Western mainstream media outlets habitually refer to Ukrainian nazis in softer terms like “right-wing nationalists.” However counter-intuitive this might seem, nazism is not nationalism. If anything, it is the opposite of nationalism. Here’s why.
Let’s compare Hitler and Zelensky. Can we truly call them nationalists? I think these two guys actually have a lot in common. They’re both nazis, of course. Hitler is dead and Zelensky is probably about to be dead. But beyond that, they were (past tense) both bright, intelligent guys who loved attention. And they were both put in a similar situation with Russia, and both made the same choice. Yes, you read that correctly. Zelensky made the same choice as Hitler. Not only that, what happened with Zelensky I think actually provides some insight about Hitler as well.
First, Hitler. Let’s look at a parallel universe where Hitler was a nationalist, not a nazi. This different Hitler doesn’t even have to be a good guy, just not a nazi. A normal guy trying to do what’s best for Germany. Now put yourself in this Hitler’s shoes in 1941. Wouldn’t any remotely sensible person have finished crushing Great Britain? Instead he did the opposite and started a second front. This choice led to Germany being conquered and millions of Germans killed. The damage to Germany went deeper than deaths and destruction. The idea of German pride and patriotism was permanently tainted.
How could Hitler have been doing what’s best for Germany if his actions directly resulted in Germany’s destruction and subordination? Even if he was just a greedy dictator, that still doesn’t add up. Isn’t the whole point of being a dictator that you get to stay in power for life and die in bed? Suiciding yourself in a bunker while your capital is being destroyed isn’t exactly a success story.
Now let’s look at Zelensky. Ukraine had every chance to be a strong, independent country. They were given every chance to be independent until Feb. 24, before the first Russian soldier crossed the border. At any time until that last moment, Zelensky could have established Ukraine as an independent, prosperous, sovereign nation. Instead, he did the opposite.
Now it’s come out, in Zelensky’s own words, that Ukraine had been refused a roadmap into NATO. A lot of writers (see this article from Moon of Alabama) have critiqued the USA, Germany, and NATO for not giving Russia a guarantee that Ukraine wouldn’t join. That’s an interesting idea, but completely missing the point. I don’t think such a guarantee would have even prevented Russian military action. Only one country could save Ukraine from destruction… Ukraine. Only Ukraine could promise Ukraine would never join NATO. More importantly, only Ukraine could stop shelling civilians in Donbass and start respecting the Minsk agreement.
Hitler could have saved Germany, instead he destroyed it. Likewise, Zelensky could have saved Ukraine. When he was told that Ukraine couldn’t join NATO, there was a very obvious alternative and Zelensky has no excuse for not taking it. He himself could have assured Russia of Ukraine’s neutrality. Take this a step further. Why do Russia and Ukraine have to be in an antagonistic relationship anyway? If Ukraine is truly a sovereign nation, then she should be free to choose her own allies, including Russia.
It amazes me that we have millions of analysts (see my post about Tom Cooper) and they are so blinded by ideology and hatred they have less common sense than a child. Imagine you’re playing a strategy board game with your family. You hold Ukraine, while your sister holds Russia and your brother holds Europe. You know you can’t win without an ally so you ask for a partnership with your brother in Europe. He refuses. Again, you know you can’t win without an ally and one of your two choices has already refused. Wouldn’t any sensible person, even a child, be smart enough to ask for an alliance with your sister in Russia?
So I have to ask, why didn’t Zelensky ask for an alliance with Russia? Well, for the same reason Hitler didn’t! If that question sounds strange to you, it shouldn’t.
In my post comparing Ukraine to 1919-39 Poland, I said this:
“Think about how weird this is. On paper, his strategy seemed insane. The combined French and British armies were larger and more mechanized than Germany’s and could easily win. Hitler’s invasion of Poland was so controversial, even some of his own generals considered overthrowing him. What did Hitler know that they didn’t?”
When the Battle of Britain started to go poorly, imagine if Hitler was a sensible and pragmatic leader. Think of all the sensible solutions he could have come up with. Why didn’t Germany bring the Soviet Union back to the negotiating table? Why not say “Hey, that Poland thing worked out pretty good. The British are really annoying and nobody likes them. Sell us some more steel and oil so we can get rid of them.”
Even western academics acknowledge the Soviets were trying to deflect European aggression westward. The longer Hitler spent fighting other Europeans, the more time the Soviets had to prepare their defenses. If he had offered further economic cooperation to beat up Churchill, who’s to say the Soviets would have refused?
But of course that help would have come at a price. If Hitler spent another year or two subjugating Britain, it would have been too late to invade the Soviet Union. They would have finished modernizing their army and no invasion could ever work.
