Connect with us

RussiaFeed

History

Politics

Russia Insider goes Goebbels: debunking Charles Bausman’s warped vision of Russian reality

Russia Insider’s editor-in-chief railed against the supposed Jewish origin of the world’s ills, but totally fails to understand Russia’s history or its people

Dmitry Babich

Published

on

87 Views

Going After Jews Instead of Neo-Liberals

Charles Bausman, the editor-in-chief of Russia Insider, has chosen a path well-trodden: he decided to woo his audience by discovering the “Jewish origin” of today’s wars and tensions.

Nothing could be a greater service to the globalist neoliberals and neoconservatives, who try to present the alternative voices (and in the first place the alternative voices from Russia) as a chorus of anti-Semites, conspiracy theorists and Putin’s pals.

The detractors of RT and Sputnik in the United States and the EU may quickly forget that RT’s Paula Slier made award-winning documentaries on the horrors of Holocaust, which did not prevent Paula from reporting on the horrors of Israel’s bombardment of Palestinian areas. But the detractors of RT and Sputnik will remember Mr. Bausman’s recent opus headlined “It’s Time to Drop the Jew Taboo.”

They will remember it and cite it as an example of “Putin’s man going fascist,” quickly spreading its ill fame to all the media outlets which Mr. Bausman happened to visit. Such reactions from the representatives of the Western mainstream media are already coming. Judging from the text of his article, Mr. Bausman was fully aware of this kind of reaction before starting to pen out his feelings about Jews, but nevertheless proceeded with its publication. 

Nothing To Do With Russia

Attempts to connect Mr. Bausman’s article to our country or to its president are not just missing the point – they are outright deceitful. Mr. Bausman’s article was published on his own private media resource, for which he is trying to get donations from the public. Mr. Bausman’s anti-Semitic article has nothing to do with Putin or with the “atmosphere in Putin’s Russia” (which is not anti-Semitic and not xenophobic in general).

Moreover, it has nothing to do with the Russian intellectual tradition. Please note that no reference to Russian thinkers was made in Mr. Bausman’s article, except for a few illustrations from the legacy of the late Russian painter Ilya Glazunov, who dismissed accusations of anti-Semitism during his lifetime, but who died last year and so can defend neither his reputation nor for his copyright.

That is not an unusual situation for anyone dealing with Mr. Bausman: in his article, Mr. Bausman writes that Russia Insider “republishes the best articles about Russia with a link to the original,” but he forgets to add that Russia Insider usually does it without permission and, consequently, without any compensation for the holders of the articles’ copyright.

This is not Mr. Bausman’s only omission. In this article, I will try to single out just the chief among Mr. Bausman’s many omissions. I am doing this in the hope of backing up my previous paragraph with facts, which are quite plentiful in the dramatic history of Russia’s more than 200 years long “blood liaison” with East European Jews.

The vast majority of the Jews that found themselves on the territory of the Russian Empire and later of the Soviet Union as a result of our country’s expansions in the 18-20th centuries became our Jews. They call themselves Soviet, Russian, sometimes even Ukrainian, Moldovan or Georgian Jews, but nonetheless they are a part of what president Putin called the “Russian world,” and not just because the Russian language is native to them – as, in most cases, it is their mother-tongue.

“They” Made Everything, from Neo-liberalism to the Soviet Atomic Bomb

Here is what Mr. Bausman writes: “On the policy side, the neo-conservative movement, Russia’s harshest foe, was conceived of, is led by, and consists mostly of, Jews.”

How very interesting! Following the same logic and sticking to the same standards of accuracy, I could say that the Soviet atomic bomb, Russia’s dearest friend, was conceived of and developed mostly by, Jews. Yes, academician Abraham Joffe was the head of the physics’ department at the Soviet Academy of Sciences which had to answer Stalin’s question about the feasibility of a nuclear weapon back in 1942. Joffe’s conclusion was a positive one, with proposals on the way to make the bomb real (here we have the Jewish “conception” of the Soviet bomb). The works on producing plutonium for the first Soviet atomic bomb were headed by the chief engineer Rotshild and the chief technologist Zilberman (so their second names sounded in Russian).

