"Politico" has an article on Russian support for the California secession movement.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/01/why-russia-loves-the-idea-of-california-seceding-214632
There is some interesting information on how the California secessionists are open about their Russian support in contrast to the Texas secessionists.
Also, it seems that the leader of the YesCalifornia movement, Louis Marinelli, has a past in working with the National Organization for Marriage which campaigned against same sex marriage. The article says that Marinelli has recanted these views. I find it rather convenient that he did.
Another secessionist group, the California National Party, doesn't like Louis Marinelli at all.
Many journalists are not taking these secessionist movements seriously, but the United States, unlike most nations, has monuments in its national capitol and many monuments elsewhere celebrating those who would have broken up the nation through secession.
Across the United States there are literally numerous monumental endorsements of secession from the United States. Why shouldn't the Russians think that their efforts might secede.
Perhaps American presidents should consider not sending a wreath to the Arlington Confederate Monument.
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia. Show all posts
Sunday, January 15, 2017
Saturday, December 10, 2016
"Breitbart" and the Confederacy. They aren't the "Southern Partisan." They are banal white nationalists with a policy destructive to American nationalism. "Breitbart" reporting could be an aid to Russia
I had said earlier that Breitbart was a modern day Southern Partisan, They are not. After printing out maybe about 100 articles and scanning them and reading for the last few weeks closely what they say I am beginning to see what their strategy is.
The Breitbart view of the Confederacy will please and displease neo-Confederates.
On one hand Breitbart will publish articles like this.
For example this series about the Houston Independent School District in Texas getting rid of Confederate names for schools.
In this article Breitbart claims they are erasing history.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/03/22/more-texas-school-district-seek-to-erase-confederate-past/
This article says that taxpayers are complaining that changing the name is a waste of money. How many taxpayers isn't mentioned.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/05/03/changing-name-of-texas-school-will-cost-500k/
Again another article about irate taxpayers, which means that there are at least 2.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/08/11/taxpayers-slam-multi-million-dollar-plans-rename-houston-schools/
On the other hand Breitbart invokes the Confederacy to condemn Democrats and liberals.
In this article Ian Hanchett quotes Charles Krauthhammer saying that the supporters of Sanctuary cities, cities where the police don't go after immigrants, are using "the language of the Confederates."
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/12/05/krauthammer-sanctuary-cities-speaking-the-language-of-the-southern-segregationists/
Then there is this article in which the California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon is condemned as neo-Confederate. As I blog earlier on, I didn't see exactly how Rendon was neo-Confederate and I am fairly good on determining neo-Confederacy.
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/12/05/rendon-speech-neo-confederate-editorial/
Condemning a speaker, writer, author, columnist, politician, celebrity by claiming that they have some element or feature or similarity to the Confederacy is also a condemnation of the Confederacy. Denouncing some statement, policy, position paper, or resolution claiming that it has elements of the Confederacy is necessarily a condemnation of the Confederacy.
Saying that something is bad because is like or similar or derives from something else, necessarily means that the something else is bad.
More interesting is that Breitbart reporting implies neo-Confederate ideology is bad, since it condemns certain thinking as having Confederate affinities or components or elements.
However, if anyone tries to get rid of a Confederate monument or holiday or place name Breitbart is entirely against it. It might seem contradictory and a person might think that it is just that Breitbart has no coherent ideology and is just a maniacal rage machine. Just because it is a rage machine doesn't mean they are stupid or don't have a strategy.
Breitbart supports a banal white nationalist America. So for issues in the present it supports a strong national government in pursuit of its agenda.
However, in the past, all fighting white Americans are held to be heroic and pulling down one statue to one white American might lead to another statue of a white American being pulled down. The Civil War of Breitbart seems to be the Civil War of the 1950s or earlier, a "romance of reunion" Civil War, a white solidarity maintained by the idea that the Civil War was an avoidable mistake or was only about preserving the union, but wasn't about slavery or race, and in any case the Civil War demonstrated white bravery.
Breitbart's concept of patriotism, a white nationalism, is dangerous to the United States, since white nationalism can't be the basis of a strong American national identity in a multiracial America, and instead will work to undermine America.
And there are foreign powers which will be glad to exploit the situation. It has already become clear that Russia is aiding both left wing and right wing nationalist groups, both California and Texas secessionists. They are aiding both left wing and right wing groups in Europe also. Their policy is a pragmatic realpolitik to attack Western democracy and to undermine their geopolitical opponents.
They will be very quick to seize on strategies of exploiting racial nationalist groups. With their support of neo-Confederates and Texas secessionists already supporting white nationalists. The Russians must be reviewing what other racial nationalists that they can support.
