Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina

19/09/2013

Semanov and others inform about the dual loyalist sayanim

Filed under: Uncategorized — grypa666 @ 20:19

PB: Dr Walichnowski’s research on German gov’t ties to Israel, and his premonitions on similar regarding America, confirm the existence of the Judeocentric Power Complex. Third Reich (and USA, too!) was de facto under Zionist and Judeo-bankster control. And not much has changed after WW2.

………………………

Comment to the article below, by email from Bronek:

Along With Semanov Other Intellectuals Found Ways To Inform About the Dual Loyalists Sayanim

Hats off to you guys at TOO [The Occidental Observer]. In all probability KMac [Professor Kevin McDonald] is one of the greatest men of Euroman’s community. Unlike most he never took a nom de guerre. I find it amazing that he was able to hold his job. Also, that he has not had an accident. What a truly noble person. His labour being published in foreign languages makes my soul sing. He is deep within my heart.

Indeed, the staff at Occidental Observer deserve high praise, to say the least. Having spent time in Russia  — having numerous friends in the Baltic States and the East —  there was nearly always the perception that the “official” USSR was much like the USA. Both were similar in nomenklatura leadership networking and international connections. Your piece here is kinda like a Eurobarometr of Euroman’s  present reality. When absorbing your work about Semanov, the readership should dwell upon the Amerykanski Andropovs instituting laws via Eskimo mentality (HS, habeas corpus…).

Andropov was a pure disaster for European people, Russians and the concept of “peoplehood” in general (unless it was unofficially Zyds [Jews] assisting other Zyds). There, as in America, they glorified one another and  have filled the positions in the hierarchy, academia and media. Semanov, like KMac, laboured in the realms of possibilities. Imagine if they could of had distributed their ideas in a pristine honest media? They would have monuments built of them all over their respective countries. They’d be real champions and not have their statues guarded like that Lenin’s bronze in Krakow. Marks? Freud? Come on!

As noted by Semanov, most noticeable about the nemesis of mankind was their influence in reducing all aspects of majority sentiments. This could be seen in Ukraine, the Baltic States, or even in the West, say in Budapest. It’s all about what we Polonians call ewolucja (evolution) and now zydokracji [Judeocracy]. The Russians learned the hard way. Years ago I spoke with Solzhenitsyn and he attributed St. Petersburg’s fall with the partitions of Poland. I hear such is even in his last book, which I hope someday to consume.

KMac has always been correct about legal migration. Allowing Zs [Js] into the West! All of  Europe, like Amdom, is now full of Krauthammers pointing out “nogoodniks” for the masses of sheeple to hate. It’s their corporatocracy “free press” that has protected the oligarchy from incarceration and the neocons from the electric chair.

What was most painful to this writer and his family was that few in the West realized what role Andropov played in killing the soul of our beloved Magyar brothers, during their Hungarian Revolution.  No doubt Semanov saw this. I wonder what he thought of the Billary’s Ms. Halfbright bombing Christian Serbia for Muslim Albania.

As for the big picture, one would often be asked how an anti-majorityite, like Andropov, could become head of the spying entity. Oh, how well one remembers the intelligentsia within the Workers’ Paradise. More often, than not, as majorityites spoke in private  — most were journalists, laboured in academia —  they expressed an ideology of Russia’s cultural and political heart/ brain being the factors of info-flow (via Zyd networking, Sayanim ideology). As time passed our Pentagon and HomeLand Security would resemble, in more ways then one, that of Moscow’s. A close friend and Minister would say it was a twin entity, two peas in a pot. Whata think? Was Warsaw’s Mieczyslaw Moczar wrong? His mind was like an extension of Kmac’s cerebral sphere.

Back then, when looking at Moscow my thoughts would drift to Capitol Hill, NYC, LA, Hollywood… A few of my best friends would insist that the Zyd would eventually destroy EuroMan. Back then I was only a young man and (thus) deemed they were only half correct. Certainly they would never be able to destroy Christianity as they had done in the USSR.

Certainly, eventually, a majority had a right to assert that they wished to retain their identity. After all, in 1967-’68 Warsaw was able to get rid of 35,000 anti-majority Zionistic types. These anti-majorityites mostly, according to various authors,  migrated to Israel, the USA, London and Paris. They would enrich Washington’s Secret Police mechanism.

