Daily Archives: December 28, 2016

Gingrich: Trump Will Repeal 60-70% of Obama’s Executive Orders – FAKENEWS


21st Century Wire says…

In a recent interview former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, told Fox that Trump will likely be vetoing out the majority of executive orders made by Obama.

If we examine the mountain of executive orders that were penned under the Obama administration, we must wonder if Gingrich isn’t making a good point and an accurate assessment about President Elect Trump’s intentions with regards to his promise to “drain the swamp.” Obama had very little luck getting many of the draconian, unconstitutional policies his administration wanted to see enacted approved by Congress so he leaned heavily on Executive Orders to push policies and conflicts that would not have been approved by Congress otherwise.

Perhaps this will be one of the early indicators of how serious Trump is about rolling back policies that have proven to be detrimental to Americans.


US President-elect Donald Trump may reverse up to 70 percent of President Barack Obama’s executive orders, practically erasing the legacy of the first African-American head of state, Former House speaker Newt Gingrich told Fox.

“I think in the opening couple days, he’s going to repeal 60 to 70 percent of Obama’s legacy by simply vetoing out all of the various executive orders that Obama used because he couldn’t get anything through Congress,” Gingrich said in an interview with “Sunday Morning Futures” on Fox Business.

Obama, who signed over 260 executive orders in his two terms in office, urged Trump, who will be inaugurated on January 20, not to circumvent Congress when trying to enact his agenda. Obama used his executive powers to push through labor, climate and immigration reforms after Congress refused to go along with his proposed programs.

READ MORE: ‘US refusal to veto UN Israeli resolution symbolic gesture by lame duck Obama’

“My suggestion to the president elect is, you know, going through the legislative process is always better, in part because it’s harder to undo,” Obama told NPR last week. “In my first two years, I wasn’t relying on executive powers because I had big majorities in … Congress and we … [were] able to get bills passed. Even after we lost the majorities in Congress, I bent over backward consistently to try to find compromise and a legislative solution to some of the big problems that we’ve got.”

READ MORE: ‘We are rooting for his success’: Obama on Trump victory as he urges smooth transition

Obama noted that Trump is “entirely within his lawful power” to sign new executive orders and “if he wants to reverse some of those rules, that’s part of the Democratic process.”

Gingrich believes that by exercising such power Trump will just sign Obama’s legacy away.

“I think President Obama is beginning to figure out that his legacy is like one of those dolls that as the air comes out of it, it shrinks and shrinks and shrinks,” Gingrich said.

During the election campaign Trump did promise to repeal Obama’s initiatives, telling his voters in North Carolina in September that his administration would “eliminate every unconstitutional executive order and restore the rule of law to our land.”

That promise now seems a reality especially after Obama failed to honor his promise of a “smooth” transition to Trump after his victory. The rift between the future administration and Obama’s office became apparent on Friday when the US abstained from voting at the UN Security Council, allowing an anti-Israeli settlement resolution to pass, despite a strong calls for Trump to “veto” the document.

“He [President Obama] is in this desperate frenzy. What he’s actually doing is he’s setting up a series of things to distract Trump, which will make his liberal allies feel good about Democrats and hate Republicans when Trump rolls them back,” Gingrich noted…

Continue this story at RT

READ MORE MSM LIES AT: 21st Century Wire MSM Files

Read More Articles Here…


via 21st Century Wire

December 29, 2016 at 02:19AM

ANGRY CONGRESS SET To Cut Off Funding To U.N…Threatens To Expel Palestinian Diplomats From U.S. Soil After Obama’s Final Assault On Israel – FAKENEWS


Barack Hussein Obama is anything but a lame-duck President. Apparently dividing our nation, financially devastating low and middle-income families with a disastrous universal health care plan, flooding it with unvetted immigrants and dangerous illegal aliens, and leaving us with a $20 TRILLION debt isn’t enough. Obama has to turn Israel over to a group of hard-line Muslim terrorists on his way out. The good news is, there’s a new sheriff in town, and he’s helping to embolden a spineless Congress who’s about to put the brakes on

Congress is already setting the stage to cut off U.S. funding to the United Nations in the wake of a contested vote last week in which the Obama administration permitted an anti-Israel resolution to win overwhelming approval, according to congressional leaders, who told the Washington Free Beacon that the current administration is already plotting to take further action against the Jewish state before vacating office.

Other punitive actions by Congress could include expelling Palestinian diplomats from U.S. soil and scaling back ties with foreign nations that voted in favor of the controversial measure, according to multiple sources who spoke to the Free Beacon about the situation both on and off the record.

The Obama administration is still under bipartisan attack for its decision to help craft and facilitate the passage of a U.N. resolution condemning the construction of Jewish homes in Jerusalem, a move that reversed years of U.S. policy on the matter.

The Free Beacon was the first to disclose on Monday that senior Obama administration officials played a key role in ensuring the measure was passed unanimously by the U.N. Security Council. This included a phone call by Vice President Joe Biden to Ukraine’s president to ensure that country voted in favor of the measure.

While Biden’s office continues to dispute the claim, reporters in Israel and Europe confirmed in the intervening days that the call between Biden and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko did in fact take place.

With anger over the issue still roiling, leading members of Congress told the Free Beacon on Wednesday that they will not delay in seeking retribution against the U.N. for the vote. This could include cutting off U.S. funding for the U.N. and stripping the Palestinian mission’s diplomatic privileges.