National sentiment is always provisional. With a change in a situation individuals will reevaluate their national identity. This is demonstrated by the current secession movements where both left wing and right wing groups feel that they have no prospects of their agenda in the current political unit being successful.
If the Trump administration is dragging hundreds of thousands or even millions of Hispanics out of their homes and dumping them in Mexico where these individuals end up in camps where they are starving there is bound to be a Hispanic nationalist movement. The United States did steal the Southwest United States as President Ulysses S. Grant as explain in his memoir:
As the Trump administration undermines civil rights and voting rights and shows an indifference to cases where police officers shoot African Americans and the Trump administration expresses a hostility towards the Black Lives Matter movement surely some Black Nationalists will seek to capitalize on the situation.
In 2016 the situation regarding reckless and wrongful shooting of African Americans came dangerously close to getting out of control as some individual African Americans sought to take revenge by shooting police officers and some neo-Confederate groups sought to have counter protest at Blasck Lives Matter protests.
I think with Trump being elected we are likely to see right wing white groups show up with guns at Black Lives Matter protests. At Black Lives Matter protests there are already African American groups parading with guns. A few days ago a young person with guns fired shots in a pizza parlor in Washington, D.C. because of some lunatic right wing news story that the Clinton's were using its back rooms for child sex slavery. These protests with white nationalists, black nationalists, and the Black Lives Matter protesters, some carrying guns, will be combustible.
All we need to have is two groups at a Black Lives Matter protest shooting at each other and the situation could spiral out of control. It might not even be that the two protesting groups set it off, a third party, a lone individual, might decided to shot one of the protesters to set things off.
In any deteriorating situation Black Nationalism will seek to capitalize on the situation.
Then there is the situation of native Americans. How well has the American nation treated these groups historically? Not very well. We still have Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. Surely the Russians will find some opportunities.
All racial nationalisms share the same reactionary understanding of nationality. They only differ in which group they see themselves as advocating for. So it won't be that difficult for a white reactionary nationalist Russia to support minority nationalisms in America. They will find that in many ways they think very similarly.
Also, it should be understood to have your movement backed by a major world power gives it credibility. Also, a major world power has ways of impressing a separatist movement.
When visiting nationalists are hosted by important officials in prestigious buildings the visiting nationalists are certainly impressed and given confidence and faith in their movement. When the nationalist group sees their leader hosted by important officials in an impressive historic building they can't but imagine what they are doing is important since important people with real power see it as important. The photos of these meetings certainly will give the movement credibility.
Our nationalist elites still see separatism as amusing and a novelty and don't take it seriously. This is because they are in many ways vacuous and an intellectually inbred set of people.
It is time for the government to wake up and start counter measures against separatism. As I stated earlier it needs to be NOT oppressive, but a strategy informed by a critical understanding of the theory of nationalism.
Also, government actions and policy needs to be reviewed such that nationalists are not encouraged. This is not to say avoid certain policies because you are afraid to aggravate some separatist nationalist direction, but to make sure that some policy doesn't needlessly enable separatist nationalism when it could easily have been avoided.
I suggest Michael Billig's "Banal Nationalism," and Donald Mitchell's "Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction." These books are available on the used market. They are not big books, and reading the both of them will give a fairly comprehensive view of the topic and provide most what a an anti-separatist program needs to know.
My paper on banal white nationalism.
http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking-the-white-nation.html
The Breitbart view of the Confederacy will please and displease neo-Confederates.
On one hand Breitbart will publish articles like this.
For example this series about the Houston Independent School District in Texas getting rid of Confederate names for schools.
In this article Breitbart claims they are erasing history.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/03/22/more-texas-school-district-seek-to-erase-confederate-past/
This article says that taxpayers are complaining that changing the name is a waste of money. How many taxpayers isn't mentioned.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/05/03/changing-name-of-texas-school-will-cost-500k/
Again another article about irate taxpayers, which means that there are at least 2.
http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/08/11/taxpayers-slam-multi-million-dollar-plans-rename-houston-schools/
On the other hand Breitbart invokes the Confederacy to condemn Democrats and liberals.
In this article Ian Hanchett quotes Charles Krauthhammer saying that the supporters of Sanctuary cities, cities where the police don't go after immigrants, are using "the language of the Confederates."
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/12/05/krauthammer-sanctuary-cities-speaking-the-language-of-the-southern-segregationists/
Then there is this article in which the California Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon is condemned as neo-Confederate. As I blog earlier on, I didn't see exactly how Rendon was neo-Confederate and I am fairly good on determining neo-Confederacy.
http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/12/05/rendon-speech-neo-confederate-editorial/
Condemning a speaker, writer, author, columnist, politician, celebrity by claiming that they have some element or feature or similarity to the Confederacy is also a condemnation of the Confederacy. Denouncing some statement, policy, position paper, or resolution claiming that it has elements of the Confederacy is necessarily a condemnation of the Confederacy.