In reality, of course, the Soviet atomic bomb was created by a multi-ethnic team of heroes, who had a variety of motivations. Some of them had an ideological motivation (serving communism), some wanted to protect mother Russia and mankind from an American nuclear monopoly (serving motherland and humanity). And some were just saving their lives, since the project was supervised by the sinister minister of state security, Lavrenty Beria. And, according to eyewitnesses’ memoirs, Jews were present in all three groups.   

Not Blood, But Ideology

In the same way it is profoundly unfair on Mr. Bausman’s side to reduce the cruel and extremist neoliberal and neoconservative ideologies to the Jewish origins of some of their proponents. Writing on the matter, Mr. Bausman forgets to mention that neoconservatism’s most vocal and best known opponent in the United States is none other than professor Stephen F. Cohen – a Jew.

And, talking about responsibility, where shall we stick the father of the drone killings’ program, CIA’s top Angel of Death John Brennan, who happens to be an Irish Catholic (oh, my God, even a practicing one)?

Taking into account the color of the skins of Barack Obama and Condoleeza Rice, the father of the Ukrainian war and the mother of the invasion into Iraq, one could think of the IDEOLOGICAL similarities between neoliberalism and neo-conservatism rather than of any Jewish conspiracies.

Or, following Mr. Bausman’s logic, we must put the blame for America’s wars on people of African origin, probably with an even more “colorful” inclusion of Mr. Powell into this affair. (As Mr. Bausman puts it, “there is overwhelming ethnic imbalance.”)

The truth is that the affairs with Mr. Powell’s “lab tube speech” in the UN, as well as with Mrs. Nuland’s distribution of cookies to Maidan rebels, were indeed unseemly, but these affairs had nothing to do with their Jewish or non-Jewish origins.

These affairs reflected not ethnic hatreds, but the Western infatuation with its own ultraliberal ideology, an explosive mix of vulgarized 20th century “old dead truths,” justifying murders and lies in the name of “elections” and “justice,” which somehow must always bring “liberals” to power. 

Mr. Bausman also forgets to notice one other important thing: very often neo-libo-conservatives declare themselves Jews out of sheer conformism.

Take Madeleine Albright, Clinton’s secretary of state during the NATO’s invasion of Yugoslavia in 1999. She conveniently found Jewish roots in her family only AFTER bombing Yugoslavia, until then she was a proud daughter of a prominent Czech diplomat, Joseph Korbel, who during the advent of Czech nationalism in the first half of the twentieth century felt himself the most Slavic of the Czechs.

Mrs. Albright rushed to fit the positive neo-liberal vision of Jews with the same passion that Mr. Bausman shows when trying to squeeze the Jews (Russian and non-Russian ones) into the negative stereotype.

Repeating the Whites’ Mistakes

Charles Bausman writes: “Many White Russians fleeing the revolution believed that it was mostly a Jewish coup d’etat, financed by wealthy bankers in New York and London who were sworn enemies of Christian Tsarism.”

Indeed, many White Russians thought so, and this is the reason why they lost the civil war, even though the White Guard was supported by those same American, British and French interventionists, whom Mr. Bausman so rightly despises now.

Many of the White Guard’s generals considered Jewish radicalism Russia’s only (or at least Russia’s main) problem, and they did not bother to suggest to the Russian population a viable alternative to Bolshevism – only a return to the status quo before 1917.

The formula “let’s get back to the past + anti-Semitism”  did not work in Russia during the civil war in 1918-1920, and it won’t work now. Even Gennady Zyuganov understood it, but Mr. Bausman is still living encapsulated inside the mind of not the wisest of the White émigrés.

The wisest, such as the writers Vladimir Nabokov and Ivan Bunin, were against anti-Semitism. Nabokov even had a Jewish wife (Vera Nabokov is frequently called the best writer’s wife in the history of literature) and made a row in an American restaurant which had a sign “Gentiles Only.”

