The Orthodox Nationalist: Stalin the Philo-Semitic Internationalist

Dr Matthew Raphael Johnson begins with a summary of current events concerning Donald Trump and Black violence in the USA, before getting to the bulk of the podcast which debunks two big myths about Joseph Stalin, that he was a Russian nationalist and that he was an anti-Semite. He was neither.

It is one thing to show Stalin was not a nationalist and was philo-Semitic but it is another to explain why these myths have been around for so long, as Stalin’s writings and policies were not secret and his works are available to all. The explanation is that the leftist mind eventually tired of the USSR and its misery and sought for ways that it could be denounced.

A search for legislation that assisted the cause of labor in the USSR will prove fruitless as it was never about the workers, but rather the enrichment of a small oligarchic elite that was overwhelmingly Jewish. The USSR could not be hated by leftists just on these grounds, so other foundations were needed. If he could be depicted as “another Hitler” then not only would it be OK to hate Stalinism, but it would also give the left an excuse to say that “Leninism has never been tried.”

Almost without exception, American and western historians paint Stalin as both a “Russian nationalist” and an “Anti-Semite.” The latter especially being believed without question. Stalin is presented this way because it allowed the western left to oppose the USSR in good conscience. Nationalism was universally hated by the ruling class from campus anarchists to corporate billionaires, hence, to recast Stalin as one is to make him non-socialist.

Communism as a vague ideology was never a problem in the minds of the US, the State Department or western corporate capital. Obviously, since corporate capital built the USSR, socialism was a part of the profit structure of American capitalism. Only nationalism was to be fought and therefore, allowing Stalin to be hated by the left required him to be recast as a nationalist and anti-Semite. As with all American academic dogma, this is false.

The myth has been deliberately created. Jewish writers need the gentiles to believe that Hitler and Stalin were the same, lest they be forced to admit that Jews in the USSR slaughtered Christians. By claiming that Stalin was anti-Jewish, they can blunt this claim and argue that the Jews were also targeted. The fact is that the USSR was largely Jewish, was based far more on Jewish ethnic identity than Marxism and certainly had nothing to do with labor. Stalin continued this trend and backed Jewish ethnic interests indirectly throughout his life.

[A paper soon to be published in the Barnes Review on this subject is called: Self-Indulgent Historical Mythology:The Fantasy of Stalin’s “Anti-Semitic Russian Nationalism”]


Andrea Ostrov Letania

Urban gentry Libs wanted safer cities. So, they supported increased policing.

But the very same Libs, posing as ‘progressives’, made lots of pro-black noises about ‘police brutality’ to cover up their own pro-law-and-order policies.

Proggy elites are the biggest hypocrites. They want the cake and eat it too.

They want more police and tougher measures against blacks, but they also want to seem pro-black and against ‘white privilege’.

Look at the two white shitters that came to prominence in the 90s. In fiction, there is CucQentin Tarantino and in non-fiction there is CucKen Burns. Both are successful white boys who live in affluence and privilege and surely appreciate cops who protect their tony privilege and property. But part of white proggy privilege is to virtue-signal about how much they care about Negroes, how much they worship Negro cool.

So, even as CucKen Burns lives in luxury, he gives us UNSTOPPABLE BLACKNESS. And just as Tarantino wallows in his millions and privilege, he gives us DJANGRO KILLS HONKEYS.

Liberal Privilege is Evilege.



When you say what you did above the Third Reich and the Führer which was extremely low brow and superficial and then dismissed valid criticism of same as ’14/88 nuttery’ you did the exact same thing that the liberals, neoliberal and neo-cons of the U.S. do and the Communist Party in the USSR did decades ago. Label any criticism as the product of an insane critic and accuse those who believed in and fought for their nation with a different world view you disagree with or that is opposed to your interests and beliefs as ‘pathological’. It’s sad because I actually agree with a lot you wrote and it’s somewhat entertaining to read with your bombastic style.
All that said what’s most disappointing is these are supposed to be comments about Fr. Matthew Raphael’s podcast about Stalin not having been an Anti-Jewish Nationalist at any point while Gensek of the Central Committee of the Soviet Union but was in fact always a philo-Semitic enemy and destroyer of the Church in all the Soviet Republics and the Iron Curtain! Its incredibly rude to use a comment section as a personal platform especially when you are not even dealing with the podcast or the subject matter or said in your writing!

Gubbler Chechenova

Actually, the terrorists are welcome in my view.

At least they wake white Europe up and make people think twice.

The real problem is not that too many migrants commit terror. The problem is not enough do. Because most immigrants don’t commit terror, they are ‘welcomed’ as ‘new Europeans’.

How nice if every migrant were a terrorist. Europeans would wake up and kick them all out.

Now, let’s suppose all migrants are not terrorists. Suppose none raped. Suppose all just want to settle and find work.

Actually, such people would be more dangerous because there would be no justification for stopping them… unless you are a true nationalist whose primary reason for opposing immigration is racial and cultural than scaremongering about terrorism.

Too much of anti-immigrant/migrant rhetoric is invested in fears of terrorism and rape. In truth, the MAIN ARGUMENT should be that each ethno-nation state has a right to preserve its uniqueness in blood, culture, history, and soil… just like Israel.

After all, if the argument is ‘we must oppose migration cuz of terrorism’, there is no good argument against those who are not going to commit terror.

Chinese and Asian-Indians in Australia don’t commit terror. But that is why they are dangerous. They arrive as ‘peaceful’ immigrants and, in time, may take over the entire nation and reduce whites to minorities.

Chinese in Canada are nice enough, but they are displacing whites just the same in whole swaths of cities.

So, migration must be opposed primarily because too many foreigners change the character of the nation. Look what too much Jewish immigration did to Palestine. Of course, Jews know this, which is why they only allow Jewish immigration.

Also, national identity is cheapened when a nation says ANYONE can become part of the nation. Take Frenchness. It used to be linked with race, history, culture, roots, ancestry, soil, and etc. It was more than an idea.

So, French people had a deep and rich sense of being French. It wasn’t just about ink on paper but about blood in their veins, soil under their feet, remembrance of history, and etc.

Now, ANYONE can become French. So, a recent arrival from Nigeria with NO ROOTS in French blood and history is just as French as a Frenchman whose ancestry goes back many centuries in France. Frenchness has become just ink on paper. Just a t-shirt anyone can put on. Something you can buy in a souvenir shop. The 1000 yrs of Frenchness in your blood and culture count for nothing in making you more French than a newcomer from Africa, Asia, or Middle East with zero roots in French soil and history.

Now, imagine if Black-American-ness was turned into a universal thing. We are used to thinking that black-american-ness is about identity based on blood and history that involves slavery, Jim Crow, and civil rights movement.

But if black-americanness is turned into ink on paper, than an Iranian or Rachel Dolezal can apply for black-American-ness and claim to be just as black as any black-American even though he or she has zero blood or roots in black American history. Identity made interchangeable is cheapened beyond measure.

Also, this kind of globalism is arrogant. It is a kind of suicidal neo-imperialism. Instead of old imperialism of invading other nations, it tells the people of world to come to France, abandon their identity and become ‘French’, and serve France.

Such globalism is an attack on both Frenchness and the culture of the migrants/immigrants. It tells real Frenchmen that Frenchness is just ink on paper, and it tells newcomers to abandon their own roots(that goes back centuries and millennia in their ancestral lands) and become ‘French’. It is a double attack on identity and culture. It is based on neo-Americanism where ‘global citizenship’ is the only allowed identity for all.

Look at both white Americans and immigrant Americans in the era of globo neo-Americanism. White Americans have lost their identity and roots since Americanism is now all about ‘diversity’. White American identity is turning into a matter of how many tattoos one has.

And immigrant communities have lost their own identity and roots and live for MTV and McDonalds. Having lost roots and identity, their idea of culture is listening to rap and watching TV sitcom that worship homos.

Andrea Ostrov Letania

The main lesson about Germany and WWII is that people must choose truth over lies.