At the end of the day, Hitler had to make a choice. He could defeat Britain, or he could defeat the Soviet Union, but not both. So Hitler had to give up on the Battle of Britain and attack the Soviets while he still could. I have to ask… what did Hitler know that we don’t? Who was pressuring him to do that? What promises were made to him behind closed doors?
So in short, Hitler had his chance to do his masters’ bidding and destroy the Soviet Union, but by December 1941, he had screwed that up and there was no recovery from it (see my post about why Hitler declared war on the USA). He was doomed, and the only question left was how much damage could he do on his way down. But still, even while technically an enemy, nobody in the West tried very hard to stop him. After all, there was no Western front until June 6, 1944, 2.5 years later.
Every school child in the West, possibly the whole world, is taught this story about Hitler being a madman and it doesn’t make any sense. If Hitler was crazy and stupid, nobody would have listened to him. He never would have risen to power.
Now as silly and appalling as this sounds, I have to go back to an underlying issue – why was Hitler bad? This should go without saying, but people seem to get it wrong, and more often than they used to.
In my article about fake news killing the Ukrainians, I quoted professional Russia hater Julia Ioffe, who has repeatedly and endlessly compares the Russian operation in Ukraine to the Holocaust. No, sweetheart. Hitler wasn’t bad because he invaded other countries. Yes, war is bad but it isn’t that bad. There are thousands of famous leaders throughout history who fought wars of aggression and are still celebrated as heroes. If invading other countries was the only bad thing Hitler ever did, there would still be statues of him in Berlin. Hitler was bad because he killed tens of millions of people! Why do I have to explain this, and to a “professional journalist” no less?
Here’s the truth. Hitler wasn’t a nationalist. He was a globalist. He served the interests of the “collective West.” German nationalism was nice and he paid lip service to it, but Hitler always subordinated the interests of Germany to the interests of the collective West. More specifically, he obeyed the commands of western bankers.
There is nothing worse for a country than nazism. Germans had every right to be angry, and of course they wanted a strong leader who would say a lot of nationalistic things and start standing up for Germany. Hitler was a trojan horse. On the surface, he looked like that perfect candidate. He spoke of a strong, rejuvenated Germany, and the normal German person had a lot of reasons to like him. But in reality, Hitler didn’t have any ideas of his own and was a pawn of outside forces. He preached hate and racism, and there was no substance to his ideas. He reached for the easiest, lowest common denominator of human nature – finding someone else to hate and blame for their problems.
Think about it and I don’t care about theory, this isn’t an issue that needs to be over-complicated. Just think in practical, common-sense terms. What happened to Nazi Germany? Destroyed and subordinated. What is happening to Ukraine now? Destroyed and subordinated. There are more examples. Consider my previous post about Poland. Their government’s actions in 1939 resulted in their country being destroyed and subordinated. The same happened to Mussolini’s regime in Italy. Destroyed and subordinated.
Or also the Polish government in exile in 1944. Again. Why instigate a doomed rebellion in Warsaw and deliberately refuse to coordinate it with advancing Soviet forces? I’m not mincing words here. Polish authorities tricked their own people into dying by the thousands for no reason, and did it all from the safety of their London penthouses. What kind of government does something like that? If their plan was to show Stalin they were retarded and couldn’t be trusted, call it a success.
Or how about Hungarian fascists in 1944? What’s the point of seizing power and starting a genocide right when you’re about to get steamrolled by the Red Army?
If nazis are nationalists, they’re really bad at their jobs!
No nation can adapt nazism and not be destroyed. But why? Here’s the underlying, poisonous nature of nazism that brings death to anyone who adapts it. Every national idea, no matter how objectively “bad” it was, had something good about it. But not nazism, there was nothing good about it. Nobody can look at Germany’s nazi era and think of even one good thing from it. The problem with the idea of nazism is that it isn’t an idea at all. It is an ideology built in opposition against another ideology.
During my visit to Moscow in December, I wrote a post about the Soviet and German entries in the 1937 Paris Expo. The Soviets built a fitting symbol to represent their communist ideals of the time, Worker and Kolkhoz Woman (Рабо́чий и колхо́зница). The Germans represented their own culture not as an idea at all, but as opposition to the Soviet idea. See, “Europe” and “Defender of Europe” are two very different things. A wall isn’t a culture. A weapon isn’t a culture either. Nazi Germany was an ancient culture that had been weaponized, corrupted, and ruined.
That’s the problem with nazism. Evil cannot create anything new, they can only corrupt and ruin what good forces have invented or made. Nationalists create an idea, but nazis can’t. They can only take existing ideas and corrupt them.
Is Nazi Ukraine, Ukronazistan, a real country and idea? Their national anthem is about killing Russian people, which is pretty weird for an anthem. Or consider their flag. Blue-yellow is a very peculiar color scheme, especially for a Slavic country. Where’s the red? Now look at the color wheel, and it all makes sense.
Blue + Yellow is opposite of Red. Ukraine is not an idea. It’s opposition to an idea.
Next time you run into a pro-Ukraine troll on the internet, or in person, I want you to ask him something. What does he like about Ukrainian culture and history? What’s good and beautiful about it? Does he have a favorite Ukrainian artist or filmmaker? Here’s the reality. You could talk to a thousand people with Ukrainian flag filters on their social media profiles, and none of them will be able to say even one thing they like about Ukrainians, besides that they’re good soldiers (cannon fodder). That’s really sad, isn’t it? The reality is that none of these people in the West care about Ukraine. They see Ukraine as human weapons against the Russian people. “Fight to the last Ukrainian!”
Like the Nazi regime that infected Germany, Zelensky’s regime in the Ukraine (borderland) isn’t a real country either. I’m not sure we should even give this regime the privilege of a name anymore. We should call it “404_country not found”
Ian Kummer
Support my work by making a contribution through Boosty
All text in Reading Junkie posts are free to share or republish without permission, and I highly encourage my fellow bloggers to do so. Please be courteous and link back to the original.
I now have a new YouTube channel that I will use to upload videos from my travels around Russia. Expect new content there soon. Please give me a follow here.
Also feel free to connect with me on Quora (I sometimes share unique articles there).
good stuff. random thoughts:
i always thought a big part of germany’s aggression toward the USSR and its timing was taking advantage of stalin’s purges and the general mess he was making of the country with his paranoid delusions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1941_Red_Army_Purge
also, as you allude to, the west adored hitler and thought his resurrection of post-WWI germany was a model they could learn from. prescott bush, joe kennedy and henry ford all heaped praise (and in some cases, money). ironically, putin’s cadre and their attempts at undoing the 1990s raping and pillaging of post-fall russia are one of the reasons he’s the current “bad guy”.
i’d say a good litmus test of all the press stenographers and avatar idiots on social media is: what was their reaction – days before the russian operation – to putin recognizing the “breakaway regions”? mine was “better late than never”. for most of them (if they had any reaction at all) it was probably along the lines of “derp…what’s a lugansk?”
final note: most ukrainians i’ve met are the “former” variety and have no intention of ever setting foot in the place again. probably not coincidentally a lot of them are also jewish. a lot of westerners have also experienced the country solely as a sex tourism destination…fitting since a lot of “sex work” creeps in europe are already salivating at the sight of refugees.
I wasn’t going to voice this publicly, but about creepy sex tourists – yes. There were 30k Americans in Kiev. Why? Is Slavic culture THAT interesting?
Hello. I have quiet a few questions for you.
1. What are your reasons to trust Putin and do not trust Zelensky?
2. Do you know that Zelensky is a Jewish and he doesn’t even hide it? Do you know that he spoke Russian only before he became a president?
3. Where can I see this information about 30k exactly Americans in Kiev now? Just in Kiev 30k? It’s a lot of solders and Russian media doesn’t say anything about it? It would be actually good for Russians to talk about it. But Russian media doesn’t say anything about it. Where can I find this info?
And you’re right! Slavic culture should not be interesting for you or anybody in this Western world, but if you’re retired solder you know what a war is like and you know that a war with a nuclear power country can be dangerous. Especially dangerous a war with a dictator that is ill. You don’t know where he (dictator) sees himself tomorrow. And he sees himself in Europe. Do you know that Europe has huge trading and financial connections with America and in a case of war in Europe America would loose them with all and would have to step into the war anyway, but that war would be much more brutal and there would be. chance to end the humankind? Do you think that any dictator with a nuclear or any other weapon of mass distractions better be destroyed in the beginning of a war rather than later? Do you know that you can expect anything from a dictator with ill mind? Let’s talk a little about Putin’s role in this conflict? Why there are so many features of Nazism and aggression including swastika in Russia now and why you didn’t analyze that fact that PUTIN itself started this war and not “the nazi” Zelensky?
If you served military have you ever been with your troops in a nuclear aggressive country as an enemy and how did you feel about it?
Thank you.
Hi Elena,
1. I wouldn’t say I “trust” Putin. But he has given no reason for me to see him as an enemy either. The USA and Russia should be friends, and being friends requires trust and cooperation. Yes, Zelensky is Jewish. You know who else was Jewish? Madeleine Albright. But she was a nazi and supported nazis and helped them murder people. Same with Antony Blinken.
Yes, Zelensky speaks Russian. You know who else speaks Russian? Azov Battalion. Ukrainian Waffen SS in WWII also spoke Russian.
2. I didn’t say soldiers. Also, there are (or at least were) 200k Americans in Russia. These numbers are easy to look up.
European “allies” have been extremely shifty and untrustworthy, and have been for a long time. I also don’t believe that Russia would ever invade Western Europe. If total war broke out, those countries would simply be nuked and destroyed. Maybe destroyed with conventional bombs so Russia doesn’t have to fear radioactive fallout. I don’t know.
Your correct about sex tourists in Ukraine. I have heard that Kyiv is considered the Bangkok of Europe, since many Americans and Europeans go there for their sexual satisfaction. Easier to travel there also. Very, very sad.
“Bangkok of Europe” is a good and unfortunate way to put it!
Concerning the theme of your article.
Germany like many continental nations was subjected to upheavals organised from Britain with Lord Palmerston playing a prominent role.
The youth networks Britain used all over the world were intended for imperial purposes.
For example to encourage young people to revolt against traditional leaders.
Perhaps Open Society over a century later has some similarity.
One such encouraged individual was young Richard Wagner and during the 1830s he obtained a book by an author who belonged to the Palmerston circle. The book led Wagner to create an opera about a germanic hero being brought down by jewish nobility.
I dont know how much this shaped Wagners career but lets say the British did encourage him to emphasise german-jewish animosity. Something which became Wagners signature until his death half a century later. There are more signs of the same british background continuing to provide more related encouragement.
But eventually a Wagner cult emerged related to Bayreut and the most important member of that group happened to be an englishman Houston Steward Chamberlain (HSC) The cult was intimately related to nazism, Hitler being an enthusiastic admirer of Wagners operas and prose, the latter which he may have learned from HSCs books since he authored several works about Wagner.
As a young man Hitler spent his limited funds for visiting the operas and would be very attentive to the details in the musical performance.
Hitler was a romantic in the sense of being involved in the semireligious context of the Wagner-themes.
And the romantic era may well have been deliberately launched originally in order to give room for winning hearts and opening them to be manipulated for imperial purposes.
In particular by the british empire. Palmerstons was influenced by Jeremy Bentham, a prophet of liberalism( or rather of hedonism?). And Lord Shelburne and Bentham had been encouraged by Sir Edward Gibbons (who wrote the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire) to employ the method of cults for imperial purposes following the examples from Rome. Thus there are signs that Britain consciously and patiently worked the germans towards nazism during a whole century.
Britain also spread liberalism which was associated with certain business practices associated with jews and also presumably had a side effect of stimulating antisemitism.
So there was antisemitism and on top of that but less wellknown the encouragement of antijewish currents in the form of a cult.
There is much more but my intention was as you may understand to point out that Hitler was indeed prepared by the main globalist operator Britain.
Exclusive Interview – Aiden Aslin – British Man Fighting for Ukraine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNizGwjZbo0
MSM is apparently pretending this full video doesn’t exist. I know why, it’s because he admits that there are NAZIs fighting for Ukraine, at least in Mariupol. It’s a shame the interviewer lays it on too thick.
Zelensky is an effing Nazi. I am a Jew he is doing literally everything Hitler did but throwing people into camps of wait he is already doing that by preventing men from leaving the country and sending teenagers, old men, and slavs to the death in his racist goal of turning Ukraine into “Greater Israel”. Zelensky is worse then Hitler because Hitler was not supported by the West after 1941. Zelensky is which makes him far more dangerous and why Putin should have removed him from power immediatley. The longer Zelensky remains in power the more dangerous and unpredictable he will become. Zelensky should be removed from power immediatley. Ukraine will be free when Arestovich or someone level headed like Medvedchuk replaces him.
Zelensky is a Nazi just like Soros was. Yes Jews can be Nazis as well. He treats Ukranians Slavs as if they are “Untermenschen”. He does not allow men to leave his country he begs and cries like a coward in his bunker. To be fair Hitler never begged and cried like a coward. But Zelensky is not much different because he is just as eradict as Hitler. Hitler also refused to sign a treaty so Stalin had no choice but kill him because he was so ruthless. Yes Zelensky’s treatment of his own people is proof of this with his imposed martial law and 13 rounds of mobilization and his inability to compromise.
Zelensky is a drug addicted piece of human penis piano playing garbage. Don’t you dare call me an anti-semite either because I am an actual real Jew that hates Zelensky because he is a POS and is not a real Jew.
One could also make the argument Zelensky is worse then Hitler and is a Trotskyite. In my opinion Trotsky was worse then Hitler because he wanted to spread communism through violent revolution worldwide. Trotsky was that bad as well. Soros is Trotskyite and Zelensky is an unpredicatable Hitler.