But Mr. Bausman will probably never understand THIS KIND of Russian. 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

De-Dollarization Tops Agenda at Russia’s Eastern Economic Forum

The Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) was held in Vladivostok on Sept.11-13. Founded in 2015, the event has become a platform for planning and launching projects to strengthen business ties in the Asia-Pacific region.

Published

on

Via Strategic Culture

This year, the EEF brought together delegations from over 60 countries to discuss the topic “The Far East: Expanding the Range of Possibilities”. A total of 100 business events involving over 6,000 participants were held during the three days.

1,357 media personnel worked to cover the forum. Last year, the number of participants was 5,000 with 1,000 media persons involved in reporting and broadcasting. The EEF-18 gathered 340 foreign and 383 Russian CEOs. Nearly 80 start-ups from across South-East Asia joined the meeting.

CLICK HERE to Support The Duran >>

This year, a total of 175 agreements worth of 2.9 trillion rubles (some $4.3 billion) were signed. For comparison, the sum was 2.5 trillion rubles (roughly $3.7 billion) in 2017.

They included the development of the Baimsky ore deposits in Chukotka, the construction of a terminal for Novatek LNG at Bechevinskaya Bay in Kamchatka and the investment of Asian countries in Russia’s agricultural projects in the Far East.

Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Mail.Ru Group, Megafon and Chinese Alibaba inked an agreement on establishing AliExpress trade joint venture. Rosneft and Chinese CNPC signed an oil exploration agreement.

The Chinese delegation was the largest (1,096 people), followed by the Japanese (570 members). The list of guests included the president of Mongolia and prime ministers of Japan and South Korea.

It was also the first time Chinese President Xi Jinping attended the event to meet his Russian counterpart. The issue of de-dollarization topped the agenda. Russia and China reaffirmed their interest in expanding the use of national currencies in bilateral deals.

During the forum, Kirill Dmitriev, the head of RDIF, said the fund intends to use only national currencies in its transactions with China starting from 2019. It will cooperate with the China Development Bank.

This “yuanification” is making visible progress with Shanghai crude futures increasing their share of oil markets up to 14 percent or even more. China has signed agreements with Canada and Qatar on national currencies exchange.

READ MORE: Eastern Economic Forum opens new chapter in US-Russia dialogue

De-dollarization is a trend that is picking up momentum across the world. A growing number of countries are interested in replacing the dollar. Russia is leading the race to protect itself from fluctuations, storms and US-waged trade wars and sanctions.

Moscow backs non-dollar trade with Ankara amid the ongoing lira crisis. Turkey is switching from the dollar to settlements in national currencies, including its trade with China and other countries. Ditching the US dollar is the issue topping the BRICS agenda. In April, Iran transferred all international payments to the euro.

The voices calling for de-dollarization are getting louder among America’s closest European allies. In August, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas called for the creation of a new payments system independent of the US.

According to him, Europe should not allow the United States to act “over our heads and at our expense.” The official wants to strengthen European autonomy by establishing independent payment channels, creating a European Monetary Fund and building up an independent SWIFT system.

Presenting his annual program, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker called on Sept. 12 for the European Union to promote the euro as a global currency to challenge the dollar.

According to him, “We must do more to allow our single currency to play its full role on the international scene.” Mr. Juncker believes “it is absurd that Europe pays for 80 percent of its energy import bill – worth 300 billion euros a year – in US dollars when only roughly 2 percent of our energy imports come from the United States.” He wants the raft of proposals made in his state of the union address to start being implemented before the European Parliament elections in May.

70% of all world trade transactions account for the dollar, while 20% are  settled in the euro, and the rest falls on the yuan and other Asian currencies. The dollar value is high to make the prices of consumer goods in the US artificially low. The demand for dollars allows refinancing the huge debt at low interest rates. The US policy of trade wars and sanctions has triggered the global process of de-dollarization.

