The West has no right to lecture Putin on democracy.

Vladimir Putin has two distinguishing characteristics that our North American leaders possess in small measure: A backbone and principles. But where does Putin get his strength from? We’ll return to that question later. What I find admirable about the Russian Leader is his clarity of vision. Pat Buchanan analyzes Putin’s socio/cultural views here.

On minorities

Putin supposedly said that Russia doesn’t need minorities but some skeptics believe that this incident was fabricated and that he never spoke those words. We can be confident, however, that he said that Russia needed to be defended from “aggressive” minorities. Personally I think Putin is spot on here. Minorities need to handled with care and in best case scenarios they can be apolitical and economically prosperous (Parsis of India), or worse, a parasitic and subversive threat (Jews and Brahmins). But mostly they are a damned nuisance (North African and Arab Muslims in Europe/unskilled illegal Mexicans in the US). Minorities will always appear “aggressive” due to their tribal instincts which stem from feelings of isolation. At best these minorities can assimilate into and identify with the nationalism of the majority or in worst case scenarios they can pursue their own tribal interests at the expense of the majority.

On traditional values and tolerance

It would be an understatement to say that Putin believes that traditional values are a prerequisite to a healthy society. However he goes so far as to say that the promotion of destructive values is being enforced from the top, ie elites. Putin believes that this process is undemocratic and nobody in good conscience could disagree with such as assessment. When we observe our universities and media churn out liberal and cultural Marxist propaganda, we must ask ourselves whose interests they serve. The media is supposed to represent the views and trends of society, not manufacture trends for mass consumption. In India, for example, the somewhat liberal TV soaps of the 90s were followed by a resurgence of culturally conservative programming spearheaded by Ekta Kapoor. India is a deeply conservative nation and this is rightly reflected in their entertainment.

What about our entertainment? According to a poll in 2006 (I couldn’t find a more recent one) 60% of Americans believed that Hollywood’s values are not in line with the rest of America. Hardly surprising when one considers that Hollywood is dominated by a minority bent on pursuing their own tribal interests. Homosexuality is likewise forced down our throats by the media which portrays gays as flamboyant, fashionable, and chic. In reality, however, nearly half of Americans think that homosexuality is a sin. Putin was right to use the term “undemocratic.”

Some critics believe that Putin is a political opportunist that panders to the prejudices of his conservative support base (80% of Russians are baptized orthodox). But even if this is so, it hardly discredits Putin as his policies still represent the views of the Russian masses. Here in North America, our leaders fail miserably in this regard. The conservative government of Stephen Harper has flushed millions of dollars down the toilet by funding feminist initiatives and programs. You can read about this here and here. These programs further women’s interests at the expense of society behind the facade of “equality”. Where does Harper get of calling himself a conservative?

To turn to our earlier question: Where does Putin get his strength from? He gets it from the legitimacy conferred onto him by the masses he faithfully represents.

This entry was posted in Christianity, conservative values, Cultural Marxism, India, Jewry, Organized Jewry, Subversion, Tribalism, White nationalism and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to The West has no right to lecture Putin on democracy.

  1. guerrer0 says:

    Issues about race or sexuality is not what people feels, is about what is the right thing. Decades ago still most Americans would discriminate Black people like the Apartheid of South Africa and Black Faces portrayed by White actors were popular. Giving Blacks the opportunity in Hollywood make aware the people about the problem of racism, no matter if most people that time were racist they were on the wrong and really need to change it, just like the perceptions of many Americans about homosexuality need to change, if we think like that United States should have been still the country of Martin Luther King. in Brazil they have aired their first Telenovela with a gay kiss, think and reflect about it.

  2. mixedraced says:

    Russia controls 100’s of sq km of non-Russian land that’s inhabited by a large number of races. Most ethnic Russians live west of the Urals and north of the Caucasus mountains, a tiny portion of Russia

  3. mixedraced says:

    And you still haven’t replied to my comment about video games.

    • Lee Min Ho says:

      Jajaja dejalos Axum, ellos aqui se la pasan hablando de judios y esos temas que a muchos como nosotros no nos importan tanto, me importan un comino los judios y esas cosas, ellos no entienden tan bien de cultura popular como video juegos, musica y series, yo por mi parte voy a pasar mas tiempo en Dramabeans o Jezebel, aqui en este blog fueron groseros con nosotros, vamonos Axum, no nos juntemos con estas chusmas : P chusma chusma (jajaja como en el chavo del 8 )

  4. mixedraced says:

    Everyone is tribal including those who are a part of majority ethnic groups.

  5. mixedraced says:

    Race riots in 1950’s London began because of a petty argument between a white wife and her black husband.

  6. coward says:

    Hey Dota do u ever drop by Boberts blog anymore

  7. pranav says:

    Out of curiosity do you still think Brahmins are legitimate threat for the Indian society?

    Considering their population is 56 Million which is a miniscule of India’s exploding population.. They had been vicious monsters ever the earth has seen like zionists no denying that and had been at the pinnacle of so and so of India for far too long but now the case is not the same.
    As far as I checked Indian politics, bureaucracy, judiciary, higher education, and media were not dominated by Brahmins thanks to the outrage in states like Tamil Nadu, Bihar against them and the following things like reservations, absence of vote bank, migration. They now occupy positions in some worthless organizations like RSS Bajrang Dal which has no say in elections nor being taken by the people seriously. Even if those parties, I doubt whether they could have a long uninterrupted run being the miniscule of the lot without the support of the other castes,
    In addition to that there are far too many poorer brahmins struggling to make their ends meet as like the other castes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s