The Art of Border Quilting

The favorite game of the West is divide and conquer. It works at many levels: cultural, ethnic, religious, classist, racial, sexual/gender, etc.

I will never believe that the BLM movement was planned and implemented by the US black community. Neither it is the beneficiary. The US liberal Deep State doesn’t care about the LGBTQ+ rights more than they care about the black people. They don’t care about Islam or the Orthodox church. In fact, these dull people only care about their own profits. They use any category of self-identification (real or fictitious) to instill hostility and create lines of division between people. And as I have said many times before, it only proves that they are anything but smart. No sentient being wants their children to inherit the planet of hate and bunkers.

Yet, these are generalizations I love so much. Today I wanted to speak about something [slightly] more particular: the vicious Art of Border Quilting that seems to underlie many if not all modern Divide and Conquer games of the West. I’ve noticed long ago that a large part of the misfortunate colonial legacy are ethnic/religious conflicts. I think they were planned well in advance to pull the strings and weaken other countries whenever needed, as opposed to conflicts based on gender/sex, class, or other less conspicuous identity markers that were initially tried at home to control the degree of solidification of the society.

Just look at how borders of “independent” countries were drawn in the Global South. Recently I have read a book about the history of Afghanistan. What was most revealing is how the borders of this country were drawn by the British. There is 0 logic in that. The territory that was allowed to become a country doesn’t seem to have any pre-colonial history of statehood in this exact shape, nor is it home to a specific ethnicity or majority of several ethnicities. It was just randomly drawn on the map with an ulterior goal to have a weak state torn by internal and border conflicts for ethnic and religious reasons, as several communities found themselves divided/jammed together without any reason or common sense.

Same seems to be true for India. Historically, it is a unique case where numerous ethnicities learned to coexist. There are numerous languages and several major religions. If I am not mistaken, there are at least two larger groups (Indo-european and Dravidian) that met thousands of years ago forming a melting pot of mentalities and genes. As I said before, they learned to coexist, developed internal checks and balances, even if at times imperfect. India was not a single state politically, but it functioned as a loose unity and was perceived this way by outsiders.

Had colonization not happened, it would probably become a unified state of modern type on its own. But ..there was a but. And then, as I have mentioned recently, India acquired independence with the border quilting thrown in. Did it benefit the subcontinent? No. As in Afghanistan, it gave rise to conflicts and enabled revival/continuation of reactionary or archaic cultural and civilizational patterns that would otherwise have died out long ago through a normal evolutionary process. I keep noticing that whenever a culture is under attack (e.g. colonized), it clings to its archaic patterns more and is more reluctant to give up even a tiny part of is perceived as the national/ethnic identity.

China is similar, yet contrasting case. Almost as multiethnic as India, it retained its solidity, thanks to Mao. Note that some “dialects” of Chinese are actually different languages that are not mutually understandable (e.g. like English and Russian). The writing system does provide a unique means of solidification, though, as it is applicable to all local languages. So, at least writing is more or less the same throughout the country. And, while this approach cannot be applied to India where languages rely on syllabic and phonetic spelling, having English(!) as one of the official languages doesn’t seem to benefit national identification. In fact, according to the Wikipedia, its status is higher than that of the majority of other languages, except for Hindi.

Now, let’s look at Africa. As far as I can see, borders there haven drawn depending on which European power owned the colony and by this power. No one cared about how local people felt about it. Any organic nation-building was curbed when colonization started. Maghreb and Egypt are lucky exceptions, as these countries had states long before Europeans had those. Therefore, despite periods of colonization and strong pressure, we can see that societies in the Northern Africa are more stable and solid.

Now look at how the Soviet Union was fragmentated. Ethnic Russians are now among the most divided people of the world, while the new borders are very arbitrary and fail to satisfy all the parties. Don’t trust those who tell you that the USSR died silently and peacefully. It’s not true. All old ethnic conflicts reappeared killing thousands of people.

Now the West wants to take the quilting process a step further and fragmentate Russia itself to create a buch of ever-fighting, ever-bleeding impoverished principalities ruled by the Globalists. That’s their endgame and it’s bigger than Ukraine.

PS: Please, subscribe to our Telegram and YouTube channels (see bios), I also have restarted tweeting (x-ing, I mean) at https://twitter.com/mkondorskaya. Hope the account will last. To make ourselves heard, we need to be listened (and found). We cannot do that without subscribers: like, share, repost). Thank you!

---

Maria Kondorskaya

Linguist, [very] professional Content writer, Russian (and even Soviet), Muscovite, patriot, internationalist. Passive aggressive, vivacious pessimist, optimist with a morbid sense of humor. Made in the USSR in 1982.