Using punitive measures as a foreign policy tool is like shooting oneself in the foot. It prompts a backlash to undermine the dollar’s status as the world reserve currency – the basis of the US economic might. The aggressive policy undermines the US world standing to make it weaker, not stronger.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Putin and Erdogan Plan Syria-Idlib DMZ

What the Putin-Erdogan DMZ decision means is that the 50,000 Turkish troops occupying Idlib will take control over that land, and have responsibility over the largest concentration of jihadists anywhere on the planet.

Eric Zuesse

Published

on

As I recommended in a post on September 10th, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin and Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan jointly announced on September 17th, “We’ve agreed to create a demilitarized zone between the government troops and militants before October 15. The zone will be 15-20km wide,” which compares to the Korean DMZ’s 4-km width. I had had in mind the Korean experience, but obviously Putin and Erdogan are much better-informed about the situation than I am, and they have chosen a DMZ that’s four to five times wider. In any case, the consequences of such a decision will be momentous, unless U.S. President Donald Trump is so determined for there to be World War III as to stop at nothing in order to force it to happen no matter what Russia does or doesn’t do.

What the Putin-Erdogan DMZ decision means is that the 50,000 Turkish troops who now are occupying Idlib province of Syria will take control over that land, and will thus have the responsibility over the largest concentration of jihadists anywhere on the planet: Idlib. It contains the surviving Syrian Al Qaeda and ISIS fighters, including all of the ones throughout Syria who surrendered to the Syrian Army rather than be shot dead on the spot by Government forces.

For its part, the U.S. Government, backed by its allies and supported in this by high officials of the United Nations, had repeatedly threatened that if there occurs any chemical-weapons attack, or even any claimed chemical-weapons attack, inside Idlib, the U.S. and its allies will instantaneously blame the Syrian Government and bomb Syria, and will shoot down the planes of Syria and of Russia that oppose this bombing-campaign to conquer or ‘liberate’ Syria from its Government. The U.S. has announced its determination to protect what one high U.S. official — who is endorsing what Trump is doing there — “the largest Al Qaeda safe haven since 9/11.” He admits it, but he wants to protect them from being bombed by Syria and by Russia.

During recent weeks, the U.S. military has increasingly said that even if the jihadists they’ve been assisting to assemble the materials for a chemical-weapons attack fail to carry it out or to stage one, any attempt by Syrian and Russian forces to destroy the jihadists (which the U.S. side calls ‘rebels’) in Idlib will be met with overwhelming U.S.-and-allied firepower. That would spark WW III, because whichever side — Russia or U.S. — loses in the Syrian battlefield will nuclear-blitz-attack the other side so as to have the lesser damage from the nuclear war and thus (in military terms) ‘win’ WW III, because the blitz-attack will destroy many of the opposite side’s retaliatory weapons. In a nuclear war, the first side to attack will have a considerable advantage — reducing the number of weapons the other side can launch.

If, on the other hand, the DMZ-plan works, then Turkey’s forces will be responsible for vetting any of Idlib’s residents who try to leave, in order to prohibit jihadists and their supporters from leaving. Once that task (filtering out the non-dangerous inhabitants and retaining in Idlib only the jihadists and their supporters) is done, the entire world might be consulted on whether to exterminate the remaining residents or to set them free to return to the countries from which they came or to other countries. Presumably, no country would want those ‘refugees’. That would answer the question.

America’s Arab allies, the oil monarchies such as the Sauds who own Saudi Arabia and the Thanis who own Qatar, and which have funded Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, would then be put on a spot, because if they say “Exterminate them!” then their clergy who have provided the moral imprimatur upon those families’ ownership of those nations, will either be in rebellion or else will themselves become overthrown either by their own followers or else by their monarch — overthrown from below or from above.

Alternatively, after Turkey’s forces in Idlib will have allowed release from Idlib of all who will be allowed out, Syria’s and Russia’s bombers will simply go in and slaughter the then-surrounded jihadists and take upon themselves the responsibility for that, regardless of what the leaders of the U.S. and its allied governments might say.