An excellent book on this period is by Jerzy Brochocki , Rewolta Marcowa (The Mach Revolt). I composed an English language reduced summary. The meat of Brochocki’s thoughts filled about 50 pages. Initially 500 copies were printed. This expanded to wee bit over 1,500. This labour was done during naps of a granddaughter. But, let’s get back to our topic.

During this period there were others fighting the Sayanim nemesis of mankind. Of course, they are just about unknown in the West, such as Semanov. A most unusual KMac-type fellow was  Dr. Tad Walichnowski. Bet you never heard of him. He had balls of steal. Walichnowski, an unusually brave intellectual, was obsessed with the transnational Sayanim factor. He utilized a lot of satire in lectures. He wrote brain-teasing riddles, that had two meanings. According to him, if the Sayanim problem wasn’t solved, Euroman would be kaput.

Somehow he composed a book about Bonn (W. Germany’s capital at that time) and Tel Aviv having transnational networking that was not advantageous to mankind. I wish I could recall more, but have had cardio problems (bypass x6, MI’s CVAs). Thus, a plethora of skills have been reduced significantly. Anyways, the author, a very decent fellow, spent months attempting to figure out how a study could be legally produced, distributed and translated into various languages, without the author being incarcerated. What did he politicos want!

His goal: Demonstrate international Sayanim networking to the intellectual community. He drifted away from Prague’s earlier endeavors on behalf of the Zionistic Middle East democracy. The only possible solution would be to indicate Bonn was like a puppet to the Zionist State. He asserted that Bonn was arming Tel Aviv to the teeth. This would be detrimental to European peace. In the end humanity might have to pay a high price for globalsyjonizm. Privately he insisted that Capitol Hill was also a puppet to American Sayanim and their Tel Aviv.

After his publication was distributed around Mother Earth, Walichnowski lost his job lecturing, his publishing ability was reduced to just about zilch. Long after his book was unofficially banned by US publishers, he was incarcerated under some crazy pretext of other reasons (which I’ve forgotten). He was economically murdered. Nevertheless, without doubt he reached the heads of states around our globe. You see, his book was even allowed in Warsaw’s various diplomatic facilities, including NYC, Tokyo and all over Asia and So. America.

Walichnowski was slightly different than Wilmot Robertson, a champion of our US majority and Russia’s Semanov. Dr. Tad Walichnowski, like KMac, was concerned with the Sayanim’s globalsyjonizm. He was a champion of Euroman. Well my granddaught’s getting up. Gotta stop.

………………………….

Sergei Semanov and the “Russianists”

September 18, 2013Leave a Comment

Dan Michaels

semanovRecently deceased Sergei Semanov (1934–2011), Russian writer and editor, was at times in his life a Stalinist, a critic of the post-Stalinist Soviet governments, an historian, and a public political commentator closely associated with the nationalist Russian political parties and the Russian Club, all of which peaked in popularity in the late 1960s under General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev. The Russian people generally approved of Brezhnev’s 18-year rule (1964–1982). Although known derisively in the West as a period of stagnation, it gave the people time finally to take stock of Russia’s postwar position in the world and plan for a future such as circumstances would permit.

However, even these early subdued expressions of the Russian people’s desire to influence the governance of their country ended abruptly when newly appointed Secretary General Yuri Andropov, an enemy of the nationalists whom he called “Russianists,” had Semanov arrested, interrogated in Lefortovo prison, removed from all his editorial and writing positions, and threatened with expulsion from the Party for the crime of propagating dangerous, possibly treasonous nationalist ideas.

Following the deaths of Stalin and Beria and the gradual disappearance of the military heroes of the Great Patriotic War, the USSR was obliged to choose new leaders to manage the affairs of the Russian State in the nuclear age. Unfortunately, because of the enormity of the wartime destruction and the dearth of energetic youthful Party leaders possessing even a fraction of the stature and authority of Stalin, the Soviet Union found itself lacking strong leadership. Although many native Russian intellectuals personally despised Communism, they nonetheless continued to support it as State doctrine for fear that many of the peripheral countries taken over hundreds of years by the Imperial Russian Empire would break away from Moscow if the combined centripetal forces of Moscow, the Party, and State security were not kept strongly in evidence. This façade of the all-powerful USSR was retained as a protective shield even though Russia was bereft of strong leadership, an effective economy, a reliable agricultural base, and a unified nation.

The enigmatic subtitle of Semanov’s posthumous The Russian Club: Why the Jews Will Not Win refers to a clandestine society of Russian intellectuals – members of the so-called Russian Club.[1] Semanov was one of the Club’s founding officers who met weekly from the 1960s to the early 1980s to discuss the existing state of native Russian cultural and political affairs, often critical of the official Marxist government positions. So influential had the Russian Club become by 1981 that it can take some credit for the collapse of Communism.

Advertisement



Membership in the Club was diverse: some for one reason or another actually supported the government, some backed the Orthodox Church, others — Marxism and the goal of world revolution. But most had no firm convictions (or preferred not to express them). Some were believers, others atheists. The extreme nationalism of German National Socialism appealed to many, especially those “Eurasians” who favored a Great Russia policy. Nationalist resentment against the Jews and their still prominent place in the governance of the Communist Marxist world continued unabated.

Semanov was a good example of the nationalist opposition. So long as Brezhnev remained Secretary General, Semanov was permitted to continue his writing on historical themes and to edit the popular anti-corruption journal Man and the Law from 1976 to 1981, when Andropov suddenly removed him from the editorial board, calling him a “Russian anti-Soviet Element.” The Government declared the Russian Club off-limits. Andropov even threatened to excommunicate Semanov from the Communist Party because of his criticism of Russia’s “liberal” intelligentsia, Zionists, and globalists in his writings and especially in his best selling book, Russian-Jewish Altercations. Like so many of his readers, Semanov was neither a particular enemy of Orthodoxy nor of the October Revolution. He was certainly no friend of Marxism, which he preferred to label “Trotskyism.”

Underlying and fueling the resentment most of the Russianists felt toward the Communist Party, and which Semanov publicized as best he could, was the close relationship between the Communist Party and Zionist elements in which Jews received preferential treatment as Russia’s elite, especially in politics and the media. The Politburo had already started to crackdown on nationalist dissident writers in 1970 when they removed Anatoli Nikonov, the editor of Young Guard magazine, for being excessively Russophilic. The first victim of the Government’s crackdown on writers it considered dangerously nationalistic was the highly regarded historian Valery Ganichev who was dismissed from his editorial duties in October 1980. Today, however, through the efforts of his professional peers in and outside of Russia, Ganichev is a professor at Moscow State University, and since his election as chairman of the board of the Union of Russian Writers known worldwide in the literary field.

In his article On Relative and Eternal Values, Semanov showed the importance he assigns to Stalin’s purges of the 1930s:

It is now quite clear that a major turning point was reached in the mid 1930s in the battle against the destructive and nihilistic. It seems to me that we still do not recognize the importance of the enormous changes made in that period. These changes have had a salutary effect on the development of our cultural world.

He was proud of the fact that his first official act as chief editor of Man and the Law was to remove the slogan “Proletariats of the World, Unite!” from the masthead. As the main editor of a series of popular, but sometimes critical and controversial biographies of Russian historical figures: Alexander II, Andropov, Brezhnev, Admiral Makarov, General Brusilov, and others, called the Lives of Remarkable Men. Semanov said of this period in his life “I managed to switch the Lives series from the Jewish to the Russian side.” Writing earlier for the Young Guard magazine he described his work there: “ I tried to translate Marxism from the Hebrew to Russian.”

When Semanov was foolish (or bold) enough to entertain the supposition that Felix Dzerzhinsky, the patron saint of Lubyanka and the Soviet secret police, was himself the product of a Russian-hating Polish-Jewish background, he overstepped the bounds of discretion and self-preservation. The attack on Dzerzhinsky violated the principles of the All-Russian Society for the Protection of Historical and Cultural Monuments and Memorials. Also, by suggesting that the inhuman cruelty of a communist police state to enforce hateful policies like collectivization, the Gulag, atheism, and the rest on the Russian people by non-Russians like the Jews, Latvians, Georgians, et al., who have hated the Russian people since the time of the Romanovs, would only encourage the racists on both sides. His comment that the current Russophobic West is “essentially controlled by Internal Masonic and Zionist financial circles” is also attributed to Semanov. The similarity between Goebbels World War II charge that Jews were the real, behind-the-scene policy makers in both the Soviet Union and the United States cannot escape notice.