Saying that something is bad because is like or similar or derives from something else, necessarily means that the something else is bad.
More interesting is that Breitbart reporting implies neo-Confederate ideology is bad, since it condemns certain thinking as having Confederate affinities or components or elements.
However, if anyone tries to get rid of a Confederate monument or holiday or place name Breitbart is entirely against it. It might seem contradictory and a person might think that it is just that Breitbart has no coherent ideology and is just a maniacal rage machine. Just because it is a rage machine doesn't mean they are stupid or don't have a strategy.
Breitbart supports a banal white nationalist America. So for issues in the present it supports a strong national government in pursuit of its agenda.
However, in the past, all fighting white Americans are held to be heroic and pulling down one statue to one white American might lead to another statue of a white American being pulled down. The Civil War of Breitbart seems to be the Civil War of the 1950s or earlier, a "romance of reunion" Civil War, a white solidarity maintained by the idea that the Civil War was an avoidable mistake or was only about preserving the union, but wasn't about slavery or race, and in any case the Civil War demonstrated white bravery.
Breitbart's concept of patriotism, a white nationalism, is dangerous to the United States, since white nationalism can't be the basis of a strong American national identity in a multiracial America, and instead will work to undermine America.
And there are foreign powers which will be glad to exploit the situation. It has already become clear that Russia is aiding both left wing and right wing nationalist groups, both California and Texas secessionists. They are aiding both left wing and right wing groups in Europe also. Their policy is a pragmatic realpolitik to attack Western democracy and to undermine their geopolitical opponents.
They will be very quick to seize on strategies of exploiting racial nationalist groups. With their support of neo-Confederates and Texas secessionists already supporting white nationalists. The Russians must be reviewing what other racial nationalists that they can support.
National sentiment is always provisional. With a change in a situation individuals will reevaluate their national identity. This is demonstrated by the current secession movements where both left wing and right wing groups feel that they have no prospects of their agenda in the current political unit being successful.
If the Trump administration is dragging hundreds of thousands or even millions of Hispanics out of their homes and dumping them in Mexico where these individuals end up in camps where they are starving there is bound to be a Hispanic nationalist movement. The United States did steal the Southwest United States as President Ulysses S. Grant as explain in his memoir:
"I was bitterly opposed to the measure, and to this day, regard the war, which resulted, as one of the most unjust ever waged by a stronger against a weaker nation. It was an instance of a republic following the bad example of European monarchies in not considering justice in their desire to acquire additional territory."Surely some Hispanic nationalist will want to quote this.
As the Trump administration undermines civil rights and voting rights and shows an indifference to cases where police officers shoot African Americans and the Trump administration expresses a hostility towards the Black Lives Matter movement surely some Black Nationalists will seek to capitalize on the situation.
In 2016 the situation regarding reckless and wrongful shooting of African Americans came dangerously close to getting out of control as some individual African Americans sought to take revenge by shooting police officers and some neo-Confederate groups sought to have counter protest at Blasck Lives Matter protests.
I think with Trump being elected we are likely to see right wing white groups show up with guns at Black Lives Matter protests. At Black Lives Matter protests there are already African American groups parading with guns. A few days ago a young person with guns fired shots in a pizza parlor in Washington, D.C. because of some lunatic right wing news story that the Clinton's were using its back rooms for child sex slavery. These protests with white nationalists, black nationalists, and the Black Lives Matter protesters, some carrying guns, will be combustible.
All we need to have is two groups at a Black Lives Matter protest shooting at each other and the situation could spiral out of control. It might not even be that the two protesting groups set it off, a third party, a lone individual, might decided to shot one of the protesters to set things off.
In any deteriorating situation Black Nationalism will seek to capitalize on the situation.
Then there is the situation of native Americans. How well has the American nation treated these groups historically? Not very well. We still have Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill. Surely the Russians will find some opportunities.
All racial nationalisms share the same reactionary understanding of nationality. They only differ in which group they see themselves as advocating for. So it won't be that difficult for a white reactionary nationalist Russia to support minority nationalisms in America. They will find that in many ways they think very similarly.
Also, it should be understood to have your movement backed by a major world power gives it credibility. Also, a major world power has ways of impressing a separatist movement.
When visiting nationalists are hosted by important officials in prestigious buildings the visiting nationalists are certainly impressed and given confidence and faith in their movement. When the nationalist group sees their leader hosted by important officials in an impressive historic building they can't but imagine what they are doing is important since important people with real power see it as important. The photos of these meetings certainly will give the movement credibility.