On the night of September 17th in Syria, there were missile-attacks “from the sea” against several Syrian cities; and those attacks could have come from either Israel’s or America’s ships, or from other U.S.-allied ships. Russian Television bannered, “Russian plane disappears from radars during Israeli attack on Syria’s Latakia – MoD” and reported:

A Russian military Il-20 aircraft with 14 service members on board went off the radars during an attack by four Israeli jets on Syria’s Latakia province, the Russian Defense Ministry said.
Air traffic controllers at the Khmeimim Air Base “lost contact” with the aircraft on Wednesday evening, during the attack of Israeli F-16 fighters on Latakia, said the MOD.Russian radars also registered the launch of missiles from a French frigate in the Mediterranean on the evening of September 17. …
The attack on Latakia came just hours after Russia and Turkey negotiated a partial demilitarization of the Idlib province

If the missiles were authorized by President Trump, then WW III has already begun in its pre-nuclear stage. However, if the attacks were launched by Israel’s Netanyahu, and/or by France’s Macron, without U.S. authorization, then the U.S. President might respond to them by siding against that aggressor(s) (and also against what he used to call “Radical Islamic Terrorists”), so as to prevent a nuclear war.

Late on September 17th, Al Masdar News bannered “NATO warships move towards Syrian coast” and reported “The NATO flotilla cruising off the Syrian coast reportedly consists of a Dutch frigate, the De Ruyter, a Canadian frigate, the Ville de Quebec, and a Greek cruiser, the Elli.” Al Qaeda and ISIS have influential protectors.

Ultimately, the decision will be U.S. President Trump’s as to whether he is willing to subject the planet to WW III and to its following nuclear winter and consequent die-off of agriculture and of everyone, in order to ‘win’ a nuclear war, such as America’s aristocracy has especially championed since the year 2006. The nuclear-victory concept is called “Nuclear Primacy” — the use of nuclear weapons so as to win a nuclear war against Russia, instead of to prevent a nuclear war. That concept’s predecessor, the “Mutually Assured Destruction” or “M.A.D.” meta-strategy, predominated even in the U.S. until 2006. Trump will have to decide whether the purpose of America’s nuclear-weapons stockpiles is to prevent WW III, or is to win WW III.

In Russia, the purpose has always been to have nuclear weapons in order to prevent WW III. But America’s President will be the person who will make the ultimate decision on this. And Idlib might be the spark. Netanyahu or Macron might be wanting to drag the U.S. into war even against Russia, but the final decision will be Trump’s.

The ultimate question is: How far will the U.S. go in order to continue the U.S. dollar as being the overwhelmingly dominant global currency?

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Russian MoD: Il-20 downed by Syrian missile after attacking Israel’s F-16s used it as cover

Israeli pilots used the Russian plane as cover and set it up to be targeted by the Syrian air defense forces.

The Duran

Published

on

Russia has stated that it “reserves right to response” after claiming that Israel’s actions led to downing of Il-20 by Syrian S-200 missiles.

The Russian military accused their Israeli counterparts for causing the downing of a Russian Il-20 plane by the Syrian air defense forces, which were responding to an Israeli air raid on Latakia.

Via RT


The Russian military say the Israeli raid on Syria triggered a chain of events, which led to the shooting down of a Russian Il-20 plane by a Syrian S-200 surface-to-air missile. Moscow reserves the right to respond accordingly.

On Monday evening four Israeli F-16 fighter jets attacked targets in Syria’s Latakia after approaching from the Mediterranean, a statement by the Russian defense ministry said on Tuesday. The Israeli warplanes came at a small altitude and “created a dangerous situation for other aircraft and vessels in the region”, it said.

The military said the French Navy’s frigate “Auvergne” as well as a Russian Il-20 plane were in the area of the Israeli operation.

“The Israeli pilots used the Russian plane as cover and set it up to be targeted by the Syrian air defense forces. As a consequence, the Il-20, which has radar cross-section much larger than the F-16, was shot down by an S-200 system missile,” the statement said.

The Russian ministry stressed that the Israelis must have known that the Russian plane was present in the area, which didn’t stop them from “the provocation”. Israel also failed to warn Russia about the planned operation in advance. The warning came a minute before the attack started, which “did not leave time to move the Russian plane to a safe area,” the statement said.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending