Citat:
Ursprungligen postat av
Tumidanda
Notera att "Ukrainas" nationalhjälte, jude- och polack-krossaren Bogdan Chmelnitsky, är listad som en historisk "Amalek". Han var ju även allierad med Ryssland och lyddde under Ryssland.
Jag behöver läsa på mer men för mig framstår det allt mer som att "Ukraina" i nutida mening är helt påhittat och att detta påhitt lanserades och fick fäste i Lvov med omnejd så nyligen som för lite drygt 100 år sedan, eller kanske runt förra sekelskiftet.
Hela konceptet, identiteten och den nationella självbilden verkar vara påhittad ganska nyligen och medvetet ha odlats och underblåsts av lokala galningar som Bandera och Lebed, amerikansk och brittisk underrättelsetjänst och ukrainsk diaspora i Väst under snart 100 år och efter andra världskriget. Stöd för detta antagande är att väldigt få i Ukraina verkar prata ukrainska till vardags (en majoritet även inom Azov pratar ryska) och att stora delar av landet inte har någon som helst historisk koppling till något "ukrainskt". Trots detta så ska Krim och östra Ukraina "återerövras" till varje pris (fastän det aldrig har varit något annat än ryskt eller tatariskt). Det är liksom en helt "negativ" nationell identitet som går ut på att vara "Anti-Ryssland" (anti sig själv i praktiken alltså), hata ryssar, döda ryssar, skrika slagord och tjäna juden.
Det kan verka vara ett fantastiskt påstående men jag är också inne på det här spåret. Ju närmare man granskar Ukraina och ukrainsk nationalism desto mer suspekt och fejk ger det intryck av att vara. En artikel på ryska nyhetsbyrån RIA, som har "made its rounds" bland en del nationella under dagen för att påvisa hur hemska Ryssland är, menar bland mycket annat att Ukraina just är en artificiell skapelse i syfte att vara ett anti-Ryssland. Textens budskap är häpnadsväckande radikalt och det finns väl en del som man skulle kunna invända mot men i huvudsak verkar budskapet korrekt - Ukraina har varit och är ett verktyg skapat och underhållet av Väst (judarna) för att skapa oreda i Ryssland och kring Ryssland:
Citat:
Back in April last year, we wrote about the inevitability of the denazification of Ukraine. Nazi, Bandera Ukraine, the enemy of Russia and the West's tool for the destruction of Russia, we do not need. Today, the issue of denazification has moved into a practical plane.
...
The nazification of Ukraine continued for more than 30 years, beginning at least in 1989, when Ukrainian nationalism received legal and legitimate forms of political expression and led the movement for "independence" towards Nazism.
The peculiarity of modern nazified Ukraine is in amorphousness and ambivalence, which make it possible to disguise Nazism as a desire for "independence" and a "European" (Western, pro-American) path of "development" (in reality - to degradation), to assert that in Ukraine "there is no Nazism , only private individual excesses". After all, there is no main Nazi party, no Fuhrer, no full-fledged racial laws (only their truncated version in the form of repressions against the Russian language). As a result, there is no opposition and resistance to the regime.
However, all of the above does not make Ukrainian Nazism a "light version" of German Nazism during the first half of the 20th century. On the contrary, since Ukrainian Nazism is free from such "genre" (essentially political technology) frameworks and restrictions, it freely unfolds as the fundamental basis of any Nazism - as European and, in its most developed form, American racism. Therefore, denazification cannot be carried out in a compromise, on the basis of a formula like " NATO - no, EU - yes." The collective West itself is the designer, source and sponsor of Ukrainian Nazism, while the Western Bandera cadres and their "historical memory" are only one of the tools for the Naziification of Ukraine. Ukronazism carries not less, but a greater threat to the world and Russia.
The name "Ukraine" apparently cannot be retained as the title of any fully denazified state entity in a territory liberated from the Nazi regime. The people's republics newly created in the space free from Nazism should and will grow from the practice of economic self-government and social security, restoration and modernization of the life support systems of the population.
In fact, their political aspirations cannot be neutral - expiation of guilt before Russia for treating it as an enemy can be realized only by relying on Russia in the processes of restoration, revival and development. No "Marshall Plans" should be allowed for these territories. There can be no "neutrality" in the ideological and practical sense, compatible with denazification. The cadres and organizations that are the instrument of denazification in the newly denazified republics cannot but rely on Russia's direct military and organizational support.
Denazification will inevitably also be a de-Ukrainization - a rejection of the large-scale artificial inflation of the ethnic component of self-identification of the population of the territories of historical Little Russia and New Russia, begun by the Soviet authorities. Being an instrument of the communist superpower, after its fall, artificial ethnocentrism did not remain ownerless. In this official capacity, he passed under the authority of another superpower (the power standing over the states) — the superpower of the West. It must be returned to its natural boundaries and deprived of political functionality.
Unlike, say, Georgia and the Baltic countries , Ukraine, as history has shown, is impossible as a nation state, and attempts to "build" one naturally lead to Nazism. Ukrainism is an artificial anti-Russian construction that does not have its own civilizational content, a subordinate element of an alien and alien civilization. Debanderization by itself will not be enough for denazification - the Bandera element is only a performer and a screen, a disguise for the European project of Nazi Ukraine, therefore the denazification of Ukraine is also its inevitable de-Europeanization.
The Bandera elite must be eliminated, its re-education is impossible. The social "bog", which actively and passively supported it by action and inaction, must survive the hardships of the war and assimilate the experience as a historical lesson and atonement for its guilt. Those who did not support the Nazi regime, suffered from it and the war unleashed by him in the Donbass, must be consolidated and organized, must become the pillar of the new government, its vertical and horizontal. Historical experience shows that the tragedies and dramas of wartime benefit peoples who have been tempted and carried away by the role of an enemy of Russia.
https://ria.ru/20220403/ukraina-1781469605.html