Lawmakers also will work to rebuff further attempts by the Obama administration to chastise Israel on the international stage. This would include freezing funds that could be spent by the administration on further U.N. action.

“The disgraceful anti-Israel resolution passed by the UNSC was apparently only the opening salvo in the Obama administration’s final assault on Israel,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) told the Free Beacon. “President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Ambassador Power, and their colleagues should remember that the United States Congress reconvenes on January 3rd, and under the Constitution we control the taxpayer funds they would use for their anti-Israel initiatives.”

“The 115th Congress must stop the current administration’s vicious attack on our great ally Israel, and address the major priorities of the incoming administration,” Cruz said, expressing his desire to work with the incoming Trump administration to reset the U.S. relationship with Israel.< Senior congressional sources currently working on the issue further disclosed to the Free Beacon that lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are in an uproar over the Obama administration, which they accuse of plotting behind closed doors to smear Israel.

“Not content with spending the last eight years using the United Nations to undermine American sovereignty, the Obama administration has finally trained their sights on Israel and is trying to exploit this unelected and unaccountable international body to impose their resolution of the Palestinian issue on Israel,” one senior congressional aide told the Free Beacon. “Enough is enough.”

While the Trump administration will not take office until the end of January, Congress will be working overtime before then to stop the Obama administration from further damaging the U.S.-Israel relationship, according to the source, who hinted that a full cut-off of U.S. funding to the U.N. currently is on the table.

“A new administration will arrive on January 20th, but in the intervening weeks Congress has an important role mitigating the damage President Obama can do in his final hours,” the source said. “Why on earth would we throw good taxpayer dollars after bad in support of the UN, which has proven itself again and again utterly unable to encourage any positive progress? Just take Syria — if they were doing anything over the last five years, it should have been working out a fair and equitable adjudication of the Syrian war.”

“Instead, they’ve proven themselves utterly useless–in fact they’ve probably made a gut-wrenching catastrophe worse,” the source explained. “There’s no reason to think this action will turn out any more favorably.”

For entire story –WFB

The post ANGRY CONGRESS SET To Cut Off Funding To U.N…Threatens To Expel Palestinian Diplomats From U.S. Soil After Obama’s Final Assault On Israel appeared first on 100percentfedUp.com.

Read More Articles Here…


via 100percentfedUp.com

December 29, 2016 at 02:18AM

Obama names 2 new national monuments in Utah, Nevada – FAKENEWS


SALT LAKE CITY — President Obama designated two national monuments Wednesday at sites in Utah and Nevada that have become key flash points over use of public land in the U.S. West, marking the administration’s latest move to protect environmentally sensitive areas in its final days.

The Bears Ears National Monument in Utah will cover 1.35 million acres in the Four Corners region, the White House said. In a victory for Native American tribes and conservationists, the designation protects land that is considered sacred and is home to an estimated 100,000 archaeological sites, including ancient cliff dwellings.

It’s a blow for state Republican leaders and many rural residents who fear it will add another layer of unnecessary federal control and close the area to energy development and recreation, a common refrain in the battle over use of the American West’s vast open spaces.

In Nevada, a 300,000-acre Gold Butte National Monument outside Las Vegas would protect a scenic and ecologically fragile area near where rancher Cliven Bundy led in an armed standoff with government agents in 2014. It includes rock art, artifacts, rare fossils and recently discovered tracks.

The White House and conservationists said both sites were at risk of looting and vandalism.

“Today’s actions will help protect this cultural legacy and will ensure that future generations are able to enjoy and appreciate these scenic and historic landscapes,” Obama said in a statement.

His administration has rushed to safeguard vulnerable areas ahead of President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration. It has blocked new mining claims outside Yellowstone National Park and new oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean.

Obama’s creation and expansion of monuments covers more acreage than any other president.

But Trump’s upcoming presidency has tempered the excitement for tribal leaders and conservationists, with some worrying he could try to reverse or reduce some of Obama’s expansive land protections.

Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, who opposes the Bears Ears Monument, has suggested presidents have the power to undo monuments, though it has not been done before.

A coalition of tribes pushed for the creation of Utah’s eighth national monument, though the tribes asked Obama to make it about 500,000 acres larger than the monument he named Wednesday.

Tribal members visit the Bears Ears area to perform ceremonies, collect herbs and wood for medicinal and spiritual purposes and do healing rituals.

Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye called it an exciting day for his tribe and people of all cultures.

“We have always looked to Bears Ears as a place of refuge, as a place where we can gather herbs and medicinal plants, and a place of prayer and sacredness,” Begaye said. “The rocks, the winds, the land — they are living, breathing things that deserve timely and lasting protection.”

The Navajo Nation is one of five tribes that will get an elected official on a first-of-its-kind tribal commission for the Bears Ears monument. The panel will provide federal land managers with tribal expertise and historical knowledge about the area, federal officials said.

Tucked between existing national parks and the Navajo reservation, the proposed monument features stunning vistas at every turn and a mix of cliffs, plateaus, towering rock formations, rivers and canyons across wide expanses covered by sagebrush and juniper trees.

Opponents agree the area is a natural treasure worth preserving but said the federal designation would create restrictions on oil and gas development as well residents’ ability to camp, bike, hike and gather wood.

No new mining and oil and gas development will be allowed within the monument boundaries, said Christy Goldfuss, managing director of the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

Members of Utah’s all-GOP congressional delegation had backed a plan to protect about 1.4 million acres at Bears Ears, while opening up other areas of the state for development.

To many residents in the small, predominantly Mormon town of Blanding that sits near the new monument, the proposal is a thinly veiled, repackaged push from environmental groups who recruited tribes after previous attempts at the designation fizzled out.

In Nevada, retiring Democratic Sen. Harry Reid has pushed for protections at Gold Butte, a remote area northeast of Lake Mead, but GOP members of the state’s congressional delegation have been vocal opponents.

Bundy is one rancher who does not recognize federal jurisdiction in the area. He was accused of illegally allowing his cows to roam there after failing to pay more than $1.1 million in fees and penalties.

He has pleaded not guilty to charges in the 2014 standoff with U.S. agents trying to round up his cattle.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2hugtg5

Read More Articles Here…


via USATODAY – News Top Stories

December 29, 2016 at 02:13AM

Herman Cain Takes Down Kerry’s Anti-Israel Speech With One Line That Says It All – FAKENEWS


Herman Cain really nailed it.

Amid the reams of statements reacting to Secretary of State John Kerry’s speech defending the Obama administration’s betrayal of one of America’s closest allies in the world, plenty of Obama apologists have sounded off, as have plenty of outraged conservatives.

But none summed up the right-side reaction with the rapier-sharp mockery Cain thrust into the conversation.

On Fox News’ “Outnumbered” Wednesday, the syndicated radio host and former GOP presidential contender summed it up with one sentence any conservative can understand.

“The only thing worse than a one hour-plus speech by John Kerry is a one-hour speech by President Obama,” Cain said.

As a one-liner, it’s tough to beat, and like all great jokes, it’s built on a fundamental truth.

Both Obama and Kerry obviously love to hear themselves talk, both have astonishingly little to say, and what they do say is almost uniformly a cause for outrage among the saner, conservative half of the American public. (As far as is known, Kerry’s voice never sent a thrill up anyone’s leg, though.)

The biggest problem of Kerry’s speech, Cain said, was that it was based on a flawed premise: That the Palestinians – and the Arab world in general – will ever accept Israel and its inherent right to exist in return for a permanent peace in the region.

“Security is the most important thing. If you demand that the occupied territory be given to the Palestinians, Israel becomes a sitting duck,” said Cain. “This is why Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israelis are simply not going to go along with that approach.”

Check it out below. (Cain’s comments come at the beginning of the discussion.)

As usual, the business magnate was dead on. Literally from the day Israel declared its existence in a hostile neighborhood, the Arab world has sought to stamp it out.

The peace agreements it has reached with neighboring countries – Jordan and Egypt – have been based entirely on the knowledge of the Arab countries that the Jewish state is more than capable of holding its own in a military engagement. It is, in fact, capable of destroying the very countries that wish to destroy it.

If the Arabs could have rid the world of the Jewish state at some point over the past seven decades, they would have done so.

And that’s what makes comments like Kerry’s so risible.

As Fox News contributor Eboni Williams pointed out, the main obstacle to peace between Israel and the Arabs has nothing to do with “settlements” (though how any Jewish construction in the city of Jerusalem could be considered a “settlement” defies both logic and history).

It boils down to “recognition of Israel’s right to exist,” Williams said. “Until that is acknowledged, really in Arabic, by the Palestinian people, we can’t move forward with this.”

But acknowledging that inconvenient truth by the Obama administration, and flunkies like John Kerry, would mean putting the responsibility for ending the conflict exactly where it belongs – on the Palestinians and Arabs who’ve been supporting the terror war against Israel for almost 70 years.

John Kerry and President Obama will never admit that, no matter how long they talk.

Read More Articles Here…


via The Point

December 29, 2016 at 02:10AM



Image may contain: 1 person, suit and text


Reuters:   Trump says Sprint to bring 5,000 jobs back to U.S.

U.S President-elect Donald Trump said on Wednesday wireless carrier Sprint Corp (S.N) will bring 5,000 jobs back to the United States and OneWeb, a new company, will be hiring 3,000 people.

“I was just called by the head people at Sprint and they are going to be bringing 5,000 jobs back to the United States, they are taking them from other countries,” Trump told reporters outside his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

“And also OneWeb, a new company, is going to be hiring 3,000 people. So that’s very exciting,” he added.



BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — Japanese electronics company Panasonic and U.S. electric car maker Tesla said Tuesday they plan to begin production of solar cells at a factory in Buffalo, New York.

The two companies said they finalized an agreement calling for Tokyo-based Panasonic to pay capital costs for the manufacturing. Palo Alto, California-based Tesla made a “long-term purchase commitment” to Panasonic.

Their statement gave no financial figures.

The factory in Buffalo is under development by SolarCity Corp., a San Mateo, California-based solar panel company owned by Tesla. The photovoltaic cells and modules will be used in solar panels for non-solar roof products and solar glass tile roofs that Tesla plans to begin making, the announcement said.

Production is due to begin in mid-2017. Tesla said it will create 1,400 jobs in Buffalo, 500 in manufacturing and plans further expansion in Buffalo.

READ MORE: https://yhoo.it/2hOWJBuasonic-agree-pv-cells-buffalo-york-101926856–finance.html 




Read More Articles Here…


via 70news

December 29, 2016 at 02:06AM

The Real 'Clash of Civilizations'? Spiritual Roots of Russo-American Conflict – FAKENEWS

© Pavel Kazachkov
The Kremlin in Moscow

Whatever Russia is called outwardly, there is an inner eternal Russia whose embryonic character places her on an antithetical course to that of the USA.

The rivalry between the USA and Russia is something more than geopolitics or economics. These are reflections of antithetical worldviews of a spiritual character. The German conservative historian-philosopher Oswald Spengler, who wrote of the morphology of cultures as having organic life-cycles, in his epochal book

The Decline of The West

had much to say about Russia that is too easily mistaken as being of a Russophobic nature. That is not the case, and Spengler wrote of Russia in similar terms to that of the ‘Slavophils’. Spengler, Dostoyevski, Berdyaev, and Solzhenistyn have much of relevance to say in analyzing the conflict between the USA and Russia. Considering the differences as fundamentally ‘spiritual’ explains why this conflict will continue and why the optimism among Western political circles at the prospect of a compliant Russia, fully integrated into the ‘world community’, was so short-lived.

Of the religious character of this confrontation, an American analyst, Paul Coyer, has written:

Amidst the geopolitical confrontation between Vladimir Putin’s Russia and the US and its allies, little attention has been paid to the role played by religion either as a shaper of Russian domestic politics or as a means of understanding Putin’s international actions. The role of religion has long tended to get short thrift in the study of statecraft (although it has been experiencing a bit of a renaissance of late), yet nowhere has it played a more prominent role—and perhaps nowhere has its importance been more unrecognized—than in its role in supporting the Russian state and Russia’s current place in world affairs.1

Russia’s ‘Soul’

Spengler regarded Russians as formed by the vastness of the land-plain, as innately antagonistic to the Machine, as rooted in the soil, irrepressibly peasant, religious, and ‘primitive’. Without a wider understanding of Spengler’s philosophy, it appears that he was a Slavophobe. However, when Spengler wrote of these Russian characteristics, he was referring to the Russians as a still youthful people in contrast to the senile West. Hence the ‘primitive’ Russian is not synonymous with ‘primitivity’ as popularly understood at that time in regard to ‘primitive’ tribal peoples. Nor was it to be confounded with the Hitlerite perception of the ‘primitive Slav’ incapable of building his own State.

To Spengler, the ‘primitive peasant’ is the wellspring from which a people draws its healthiest elements during its epochs of cultural vigor. Agriculture is the foundation of a High Culture, enabling stable communities to diversify labor into specialization from which Civilization proceeds.

However, according to Spengler, each people has its own soul, a conception derived from the German Idealism of Herder, Fichte et al. A High Culture reflects that soul, whether in its mathematics, music, architecture; both in the arts and the physical sciences. The Russian soul is not the same as the Western


, as Spengler called it, the ‘Magian’ of the Arabian civilization, or the Classical of the Hellenes and Romans. The Western Culture that was imposed on Russia by Peter the Great, what Spengler called


, is a veneer.

Spengler stated that the Russian soul is

‘the plain without limit’



The Russian soul expresses its own type of infinity, albeit not that of the Westerner’s


soul, which becomes


by its own technics at the end of its life-cycle.


(Although it could be argued that Sovietism enslaved man to machine, a Spenglerian would cite this as an example of


). However, Civilizations follow their life’s course, and one cannot see Spengler’s descriptions as moral judgements but as observations.

The finale for Western Civilization according to Spengler cannot be to create further great forms of art and music, which belong to the youthful or ‘spring’ epoch of a civilization, but to dominate the world under a technocratic-military dispensation, before declining into oblivion like prior world civilizations.

While Spengler saw this as the fulfilment of the Western Civilization, the form it has assumed since World War II has been under U.S. dispensation and is quite different from what might have been assumed under European imperialism.

It is after this Western decline—which now means U.S. decline—that

Spengler alluded to the next world civilization being Russian


According to Spengler, Russian Orthodox architecture does not represent the infinity towards space that is symbolized by the Western high culture’s Gothic Cathedral spire, nor the enclosed space of the Mosque of the Magian Culture,


but the impression of sitting upon a horizon. Spengler considered that this Russian architecture is ‘not yet a style, only the promise of a style that will awaken when the real Russian religion awakens’.


Spengler was writing of the Russian culture as an outsider, and by his own reckoning must have realized the limitations of that. It is therefore useful to compare his thoughts on Russia with those of Russians of note.

Nikolai Berdyaev in

The Russian Idea

affirms what Spengler describes:

There is that in the Russian soul which corresponds to the immensity, the vagueness, the infinitude of the Russian land, spiritual geography corresponds with physical. In the Russian soul there is a sort of immensity, a vagueness, a predilection for the infinite, such as is suggested by the great plain of Russia.6

The connections between family, nation, birth, unity and motherland are reflected in the Russian language:

род [rod]: family, kind, sort, genus

родина [ródina]: homeland, motherland

родители [rodíteli]: parents

родить [rodít’]: to give birth

роднить [rodnít’]: to unite, bring together

родовой [rodovói]: ancestral, tribal

родство [rodstvó]: kinship

Western-liberalism, rationalism, even the most strenuous efforts of Bolshevik dialectal materialism, have so far not been able to permanently destroy, but at most repress, these conceptions—conscious or unconscious—of what it is to be ‘Russian’

. Spengler, as will be seen, even during the early period of Russian Bolshevism, already predicted that even this would take on a different, even antithetical form, to the


import of Marxism.

It was soon that the USSR was again paying homage to Holy Mother Russia rather than the international proletariat, much to Trotsky’s lament.

‘Russian Socialism’, Not Marxism

Of the Russian soul, the ego/vanity of the Western culture-man is missing; the persona seeks impersonal growth in service, ‘in the brother-world of the plain’. Orthodox Christianity condemns the ‘I’ as ‘sin’.


The Russian concept of ‘we’ rather than ‘I’, and of impersonal service to the expanse of one’s land, implies another form socialism to that of Marxism. It is perhaps in this sense that

Stalinism proceeded along lines often antithetical to the Bolshevism envisaged by Trotsky, et al.8

A recent comment by an American visitor to Russia, Barbara J. Brothers, as part of a scientific delegation, states something akin to Spengler’s observation:

The Russians have a sense of connectedness to themselves and to other human beings that is just not a part of American reality. It isn’t that competitiveness does not exist; it is just that there always seems to be more consideration and respect for others in any given situation.9

Of the Russian traditional ethos, intrinsically antithetical to Western individualism, including that of property relations, Berdyaev wrote:

Of all peoples in the world the Russians have the community spirit; in the highest degree the Russian way of life and Russian manners, are of that kind. Russian hospitality is an indication of this sense of community.10

Taras Bulba

Russian National Literature starting from the 1840s began to consciously express the Russian soul. Firstly Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol’s

Taras Bulba

, which along with the poetry of Pushkin, founded a Russian literary tradition; that is to say, truly Russian, and distinct from the previous literature based on German, French, and English. John Cournos states of this in his introduction to

Taras Bulba


The spoken word, born of the people, gave soul and wing to literature; only by coming to earth, the native earth, was it enabled to soar. Coming up from Little Russia, the Ukraine, with Cossack blood in his veins, Gogol injected his own healthy virus into an effete body, blew his own virile spirit, the spirit of his race, into its nostrils, and gave the Russian novel its direction to this very day.

Taras Bulba is a tale on the formation of the Cossack folk. In this folk-formation the outer enemy plays a crucial role. The Russian has been formed largely as the result of battling over centuries with Tartars, Muslims and Mongols.11

Their society and nationality were defined by religiosity, as was the West’s by Gothic Christianity during its ‘Spring’ epoch, in Spenglerian terms. The newcomer to a


, or permanent village, was greeted by the Chief as a Christian and as a warrior: ‘Welcome! Do you believe in Christ?’ —’I do’, replied the new-comer. ‘And do you believe in the Holy Trinity?’— ‘I do’.—’And do you go to church?’—’I do.’ ‘Now cross yourself’.


Gogol depicts the scorn in which trade is held, and when commerce has entered among Russians, rather than being confined to non-Russians associated with trade, it is regarded as a symptom of decadence:

I know that baseness has now made its way into our land. Men care only to have their ricks of grain and hay, and their droves of horses, and that their mead may be safe in their cellars; they adopt, the devil only knows what Mussulman customs. They speak scornfully with their tongues. They care not to speak their real thoughts with their own countrymen. They sell their own things to their own comrades, like soulless creatures in the market-place…. . Let them know what brotherhood means on Russian soil!13

Here we might see a Russian socialism that is, so far from being the dialectical materialism offered by Marx, the mystic we-feeling forged by the vastness of the plains and the imperative for brotherhood above economics, imposed by that landscape. Russia’s feeling of world-mission has its own form of messianism whether expressed through Christian Orthodoxy or the non-Marxian form of ‘world revolution’ under Stalin, or both in combination, as suggested by the later rapport between Stalinism and the Church from 1943 with the creation of the Council for Russian Orthodox Church Affairs.

14 In both senses, and even in the embryonic forms taking place under Putin, Russia is conscious of a world-mission, expressed today as Russia’s role in forging a multipolar world, with Russia as being pivotal in resisting unipolarism


Commerce is the concern of foreigners, and the intrusions bring with them the corruption of the Russian soul and culture in general: in speech, social interaction, servility, undermining Russian ‘brotherhood’, the Russian ‘we’ feeling that Spengler described.


The Cossack brotherhood is portrayed by Gogol as the formative process in the building up of the Russian people. This process is not one of biology but of spirit, even transcending the family bond. Spengler treated the matter of race as that of soul rather than of zoology.


To Spengler, landscape was crucial in determining what becomes ‘race’, and the duration of families grouped in a particular landscape—including nomads who have a defined range of wandering—form

‘a character of duration’

, which was Spengler’s definition of ‘race’.


Gogol describes this ‘race’ forming process among the Russians. So far from being an aggressive race nationalism it is an expanding mystic brotherhood under God:

The father loves his children, the mother loves her children, the children love their father and mother; but this is not like that, brothers. The wild beast also loves its young. But a man can be related only by similarity of mind and not of blood. There have been brotherhoods in other lands, but never any such brotherhoods as on our Russian soil.18

The Russian soul is born in suffering

. The Russian accepts the fate of life in service to God and to his Motherland. Russia and Faith are inseparable. When the elderly warrior Bovdug is mortally struck by a Turkish bullet, his final words are exhortations on the nobility of suffering, after which his spirit soars to join his ancestors.


The mystique of death and suffering for the Motherland is described in the death of Tarus Bulba when he is captured and executed, his final words being ones of resurrection:

‘Wait, the time will come when ye shall learn what the orthodox Russian faith is! Already the people scent it far and near. A czar shall arise from Russian soil, and there shall not be a power in the world which shall not submit to him!’20


A dichotomy has existed for centuries, starting with Peter the Great, of attempts to impose a Western veneer over Russia. This is called


The resistance of those attempts is what Spengler called ‘Old Russia’.


Berdyaev wrote: ‘Russia is a complete section of the world, a colossal East-West. It unites two worlds, and within the Russian soul two principles are always engaged in strife—the Eastern and the Western’.


With the orientation of Russian policy towards the West, ‘Old Russia’ was ‘forced into a false and artificial history’.


Spengler wrote that Russia had become dominated by Late Western culture:

Late-period arts and sciences, enlightenment, social ethics, the materialism of world-cities, were introduced, although in this pre-cultural time religion was the only language in which man understood himself and the world.24

‘The first condition of emancipation for the Russian soul’, wrote Ivan Sergyeyevich Aksakov, founder of the anti-Petrinist ‘Slavophil’ group, in 1863 to Dostoyevski, ‘is that it should hate Petersburg with all this might and all its soul’. Moscow is holy, Petersburg satanic. A widespread popular legend presents Peter the Great as Antichrist.

The hatred of the ‘West’ and of ‘Europe’ is the hatred for a Civilization that had already reached an advanced state of decay into materialism and sought to impose its primacy by cultural subversion rather than by combat, with its City-based and money-based outlook, ‘poisoning the unborn culture in the womb of the land’.


Russia was still a land where there were no bourgeoisie and no true class system, but only lord and peasant, a view confirmed by Berdyaev, writing: ‘The various lines of social demarcation did not exist in Russia; there were no pronounced classes. Russia was never an aristocratic country in the Western sense, and equally there was no bourgeoisie’.


The cities that emerged threw up an intelligentsia, copying the intelligentsia of Late Westerndom, ‘bent on discovering problems and conflicts, and below, an uprooted peasantry, with all the metaphysical gloom, anxiety, and misery of their own Dostoyevski, perpetually homesick for the open land and bitterly hating the stony grey world into which the Antichrist had tempted them. Moscow had no proper soul’.


Berdyaev likewise states of the


of the upper class that ‘Russian history was a struggle between East and West within the Russian soul’.



Berdyaev states that while


introduced an epoch of cultural dynamism, it also placed a heavy burden upon Russia, and a disunity of spirit.


However, Russia has her own religious sense of mission, which is as universal as the Vatican’s. Spengler quotes Dostoyevski as writing in 1878: ‘all men must become Russian, first and foremost Russian. If general humanity is the Russian ideal, then everyone must first of all become a Russian’.


The Russian messianic idea found a forceful expression in Dostoyevski’s

The Possessed

, where, in a conversation with Stavrogin, Shatov states:

Reduce God to the attribute of nationality? … On the contrary, I elevate the nation to God…. The people is the body of God. Every nation is a nation only so long as it has its own particular God, excluding all other gods on earth without any possible reconciliation, so long as it believes that by its own God it will conquer and drive all other gods off the face of the earth…. The sole ‘God bearing’ nation is the Russian nation….31

This is Russia as the


, as the ‘nation’ whose world-historical mission is to resist the son of perdition, a literal Anti-Christ, according to the Revelation of St. John, or as the birthplace of a great Czar serving the traditional role of nexus between the terrestrial and the divine around which Russia is united in this mission. This mission as the


defines Russia as something more than merely an ethno-nation-state, as Dostoyevski expressed it.


Even the USSR, supposedly purged of all such notions, merely re-expressed them with Marxist rhetoric, which was no less apocalyptic and messianic, and which saw the ‘decadent West’ in terms analogous to elements of Islam regarding the USA as the ‘Great Satan’. It is not surprising that

the pundits of secularized, liberal Western academia, politics, and media could not understand, and indeed were outraged, when Solzhenitsyn seemed so ungrateful when in his Western exile he unequivocally condemned the liberalism and materialism of the a ‘decadent West’. A figure who was for so long held up as a martyr by Western liberalism transpired to be a traditional Russian and not someone who was willing to remake himself in the image of a Western liberal to for the sake of continued plaudits.

He attacked the modern West’s conceptions of ‘rights’, ‘freedom’, ‘happiness’, ‘wealth’, the irresponsibility of the ‘free press’, ‘television stupor’, and referred to a ‘Western decline’ in courage. He emphasized that this was a spiritual matter:

But should I be asked, instead, whether I would propose the West, such as it is today, as a model to my country, I would frankly have to answer negatively. No, I could not recommend your society as an ideal for the transformation of ours. Through deep suffering, people in our own country have now achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state of spiritual exhaustion does not look attractive. Even those characteristics of your life which I have just enumerated are extremely saddening.33

These are all matters that have been addressed by Spengler, and by traditional Russians,

whether calling themselves Czarists Orthodox Christians or even ‘Bolsheviks’ or followers of Putin


Spengler’s thesis that Western Civilization is in decay is analogous to the more mystical evaluations of the West by the Slavophils, both reaching similar conclusions. Solzhenitsyn was in that tradition, and Putin is influenced by it in his condemnation of Western liberalism.

Putin recently pointed out the differences between the West and Russia as at root being ‘moral’ and religious


Another serious challenge to Russia’s identity is linked to events taking place in the world. Here there are both foreign policy and moral aspects. We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual.34

Spengler saw Russia as outside of Europe, and even as ‘Asian’. He even saw a Western rebirth vis-à-vis opposition to Russia, which he regarded as leading the ‘colored world’ against the whites, under the mantle of Bolshevism. Yet there were also other destinies that Spengler saw over the horizon, which had been predicted by Dostoyevski.

Once Russia had overthrown its alien intrusions, it could look with another perspective upon the world, and reconsider Europe not with hatred and vengeance but in kinship. Spengler wrote that while Tolstoi, the


, whose doctrine was the precursor of Bolshevism, was ‘the former Russia’, Dostoyevski was ‘the coming Russia’. Dostoyevski as the representative of the ‘coming Russia’ ‘does not know’ the hatred of Russia for the West. Dostoyevski and the old Russia are transcendent. ‘His passionate power of living is comprehensive enough to embrace all things Western as well’. Spengler quotes Dostoyevski: ‘I have two fatherlands, Russia and Europe’. Dostoyevski as the harbinger of a Russian high culture ‘has passed beyond both Petrinism and revolution, and from his future he looks back over them as from afar. His soul is apocalyptic, yearning, desperate, but of this future he is




To the ‘Slavophil’, Europe is precious. The Slavophil appreciates the richness of European high culture while realizing that Europe is in a state of decay. We might recall that while the USA—through the CIA front, the Congress for Cultural Freedom—promoted Abstract Expressionism and Jazz to Europe (like it now promotes Hi-Hop, which the State Department calls ‘Hip-Hop diplomacy’), the USSR condemned this as ‘rootless cosmopolitanism’. Berdyaev discussed what he regarded as an inconsistency in Dostoyevski and the Slavophils towards Europe, yet one that is comprehensible when we consider Spengler’s crucial differentiation between





Dostoyevsky calls himself a Slavophil. He thought, as did also a large number of thinkers on the theme of Russia and Europe, that he knew decay was setting in, but that a great past exists in her, and that she has made contributions of great value to the history of mankind.36

It is notable that while this differentiation between




is ascribed to a particularly


philosophical tradition, Berdyaev comments that it was present among the Russians ‘long before Spengler’:

It is to be noted that long before Spengler, the Russians drew the distinction between ‘culture’ and ‘civilization’, that they attacked ‘civilization’ even when they remained supporters of ‘culture’. This distinction in actual fact, although expressed in a different phraseology, was to be found among the Slavophils.37

Dostoyevski was indifferent to the Late West, while Tolstoi was a product of it, the Russian Rousseau.

Imbued with ideas from the Late West, the Marxists sought to replace one Petrineruling class with another. Neither represented the soul of Russia

. Spengler stated: ‘The real Russian is the disciple of Dostoyevski, even though he might not have read Dostoyevski, or anyone else, nay, perhaps because he cannot read, he is himself Dostoyevski in substance’. The intelligentsia hates, the peasant does not. He would eventually overthrow Bolshevism and any other form of


. Here we see Spengler unequivocally stating that the post-Western civilisation will be Russian.

For what this townless people yearns for is its own life-form, its own religion, its own history. Tolstoi’s Christianity was a misunderstanding. He spoke of Christ and he meant Marx. But to Dostoyevski’s Christianity, the next thousand years will belong.


To the true Russia, as Dostoyevski stated it, ‘not a single nation has ever been founded on principles of science or reason’.


By the time Spengler’s final book,

The Hour of Decision

, had been published in 1934 he was stating that Russia had overthrown


and the trappings of the Late West. While he called the new orientation of Russia ‘Asian’, he said that it was ‘a new


, and an idea with a future too’.


To clarify, Russia looks towards the ‘East’, but while the Westerner assumes that ‘Asia’ and East are synonymous with Mongol, the etymology of the word ‘Asia’ comes from Greek


, ca. 440 BC, referring to all regions east of Greece.


During his time Spengler saw in Russia that,

Race, language, popular customs, religion, in their present form… all or any of them can and will be fundamentally transformed. What we see today then is simply the new kind of life which a vast land has conceived and will presently bring forth. It is not definable in words, nor is its bearer aware of it. Those who attempt to define, establish, lay down a program, are confusing life with a phrase, as does the ruling Bolshevism, which is not sufficiently conscious of its own West-European, Rationalistic and cosmopolitan origin.42

Of Russia in 1934, Spengler already saw that ‘of genuine Marxism there is very little except in names and programs’. He doubted that the Communist program is ‘really still taken seriously’. He saw the possibility of the vestiges of


Bolshevism being overthrown, to be replaced by a ‘nationalistic’ Eastern type which would reach ‘gigantic proportions unchecked’.


Spengler also referred to Russia as the country ‘least troubled by Bolshevism’,


and the ‘Marxian face [was] only worn for the benefit of the outside world’.


A decade after Spengler’s death the direction of Russia under Stalin had pursued clearer definitions, and


Bolshevism had been transformed in the way Spengler foresaw.



As in Spengler’s time, and centuries before, there continues to exist two tendencies in Russia: the Old Russian and the


. Neither one nor the other spirit is presently dominant, although

under Putin Old Russia struggles for resurgence. U.S. political circles see this Russia as a threat, and expend a great deal on promoting ‘regime change’

via the National Endowment for Democracy, and many others; these activities recently bringing reaction from the Putin government against such NGOs.


Spengler in a published lecture to the Rheinish-Westphalian Business Convention in 1922 referred to the ‘ancient, instinctive, unclear, unconscious, and subliminal drive that is present in every Russian, no matter how thoroughly westernized his conscious life may be—a mystical yearning for the South, for Constantinople and Jerusalem, a genuine crusading spirit similar to the spirit our Gothic forebears had in their blood but which we can hardly appreciate today’.


Bolshevism destroyed one form of Petrinism with another form, clearing the way ‘for

a new culture that will some day arise between Europe and East Asia. It is more a beginning than an end

‘. The peasantry ‘will some day become conscious of its own will, which points in a wholly different direction’. ‘The peasantry is the true Russian people of the future. It will not allow itself to be perverted or suffocated’.


The arch-Conservative anti-Marxist, Spengler, in keeping with the German tradition of


, considered the possibility of a Russo-German alliance in his 1922 speech, the Treaty of Rapallo being a reflection of that tradition. ‘A new type of leader’ would be awakened in adversity, to ‘new crusades and legendary conquests’. The rest of the world, filled with religious yearning but falling on infertile ground, is ‘torn and tired enough to allow it suddenly to take on a new character under the proper circumstances’. Spengler suggested that ‘perhaps Bolshevism itself will change in this way under new leaders’. ‘But the silent, deeper Russia,’ would turn its attention towards the Near and East Asia, as a people of ‘great inland expanses’.


While Spengler postulated the organic cycles of a High Culture going through the life-phases of birth, youthful vigor, maturity, old age and death, it should be kept in mind that a life-cycle can be disrupted, aborted, murdered or struck by disease, at any time, and end without fulfilling itself. Each has its analogy in politics, and there are plenty of Russophobes eager to stunt Russia’s destiny with political, economic and cultural contagion. The Soviet bloc fell through inner and outer contagion.

Spengler foresaw new possibilities for Russia, yet to fulfil its historic mission, messianic and of world-scope,

a traditional mission of which Putin seems conscious, or at least willing to play his part

. Coyer cogently states: ‘The conflict between Russia and the West, therefore, is portrayed by both the Russian Orthodox Church and by Vladimir Putin and his cohorts as nothing less than

a spiritual/civilizational conflict



The invigoration of Orthodoxy is part of this process, as is the leadership style of Putin, as distinct from a Yeltsin for example.

Whatever Russia is called outwardly, whether monarchical, Bolshevik, or democratic, there is an inner—eternal—Russia that is unfolding, and whose embryonic character places her on an antithetical course to that of the USA



[1] Paul Coyer, (Un)Holy Alliance: Vladimir Putin, The Russian Orthodox Church And Russian Exceptionalism,


, May 21, 2015,

[2] Oswald Spengler,

The Decline of The West

, George Allen & Unwin, London, 1971, Vol. I, 201.

[3] Ibid., Vol. II, 502.

[4] Ibid., Vol. I, 183-216.

[5] Ibid., 201

[6] Nikolai Berdyaev,

The Russian Idea,

Macmillan Co., New York, 1948, 1.

[7] Oswald Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., Vol. I, 309.

[8] Leon Trotsky,

The Revolution Betrayed: what is the Soviet Union and where is it going?

, 1936.

[9] Barbara J. Brothers, From Russia, With Soul,

Psychology Today

, January 1, 1993

[10] Berdyaev, op. cit., 97-98.

[11] H Cournos,’Introduction’, N V Gogol,

Taras Bulba & Other Tales

, 1842

[12] N V Gogol, ibid., III.

[13] Ibid.

[14] T A Chumachenko,

Church and State in Soviet Russia

, M. E. Sharpe Inc., New York, 2002.

[15] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., I, 309

[16] Ibid., II, 113-155.

[17] Ibid., Vol. II, 113

[18] Golgol, op. cit., IX.

[19] Ibid.

[20] Ibid., XII.

[21] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., II, 192.

[22] Berdyaev, op. cit., 1

[23] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., II, 193

[24] Ibid., II, 193

[25] Ibid., II, 194

[26] Berdyaev, 1

[27] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., II, 194

[28] Berdyaev, op. cit., 15

[29] Ibid.

[30] Spengler,

The Hour of Decision

, Alfred A Knopf, New York, 1963, 63n.

[31] Fyodor Dostoevski,

The Possessed

, Oxford University Press, 1992, Part II: I: 7, 265-266.

[32] Ibid.

[33] Alexander Solzhenitsyn, ‘A World Split Apart’ — Commencement Address Delivered At Harvard University, June 8, 1978

[34] V Putin, address to the Valdai Club, 19 September 2013.

[35] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., II, 194

[36] Berdyaev, op. cit., 70

[37] Ibid.

[38] Spengler,

The Decline

, op. cit., Vol. II, 196

[39] Dostoyevski, op. cit., II: I: VII

[40] Spengler,

The Hour of Decision

, Alfred A Knopf, New York, 1963, 60

[41] Ibid., 61

[42] Ibid.

[43] Ibid., 63.

[44] Ibid.,182

[45] Ibid., 212

[46] D Brandenberger,

National Bolshevism: Stalinist culture and the Formation of Modern Russian National Identity 1931-1956

. Harvard University Press, Massachusetts, 2002.



, Vladimir Putin signs new law against ‘undesirable NGOs’, May 24, 2015

[48] Spengler, ‘The Two Faces of Russia and Germany’s Eastern Problems’,

Politische Schriften

, Munich, February 14, 1922.

[49] Ibid.

[50] Ibid.

[51] Paul Coyer, op. cit.

Read More Articles Here…


via Signs of the Times

December 29, 2016 at 02:05AM