A recently declassified memo On the Anti-Soviet Activities of A. Ivanov and S. N. Semanov written by then KGB boss Yuri Andropov to the Politburo in the late 1970s reads in part:

Recently, in Moscow and other cities of the country a new tendency toward negative and critical thinking has manifested itself in elements in the scientific and creative intelligence sectors. They are referred to as Russianists (rusisty). Under the pretext of defending Russian traditions they are in fact engaged in anti-Soviet activities. … The chief editor of the Man and the Law journal, Communist Party member S. M. Semanov distributes slanderous stories about Communist Party leadership in the domestic and foreign affairs policies of the government. … He emphasizes the need to fight the government. … If we ourselves do not resist, we are lost.

The much-publicized “dissident” movement in postwar Russia is generally perceived in the West as consisting of émigré Soviet Jews and other sympathizers who have become dissatisfied with conditions in Russia and who now demand change. They want more control of the Russian government, its media, and more acceptance of Western business and financial practices. The United States, Britain, and Israel understandably support and collaborate with them. On the other hand, Sergei Semanov and Russians like him (about whom almost nothing is known in the West) prefer a different path to reforming and improving Russian life. They too are dissidents, but they are native Russians first and foremost who have also chosen to modernize the Russian Federation, but only on the basis of retaining the best of old Russian culture, including its love of the Motherland, its music, its literature, and its sacred traditions. As Semanov said of himself (and by extension, Russians like himself): “I am a real dissident — the Russian kind.”

Like most Soviet big-city intellectuals, the young Semanov originally shared the political views of his peers until about 1967-68 when two international events occurred – the Arab-Israeli War and the Prague Spring – during which time Soviet “dual citizenship” Jews could no longer conceal their pro-Israel and pro-Zionist bias. Semanov’s nationalism found it increasingly difficult to accept the presence, the policies, and the influence of so many native and foreign-born Judaic Marxists, dual-citizen Jews, Latvians, Georgians, and other minority groups in the formulation of government policies. Some of these minorities, many Slavs believe, actually hate the native Russians and Ukrainians, referring to them as Eurasianists, Russianists, racists and worse.

Russian nationalists are determined to keep Siberia an integral part of the Russian Federation while the minorities and internationalists favor Anglo-American and Israeli development schemes to exploit the mineral wealth of Siberia for their own parochial and financial interests. When General Aleksandr Lebed, an authentic Russian hero and governor of most of Siberia, was killed in a helicopter “accident” a few years ago, many Russians suspected foul play. When, near the end of Brezhnev’s term of office, a delegation of “village writers,” led by Valentin Rasputin, complained to Mikhail Suslov, the Chief Ideologue of the Party, about the destructive modernization policies of the government, and the state of the country in general, the group was told quite frankly, “Boys, the ship is sinking.” Rasputin then suggested that Russia secede from the Federation unless and until the Government take measures to protect the Russian landscape against the ravages of irresponsible modernization with the same concern and energy that it expends in supporting international exploitation of Siberian mineral resources.

The Zeitgeist of Russian national leaders today seems to be concentrated on banking and investment opportunities in New York, Tel Aviv, London, and the myriad of islands from Cyprus to the Cayman Islands rather than on Russia itself. It appears for the moment that neither Marxism nor Nationalism has much of a role to play unless, of course, capitalism fails again. In his 3-volume investigation into the death of the USSR Aleksandr Ostrovsky, who also blames the Russian Club for the demise, writes:[2]

In the real sense of the word Russia in this period had no national elite. None of the leaders, certainly not those in Moscow, would even think of putting national interests above their own personal interests. Not one. Neither those who were charged with deciding the fate of the country, nor the masses of people possessed a Russian national consciousness.

As a consequence of the USSR not having a national elite to protect the ownership of all State property rightfully belonging to the Russian people, the arrangements made with the United States for Russia’s transition from State to international capitalism were made by bankers, financiers, and con artists. Details of the transactions are described in [3].

Part 2 of this presentation on Semanov will consist of an article he wrote describing the role of Jewish and other non-Russian NKVD bosses in enforcing Stalin’s purges of the 1930s. Semanov’s writings have been criticized by some as anti-Semitic and by others as unvarnished factual history.

Endnotes:


[1] Ivan Peresvetov. The Flash and Poverty of the Russian Club: How We Russians Resisted the Dulles Plan. i-news.kz/2012/03/28/6354862.html

[2] Aleksandr V. Ostrovsky. Stupidity or Treason: Investigation into the Death of the USSR. Krymskiy most – 9D, Moscow, 2011

[3] D. Michaels. Boris Yeltsin’s Legacy. TBR, No. 1, p. 41, 2004

Advertisements
TrackBack URI

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: