putin at such a critical time. Tucker Carlson's trip to Moscow might be the last chance to stop the disappearance of humanity. The gigantic billion-strong attention to this pivotal interview from humanity itself, as well as the frenzied, inhuman rage of Biden, the globalists, and the world's citizens intoxicated with decay, testify to humanity's awareness of the seriousness of the situation.
The world can only be saved by stopping now. For that, America must choose Trump. And Tucker Carlson. And Elon Musk. And Abbott. Then we get a chance to pause on the brink of the abyss. Compared to this, everything else is secondary. Liberalism and its agenda have led humanity to a dead end. Now the choice is this: either liberals or humanity. Tucker Carlson chooses humanity, which is why he came to Moscow to meet Putin. The whole world understood why he came and how important it is.
Eleni sent the Russian analysis of American politics above, which is oversimplified in her view, and these 3 essays from Russia-specialist, Andrew Korybko, which are not.
Putin Subverted The Mainstream & Alternative Media’s Expectations In His Interview With Tucker
The first takeaway for average viewers/readers is that American foreign policy is actually controlled by elite members of its permanent bureaucracy (‘deep state’) such as those in the CIA, not the President, since Clinton and Bush’s initial interests in cooperating with Russia were scuttled by that agency. The second point is that foreign meddling in Ukraine turned the question of its people’s identity into a geopolitical weapon for weakening Russia, which wants to live in peace and prosperity with that country.
Third, President Putin only commenced his country’s special operation after feeling that the failure to do so would lead to irreversible security challenges that risked culminating with time in Russia’s Balkanization, which he explicitly claimed that the West is pursuing as a means of containing China. The fourth point is that it’s this obsession with dominance among its policymaking elite (i.e. CIA) that’s responsible for destabilizing the world, with the final point being that he wants peace via diplomacy.
As was pointed out earlier, he isn’t the monster or madman that the MSM portrays him as, though he also isn’t the anti-Western revolutionary mastermind that the AMC claims either. President Putin is simply an apolitical pragmatist that solely wants to preserve his country’s conservative-nationalist society, robustly develop its economy, and ensure its objective national security interests, all while cooperating with others in pursuit of mutual benefit. He’s neither a villain nor a hero, but just himself.
Why’d Putin Spend So Much Time Talking About Poland In His Interview With Tucker?
Warsaw’s nostalgia for its interwar control over what’s nowadays’ Western Ukraine as well as its earlier control over a swath of that modern country during the Commonwealth era is why it plays a leading role in this conflict.
Prior to the special operation, the Polish intelligentsia were the first external actors to plant the seeds of Ukrainian identity into its people’s minds, which they did as a means of legitimizing their control over the former lands of Kievan Rus whose people’s ethno-religious identity was different than their own. As President Putin explained, Warsaw’s meddling played a major part in the events that later gave rise to some of its own people’s self-proclaimed separate identity that others then exploited for their own ends.
It's therefore impossible for anyone to have a solid understanding of current events and the historical processes that gave rise to them without learning about Poland’s inextricable role in both. The past laid the basis upon which present developments are unfolding since modern-day Ukrainian identity wouldn’t have taken shape nor would the ongoing proxy war have unfolded without Poland’s participation. These facts suggest that peace isn’t possible without Poland playing some sort of role in this process as well.
Did Putin Really Compare Himself To Hitler & Justify The Nazis’ Invasion Of Poland?
Hitler could have backed down, but he wasn’t one to take no for an answer, plus he was obsessed with reincorporating Imperial Germany’s lost regions prior to expanding into the Slavic East for “Lebensraum”. That’s why he decided to push his plans forward instead of risking the scenario of them becoming unattainable if the incipient (but at that time illusory) anti-Nazi alliance strengthened. This is a valid point that doesn’t equate to President Putin comparing himself to Hitler or justifying the latter’s invasion.
Only ill-intentioned propagandists would draw a parallel between the events leading up to the Nazis’ invasion of Poland in 1939 and those that preceded Russia’s special operation in 2022. These are two completely different conflicts that can’t be compared by any honest observers. President Putin brought up the first-mentioned simply to correct the historical record after Poland led the EU in laying equal blame on the Soviets for World War II in 2019 and to add further context to the ‘Ukrainian Question’.
As a history buff who rarely gives interviews to Western journalists, the Russian leader probably didn’t realize at the time how his impromptu summary of events leading up to that conflict would be spun, but he obviously didn’t intend to compare himself to Hitler to justify the Nazis’ invasion of Poland.
The US definitely poisons relations in a number of countries. Color Revolutions have caused all sorts of undemocratic problems in the name of democracy.
It should be appalling to most nations and Americans that Yugoslavia was torn apart in complete violation of law. Canadian archives released in Dec 2022 reveal a lot about how much of the narrative aimed at Yugoslavia was a complete fabrication created by the US.
Putin downplayed the US relationship with Pres Yeltsin. The US spent $50 billion to get Yeltsin elected and place oligarchs in positions to feed resources to the US. The US leaders bragged about the success in putting Yeltsin in power for many years in a number of public sources like Time from July 1996 and other more scholarly works.
The history lesson is not one sided. Poles celebrate battles from centuries ago today as well. Lithuania still mourns the loss of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth founded in the 1500s. Americans have no idea. The cultural and political identities of this region are deep.
Whoever Putin's history lesson was specifically targeted at is one thing. What everyone got a sense of is, what it means to tangle with a culture that is 1,000 years old.
The US is willfully ignorant of history. It is not lazy. Historic amnesia is part of the American identity. Forget Europe. We are a new people. It has negative and positive aspects. One result is clear though. Americans have no clue about historic motivations of much of Europe. Americans often try to push history aside. This is true for their chosen adversary in particular. Misunderstanding an opponent never goes well.
Russia lost over 20 million people fighting Nazi Germany. They hate fascists. The US partnered and promoted fascists like Stepan Bandera and Mykola Lebed. The US partnered with Nazi LtGen Gehlen in East Europe to support Ukrainian fascism.
History matters.
Thank you. And for what it's worth, I'm sorry the US tore up Serbia and destroyed so much. And the EU participated. I'm not sure what can be done, but it was wrong and based on lies.
I, like many others here, did learn much new from the Putin-Tucker discussion. After all, avidly reading BMA and several similar authors (Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter, Simplicius76, and many more) our knowledge is well above our day to day peers. This knowledge is also very helpful when countering narratives espoused by legacy media and their drones.
Thank you Aleks for sharing a bit of your family's personal tragedy.
Thank you Piquet for fixing the author of this article 😁😁
The beauty of Slavic languages :) Kraj can also mean land, or part (of the world) like in the names of some Russian regions (Krasnojarskiy kraj). But in the case of Ukraine it comes from Okraina which means borderland. Hopefully there are no NAFOids here to wine that krajina means country in Ukrainian. :)
Thanks for sharing your background a bit. That explains the empathy you always project.
I have always wondered why there is such animosity and hostility to Slavs in the West through the centuries.
During the interview when he was going through the part where Lenin gave parts of Russia (especially Odessa) to “Ukraine” he casually said he didn’t know.
I think he does.
There was a certain group that was over represented in western Ukraine who have their origins in Poland. That same group happened to compose 80% of the Bolshevik leaders.
I think that might have something to do with it.
Do you have any theories or facts as to why Lenin (and Stalin) did that?
I don’t think your alone in seeing the poison the West elites brings to a society. Wishing they will vanish is a good wish and highly likely for this War is now against the Elites. The social trust is gone and no one voted for their policies of Forever War.
The elites stand alone now without a populace they can influence with lies.
My impression of interview is that people will see Putin as real and contradicts the fearful bogeyman living under the child’s bed.
People glean much from listening to someone real. Stark difference from the lies parading as the truth we are bombarded with.
Great input. And thanks for sharing your family's background.
The last part you mentioned was Putin's secondary audience, the Ukrainians. Basically, "Once your radical element is gone, we are Slavs together."
I hit a luck last night, whilst in bed, seeing a link to Tucker Carslon appearing at the World Government Summit after Putin's interview (his team planned well too). It was helluva interesting!
Thank you very much for further shaping my takeaways from this two-hour talk. I followed intensely, but reading about the »points« afterwards is very helpful, it's called learning, isn’t it? Two statements I do not agree with: Lenin and Stalin were no »morons« but highly intelligent people with a deep conviction to engineer the world into a (socialist, communist, Marxist) paradise. Lenin, who failed for twenty years but always stayed their course, succeeded. Watch him, arriving from Finland in Petrograd in spring 1917 — the Bolshevics greeted him but did not at all agree to his further action-program. He pushed it through (including against Stalin!) and won. An amazing historical figure of mega-proportions, in my view. But, of course, a fanatical social engineer and the latter will always, always turn out ... well, not so good. Same for Stalin, who probably was the main designer of the Soviet Union structure (federal state, republics with the right to secede). And Stalin was a huge winner plus: he inherited a rubbish heap of a state and left a world power. What else would you expect from a state leader?
And I do not agree with the »German gene« that you threw at us. Germany is a failed nation always supplied the plying blocs for other powers such as France in particular. We never managed to build a centralized nation state, and when we did (Bismarck!), it was a compromise but worked wonders. The British destroyed it by (mainly) proxying France (and the USA in the end with another type of social engineer, the exact opposite of Lenin: Wilson!). National socialism was another attempt, much like the nation-building attempt of the so-called Ukraine. Hitler’s race ideology also served social engineering purposes (master race, slave races, useless human animals to be murdered …). Failed again. The French becoming a »victory power« without even fighting (masterful de Gaulle) insisted on forming a FEDERAL republic again such as they are used to play with, one part against the other and all for their national interest. Now we are woke, »nation« is one of the most mainstream-detested words here, next to »nazi«, by the way.
Is there hope for a German centralized nation state, acknowledged by the people? I don’t know, toon many there are too manny non-Germans here who do not and will not accept a German cultural identy. Simply because the mainsream does not offer one, nobody wants one. I assume, therefore, »Germany« will become a void, like in the Thirty Year War, neighbours will play with parts for the benefit of their national interest. It truly is a failed nation. For me anyway. We’ll see …
They might have done several good things for Russia, without any doubt. However, as President Putin once said, the Bolsheviks effectively placed a "nuclear bomb" under Russia, which eventually exploded during Gorbachev's tenure. Therefore, we might discuss the short-term, medium-term, and long-term efficiency and achievements of these figures.
Germans:
Unfortunately, Germans have been influenced by foreign powers since they consolidated under the German Empire (Deutsches Kaiserreich). Some might argue that this influence dates back even before then. Today's Germany is a very good example of this. In the past, it (foreign influence) was not as visible at first glance. Today, Germany is openly submitting itself to the Western Empire. And yes, the people follow (my reference to the genes), although the farmers are publicly expressing their dissatisfaction.
It's not my fault.
But I completely understand you and hope things will improve for you guys in the future.
It is obvious that they made a mistake, however to blame them for the current tragedy is too much. It is more a mistake that was used by the CIA Gladio operation.
I totally disagree with Lenin views but at the time include Novarussia into Ukraine was useful to promote socialism in Ukriane. Novarussia was one of the most pro soviet places in Russia.
Later Stalin also did made the mistake of giving a UN sit to Ukraine and Belarus. Again logical if we think that Soviet Union was in a perpetual disadvantage in voting. However if give tools to the CIA to artificially promote divisions inside the URSS and specially inside the Russian people.
The absurdity derived from considering that Russians in Belarus and Ukraine are a people colonised and should have there right of self determination.
Lenin ideas were great for all really colonised countries in the world but are absurd applied to Ukriane and Russia. The contradiction reach the level of include really other “people” in the Russian federation but not people that are absolutely fully Russian.
And I know well what I am taking about. I am Spanish, my wife is Belarussian. I have been siting in tables many times with Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians.
They are literally the same people, not even the minor regional differences.
A German from Bavaria and a German from Hamburg are far more different between them.
A French from Toulouse and from Britanny
A Italian from Venice and from Napoli
All those are far more different between them than a guy from Ukraine and from Moscow
Ironically Ukrainians non living under western influence know it well. All Ukrainians I know living in Belarus (apart from one that is very pro Ukraine) are hardcore pro Russia.
What is even more sad is that the pro Ukrainian one, is married with a russian woman whose daughter is a volunteer in the russian army.
Of course. That's why I mentioned that they were only a PART of the problem. Decades of nationalism being cultivated by Western agencies definitely were a more significant factor of influence.
There was one aspect of the interview that I found interesting.
It was not what it contained, and thank you for your prescient analysis of it, but what was omitted.
Namely, any reference to religion or Christianity.
In almost every wide ranging domestic speech or interview given by Putin in recent years, he always references the strong Christian roots and traditions of Russia, and their importance in the daily life of the state and the people.
Perhaps it was there and I missed it, if so, just ignore these ramblings.
But if not, it would good to know why.
Particularly in view of the assault that has been launched by Kiev, presumably at the insistence of Nuland and DC, on the Ukraine Orthodox Church since the start of the conflict.
In that context, it would seem to have been a topic that warranted a bit of exploration.
Pomaze Bog Srbine Moj , In some ways Vladimir Putin is politically like the Character in the movie Scarface Tony Montana . " Me , I don't have that problem , I always tell the truth., even when I lie
Re: Denazification - I'm 100% in favor of the permanent elimination model. Unfortunately this introduces the need to capture the entire territory including Western Ukraine. This also hasn't been the style of the modern Russian leadership. As also recounted in the interview, the willingness to compromise in the 2010's was only spit on by Russia's interlocutors. It is a serious dilemma.
One would hope the European heads of state realize, that eventually, the war will end - simply because Ukraine's population can't sustain today's intensity for more than a few years. After the foreign funding stops, many of the revived fascists who European funds are boosting today, will turn West and bring their political model with them - and will be quite capable of unseating the pro-US liberals who created the perfect conditions for them. (they'll still be pro-US unfortunately)
History is complex and every politicians interpretation has an agenda .. I recommend this critique for deeper understanding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8puAFFV8Gc .. its pretty objective
A good analysis or at least one that conforms to many of my own views on the topic!
My take was also that the history lesson was intended as a marker that Putin was speaking to a specific audience, albeit the course of the monologue was perplexing. I believe Putin was broadly trying to make the points that you list, and others outlined in the comments. Neverthless I don't think anyone in the West is listening. I mix in many educated and [knowledeable?] circles and no one I meet does anything else than parrot the official line. I doubt this interview will change that situation. People have too much sense of self invested in maintaining their world view.
On a broader stage though, Putin was almost certainly explaining to a series of people outside the West the situation as Russia see it, why it came to pass and the likely outcome in the future. It was maybe his way of helping to get across the Russian perspective to decision makers and influencers in the wider world. And ta least he can honestly say he tried to open the door to some sort of negotiated settlement, and that appears to have been (publically at least) spurned by the USA. Another own goal by the West and contrary to our and my interests.
I have read about 100 impressions and reviews of the interview, and have written some myself. I think Tucker Carlson channels a certain guile-free credulous American, who does not know anything more than presented in mainstream media, but wants some questions answered. He is much smarter than he presents as being. Thanks Tucker.
Some links and excerpts reflecting views and insights:
Tucker Carlson is a ‘traitor’ – Boris Johnson , Boris Johnson has invoked Hitler in denouncing the journalist’s sit-down with the Russian leader as an “unholy charade”
https://swentr.site/news/592240-boris-johnson-tucker-putin-traitor/
Former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson had a mini-meltdown after being exposed during the Tucker Carlson-Vladimir Putin interview for sabotaging the Ukrainian peace deal. During the interview, Putin confirmed reporting that first emerged last year about Johnson’s role in prolonging the war.
David Arahamiya, the leader of Ukraine’s ruling party, revealed that Johnson had scuppered a peace deal that would have put an end to hostilities just a few months after the Russian invasion. Putin reiterated in his interview with Tucker Carlson that Russia supports a negotiated settlement with Ukraine, and plans were very much underway to making that happen before Boris Johnson stopped it.
https://modernity.news/2024/02/10/boris-johnson-has-meltdown-after-being-exposed-for-sabotaging-ukraine-peace-deal/
Russian political philosopher Alexander Dugin , whose daughter was killed by Ukrainian assassins, presents a stripped-down analysis: Tucker, Putin, and the Apocalypse
It is not about the content of the interview with Putin. It is the fact that a person like Tucker Carlson is visiting a country like Russia to meet a political figure like Putin at such a critical time. Tucker Carlson's trip to Moscow might be the last chance to stop the disappearance of humanity. The gigantic billion-strong attention to this pivotal interview from humanity itself, as well as the frenzied, inhuman rage of Biden, the globalists, and the world's citizens intoxicated with decay, testify to humanity's awareness of the seriousness of the situation.
The world can only be saved by stopping now. For that, America must choose Trump. And Tucker Carlson. And Elon Musk. And Abbott. Then we get a chance to pause on the brink of the abyss. Compared to this, everything else is secondary. Liberalism and its agenda have led humanity to a dead end. Now the choice is this: either liberals or humanity. Tucker Carlson chooses humanity, which is why he came to Moscow to meet Putin. The whole world understood why he came and how important it is.
https://www.sott.net/article/488755-Tucker-Putin-and-the-Apocalypse
Eleni sent the Russian analysis of American politics above, which is oversimplified in her view, and these 3 essays from Russia-specialist, Andrew Korybko, which are not.
Putin Subverted The Mainstream & Alternative Media’s Expectations In His Interview With Tucker
The first takeaway for average viewers/readers is that American foreign policy is actually controlled by elite members of its permanent bureaucracy (‘deep state’) such as those in the CIA, not the President, since Clinton and Bush’s initial interests in cooperating with Russia were scuttled by that agency. The second point is that foreign meddling in Ukraine turned the question of its people’s identity into a geopolitical weapon for weakening Russia, which wants to live in peace and prosperity with that country.
Third, President Putin only commenced his country’s special operation after feeling that the failure to do so would lead to irreversible security challenges that risked culminating with time in Russia’s Balkanization, which he explicitly claimed that the West is pursuing as a means of containing China. The fourth point is that it’s this obsession with dominance among its policymaking elite (i.e. CIA) that’s responsible for destabilizing the world, with the final point being that he wants peace via diplomacy.
As was pointed out earlier, he isn’t the monster or madman that the MSM portrays him as, though he also isn’t the anti-Western revolutionary mastermind that the AMC claims either. President Putin is simply an apolitical pragmatist that solely wants to preserve his country’s conservative-nationalist society, robustly develop its economy, and ensure its objective national security interests, all while cooperating with others in pursuit of mutual benefit. He’s neither a villain nor a hero, but just himself.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/putin-subverted-the-mainstream-and
Why’d Putin Spend So Much Time Talking About Poland In His Interview With Tucker?
Warsaw’s nostalgia for its interwar control over what’s nowadays’ Western Ukraine as well as its earlier control over a swath of that modern country during the Commonwealth era is why it plays a leading role in this conflict.
Prior to the special operation, the Polish intelligentsia were the first external actors to plant the seeds of Ukrainian identity into its people’s minds, which they did as a means of legitimizing their control over the former lands of Kievan Rus whose people’s ethno-religious identity was different than their own. As President Putin explained, Warsaw’s meddling played a major part in the events that later gave rise to some of its own people’s self-proclaimed separate identity that others then exploited for their own ends.
It's therefore impossible for anyone to have a solid understanding of current events and the historical processes that gave rise to them without learning about Poland’s inextricable role in both. The past laid the basis upon which present developments are unfolding since modern-day Ukrainian identity wouldn’t have taken shape nor would the ongoing proxy war have unfolded without Poland’s participation. These facts suggest that peace isn’t possible without Poland playing some sort of role in this process as well.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/whyd-putin-spend-so-much-time-talking
Did Putin Really Compare Himself To Hitler & Justify The Nazis’ Invasion Of Poland?
Hitler could have backed down, but he wasn’t one to take no for an answer, plus he was obsessed with reincorporating Imperial Germany’s lost regions prior to expanding into the Slavic East for “Lebensraum”. That’s why he decided to push his plans forward instead of risking the scenario of them becoming unattainable if the incipient (but at that time illusory) anti-Nazi alliance strengthened. This is a valid point that doesn’t equate to President Putin comparing himself to Hitler or justifying the latter’s invasion.