During the Nazi era, Germans refused to believe the truth about Hitler. They refused to pay attention to the horrors carried out by Germans in other nations. They refused to believe rumors about the killing of Jews and other folks. Nazi Germany, especially during the war, became an empire of lies and fantasies.

This is one German who refused to live by lies:

Even in DOWNFALL the film, it is amazing how those in the inner circle carry on with lies, partying and dancing, to the very end. And Hitler was lost in his own fantasies, moving phantom armies that didn’t even exist.

But Germans were so into the culture of loyalty and duty that they served the pathological nut to the end.

We see the same pattern all over again. It is ironic cuz the new culture of lies is enforced in the name of redeeming Germany from its past culture of lies.

But even that Redemption Narrative is a lie. True, Germany caused horrible hardships to other nations, but if so, Germany owes something to the nations it destroyed. And they’d be Poland, Russia, France, Holland, etc. One can argue Russians got even by killing lots of Germans, raping and looting, and ruling over a piece of Germany.

As for other nations like Poland and etc., Germany did take great measures to pay reparations. Also, Germans have done a great deal for Jews, understandable.

Those are truths.

But it is a total lie that Germany must still continue to redeem itself by taking care of the world. Germany didn’t do anything to parts of Africa and Middle East from which refugees and migrants are coming. If anything, the people most guilty and responsible for that are the Anglo-Zionists who’ve been filled with warmongering arrogance and hubris since end of Cold War. For these globalist a**holes to invoke Holocaust and WWII and dump the burden of ‘refugees’ on Germany is ridiculous. Given NYT cheerled the Iraq War, it should pay reparations for aiding the lying Bush regime into war. But NYT just says, ‘oops, sorry’ and demands that Germany and EU nations take in all these ‘refugees’ who’ve been uprooted by Zionist intervention in the Middle East and North Africa.

Despite Germany’s great guilt in WWII, Germany is only responsible to those it wronged, not to other nations. What does taking ‘Syrian refugees'(unleashed by crazy foreign policy of US, Israel, Saudis, and Turkey) have to do with the Holocaust and WWII?

Since Indonesians caused a lot of horror in East Timor, should Germans have taken Timorese refugees too?

There was that moment when Merkel was denounced as a wicked witch cuz she said a Palestinian girl had to go back home. But why should Germans be responsible for Palestinian plight when it is Zionists who continue to occupy West Bank?

And there are other lies about the current ‘refugee’ crisis, as more and more Germans are finding out.

Merkel lies. Bureaucrats lie. Police lie. Media lie. Schools lie. Celebrities lie. EU lies.

They may believe they are lying for the higher good, but all these lies add up to evil because a system based on lies and deception can only be evil.

If Nazism was built on lies, anti-Nazi Germany must be based on truth. But anti-Nazi Germany also has come to rest on lies and lies. It is based on the lie that anti-immigration sentiment and German nationalism constitute return of Hitlerism.

In truth, German patriotism and German sovereignty are NOT cases of new nazism. They are healthy nationalism, something all nations need.

Also, the main evil of Nazi Germany was not blood-and-soil ideology but the fact that it violated the blood and soil rights of OTHER nations. If Germans wanted blood-and-soil sovereignty in Germany, fine.

It’s like Jews can have blood and soil in Israel. The current situation is troublesome because Jews are violating the blood and soil rights of Palestinians in the West Bank. Zionists should take back all Jews in West Bank and drive out all Arabs in Israel into West Bank. This is how European peace was achieved after WWII. By the way of population transfers, each nation was allowed to have its right of blood and soil. And the USSR, aka Russian Empire, broke up along those lies. Lithuanians wanted their own blood and soil. Estonians too. And Armenians, Georgians, etc.

But EU and Germany, under the storm clouds of globalism, are now violating this. Blood and soil must be nationalist, not imperialist. The evil of Nazism was it went from nationalism to imperialism. Polish patriots who fought the Germans were all about blood and soil. Poles were saying ‘German blood and soil must be in Germany. Poland is for Polish blood and soil.’

