The Israeli journalist Alexander Maistrovoy describes what is happening in the Modern Multicultural West by examines the analogy of the forced multiculturalization of the Soviet Union.
Headed to the Middle Ages, or the Lebanese States of Europe
by Alexander Maistrovoy
The nations of the former Soviet Union experienced the grim consequences of social experiments on their own skin. Western Europe is next.
Marxist dogma suggests that “national question” should be resolved by “erasing national differences” and the affirmation of internationalism, and the artificial implantation of language and culture of the carrier of the “progressive ideology”.
According to Lenin, “international culture of the global labor movement” should be solely based on the great historic culture of Russia.
These principles were consistently implemented by the Soviet Communist Party, especially in the first decades of Soviet power.
On the one hand, there was the Marxist ideology, which suppressed “nationalist philistines” as Lenin called them. On the other, there was the expansion of the Russian nation as a “progressive nation”.
Ukraine became the first victim of this policy, and the current strife in this country is has its roots in communist ideology. In the 1920s Lenin worked to accelerate the process of assimilating Ukrainians by “migrating tens and hundreds of thousands Russian farmers and workers to the Ukrainian mines and cities”. According to Stalin, “Urban culture is superior because it is Russian; as for the rural (Ukrainian) culture, only the devil understands their language”.
These weren’t just empty statements. The “Rural culture” underwent total destruction, part of which was the artificially crafted Holodomor (“Hunger-extermination”). At the same time, “urban culture” was imposed by resettling millions of Russians in Ukraine. “Russification” became an instrument of Marxist dogma. Although the bloody deportations of people and settlement of Russians on the “liberated territories” were dictated by imperial considerations and personal pathology of Stalin, they fit perfectly into the Bolshevik concept of the “national question”.
The same policy was implemented in the Baltic States. Hundreds of thousands of Latvians, Estonians and Lithuanians were deported to Siberia and the Kazakh steppe. The deported “nationalist philistines” were replaced by representatives of the “worldwide labor movement,” i.e., ethnic Russians. In some cases the domination of the “worldwide labor movement” was achieved by territorial manipulation. For example, Ukrainian Transnistria was forcibly attached to Moldova. Transnistria was turned into an industrial center of Moldova and was actively populated by Russians.
When the giant and unsustainable monster known as the “Soviet Union” collapsed, people who had been victims of bloodcurdling experiments gained independence, and with it the “national question” inherited from the “Red Empire”. It turned into a time bomb. Ukraine has split in two parts: the Western Ukraine – cast off from Poland with Lvov as its capital, and Russified Eastern Ukraine — with industrial facilities. President Victor Yanukovych represents Eastern Ukraine, and the current confrontation is not only between the supporters and opponents of “Europeanization”, but also between the “Russian proletariat” and the West Ukrainian “peasantry”.
As soon as Transnistria declared itself an independent republic with Tiraspol as its capital — Moldova, which had become independent as well — immediately plunged into civil war. Although the battles raged for several months in 1992, claiming the lives of more than a thousand people, the bleeding wound of the conflict is still open.
The Slavic population (Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians) exceeds 30% as a result of forced Russification of Latvia; prior to forcible annexation to the USSR it was less than 10%. Ethnic Russians who populate the south-eastern area of the country, which is adjacent to Russia, are quite capable, like the residents of Transnistria, of demanding independence, either by their own initiative or by Kremlin’s behest.
The situation is similar in neighboring Estonia, where Russians are quarter of the population and where the border with Russia is densely populated by Russian natives, among which about 100,000 don’t have Russian citizenship.
All European countries of the former Soviet Union are in a state of constant friction between the national majority and the Russian minority, which is perceived as an agent influenced by the Kremlin.
The solution of the “national question” in the West was carried out in a more sophisticated fashion. Wrapped in multiculturalism, it was tainted with poison deadlier than Bolshevism. On the one hand, Western consciousness was suppressed by “international” dogma. The survival instinct atrophied; the average Frenchman, Italian, German, or Englishman became a hostage of powerful self-censorship, even stronger than in the totalitarian Soviet regime where people were fearful of the authorities. In Western Europe they are afraid of themselves and their innate feelings. External censorship, however, also existed: zealous and ubiquitous EU bureaucrats resembled the Communist Party apparatchiks.
On the other hand, Third World natives — the “proletariat” of XXI century — became the embodiment of the “progress” against “nationalist philistine prejudices”. While inhabiting European cities and creating ghettos, they’ve destroyed the natural structure of society. The initial demand for manpower was put at the service of ideology. As a result, the deformation occurred from the top (EU bureaucracy) and from the bottom — an alien and often hostile population.
There is no doubt that the “Pink Empire” will collapse just like the “Red” one did. The question is: how could Europeans cope with the multicultural heritage?
Sensitive Urban Zones — a bounty of closed and isolated communities — already exist in European cities. As in Lebanon, these are in fact “states within a state” which have their own laws, implicit government, “guards” and courts. In contrast to Lebanon, where ethnic-religious mosaic evolved naturally and took a century, in Western Europe the process was rapid, chaotic and random.
From London to Geneva and from Oslo to Vienna we see improvised criminal organizations, mini-”Islamic Republics” such as the “Islamic Republic of Tower Hamlets” (Kafkaesque combination), tribal unions, and mafias, such as Albanian or Caucasian ones. The state, as in Lebanon, with its courts and police, is helpless in the face of these extraterritorial entities that emerge like mushrooms after rain. They can create a coalition or collide with each other. It is already a reality. On the Edgeware Road, in London, Salafis led by Anjem Choudary attack the Shiite Iranians. Gangs of teenagers from Africa and the Caribbean in Birmingham’s Handsworth terrorize neighboring districts. In French town of Mulhouse (Haut-Rhine) Chechen criminal clans start a war with Arabs. In French cities, such as Nimes and Sarcelles, Arabs dominate local markets, hindering pork trade, alcohol and bathing suits; in Marseilles in September 2012 they vandalized a gypsy camp. Turkish neighborhoods dispute with Kurdish neighborhoods in Germany; a Muslim ghetto in Copenhagen imposes its rules on African neighbors. In all cases the authorities refrain from intervening, and are afraid to resort to force. And in all the cases these archaic, patriarchal communities are expanding their living space at the expense of the indigenous people and the state.
Repressions, deportations and cruel punitive actions would be required in order to establish the rule of law — the European consciousness is absolutely unprepared for such brutality. As a result the real power will be in the hands of those who are better organized, well-armed and have a powerful patron — like Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Russians relocated to Ukraine and Moldova were more or less people of somewhat similar culture to the local population (in many cases they belonged the same Orthodox faith as in Moldova). It did not eliminate conflicts, but reduced their intensity and hatred. Intruders from outskirts of Russia with alcohol addiction and bad habits annoyed prim and composed Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians, but the gap was not as sizeable as between Western Civilization and closed patriarchal communities with clan vendettas, institutionalized pedophilia, the beating of women, girls’ circumcision, polygamy, ritual cults, legitimized slavery, a caste system etc.
Russian youth in Ukraine and the Baltic States are not sacrificial. They don’t have any intention of dying for Mother Russia. They want to enjoy life and dream about citizenship in Switzerland, the USA or Canada. Young Pakistanis, Afghans, Sudanese, Somalis, Moroccans, Caribbean don’t have even a smidgen of sympathy for European history and culture. Deep contempt for Europe and fidelity to the laws of blood and honor are their driving forces.
Similar to the situation in Lebanon, it will be a war of all against all, but, unlike the Lebanese case with Druze or Christians, an average European does not have a cohesive clan and the quenching of eternal war behind his back.
“There is nothing more miserable as moralization of the great social catastrophe!” wrote Trotsky. His followers in the West certainly agree with him. The revolutionary ideal takes first place. No one cares what will happen to the “natural material” of revolution — ordinary people (white, black, colored, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, man and woman).
For previous posts by the author, see the Alexander Maistrovoy Archives.