Our nationalist elites still see separatism as amusing and a novelty and don't take it seriously. This is because they are in many ways vacuous and an intellectually inbred set of people.
It is time for the government to wake up and start counter measures against separatism. As I stated earlier it needs to be NOT oppressive, but a strategy informed by a critical understanding of the theory of nationalism.
Also, government actions and policy needs to be reviewed such that nationalists are not encouraged. This is not to say avoid certain policies because you are afraid to aggravate some separatist nationalist direction, but to make sure that some policy doesn't needlessly enable separatist nationalism when it could easily have been avoided.
I suggest Michael Billig's "Banal Nationalism," and Donald Mitchell's "Cultural Geography: A Critical Introduction." These books are available on the used market. They are not big books, and reading the both of them will give a fairly comprehensive view of the topic and provide most what a an anti-separatist program needs to know.
My paper on banal white nationalism.
http://www.templeofdemocracy.com/breaking-the-white-nation.html
Thursday, December 08, 2016
The reactionary idiocy of California secession/ Need for the government to have a counter strategy
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-12-07/how-to-make-california-great-secede-with-a-little-help-from-putin
The link above is to an article in Bloomberg about the California secessionists getting help from Putin and working with a reactionary group there.
This is also a good example on how some ideas that are put forth as left are really reactionary.
The head of the group, Louis Marinelli, lives in Russia teaching English.
The fundamental measure of support for democracy is the willingness to accept defeat at the polls. You really aren't a believer in democracy if you can't having lost an election. I don't mean that you can't be vocal in expression dissatisfaction with the results.
When an election is run and the results come in there will most often be an uneven distribution of results across the geography of the political unit. In one part of a political unit your faction or party or program will likely have majority support. Breaking up the political unit isn't the solution. Such a plan of secession taken to its logical conclusion results in a republic of a city block or a farm.
According to the article the Russians are working with far-left parties as well as extreme right groups to undermine European states and evidently this program is now extending to California. There is a position paper on Russian support for far-left European parties online by Political Capitol in Hungary. I don't know anything about them, but this is the link in the Bloomberg article.
http://www.statecraft.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Peter%20Kreko%20Far%20Left%20definitive.pdf
The secessionists might consider that not everyone will want boundaries and divisions in North America and to divide the continent into many small states that will inevitably quarrel. One of the great thing about North America is that most of the land mass is divided among three states, Canada, United States of America, and Mexico, and three states on relatively good terms, at least compared to some other areas of the globe.
I think a lot of the media reporting portrays secessionists in the United States as some type of amusing novelty and doesn't take it seriously. I don't think the United States government is doing anything at all to think of counter strategies. They should.
A counter strategy should NOT be to oppress secessionists by arresting them or some other act of official oppression. What needs to be done is formulate a strategy that utilizes a theoretical understanding of nationalism and what drives separatism and using that knowledge devise counter strategies.
For example Cinco de Mayo is about Hispanics in California supporting the Union against the Confederacy, which is both anti-secessionist and also a national narrative. The major Hispanic holiday in the United States is about Hispanic Californians defending the American nation against secession. I don't think the story of the origins of Cinco de Mayo is generally known, it should be as a first step against California secession to make sure that it is more generally known.
In opposing Daniel Miller's program of Texas secession I think it would be relatively easy to show it is really a movement basing itself on a white nationalist history of Texas and negates the African American and Hispanic experience in Texas.
For Southern nationalism I suggest that it ought to be considered where the dividing line is between "Southern Studies" and southern nationalism is. In fact it could be asked whether there is really a boundary at all, and if Southern Studies isn't really the venue of a Southern nationalist intelligentsia.
Also, an examination of the constructedness of the "South" should be done. John Shelton Reed in an article written under a pseudonym, J.R. Vanover, in Southern Partisan, was denouncing the term Southeastern because it was a term that people were using and he saw it as inimical to Southern nationalism. I think the antidote to Southern nationalism is a program of real regional studies and let states in the southern part of the Unites States out of the prison house of the Confederacy and southern nationalism.
These are just initial ideas I have to oppose separatism in America. I think a small group of academics could probably over a year come up with a fairly good program what would put a stop to various secessionist movements.
The link above is to an article in Bloomberg about the California secessionists getting help from Putin and working with a reactionary group there.
This is also a good example on how some ideas that are put forth as left are really reactionary.
The head of the group, Louis Marinelli, lives in Russia teaching English.
The fundamental measure of support for democracy is the willingness to accept defeat at the polls. You really aren't a believer in democracy if you can't having lost an election. I don't mean that you can't be vocal in expression dissatisfaction with the results.
When an election is run and the results come in there will most often be an uneven distribution of results across the geography of the political unit. In one part of a political unit your faction or party or program will likely have majority support. Breaking up the political unit isn't the solution. Such a plan of secession taken to its logical conclusion results in a republic of a city block or a farm.
According to the article the Russians are working with far-left parties as well as extreme right groups to undermine European states and evidently this program is now extending to California. There is a position paper on Russian support for far-left European parties online by Political Capitol in Hungary. I don't know anything about them, but this is the link in the Bloomberg article.
http://www.statecraft.org.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Peter%20Kreko%20Far%20Left%20definitive.pdf
The secessionists might consider that not everyone will want boundaries and divisions in North America and to divide the continent into many small states that will inevitably quarrel. One of the great thing about North America is that most of the land mass is divided among three states, Canada, United States of America, and Mexico, and three states on relatively good terms, at least compared to some other areas of the globe.
I think a lot of the media reporting portrays secessionists in the United States as some type of amusing novelty and doesn't take it seriously. I don't think the United States government is doing anything at all to think of counter strategies. They should.
A counter strategy should NOT be to oppress secessionists by arresting them or some other act of official oppression. What needs to be done is formulate a strategy that utilizes a theoretical understanding of nationalism and what drives separatism and using that knowledge devise counter strategies.
For example Cinco de Mayo is about Hispanics in California supporting the Union against the Confederacy, which is both anti-secessionist and also a national narrative. The major Hispanic holiday in the United States is about Hispanic Californians defending the American nation against secession. I don't think the story of the origins of Cinco de Mayo is generally known, it should be as a first step against California secession to make sure that it is more generally known.
In opposing Daniel Miller's program of Texas secession I think it would be relatively easy to show it is really a movement basing itself on a white nationalist history of Texas and negates the African American and Hispanic experience in Texas.
For Southern nationalism I suggest that it ought to be considered where the dividing line is between "Southern Studies" and southern nationalism is. In fact it could be asked whether there is really a boundary at all, and if Southern Studies isn't really the venue of a Southern nationalist intelligentsia.
Also, an examination of the constructedness of the "South" should be done. John Shelton Reed in an article written under a pseudonym, J.R. Vanover, in Southern Partisan, was denouncing the term Southeastern because it was a term that people were using and he saw it as inimical to Southern nationalism. I think the antidote to Southern nationalism is a program of real regional studies and let states in the southern part of the Unites States out of the prison house of the Confederacy and southern nationalism.
These are just initial ideas I have to oppose separatism in America. I think a small group of academics could probably over a year come up with a fairly good program what would put a stop to various secessionist movements.
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Russian interest in damaging the United States through supporting secession and insurrection continues
The following link is to an article about the militia occupiers of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and is obviously sympathetic to the militia. It is a Russian news outlet.
https://www.rt.com/usa/329156-armed-occupiers-oregon-militia-struggle/
I also find again my blog has heavy Russian readership, greater than the American readership. (See screen capture from this morning of Google statistics of my readership at the bottom of this blog post.)
This is not the first time I have had a surge of interest in my blog from Russia
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2015/10/disturbing-huge-russian-audience-for.html#.VpppsCorKM8
Movements can be aided in many ways besides money and materials. Often a movement most needs prestige to recruit members and gain credibility with the larger public. The League of the South has been getting just such type of support from the Russians.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-makes-news-in-russia-again/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
This blog posting refers to an article in The New York Review of Books explaining how Putin is using the media to undermine the West.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/12/league-of-south-allowing-it-to-be-used.html#.VppqSiorKM8
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/12/18/how-he-and-his-cronies-stole-russia/?insrc=hpma
I think that it is clear that the Russian government is eager to back any insurrection or secession movement as a counter measure to the United States.
I am sure the Russians have concluded that the League of the South is of little significance, but I think they are hedging their bets. Movements can suddenly grow. Though I think that if there is a significant Southern nationalist movement the League of the South won't be leading it.
It is understandable that people react with amusement and laughter to these groups, but it should be understood also that there are powers out there with great resources very interested in these groups These hostile powers prowl and sniff seeking opportunity seeking opportunities to injure the United States.
https://www.rt.com/usa/329156-armed-occupiers-oregon-militia-struggle/
I also find again my blog has heavy Russian readership, greater than the American readership. (See screen capture from this morning of Google statistics of my readership at the bottom of this blog post.)
This is not the first time I have had a surge of interest in my blog from Russia
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2015/10/disturbing-huge-russian-audience-for.html#.VpppsCorKM8
Movements can be aided in many ways besides money and materials. Often a movement most needs prestige to recruit members and gain credibility with the larger public. The League of the South has been getting just such type of support from the Russians.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-makes-news-in-russia-again/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
This blog posting refers to an article in The New York Review of Books explaining how Putin is using the media to undermine the West.
http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/12/league-of-south-allowing-it-to-be-used.html#.VppqSiorKM8
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2014/12/18/how-he-and-his-cronies-stole-russia/?insrc=hpma
I think that it is clear that the Russian government is eager to back any insurrection or secession movement as a counter measure to the United States.
I am sure the Russians have concluded that the League of the South is of little significance, but I think they are hedging their bets. Movements can suddenly grow. Though I think that if there is a significant Southern nationalist movement the League of the South won't be leading it.
It is understandable that people react with amusement and laughter to these groups, but it should be understood also that there are powers out there with great resources very interested in these groups These hostile powers prowl and sniff seeking opportunity seeking opportunities to injure the United States.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Disturbing, huge Russian audience for this blog
DISTURBING. HUGE RUSSIAN AUDIENCE FOR MY BLOG ON NEO-CONFEDERATES
On my blog http://newtknight.blogspot.com/ I have reported on the Russian support for neo-Confederates in the United States, specifically the League of the South.
Here is one of my postings. http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/12/league-of-south-allowing-it-to-be-used.html#.ViOhCH6rSM8
You can find the rest of the postings using the search term "Russia."
I have been tied up with other projects, but have a back log of blog postings I need to do. So I logged on this morning to my blog to start posting. I immediately notice that I am having a lot of readership which is surprising. If I haven't been posting it is usually 75 to 150 a day, typically around 100. That was the readership rate when I last checked about 2-3 weeks ago.
THIS MORNING, I am seeing 300 and 400+ readers. I start using Google's tracking features and I see that I have a huge readership in Russia. See the above graphic. There are 3 times as many readers of my blog in Russia than from the United States last week. Russia 1308, United States 439, Ukraine 58, Germany 40, Switzerland 27.
It could be that opposition to the Russian are reading my blog to see what type of movement the Russian government is backing. Or a lot of Russian government officials and supporters are reading my blog as part of their plans to back the neo-Confederates. I am inclined to think it is the latter, though I can't give a good reason why. Maybe it is both.
I have had a lot of Russian and Ukranian readership before for certain weeks. I have had weeks where the overseas interest has been very high. I find this odd for something of an internal historical matter for which the American media has very limited interest.
I don't mind overseas readers and I expect some. I think some are stray views for American Civil War students in other nations. It is just that I find having such a surge from Russia to be troubling. Maybe nationalists there are into imagining the United States breaking up and my blog is of interest to them.
I really don't know. Why would my blog be of interest to Russians that much For other countries it is just two digits.
On my blog http://newtknight.blogspot.com/ I have reported on the Russian support for neo-Confederates in the United States, specifically the League of the South.
Here is one of my postings. http://newtknight.blogspot.com/2014/12/league-of-south-allowing-it-to-be-used.html#.ViOhCH6rSM8
You can find the rest of the postings using the search term "Russia."
I have been tied up with other projects, but have a back log of blog postings I need to do. So I logged on this morning to my blog to start posting. I immediately notice that I am having a lot of readership which is surprising. If I haven't been posting it is usually 75 to 150 a day, typically around 100. That was the readership rate when I last checked about 2-3 weeks ago.
THIS MORNING, I am seeing 300 and 400+ readers. I start using Google's tracking features and I see that I have a huge readership in Russia. See the above graphic. There are 3 times as many readers of my blog in Russia than from the United States last week. Russia 1308, United States 439, Ukraine 58, Germany 40, Switzerland 27.
It could be that opposition to the Russian are reading my blog to see what type of movement the Russian government is backing. Or a lot of Russian government officials and supporters are reading my blog as part of their plans to back the neo-Confederates. I am inclined to think it is the latter, though I can't give a good reason why. Maybe it is both.
I have had a lot of Russian and Ukranian readership before for certain weeks. I have had weeks where the overseas interest has been very high. I find this odd for something of an internal historical matter for which the American media has very limited interest.
I don't mind overseas readers and I expect some. I think some are stray views for American Civil War students in other nations. It is just that I find having such a surge from Russia to be troubling. Maybe nationalists there are into imagining the United States breaking up and my blog is of interest to them.
I really don't know. Why would my blog be of interest to Russians that much For other countries it is just two digits.
Thursday, September 24, 2015
Russia and American Secessionists: America under attack
The Russians are encouraging secessionists movements in the West including secessionist groups in the United States.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/24/russia-wants-texas-and-puerto-rico-to-secede.html
The article doesn't mention any neo-Confederate groups, but Russia has been working with the League of the South.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-makes-news-in-russia-again/
Our initial reaction might be to laugh, since it seems that secession in America is so implausible and the standard response is to refer to the Civil War and say that the question of secession is settled.
Before we go further in discussing this, Puerto Rico has had votes on whether to secede, be a commonwealth affiliated with the United States or opt for Statehood. The opposition to secession in Puerto Rico is made up of Puerto Ricans. If Puerto Rico decides to be an independent country I don't think there is much opposition to this. It came under American sovereignty as a result of American victory in the Spanish-American War.
Back to the issue of secession. Secession movements usually start out with small percentages of the public supporting them. They can languish for decades, but the history of nations can be very long and nations can encounter all sorts of situations, sometimes the nation is down, such as the occupation of France by the Germans. There can be other catastrophes and during those times, it is the patriotism of the members of a nation that determine whether a nation persists. How long was Poland under foreign occupation and yet it exists.
Other nations are long forgotten like Burgundy or Arles, which unless you really know your medieval history, you probably have not heard of them.
Ultimately nations exist because their members imagine themselves to be of that nationality.
Russia instead of being a major communist world power is now a major reactionary and anti-democratic power and attacking the democratic West and looking for any fissure to exploit to bring down Western nations.
Unfortunately the United States is full of monuments to violent white supremacist insurrectionists who sought to break up the United States, that is the Confederates and their Confederacy. Already a very bad idea, now these monuments serve to enable a hostile and formidable foreign power that is against America, against the West, and against democarcy.
Confederate monuments, holidays, and buildings, streets, schools, etc. named after them need to go and need to go now.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/24/russia-wants-texas-and-puerto-rico-to-secede.html
The article doesn't mention any neo-Confederate groups, but Russia has been working with the League of the South.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-makes-news-in-russia-again/
Our initial reaction might be to laugh, since it seems that secession in America is so implausible and the standard response is to refer to the Civil War and say that the question of secession is settled.
Before we go further in discussing this, Puerto Rico has had votes on whether to secede, be a commonwealth affiliated with the United States or opt for Statehood. The opposition to secession in Puerto Rico is made up of Puerto Ricans. If Puerto Rico decides to be an independent country I don't think there is much opposition to this. It came under American sovereignty as a result of American victory in the Spanish-American War.
Back to the issue of secession. Secession movements usually start out with small percentages of the public supporting them. They can languish for decades, but the history of nations can be very long and nations can encounter all sorts of situations, sometimes the nation is down, such as the occupation of France by the Germans. There can be other catastrophes and during those times, it is the patriotism of the members of a nation that determine whether a nation persists. How long was Poland under foreign occupation and yet it exists.
Other nations are long forgotten like Burgundy or Arles, which unless you really know your medieval history, you probably have not heard of them.
Ultimately nations exist because their members imagine themselves to be of that nationality.
Russia instead of being a major communist world power is now a major reactionary and anti-democratic power and attacking the democratic West and looking for any fissure to exploit to bring down Western nations.
Unfortunately the United States is full of monuments to violent white supremacist insurrectionists who sought to break up the United States, that is the Confederates and their Confederacy. Already a very bad idea, now these monuments serve to enable a hostile and formidable foreign power that is against America, against the West, and against democarcy.
Confederate monuments, holidays, and buildings, streets, schools, etc. named after them need to go and need to go now.
Sunday, December 14, 2014
League of the South allowing it to be used by a foreign power against American interests. UPDATE:
I was reading this interesting article about Putin and Russia at the New York Review of Books in the latest issue. You can read it here:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/dec/18/how-he-and-his-cronies-stole-russia/?insrc=hpma
In understanding this we can see why Russian media has been interested in giving League of the South President Michael Hill and some others a platform in their media. Recently the League of the South was exultant in the fact that they were on Russian media.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
The Russians may not take the League of the South very seriously but want to assist any group that they feel could harm the United States of America and in the case of giving League of the South media access they are covering all their bets.
It would suit the Russians very well if a real secessionist movement would gain some traction in the United States.
At some point what the League of the South is doing is treason.
UPDATE:
This is another item of the Putin government supporting the neo-Confederate movement in the United States.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
League of the South President Michael Hill is pleased to announce that he spoke via Skype at an Anti-Globalist conference in Moscow on the topic “The Right of People for Self-Determination and Constructing a Multipolar World.”
I am trying to find out some information about the conference. This is a YouTube video of it. Doesn't seem like a major affair.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=688xDoLgAY4
The same video can be found at:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/12/14/390167/moscow-hosts-antiglobalization-conference/
I don't know if the Putin government is giving the League of the South any financial resources, but being on Russian TV and being invited to conferences certainly must encourage the neo-Confederates and maintain moral when their agenda doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Also, it has the potential to raise their prestige in the eyes of other extremists and help them recruit members and retain members.
I have not indication so far that the Sons of Confederate Veterans, United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Abbeville Institute are connecting with Russian groups as part of an anti-Western effort. The people at the Rockford Institute have been in contact with all sorts of reactionary groups in Europe and been sympathetic to reactionaries in Eastern Europe, but I haven't really paid too close attention to this. I think I will need to pay more attention to it in the future.
This article in the Dec. 2014 issue of Chronicles certain shows that they are supportive of Putin and his regime in Russia.
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2014/December/38/12/magazine/article/10826302/
The support for neo-Confederates by the regime in Moscow is a disturbing development and needs to be watched closely.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/dec/18/how-he-and-his-cronies-stole-russia/?insrc=hpma
In place of a genuine media and a real civil society, Putin and his inner circle slowly put into place a system for manufacturing disinformation and mobilizing support on a new and spectacular scale. Once the KGB had retaken the country, in other words, it began once again to act like the KGB—only now it was better funded and more sophisticated. Today’s Russian “political technologists” make use of their state-owned media, including English-language outlets such as the TV news channel Russia Today; armies of paid social media “trolls” who post on newspaper comment pages, as well as on Twitter, Facebook, and other sites; fake “experts” whose quotes can be presented with fake authority; and real experts to whom Putin’s officials have granted special access, or have simply paid. Former Western ambassadors to Moscow, businessmen who have been recruited to Russian company boards, European politicians as high-ranking as Schröder and Silvio Berlusconi—all have been well compensated, directly or indirectly, for offering their support.
Using these different sources, the Kremlin began putting out messages designed not necessarily to make Russia look good, but rather to undermine the Western establishment and Western institutions, including the European Union and NATO. Using both money and information, they seek to empower the Western far right, the anti-establishment left, and the international business community all at the same time. Thus Russia Today supports Occupy Wall Street. A Russian oligarch organizes a meeting in Vienna attended by the French National Front, Hungary’s nationalist political party Jobbik, and Austria’s Freedom Party.3 Whispering campaigns, conducted in the world’s financial capitals—especially Frankfurt and the City of London—hint at the dire things that will happen if sanctions against Russia are not lifted. In an article recently published by The Interpreter, an online publication dedicated to exposing Kremlin disinformation, the journalists Peter Pomerantsev and Michael Weiss argue that:
since at least 2008 Kremlin military and intelligence thinkers have been talking about information not in the familiar terms of “persuasion,” “public diplomacy” or even “propaganda,” but in weaponized terms, as a tool to confuse, blackmail, demoralize, subvert and paralyze.4
In understanding this we can see why Russian media has been interested in giving League of the South President Michael Hill and some others a platform in their media. Recently the League of the South was exultant in the fact that they were on Russian media.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/league-president-interviewed-on-russian-tv/
The Russians may not take the League of the South very seriously but want to assist any group that they feel could harm the United States of America and in the case of giving League of the South media access they are covering all their bets.
It would suit the Russians very well if a real secessionist movement would gain some traction in the United States.
At some point what the League of the South is doing is treason.
UPDATE:
This is another item of the Putin government supporting the neo-Confederate movement in the United States.
http://leagueofthesouth.com/the-league-of-the-south-takes-its-southern-nationalist-message-to-moscow/
League of the South President Michael Hill is pleased to announce that he spoke via Skype at an Anti-Globalist conference in Moscow on the topic “The Right of People for Self-Determination and Constructing a Multipolar World.”
I am trying to find out some information about the conference. This is a YouTube video of it. Doesn't seem like a major affair.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=688xDoLgAY4
The same video can be found at:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/12/14/390167/moscow-hosts-antiglobalization-conference/
I don't know if the Putin government is giving the League of the South any financial resources, but being on Russian TV and being invited to conferences certainly must encourage the neo-Confederates and maintain moral when their agenda doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Also, it has the potential to raise their prestige in the eyes of other extremists and help them recruit members and retain members.
I have not indication so far that the Sons of Confederate Veterans, United Daughters of the Confederacy and the Abbeville Institute are connecting with Russian groups as part of an anti-Western effort. The people at the Rockford Institute have been in contact with all sorts of reactionary groups in Europe and been sympathetic to reactionaries in Eastern Europe, but I haven't really paid too close attention to this. I think I will need to pay more attention to it in the future.
This article in the Dec. 2014 issue of Chronicles certain shows that they are supportive of Putin and his regime in Russia.
http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2014/December/38/12/magazine/article/10826302/
The support for neo-Confederates by the regime in Moscow is a disturbing development and needs to be watched closely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