Radicalism is the roots of evil. Radicalism is the extreme belief that one’s views and causes are so radiant, noble, true, and awesome that they have the right to trample on all others causes, agendas, and visions.

Look at Stalin and Hitler. Both had some good ideas but were turned evil by radical ideology/personality.

Stalin’s communism had something about the rights of working man, social justice for the proles, and the role of state to protect people from the exploitative class. But communists were so righteous and radical in their ideology that they felt they had the right to do ANYTHING to further their cause. So, even lies and tyranny were okay as long as they served the higher truth. Morality turned radical become nihilistic.

Same goes for Hitler. He had some good ideas about love of nation, identity, tradition, unity, and volk. Nothing wrong with a Germanic person loving his own people and culture. But this love became radical to the point where he thought only the ‘Aryans’ and their related races deserved any kind of rights, power, and dignity. All the rest were secondary humans, even subhuman. He started with a good idea about patriotism and racial/cultural preservation, but his excessive love for his own people blinded him to the histories and identities of other peoples and their right to survive and carry on.

It’s true that humanity cannot live with truth 100% of the time since truth is often blunt, hurtful, and inconvenient. But truth is truth, and it must be the basis of important decision. Crucial Policies cannot be based on lies in the service of Niceness.

Niceness is nice, but it’s a casual etiquette we maintain for social peace. It has little to do with the truth. What happened in Nice on Bastille Day exposed the lie to the culture of niceness as the basis of national policy. It’s like we should be nice enough to be polite to foreigners in our country. But when foreigners demographically invade our country, we must put aside niceness and firmly say they need to go back home since their massive arrival constitutes an invasion. If a nation continues to prefer the cult of niceness in the face of rude invasions, it is finished.

It’s like we shouldn’t say a fat person is a ‘fatso’ and a ‘buffalo butt’ as such insults are hurtful.

BUT, the doctor must tell the fatass patient that he or she must lose weight and exercise if he or she wants to regain health. The patient may feel hurt, but only the truth is the path to true health.

EU is an empire of lies with a fatass that needs to be called out.

These lies are perpetuated by both cynicism and dogmatism. Many German politicians, reporters, and bureaucrats know what is happening, but they prefer to keep their jobs and careers. They are no different from Stasi and other East German goons who went along with the system out of self-interest.

There was even a report that German journalists take bribes from the CIA.

But there is also dogmatism. The narrative of German Guilt is such an iron dogma of German identity after WWII, esp. since the 1960s(when Jews began to take over US elite power), that Germans favor the Narrative to any facts or truths that threaten it.

If lies better serve the narrative, they are favored over truths.

So, we even have German women lying that they were raped by German men when the rapists were Muslims or Africans. Why? The dogma pounded into the minds tell them that it is noble to uphold the narrative of White Guilt and non-white nobility.

This is the new myth.

wotan237 .

Stop spreading lies about the WW2 era. The war was brought to Hitler, and stories of German atrocities are almost wholly made up by the history writing, Zionist led victors. In the final days in the bunker there was no revelry or general breakdown in discipline- Rochus Misch in “Hitlers Last Witness” tells us the truth …..but you use a concocted film to portray how it really was ?
As to the alleged anti-other racism of the “Nazi’s” – their beliefs were founded upon evidence, observation, and were not as rigid as you make out.

wotan237 .

No- what is nutty is that anyone would try to use a film like ‘Downfall’ as actual history. The last ten days of Hitler was not exactly like the depiction in the movie..
For your education I suggest some reading- “1939: The war that had many fathers” written not so long ago by by a former Major General in the German army, Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof….For more accuracy in thinking about what actually happened inside the concentration camps (a British invention from the Boer war) , one should view on Youtube “The Jewish gas chamber hoax”…:”One third of the holocaust”…..”The Treblinka archaeology hoax”…”The Majdanek gas chamber myth”….For a more balanced view of how the war was conducted etc, watch “Hitlers war- what the historians neglect to mention” If you see these videos and object to their points, let us know so we can expand the discussion and illumination…

Leave a Reply