A Tale of Two Nazis: A Story of Betrayal and Loss

When Vladimir Putin initiated the Special Military Operation in Ukraine, he did so under the justification of denazification. In truth, denazification is really a meaningless term. German National Socialism died in 1945, and the political ideologies and theories that lie in continuity with it do little to represent the source. I have said this before, but if you desire to seek out the worst representation of National Socialist ideology, all one needs to do is look at the modern crop of the dysgenic supposed “neo-nazis”. I am willing to say that more than 90% of these people who, in the west today, idolize Hitler and the Third Reich would be carted off to a labour camp had they lived in Germany during Hitler’s rule. When Vladimir Putin makes statements denouncing “Ukrainian Nazism”, he is essentially referring to Ukrainian nationalism of the type that poses a threat to Russians living in the Ukraine, as well as Russia itself. Putin’s use of “Nazi” is essentially comparable to when Western liberals use “Nazi”, in that Nazi is just a catchall term for “enemy which needs to be destroyed”. But of course, the “Nazis” Putin denounces have western backing, have misanthropic views on Russia and the Holy Orthodox Church, and do pose a legitimate threat to both Russian statehood and the Russian nation (ironically of which Ukrainians are a part).

The contradiction of modern Russia is that it is essentially meant to be a continuation for Russian Provisional government, the White Movement, and the Russian collaborationists in World War Two. Yet the Russian Federation today still celebrates their Soviet past/occupation, and champion the Soviet’s victory over the Third Reich. The Russia of today would be the ultimate enemy of Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union, yet modern Russia attempts to play this game where they attempt to keep the accomplishments and the glory of the Soviet Union while downplaying the fact that the Russian people were essentially rendered slaves to an atheist totalitarian state, a state in which “Russian chauvinism” was actively persecuted while a type of nationalism of the minority (Ukrainian, Belarussian, Tartar, Jewish, Kazakh, etc.) was promoted. Again, all the constituent member states of the Soviet Union had a regional communist party, whereas the Russians had no such representation. It was the purpose of the Soviet state to suppress the Russian identity and replace it with a Soviet one. This was because only the Russians had a history of statehood and an identity able to rival and supplant the Soviet one. Russians were not allowed to be Russian, but instead were made to be “Soviet citizens” and it is telling that there was not a single ethnic Russian general secretary of the Soviet Union until Mikhail Gorbachev. Gorbachev, whose family suffered under the Soviet famines (the famines and Holodomor were not exclusively reserved for Ukrainians) saw to the dissolution of the Soviet Union. This was clearly not his intention, but spiritually, on a metaphysical level I do not think it was possible for the Soviet Union to persist once a Russian elite had come to power, as at an ethnic level the Soviet State was utterly incompatible with who they were.

So modern Russia is essentially the continuation of the Provisional Government of 1918. This is not necessarily a good thing. A provisional government is not meant to be permanent, and this balance on the knife’s edge between Sovietism and Russianism cannot last. One force must take over. The Bolshevik Revolution was divine retribution against those who instituted the February Revolution and established the Provisional Government. The Masons, liberals, republicans, and disloyal nobles who betrayed God and the Tsar were all exterminated at the hands of the Bolshevik Jews. The Jews were punished under Stalin, and many Soviet Jews found their new home in Israel. After Stalin, the Soviet Union rotted away into disillusion. The only good thing about Communist rule in Russia was that it was so anti-human that traditionalists and rightists could not be made to accept it, and instead could persevere in the catacombs and wait for it to die. Under the liberal Russian Republic of 1917, Russia would have become like modern day France, and the Church similar to that of the Anglicans in England. So there are positive elements of the Soviet Union which can be celebrated, but these positive things existed more in spite of Communism rather than because of it.

The last time there was an authentic expression of the Russian nation before 1991 was during the Second World War with those Russians who were subjected to German rule and who were members of the German armed forces. A testament to this was how before the war in the Pskov region, less than ten churches were open and functioning. During the German occupation, over 200 were reopened, and once the Red Army pushed the Germans out, even after Stalin’s arrangements with the Church, all those that were opened by the Germans were shuttered again. The Soviet authorities were not “on the side” of the Russian people, and maybe the Germans were not as well, but the German occupation treated the peoples of the Soviet Union far better than what was supposedly their own government. But again, this is not to downplay the sacrifice of the Russians who fought to defend what they saw as their homeland. There is a sense where we can Honour Both sides, without succumbing to a relativism which denies that one force was morally good. Likewise with the war in Ukraine, I harbour no ill will to the Ukrainian who believes he is fighting for his homeland and people. I disagree with his reasoning, but he is not an evil actor.

The Ukrainians of today celebrate their participation in the Waffen-SS and it is right to do so. The current Russian leadership may ignore or deny this, but many historically literate Russians feel the same way about the RONA, the Russian Liberation Army, and Andrey Vlasov. It also appears to be rather common for soldiers in the modern era to informally use Reich insignia. Be it the United States, which had marines take a photo before an SS banner in Iraq, Australia which had a Kriegsmarine flag attached to a military vehicle while training, or to the soldiers of both sides fighting in the Ukraine. In Ukraine there are “Nazis” on both sides of the conflict, but instead of Nazis, these people can really just be called nationalists. Nationalism can be both a virtue and a vice. The type of Ukrainian nationalism which celebrates figures like Stepan Bandera are detrimental for both Ukraine and Russia and needs to be destroyed. Bandera was a Uniate psychopath who hated the Orthodox Church and the Poles, waging wars against both until he was arrested by German forces. If one fancies themselves a “Ukrainian Nazi”, it makes little sense to idealize an enemy of the Reich and National Socialism. Alternatively, I take no issue with Ukrainians who celebrate the Galician-SS, but would ask them to do so whilst also remembering their Russian brothers who fought in similar if not the same SS units. Now if I am being asked to choose between the descendants of the Ukrainian or Russian SS, I stand with the Russians, and I have hope that in the future Russia will better integrate all aspects of its past in its national view of self.

The time of Russia’s “provisional government” will end. The dichotomy of modern Russia is best symbolized I think by Georgy Zhukov and Andrey Vlasov. I referenced Vlasov in brief. He served as a general for the Russian forces serving alongside the Germans in World War 2. He sought to remove the communists from power and re-establish a free Russia. Georgy Zhukov was the general and later marshal of the Soviet Union who led to the Soviet victory of Germany. I see Zhukov essentially as the perfect representation of a patriot. I of course take issues with patriotism, as it is a loyalty which I feel the state earns and is not owed. But for Zhukov, he served his state out of a love for his people, and even though the Soviet Union was evil, it was an evil which he saw as belonging to his people. Again, we can acknowledge that he was wrong, but we cannot denounce him as morally evil. He believed he was serving is homeland in the best way he could. Zhukov died an Orthodox Christian and had wanted to receive an Orthodox funeral, but of course the Soviet authorities would not allow this to transpire. The tragedy of Zhukov is that the state he spent his life serving only sought to use him and then dispose of him. Thankfully, the Soviet authorities permitted him to live out the remainder of his life in peace, albeit he was relegated to social and political irrelevancy. Thus in the modern Russia, Zhukov should not be remembered as the man who defeated the Germans, but instead as the patriot who loved his country in spite of those who ruled it, and one who tried to serve his people but ultimately found himself subjected to the same repression his fellow Russians suffered, albeit to a lesser degree.

My books are available here: https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AElwin+Ransom&s=relevancerank&text=Elwin+Ransom&ref=dp_byline_sr_book_1

If you are able to donate I would welcome your support on Patreon or via the crypto wallets below: https://www.patreon.com/godkingandnation

Bitcoin: bc1q3q8qaff3d2zllj3yx7jtszrs349xv4av2r8mg3

Ethererum: 0x072E4EE9268AfAA436A8f4BBdAF775b28007eCD4

Leave a comment