Only ill-intentioned propagandists would draw a parallel between the events leading up to the Nazis’ invasion of Poland in 1939 and those that preceded Russia’s special operation in 2022. These are two completely different conflicts that can’t be compared by any honest observers. President Putin brought up the first-mentioned simply to correct the historical record after Poland led the EU in laying equal blame on the Soviets for World War II in 2019 and to add further context to the ‘Ukrainian Question’.
As a history buff who rarely gives interviews to Western journalists, the Russian leader probably didn’t realize at the time how his impromptu summary of events leading up to that conflict would be spun, but he obviously didn’t intend to compare himself to Hitler to justify the Nazis’ invasion of Poland.
https://korybko.substack.com/p/did-putin-really-compare-himself
Respect, thank you for your explanations, John!
Excellent, as always.
Very good analysis. Thank you.
The US definitely poisons relations in a number of countries. Color Revolutions have caused all sorts of undemocratic problems in the name of democracy.
It should be appalling to most nations and Americans that Yugoslavia was torn apart in complete violation of law. Canadian archives released in Dec 2022 reveal a lot about how much of the narrative aimed at Yugoslavia was a complete fabrication created by the US.
Putin downplayed the US relationship with Pres Yeltsin. The US spent $50 billion to get Yeltsin elected and place oligarchs in positions to feed resources to the US. The US leaders bragged about the success in putting Yeltsin in power for many years in a number of public sources like Time from July 1996 and other more scholarly works.
The history lesson is not one sided. Poles celebrate battles from centuries ago today as well. Lithuania still mourns the loss of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth founded in the 1500s. Americans have no idea. The cultural and political identities of this region are deep.
Whoever Putin's history lesson was specifically targeted at is one thing. What everyone got a sense of is, what it means to tangle with a culture that is 1,000 years old.
The US is willfully ignorant of history. It is not lazy. Historic amnesia is part of the American identity. Forget Europe. We are a new people. It has negative and positive aspects. One result is clear though. Americans have no clue about historic motivations of much of Europe. Americans often try to push history aside. This is true for their chosen adversary in particular. Misunderstanding an opponent never goes well.
Russia lost over 20 million people fighting Nazi Germany. They hate fascists. The US partnered and promoted fascists like Stepan Bandera and Mykola Lebed. The US partnered with Nazi LtGen Gehlen in East Europe to support Ukrainian fascism.
History matters.
Thank you. And for what it's worth, I'm sorry the US tore up Serbia and destroyed so much. And the EU participated. I'm not sure what can be done, but it was wrong and based on lies.
Thank you! I appreciate your words.
I, like many others here, did learn much new from the Putin-Tucker discussion. After all, avidly reading BMA and several similar authors (Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter, Simplicius76, and many more) our knowledge is well above our day to day peers. This knowledge is also very helpful when countering narratives espoused by legacy media and their drones.
Thank you Aleks for sharing a bit of your family's personal tragedy.
Thank you Piquet for fixing the author of this article 😁😁
Cheers from Cheyenne!
^ First line; did NOT learn much new..... maybe I should hire an editor....
I like your humor :D And thank you :)))
The beauty of Slavic languages :) Kraj can also mean land, or part (of the world) like in the names of some Russian regions (Krasnojarskiy kraj). But in the case of Ukraine it comes from Okraina which means borderland. Hopefully there are no NAFOids here to wine that krajina means country in Ukrainian. :)
Thanks for sharing your background a bit. That explains the empathy you always project.
I have always wondered why there is such animosity and hostility to Slavs in the West through the centuries.
Thanks, for your further explanations ;) I fully agree!
During the interview when he was going through the part where Lenin gave parts of Russia (especially Odessa) to “Ukraine” he casually said he didn’t know.
I think he does.
There was a certain group that was over represented in western Ukraine who have their origins in Poland. That same group happened to compose 80% of the Bolshevik leaders.
I think that might have something to do with it.
Do you have any theories or facts as to why Lenin (and Stalin) did that?
To be honest... my knowledge about them is not good enough to make some valid assumptions. That's why I rather choose to not do so...
Even though, I have some thoughts.
I don’t think your alone in seeing the poison the West elites brings to a society. Wishing they will vanish is a good wish and highly likely for this War is now against the Elites. The social trust is gone and no one voted for their policies of Forever War.
The elites stand alone now without a populace they can influence with lies.
My impression of interview is that people will see Putin as real and contradicts the fearful bogeyman living under the child’s bed.
People glean much from listening to someone real. Stark difference from the lies parading as the truth we are bombarded with.
Great input. And thanks for sharing your family's background.
The last part you mentioned was Putin's secondary audience, the Ukrainians. Basically, "Once your radical element is gone, we are Slavs together."
I hit a luck last night, whilst in bed, seeing a link to Tucker Carslon appearing at the World Government Summit after Putin's interview (his team planned well too). It was helluva interesting!
https://mikehampton.substack.com/p/tucker-carlson-world-government-summit-2024
Thank you very much for further shaping my takeaways from this two-hour talk. I followed intensely, but reading about the »points« afterwards is very helpful, it's called learning, isn’t it? Two statements I do not agree with: Lenin and Stalin were no »morons« but highly intelligent people with a deep conviction to engineer the world into a (socialist, communist, Marxist) paradise. Lenin, who failed for twenty years but always stayed their course, succeeded. Watch him, arriving from Finland in Petrograd in spring 1917 — the Bolshevics greeted him but did not at all agree to his further action-program. He pushed it through (including against Stalin!) and won. An amazing historical figure of mega-proportions, in my view. But, of course, a fanatical social engineer and the latter will always, always turn out ... well, not so good. Same for Stalin, who probably was the main designer of the Soviet Union structure (federal state, republics with the right to secede). And Stalin was a huge winner plus: he inherited a rubbish heap of a state and left a world power. What else would you expect from a state leader?
And I do not agree with the »German gene« that you threw at us. Germany is a failed nation always supplied the plying blocs for other powers such as France in particular. We never managed to build a centralized nation state, and when we did (Bismarck!), it was a compromise but worked wonders. The British destroyed it by (mainly) proxying France (and the USA in the end with another type of social engineer, the exact opposite of Lenin: Wilson!). National socialism was another attempt, much like the nation-building attempt of the so-called Ukraine. Hitler’s race ideology also served social engineering purposes (master race, slave races, useless human animals to be murdered …). Failed again. The French becoming a »victory power« without even fighting (masterful de Gaulle) insisted on forming a FEDERAL republic again such as they are used to play with, one part against the other and all for their national interest. Now we are woke, »nation« is one of the most mainstream-detested words here, next to »nazi«, by the way.
Is there hope for a German centralized nation state, acknowledged by the people? I don’t know, toon many there are too manny non-Germans here who do not and will not accept a German cultural identy. Simply because the mainsream does not offer one, nobody wants one. I assume, therefore, »Germany« will become a void, like in the Thirty Year War, neighbours will play with parts for the benefit of their national interest. It truly is a failed nation. For me anyway. We’ll see …
Hello Jörg-M,
I appreciate your contribution. Thank you.
Lenin/Stalin:
They might have done several good things for Russia, without any doubt. However, as President Putin once said, the Bolsheviks effectively placed a "nuclear bomb" under Russia, which eventually exploded during Gorbachev's tenure. Therefore, we might discuss the short-term, medium-term, and long-term efficiency and achievements of these figures.
Germans:
Unfortunately, Germans have been influenced by foreign powers since they consolidated under the German Empire (Deutsches Kaiserreich). Some might argue that this influence dates back even before then. Today's Germany is a very good example of this. In the past, it (foreign influence) was not as visible at first glance. Today, Germany is openly submitting itself to the Western Empire. And yes, the people follow (my reference to the genes), although the farmers are publicly expressing their dissatisfaction.
It's not my fault.
But I completely understand you and hope things will improve for you guys in the future.
Take care.
About Lenin and Stalin and Ukraine.
It is obvious that they made a mistake, however to blame them for the current tragedy is too much. It is more a mistake that was used by the CIA Gladio operation.
I totally disagree with Lenin views but at the time include Novarussia into Ukraine was useful to promote socialism in Ukriane. Novarussia was one of the most pro soviet places in Russia.
Later Stalin also did made the mistake of giving a UN sit to Ukraine and Belarus. Again logical if we think that Soviet Union was in a perpetual disadvantage in voting. However if give tools to the CIA to artificially promote divisions inside the URSS and specially inside the Russian people.
The absurdity derived from considering that Russians in Belarus and Ukraine are a people colonised and should have there right of self determination.
Lenin ideas were great for all really colonised countries in the world but are absurd applied to Ukriane and Russia. The contradiction reach the level of include really other “people” in the Russian federation but not people that are absolutely fully Russian.
And I know well what I am taking about. I am Spanish, my wife is Belarussian. I have been siting in tables many times with Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians.
They are literally the same people, not even the minor regional differences.
A German from Bavaria and a German from Hamburg are far more different between them.
A French from Toulouse and from Britanny
A Italian from Venice and from Napoli
All those are far more different between them than a guy from Ukraine and from Moscow
Ironically Ukrainians non living under western influence know it well. All Ukrainians I know living in Belarus (apart from one that is very pro Ukraine) are hardcore pro Russia.
What is even more sad is that the pro Ukrainian one, is married with a russian woman whose daughter is a volunteer in the russian army.
That is the level of civil war in this conflict
Of course. That's why I mentioned that they were only a PART of the problem. Decades of nationalism being cultivated by Western agencies definitely were a more significant factor of influence.
Thanks for your explanation on the hostage exchange it's moderated my feelings on the matter.
There was one aspect of the interview that I found interesting.
It was not what it contained, and thank you for your prescient analysis of it, but what was omitted.
Namely, any reference to religion or Christianity.
In almost every wide ranging domestic speech or interview given by Putin in recent years, he always references the strong Christian roots and traditions of Russia, and their importance in the daily life of the state and the people.
Perhaps it was there and I missed it, if so, just ignore these ramblings.
But if not, it would good to know why.
Particularly in view of the assault that has been launched by Kiev, presumably at the insistence of Nuland and DC, on the Ukraine Orthodox Church since the start of the conflict.
In that context, it would seem to have been a topic that warranted a bit of exploration.
Pomaze Bog Srbine Moj , In some ways Vladimir Putin is politically like the Character in the movie Scarface Tony Montana . " Me , I don't have that problem , I always tell the truth., even when I lie
Pomaze bog. Izgleda da je tako :D
I think there's another audience to consider -- "the Global Majority" outside of Russia and "The Golden Billion" of the West.
Interesting perspectives, thanks.
Re: Denazification - I'm 100% in favor of the permanent elimination model. Unfortunately this introduces the need to capture the entire territory including Western Ukraine. This also hasn't been the style of the modern Russian leadership. As also recounted in the interview, the willingness to compromise in the 2010's was only spit on by Russia's interlocutors. It is a serious dilemma.
One would hope the European heads of state realize, that eventually, the war will end - simply because Ukraine's population can't sustain today's intensity for more than a few years. After the foreign funding stops, many of the revived fascists who European funds are boosting today, will turn West and bring their political model with them - and will be quite capable of unseating the pro-US liberals who created the perfect conditions for them. (they'll still be pro-US unfortunately)
History is complex and every politicians interpretation has an agenda .. I recommend this critique for deeper understanding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8puAFFV8Gc .. its pretty objective
A good analysis or at least one that conforms to many of my own views on the topic!
My take was also that the history lesson was intended as a marker that Putin was speaking to a specific audience, albeit the course of the monologue was perplexing. I believe Putin was broadly trying to make the points that you list, and others outlined in the comments. Neverthless I don't think anyone in the West is listening. I mix in many educated and [knowledeable?] circles and no one I meet does anything else than parrot the official line. I doubt this interview will change that situation. People have too much sense of self invested in maintaining their world view.
On a broader stage though, Putin was almost certainly explaining to a series of people outside the West the situation as Russia see it, why it came to pass and the likely outcome in the future. It was maybe his way of helping to get across the Russian perspective to decision makers and influencers in the wider world. And ta least he can honestly say he tried to open the door to some sort of negotiated settlement, and that appears to have been (publically at least) spurned by the USA. Another own goal by the West and contrary to our and my interests.