Navalny’s Popularity on the Wane

That’s what I counselled people hoping for (or fearing) that a color revolution was imminent a few months ago: Look at the numbers.

Well, since then, they have if anything plummeted further.

14% approval vs. 62% disapproval. Down from half a year ago.

Furthermore, while young people are relatively more pro-Navalny (this is not surprising: to those who follow my Russia blogging, I have been pointing out that Russian youth lean more liberal and more nationalist relative to the mainstream for several years now), there’s still nothing to write home about so far as absolute numbers are concerned.

Just 24% approval vs. 59% disapproval amongst the 18-24 year olds who constitute the spearhead of any color revolution.

In the Russian electoral context, it is all one big nothingburger.

Anatoly Karlin is a transhumanist interested in psychometrics, life extension, UBI, crypto/network states, X risks, and ushering in the Biosingularity.


Inventor of Idiot’s Limbo, the Katechon Hypothesis, and Elite Human Capital.


Apart from writing booksreviewstravel writing, and sundry blogging, I Tweet at @powerfultakes and run a Substack newsletter.


  1. Please keep off topic posts to the current Open Thread.

    If you are new to my work, start here.

    Commenting rules. Please note that anonymous comments are not allowed.

  2. Shortsword says
  3. Triteleia Laxa says

    Don’t know much about Navalny, except that he has such an interesting face. I can see why people may have suspicions about him having foreign handlers; he looks like he could have come out of Hollywood central casting.

    Reversing their suspicions, I wonder if this is why foreign media love reporting on him so much. His photos are just perfect for the role which he is trying to fill.

  4. The Big Red Scary says

    The professional photos are well done, but he’s rather less handsome in informal photos or video. His manner is rather repulsive as well, simultaneously aggressive and effeminately emotional. Check out the Navalny-Strelkov debate:

    Soyboy liberal versus chad silovik.

  5. Triteleia Laxa says

    It seems to me that you’re not a fan of passion!

    I can’t understand Russian, but Navalny seems passionate, if occasionally slipping into agitation, whereas the grey guy seems grey and condescending, and with a newt-like face.

    I can see the merit in your description too, and it is interesting that the dichotomy between them, their presentation-style and what they represent, is the same split that defines the “culture wars” in the West.

    I also didn’t mean to say that Navalny was particularly good looking, more that he was extremely interesting looking. He has a masculine and neotenous face. Perfect for a role in a science fiction film as some svengali tech entrepreneur, or as a media friendly Russian dissident!

  6. The Big Red Scary says

    Do you speak Russian? I’m surely interpreting Navalny’s manner in light of the content of what he says, which is liberal and platitudinous. I don’t particularly like Strelkov, but I don’t find him repulsive either. At least his comments in that debate seem based on a coherent ideology rather than emotional reaction, or “mood affiliation”, as Tyler Cowen might put it.

  7. I don’t think you should try to change Russian politics or governmental agenda’s , thru a NGO from the West , Poland, Ukraine or Lithuania. And that is why Navalny and the others that wish to enter Russian politics should be in jail for 10 years. Same as a traitor or spy. And the same should go for the Pro Western politicians that push for those western ideas and programs. Business is Business but keep it in the family – the pro Slavic one. Yes Russia is in the NWO , as far as international business is concerned – but you don’t have to catch the Fleas.

  8. AnonfromTN says

    I am not surprised 59% disapproval among 18-24 years old, but I am surprised by 24% approval. I may not be up to date (I left Russia 30 years ago), but as far as I know in Russian culture traitors are considered no more than a notch above child molesters.

  9. Bashibuzuk says

    Meanwhile in the Moscow Oblast’, in a small provincial
    town of some 75 000 people, Egorievsk, a police colonel was arrested for preparing the murder of a local businessman. Five million US $ cash have been seized at the home of this minor Silovik. That’s in a city where 500 $ a month is not a bad salary.

    В подмосковном Егорьевске за подготовку убийства бизнесменов взяли местного полковника МВД. При обыске у него только наличными нашли $5 млн. Понятно, что это только надводная часть его активов – наверняка миллионы долларов ещё лежат где-то на счетах (на родственников), вложены в недвижимость, машины, бизнесы… Думаю, у человека такого масштаба минимум на $10-15 млн. должно активов быть. Плюс его грибница из клинтеллы потянет на миллионы долларов.

    И это город Егорьевск с населением 75 тыс. человек. Представьте себе уровень кормления людей рангом выше на одну-две ступени (мэры и силовики более крупных городов, вице-губернаторы и т.д.) О Топ-1000 семей даже и не говорим, там уже речь о миллиардах и десятках миллиардов долларов.

    Как писал уже не раз, эти 100 тыс. высших семей прожирают минимум $200 млрд. в год (это $2 млн. на семью – глядя на этого егорьевского полковника даже очень скромным подсчёт кажется).
    И заодно показатель того, что в высшей страте все пухнут от денег. На самом деле Россию просто распирает от избытка денег.

    Но на низовой уровень постоянно транслируется «Денег нет!», «Русским денег не надо!» и т.п. айнрэнд. СМС-ками собирают копейки на больных детей на фоне такого безумно огромного денежного навеса у правящего класса.

    From Pryannikov’s / Tolkovatel Telegram blog.

  10. Caspar von Everec says

    Navalny is the liberal globohomo candidate, but who’s the nationalist, ”far-right” candidate?

    For example, in Poland PiS is the center right but Korwin is far right. Who’s far right in Russia?

  11. Caspar von Everec says

    If I was Russian and Strelkov ran for President, I’d vote for him. The number one trait you want in a statesman is loyalty to his nation and willingness go run the gauntlet for them.

    Putin is..fine but honestly its disconcerting how accomodating he is liberal subversives in Russia and Jewish oligarchs like Abrahamovich. I heard this on the net but supposedly the chechens murdered many Russian officers after the end of the war and Putin shoved it under the rug.

  12. Caspar von Everec says

    AK, what’s your thought on Russian birth rate prospects?

    Russia I believe has a breeder fraction known as the old believers. They have TFRs close to ten but also high mortality. Meaning its a eugenic and highly fertile population.

    Russia modernized much later than other european countries. It was a mostly rural country till Stalin industrialized it in the 30s.

  13. Russian politics seems to have much less of a “gender gap” than in Western, specifically Anglo countries.

    Among women 18-24 in the West, support for the Right is usually around the same level as what Mr. Navalny is comparably polling.

  14. Finnishguy78 says

    Why you dislike Navalny though, he has talked about many good issues like for example he would like stop building ugly apartment blocks and limit immigration etc and he is willing to go prison for his ideals.

  15. AnonfromTN says

    he is willing to go prison for his ideals.

    Correction: he went to prison not for “his ideals”, but for economic crimes (if we drop legalese, for thievery).

  16. Mr. Hack says

    Didn’t you get the memo? Everyone loves Putler* (or is supposed to).
    Rumors mount that a new Russian weekly TV series is being built around these success stories. Who better to play the role of Putin (5’6″) than fellow Vova, Zelensky (5’7″)?..

    *All except for Bashibusuk. 🙂

  17. Blinky Bill says
  18. Thieves often go far in life, Navalny has that going for him. Being a thief appeals to dissatisfied people, it shows willingness to go for the jugular – many value that in a leader. When the time is right, charismatic thieves can rise to the top.

    Don’t underestimate Navalny’s future: the key number is his support among the young in Moscow, it could be close to 50%. That is enough in a metropolitan-liberal oligarchic system that Kremlin seems to be running. All it needs is a serious economic hiccup and the West should still be able to deliver one if everything else is ready.

  19. AnonfromTN says

    There are lots of thieves in Russia. Many are smarter and/or a lot more glib than Navalny. I am not sure his support among Moscow young is anywhere near 50%. Besides, in a serious social upheaval a lot of shit rises to the top, and I won’t bet my money that Navalny is likely to win the “shittiest of shits” competition. This does not mean that whoever wins it is going to be any better.

  20. Not Raul says

    What is Navalny’s endgame?

    I doubt that he expects to beat Putin in an election.

    I doubt that he’s really trying to be a martyr.

    He could have had a think tank job years ago.

    He’s not stupid. He must have a plan, right?

  21. AnonfromTN says

    He’s not stupid.

    That’s where you went wrong. He is stupid. Just watch his interview with Sobchak before the last presidential elections in the RF. She smeared him over the wall, without even intending to. If he had at least half of her intelligence, that wouldn’t have happened. Mind you, she is no Einstein, either.

    He could have had a think tank job years ago.

    Wrong. Nobody would spend money on that piece of guano when it is outside of RF. His sponsors are paying him to be an inside annoyance to Putin. There is plenty of anti-Putin scum in the West, no new guano is needed. Besides, even Masha Gessen (it, its) is smarter than him.

  22. Bashibuzuk says

    *All except for Bashibusuk

    It is true that I have a very low opinion of Putin, but I also have and always had a rather low opinion of Navalny. Navalny always was a tool, a funnel to misdirect center-right dissident discourse into a strategy that was mainly innocuous for the Kremlins. That is why they tolerated his activism for so long, until he crossed the red line.

  23. Mr. Hack says

    Many Russians share your opinion about Navalny. Is there anyone with Russian presidential aspirations that you like?

  24. Mr. Hack says

    Но на низовой уровень постоянно транслируется «Денег нет!», «Русским денег не надо!» и т.п. айнрэнд. СМС-ками собирают копейки на больных детей на фоне такого безумно огромного денежного навеса у правящего класса.

    Is Pryannikov some sort of Russian SJW? Or worse yet, some kind of holdover from the commie past?

  25. Amazing that that was not a parody account.

  26. Along with the reputation of being a convicted thief, they are automatically first class liars, not to mention his classes at Yale and his medical history of instability. Why did the CIA’s recruiter school Yale, pick him ? Pretty obvious . Even Charley Manson had – Followers . Thanks T N.

  27. If his support is indeed 24% among 18-24, it would not be unreasonable to assume a higher % in Moscow, maybe even twice the national average. Or maybe not. I am skeptical of all surveys – I often wouldn’t know how to answer myself, and people usually don’t share their true motives – even assuming they know what they are. Suffice to say, Navalny has enough measurable support.

    There are many thieves all over the world and Navalny fits in nicely. That is his main advantage – he channels the global thieving class well, they recognise themselves in him and trust him. Not just any thief will do, you have to know what to steal, what to denounce, and what not touch. Navalny knows it and also displays a pleasing emotional enthusiasm.

    A lot has been invested in him, a new character would take years to cultivate. That’s why the Western message about Navalny has been very straightforward: “just don’t kill him“. They don’t care much about what happens in the meantime as long as their investment stays alive. Or alternatively they have decided that a martyr would be more useful at this time and they are trying to foreshadow what they would like to happen. The problem is that even Navalny doesn’t know what the plan is. Must be hell for him.

  28. Korenchkin says

    What the hell is this Microsoft Sam shit, this isn’t facebook

  29. Bashibuzuk says

    There are no serious opposition figures left in RusFed. The last election where some challenge to the kleptocracy was possible was in 1996. Zuganov won the popular vote but the election was rigged and stolen from him. And he was a coward enough to go along with it.

    The politics in RusFed are a simulation controlled by the Presidential Administration. RusFed is a democracy in name only and voting there is as useless as it is now in the US. As the saying goes: “If voting changed anything, they would have forbidden it”. Or more crudely: “Голосуй, не голосуй, всё равно получишь … Путина”

    (The full sarcastic aspect of the saying is lost if translated).

  30. Bashibuzuk says

    He is a center-left leaning Jew. Which makes his observations about the whole situation in RusFed even more interesting.

  31. RusFed is a democracy in name only and voting there is as useless as it is now in the US.

    But there is an essential difference. A stronger system like in the US can afford changing presidents from party A to party B w/o endangering the general political course while RusFed is much more fragile and thus it has be Putin because w/o him nobody knows what would happen.

  32. Mr. Hack says

    Microsoft Sam shit, ?

    I have no idea what this means, but if you watch and listen to the video you might be surprised to learn that it provides the most positive and glowing report of Putin that I can possibly imagine. It’s so nauseatingly positive that even you might find it to be a self promoted propaganda piece.

  33. Mr. Hack says

    Although Zyuganov’s resume is impressive enough, he still seems like some kind of a fruitcake:

    On the occasion of Soviet leader Joseph Stalin’s birthday on 21 December 2010, Zyuganov called for the re-Stalinization of Russian society in an open letter to President Medvedev.[11]

    Putin probably likes to keep him around, for he makes Putin seem more like a modern, post soviet man.

    What is the name of and what ever happened to the Russian army general (or colonel) who used to regularly run against Putin. What did you think of him?

  34. Mr. Hack says

    Why would a “center-left leaning Jew’s” opinion be more interesting than somebody else’s?

  35. One of my many frustrations with the coverage of modern politics is that it is essentially issue-free. We are told that Navalny is a foe of Putin – but why? How? What is Navalny saying? What has Navalny actually DONE in the past? (Follow the record, follow the record, follow the record). Who is funding Navalny? (Follow the money, follow the money, follow the money). Without this sort of information, it’s just a Pepsi-vs-Coke advertising contest.

    Political labels – “right” and “left” – are less useful than Coke vs. Pepsi. I mean, we have Biden who is supposed to be a liberal, pushing for cheap-labor open-borders immigration (traditionally considered far-right), zero taxes on the rich and higher taxes on the rest of us (no he’s not planning on increasing the taxes on people like Zuckerberg, who pay zero now and zero under any of Biden’s plans), and continuing to bail out Wall Street with trillions of dollars of public funds, and crush the younger generation into a lifetime of debt slavery, etc.etc. But hey, the New York Times says he’s “Liberal”, so that is supposed to define Biden and be the end of the matter, nothing else to see, nothing else to know, no need to dig through his putrid and corrupt record of public dis-service.

    To recap: who the heck is Navalny, what is he saying, what has he done in the past, who is funding him now?

  36. Bashibuzuk says

    In 1996 the support for Yeltsin was around 15%, General Lebed enjoyed around 25%. Zuganov was around 48% and he would have won the vote if the election was not rigged.

    Even Medvedev admitted it a few years ago. The oligarchs threatened civil war, the West offered full support to Yeltsin, Lebed chose to align himself with Bor’ka Alkash (and was later murderered). Zuganov backed off and accepted the comfortable role of controlled opposition, the rest is history.

    That was the last time a democratic change was possible in RusFed.

  37. Bashibuzuk says

    Because he can write things that if written by an ethnic Slav would be considered borderline fascist. It is actually darkly amusing to read his blog because a lot of things he decries about RusFed are exactly the same as what Russian nationalists also complain about.

    But we also can see it here on this very blog, I often agree with Dmitry, although we clearly have a very different political outlook, life experience and ethnic background. When people are honest about the situation there, they would come to similar conclusions even if they are otherwise very different and even perhaps completely opposite.

    First thing a honest person would recognize about RusFed and other FUSSR bantustans is that they are all more or less kleptocratic pseudo-democratic and pseudo-patriotic / pseudo-nationalist (Estonia is perhaps an exception to this rule, but it was very different even in Soviet times). If someone doesn’t acknowledge this, then this person is either naive or dishonest or simply cynical enough to ignore this as irrelevant (which is the most adapatative strategy if someone lives there).

  38. You now trust Medvedev? 😉

    Actually read Kireev’s article. Or just look at the polls prior to the second round:
    Yeltsin consistently had more than a ten digit lead over Zyuganov in the last month before the second round.

    The reason Zyuganov didn’t dispute is banally simple. He lost and by a significant margin, the Constitutional Court would not have sided with him in the event of a challenge and would have been correct to not do so.

  39. Why are you asking someone so completely out of touch with modern Russia this question? It’s not for nought the answer you received referenced 1996.

  40. Liberal soy-boys are having embarrassing times now trying to explain the almost panicking “retreat” of their masters from Afghanistan. They always presented their masters as all-powerful gods, but these “gods” are starring a remake of the Soviet retreat of the end of the 1980s. It would be nice a new thread about the subject and the associated dialectic efforts of liberal globo-homos to explain the NATO defeat in Afghanistan.

  41. Bashibuzuk says

    I don’t see who this colonel could be: Leded’ was murdered, Rokhlin also was murdered (btw, an excellent officer and true Russian patriot of Jewish background), Kvachkov was imprisoned twice on ridiculous charges, he is now old, sick and under constant FSB surveillance. Professional military people are kept as far from politics as possible in RusFed. If they get too close, they are sidelined and/or eliminated. RusFed army is actually in political terms thoroughly cucked by those whom Pryannikov astutely described as “Liberal-Chekists” (ex KGB / Razvedka types allied with the financial circles aligned with the Globalists).

  42. AnonfromTN says

    liberal globo-homos to explain the NATO defeat in Afghanistan.

    Liberal globo-homos will follow their standard script: upon inglorious defeat, declare victory and leave.

  43. It was Lebed that I had in mind. I wasn’t aware that he was murdered?

  44. It’s a conspiracy theory, not a fact. Now it could certainly be a conspiracy theory that happens to be true, certainly there are less plausible ones out there, but it is nonetheless an important distinction.

  45. AnonfromTN says

    Simple truth is, we will never know whether MI8 crash that killed him in 2002 was accidental or manufactured. On the one hand, by refusing to run for president in 2000 he acknowledged that the regime is stronger than him and he has no balls to contest it. On the other hand, his persistent popularity in the army and among civilians could have been perceived as a potential threat. As Stalin allegedly said, “no person – no problem”.

  46. Bashibuzuk says

    Why don’t you share your insights?

    What is the current state of RusFed politics, who would be the credible opposition (if any) and how is the whole situation with the corruption and nepotism evolving?

    I’m ready to learn and to be proven wrong.

  47. Bashibuzuk says

    Sure, just like Putin’s early criminal activities in Piter are conspiracy theories. (Sarc.)

    What about Lev Rokhlin?

    That’s what his daughter, who is still very active in populist circles told about the death of her father, hero of the first Chevhen war:

    «Человека убрали потому, что он имел возможность совершить военный переворот. А совершить его он собирался ради народа. Он стоял на народовластии. Когда он пришёл и увидел в Госдуме, насколько было объёмным это воровство, приватизация… К нему шла информация со всех сторон. От бывших кагэбэшников. Отовсюду. И в то же время он увидел огромное доверие со стороны народа, различных политических деятелей, учёных. Он не видел другого выхода. И сейчас назревает опять такая же ситуация.»

    “He was liquidated because he had the opportunity to carry out a military coup. And he was going to do it for the sake of the people. He was firm about democracy. When he came and saw in the State Duma how voluminous this theft, this privatization was … Information came to him from all corners. From former KGB officers. From everywhere. And at the same time, he saw tremendous trust on the part of the people, various politicians, scientists. He saw no other way out. And now the same situation is brewing again. ”

    Elena Rokhlina helps Russian nationalist and patriotic political prisoners. She is a brave and honorable woman, just like her father was a brave and honorable man.

  48. Bashibuzuk says

    If you trust these polls I have a couple of bridges to sell you in Piter, but then you also believe that Biden won fair and square, so I can also sell you a couple of bridges in NY.

  49. AnonfromTN says

    If you trust these polls

    There is a good American joke about polls.
    The scientists established that dick size in Shitville is twice that of neighboring Dungville. The latter number was obtained by measurements, whereas the former one by polling.

  50. Felix Keverich says

    Sobchak is a bright Jewish girl. Navalny is a pure-blood hohol, who never thought about policy, because he doesn’t expect to be in the position to run the government, and because hohols don’t care about such things in general. I was actually disappointed by how dull and uninquisitive Navalny is. This kind of person would make a good puppet, if someone managed to place him on the throne.

  51. Xi-jinping says

    Or worse yet, some kind of holdover from the commie past?

    As I have demonstrated on this blog numerous times – Russia’s commie past is far more superior than its current non-commie present. So I really don’t see what you’re getting at.

    In a commie Russia SJWs would be an impossibility and family values were far more promoted (family values = union between one man and one woman) and one could trust that the censors would get rid of any material that wasn’t good for people (eg Black Flag was a show ostensibly about pirates but they shoehorned an entire gay subplot to it – this would have been eliminated by commie Censors).

    Also, you’re a west Ukrainian living in the US so its not surprising you’d say that.

  52. Xi-jinping says
  53. Yes, I prefer to operate in the world of facts and statistics, not a make-belief world of whatever ideology.

    The gap between Yeltsin and Zyuganov was 14%. You would be hard pressed to close such a gap even with the degree of electoral fraud seen in 2010s Russia, let alone back then, when it was still delimited to some of the ethnic minority republics.

  54. Xi-jinping says

    Yes, I prefer to operate in the world of facts and statistics

    If thats so, then why do you ignore the fact that Medvedev even said that Zuganov won back then:,8599,2107565,00.html

    ” Medvedev reportedly offered another take on the official story. According to four people who were in the room, Medvedev stated, like a bolt from the blue, that Russia’s first President did not actually win re-election in 1996 for his second term. The second presidential vote in Russia’s history, in other words, was rigged.”

    Or that Clinton admitted to helping Yeltsin win the election:

    Either your ‘statistics’ are wrong or you are trying to peddle a particular narrative. Your entire argument is based on a blog post written by some random guy that unironically quotes official statistics without actually referencing them (as if they can be believed)

    And this is me using ‘official’ US sources, that people here seem to like. The US has no reason to peddle an ‘anti-Yeltsin’ narrative, so you can’t just blame it on the ‘delusions of a commie’ or ‘sovok sources’ (when facts go against your narrative) or whatever.

  55. AnonfromTN says

    Can agree with some clarifications.

    First, not all Jews are bright and successful. That’s why Yiddish word “shlimazl” exists – it’s something like Sholem Aleichem’s Pinya (Пиня), who burned his nose while ironing. Quite a few Jews are like that.

    Second, not all hohols are as dull and uninquisitive as Navalny. Yes, Navalny, not being even qualified to run a McDonalds by himself, would be a convenient puppet never asking puppet master any questions.

  56. Xi-jinping says

    In fact if you’re a “Russian nationalist” as you claim, you’d support Zyuganov over Yeltsin. Here’s a direct quote from Yeltsin to Clinton (from Clinton archives):

    If anything, Yeltsin was anti-Russian whilst the CPRF supported the exact policies you claim to support (taking back Crimea, claiming Alaska, putting Russia as the dominant power of Eurasia by turning the surrounding territories into a part of its Empire, being pro-Orthodoxy, supporting small business from being gobbled up by large business tycoons, etc)

    Even logically speaking your argument regarding support for Yeltsin makes no sense, people did vote to preserve the Union in 1991 referendum after all. Why then would they support Yeltsin who broke it?

  57. Statements of fact (that Yeltsin won in 1996, and would have won in the absence of electoral fraud) are not endorsements.

    Now get lost, your idiotic gnat.

  58. Xi-jinping says

    Statements of fact

    Its not fact when even Clinton admits Yeltsin was in the single digits in polls though.

    And your argument is literally based on the opinion of one guy, who unironically basis his entire argument on (likely) fraudulent statistics. And you present that as fact facepalm vs the actual fucking Russian president (Medvedev) saying that Zyuganov won the election.

    Medvedev > random Karlin approved blogger on the matter.

    Like go read what I posted. The US had to run a fradulent campaign for Yeltsin because he would have lost otherwise. Why else would Yeltsin have to ask the US for help then? Makes no sense.

    So nice try. Do better research next time.

    Like how stupid do you have to be to take the word of some blogger over that of an ex-Russian president faceplam. I think you’re taking you’re “dissdent” rhetoric a bit too far here.

    Either find better sources (and I’ll happily retract my statements) or get over the fact that you’re wrong.

  59. Xi-jinping says

    Even Yeltsin says he wouldn’t have won without Lebed’s votes being added to his:

    (Page 40)

    That’s also a comment that was made by someone in the blog you posted.

    Just admit it, you’re wrong.

  60. The establishment notes accordingly:

  61. Meduza projects with its use of roughshod

  62. Not Raul says


    It’s my understanding that there was a massive amount of fraud in 1996, and that polls were pretty close, so fraud could have been a critical factor.

  63. Bashibuzuk says

    You know how much Yeltsin approval polled in early 1996 ? A freaking 7 %…

    And how much his political party got in the Duma elections ? A huuuuge 10 %, despite being the party of the acting president…

    If you believe that Russian people were so freaking dumb that they completely changed their mind about Bor’ka Alkash in a half year period, just because Chubais hired a half dozen American political spin doctors, then you are a complete Russophobe…

    Massive manipulation, total oligarchic support, full MSM backing, an outspoken menace of a future civil war and outright fraud were required to bring this alcoholic zombie back to power.

    The media aspect of the whole affair was paramount:

    Even Коммерсантъ admits that Yeltsin’s victory was dubious at best:

    But now I understand better how you could write that Biden won fair and square. If you accept Yeltsin’s 1996 victory as legitimate, then anything goes.

  64. Russia is a democracy……. Poland is a paedocracy.

    From Zemsky sobor onwards, Russia has a very old and proud democratic tradition…… Poland has none

  65. I’m ready to learn and be proven wrong

    LOL – Aren’t you the same anti-russian dickhead who predicted that the arrest of Furgal and the subsequent protests in Khabarovsk was the “end for Putin” and of “the regime”?

    You’re just full of similar projection nonsense over any event in Russia.

  66. Yevardian says

    What, you’ve never heard of Zhirinovsky before, have you been under a rock? Although he hasn’t been a serious opposition figure for decades now. Although, as for prominent, thinking ‘ethno-nationalists’ in the Westoid sense, I can’t think of any.

  67. Yevardian says

    Yeah Girkin, the guy who renamed himself ‘shooter’, and bragged about turning Donetsk into a warzone within a day (ostensibly acting alone, but who knows), presenting it as an accomplished fact for others to clean up.., that’s the sort of responsible figure you want running the country. Zhirinovsky says ridiculous things but you don’t take him at face value, he’s actually an extremely canny and clever politician, you don’t want a crazy cowboy like Girkin anywhere near the levers of state, or in any position of responsibility, really.

  68. Bashibuzuk says

    Zhirinivsky is a clown. He is half Jewish on his father’s side, he is a bisexual pederast and he is a great showman with an excellent sense of humor. That’s all one needs to know about this “Russian Nationalist”…

  69. Yevardian says

    Well, as I was implying, one really has to clutch at straws to answer his question.. although I’m certain there are many talented people in Russia on that side, they’re simply biding their time out of public view. Putin has effectively neutered all native patriotic opposition, so now the only ‘serious’ public opposition figures are actual traitors or ones with obvious foreign ties, it would be senseless for any genuine nationalist to come out now and get themselves lumped in with such people, so they stay in the shadows.
    Quite an effective strategy on the part of the United Russia clique, I must say.

    Anyway, Zhirinovsky has resigned himself to court jester long ago, at least he’s talented at his role and fobs off public resentment, so good for him I guess.

  70. AnonfromTN says

    Sure, Zhirik is a clown, often playing the role of a court jester (the one who dares to say things others are afraid to). He is 10 times smarter and a lot more talented than Ukrainian clown. That’s why he lasts a lot longer and makes a lot more money. As to nationality, both are half-Jewish. This pair is a good illustration of the fact that Jews can be both smart and dumb.

  71. Bashibuzuk says

    I am afraid that the strategy of Kremlins against the opposition was too ruthlessly efficient. Any system needs a dialectical balance, better still a balance of three or four forces that can dynamically neutralize each other and replace each other when time is right. In RusFed it should be the 1) Lefties/Commies, 2) Globalist Liberals 3) Conservatives (Nationalist/Traditionalist). This competing triumvirate would balance RusFed politics and allow it to evolve towards a more dynamic system.

    Instead in RusFed we have polical constructs that borrow notions and concepts from these three political currents and lump them together in a purely opportunist manner. A kind of deformed centrism, which is only here to allow a cover up of kleptocracy.

    This won’t end up well. As I wrote several times already, the best thing to happen in the next one to two years would be Putin to transfer his powers to a younger, stronger leader. This leader might perhaps become strong enough to allow for a true multiparty system to evolve in Russia, balance the political center and the regions, disentangle Russia from geopolitical conflicts and first and foremost curtail kleptocracy and capital flight.

    That is what I hope for Russia in the next 10 years or so. That way, if I live long enough to see it, I would retire in my beloved Piter and would take walks in the Letnyi Sad and on the Neva’s embankment before I die and get buried near my family members there.

    The alternative is stagnation and lowering of living standards leading to conflicts between the Moscow center and the regional centers of power, decreasing demographic potential, increasing technological lagging behind China and the Globalized West. In the end, the outcome would be the collapse of RusFed, which I would prefer never witnessing, even from afar.

    If Putin would not have come back to power in 2012, he would be today remembered as a strong, charismatic and truly patriotic leader who saved the country. His coming back was a mistake, although an entirely understandable one.

  72. … and that polls were pretty close

    I mean, I literally cited polls showing a consistent 10-15% advantage to Yeltsin over Zyuganov in the month before the second round of the 1996 elections.

    I am open to evidence that these polls were fake or made up, if any such be forthcoming.


    If you trust these polls I have a couple of bridges to sell you in Piter, but then you also believe that Biden won fair and square, so I can also sell you a couple of bridges in NY.

    Citing another conspiracy theory in support of a conspiracy theory doesn’t quite cut it IMO.

    PS. 1996 was not 2016, or even 2006. Approval of the US was ~70%. Just to put things into perspective.

  73. = Argument from incredulity.

    Russians didn’t like Yeltsin by then, but they liked Zyuganov even less. They showed their dislike of Yeltsin by punishing his party at the polls, while voting for him over Zyuganov as the less bad option (in their opinion).

    In France, politicians with ~20-25% approval ratings often win the Presidency, because 60% of Frenchmen band together against the nationalist bogeyman come the second round. Are French elections fraudulent and illegitimate in your world?

  74. Bashibuzuk says

    I agree that we were mostly positive about both US and the West back then. We naively believed in a potential convergence. But what does it have to do with both Yeltsin’s 1996 and Biden’s 2020 election victories being fake and gay ?

  75. Xi-jinping says

    The polls demonstrate that Zyuganov was consistently winning until May on polling during the runoffs. Suddenly, May hits and Yeltsin starts winning? Suspicious. If you actually bothered to read the Clinton archives I posted, May was when Yeltsin started getting help from Clinton and then we suddenly saw a heavy turnaround in Yeltsin’s favor. Is it a coincidence or maybe its not….hmmm

    This heavily implies that IMF investment/American voting did play a significant role in skewing the results of the votes to Yeltsin’s favor. Thanks for proving my point.

  76. Bashibuzuk says

    Are French elections fraudulent and illegitimate in your world?

    They are skewed and unfair, although technically legitimate. But Yeltsin’s and Biden’s elections were at a completely superior level of manipulation.

    Read the link that I have provided about the election and the media manipulation in 1996. I mean, this was not a fair and legitimate electoral process.

    I post it again because it is a good read (in Russian) :

    Also Gleb Pavlovskyi had this to say (in Russian):

  77. Xi-jinping says

    It seems that Karlin doesn’t read anything that doesn’t support his narrative or preconceived idea of how things should be, hence he has a pretty ‘mainstream’ view of things as a ‘reactionary dissident’. I’ve seen some of his reddit exchanges that when people post something turning what he wrote on his head – he’ll respond in short statements then entirely disappear.

    I suspect that he gets paid to post a certain narrative, and as the saying goes “a man who gets his livelihood from believing something is not inclined to change his opinion”. I may be wrong though and I hope I am.

  78. On the other hand, a significant proportion of Americans have been mentally poisoned by the bipartisan political conflict that has divided families and neighbours, and converted much of the country’s culture into a non-stopping political campaign. There is one of the advantages of one-party democracy in Russia compared to the two-party democracy in America: on average people are less interested in politics, and there is less pressure for people to involve themselves in political questions that would waste their time and create unnecessarily conflicts.

    Although perhaps “poisoned” sounds too pessimistic: an optimist would say that American two-party democracy has provided the population with decades of free entertainment value.

    Would you prefer American bipartisanship, or Russian apoliticism?

    If you are sitting in the back of the plane, and you discover your pilots are incompetent, and they are drinking champagne in cockpit, and they had brought cocaine and strippers on the plane, and their strippers are now dancing on the controls while one of the engines seems to be releasing black smoke. You might also suspect that the pilots and first class passengers have escape parachutes, which are not available for the ordinary passengers.

    Will you feel more calm if the pilot starts asking for passengers’ advice by the loudspeaker, and that the passengers divide into two groups, and both groups start arguing and screaming with each other passengers about what should be the skin colour of the next pilot of the plane, and whether the plane’s toilets should be segregated by gender?

    Or instead everyone in the back of the plane can accept they have no control, sit with resignation in plane, and perhaps said to each other “our captain knows how to fly, and they do not drink champagne in the cockpit, and even if the people at the front of the plane have escape parachutes – they are patriots and will choose to die with us”, – and you might be able to enjoy a some calm and quiet, and will be in a psychological state to appreciate that you have a comfortable seat and the airline has kindly given you a small chocolate bar and a cup of orange juice.

  79. I do not think that the analogy with drunk pilots you picked wisely because I cannot help of thinking of various incidents on Russian airlines where drunk pilots were involved yet I know that it also happens elsewhere.

    I think that like many Russians you do not appreciate the adversarial nature of politics and legal system.

    I also think that you argue in a bad faith but if not why don’t you take your ass from UK and move back to Russia and enjoy the tranquility and absence of arguments under the absolute rule of Putin or is he not absolute enough for you.

  80. Bashibuzuk says

    If not for RusFed kleptocratic system, what would be the odds of Dmitry living the cosmopolitan life between UK, Europe, Israel and RusFed? A rhetorical question. That is why all critics have their limits, as soon as the egotistical interests are involved, criticism stops. One has to be a fool (or a patriot) to prefer Uralmach to Oxbridge and Dmitry is neither a fool nor a patriot…

  81. Look, believe it or not, none of this stuff is new to me. I’m of course aware that the media was tilted against Zyuganov in 1996 – the newly-minted oligarchs who controlled it didn’t want commies coming to power and divesting them of their loot (though nor did the journalists themselves want to go back to working for Pravda and Izvestia). And yes, American advisors helped with PR, I have pointed that out myself in the context of Russiagate.

    My claim is much narrower – that the 14% point victory of Yeltsin in the second round cannot be plausibly attributed to fraud (and not just because of the pre-elections polls and exit polls from multiple different polling organizations, though they’re huge and sufficient evidence by themselves, but because forensic analysis of the results simply doesn’t show fraud outside a few republics like Tatarstan, in a way that routinely happens in Russian elections since the mid-2000s). Not that it was necessarily a “fair” election.

    Would Zyuganov have won if the media was more balanced? Perhaps, maybe likely. Then again, Yeltsin had won resoundingly in 1991 despite media coverage him being against him. Communist whine and cope about the sanctity of the electoral process is somewhat undermined by them not having a single remotely free or fair election between 1917 and 1990.

  82. Bashibuzuk says

    I believe whole-heartedly that you are well aware of what exactly happened in 1996. You are usually very well informed. I also agree that outright fraud on the election day probably did not play a decisive role in Yeltsin’s victory.

    The whole process itself was completely skewed against Uncle Zu, just like it was skewed against Trump last year (although in US there was a massive electronic voting fraud). The total support by oligarchs, outspoken threatening with civil war if Uncle Zu wins, 24/7 MSM чернуха, unlimited spending (external debt increased by 4 billion US $ and internal debt by 16 billion IIRC although I am citing from memory and am perhaps mistaken) and most importantly the alignment of General Lebed’ with Bor’ka Alkash ensured that Yeltsin came on top at the end.

    On a personal note, that was the summer when my parents definitely made the choice of leaving Russia and emigrating. As I wrote a couple of times I started the whole emigration process in 1993, it took us 4 years to finalize the whole thing. We voted for Lebed’ (no surprise) and when he joined Yeltsin and later made a fool of himself in Ichkeria, we were completely black pilled. I remember a saying at the time: “Лебедь стал раком”. Well, he paid the price.

    Yeltsin in 1991 and Bor’ka Alkash in 1996 were two very different presidential candidates. The transformation was extreme and to some extent metaphysical. Yeltsin degraded and degenerated in real time. Again a saying of that time: “Россией правит труп”. Possibly the result of 1993, a form of Karmic retribution perhaps. Although the roots of future transformation of Yeltsin into a low life zombie might have been well present in 1991 already, but we did not know what was going on in his circle at the time. See Rutskoy for details:

    We were extremely naive back then, we hoped for the best: Миру мир! Наш дом Европа! One should never be too optimistic in RusFed, although extreme pessimism is also unwarranted. The majority manages to survive and a minority even to thrive. It is not Mordor, but it could be better.

    So going back to Navalny, who can you envision as potential heir to Putin?

    Is there anyone you think is preparing to step in when the time is right?

    That is if you feel comfortable sharing your thoughts about it. If not- never mind: поживём увидим…

  83. Well I don’t find anything in particular to object to in that, I am glad we were able to arrive at some semblance of a consensus.

    So going back to Navalny, who can you envision as potential heir to Putin?

    Dyumin is an oft mentioned candidate, the younger Patrushev was making the rounds as a potential successor a couple of years ago in Kremlin-connected hack circles. But the kremlins like to release random rumors, so most likely neither of them, but someone we haven’t heard of, perhaps he is some 40s something governor.

    I now expect Putin will more likely than not run again in 2024 and I will be happy to vote for him (unlike in 2018) as with his latest article and comments on Ukraine he has fully endorsed the Russian nationalist agenda.

    That is if you feel comfortable sharing your thoughts about it. If not- never mind: поживём увидим…

    I don’t see the point of these aspersions. I mean, amongst other things, I openly say that there’s large-scale elections fraud in Russia. I also deny that Navalny is a nationalist (which is a Kremlin and RT propaganda trope). I say all kinds of things which don’t sync with the Kremlin narrative, so it’s funny that you seem to think I have some kind of agenda desperately trying to curry favor with the Kremlins for the chance to write at their world-leading journalistic establishments which set global opinion. (/s)

  84. Just to be clear, I wouldn’t turn up writing op-eds at market rates for RT, as e.g. Paul Robinson (on Russia) and Noah Carl (on Wokeness scandals in academia) do, should such an opportunity present itself, and obviously also on the condition that I retain editorial freedom over my own content. I’m not anti-RT or anti-Margo, my opinion of her has in fact improved a lot over the year or two (speaking in Donbass while some Russian “nationalists” protested for Navalny in Moscow).

  85. Pericles says

    Biden as the american Yeltsin kind of fits.

  86. Mr. Hack says

    Since we’re all being nice today and putting everything on the table and also being “perfectly clear” what exactly did Putin recently say about Ukraine that has endeared him to you and has put him squarely within “the Russian national camp”?

  87. Bashibuzuk says
  88. I look forward to reading this later today. I need to get ready for work and get out the door in 15 minutes…

  89. I read Putin’s article and sadness in missed opportunities just oozes from it. He basically admits that Russia’s policy over the last 10 years has been timid and wrong. People, even whole nations, always have blind spots. Russia’s blind spot is the inability to break eggs to make an omelette – until all is f..ed, then they can scramble with the best of them, too bloody and often too late.

    I have been puzzled by the Russia’s persistent inability to show initiative, to proactively break eggs whatever the costs. They wait, procrastinate, show naivete – often consciously. And who the hell prides himself on having been naive?, that’s akin to pride in being stupid.

    Niceness is a tool that is only productive if the circumstances are right, usually in a family setting. In a world of shrinking resources that is seldom the case. Let’s not be too nice.

  90. Xi-jinping says

    My claim is much narrower – that the 14% point victory of Yeltsin in the second round cannot be plausibly attributed to fraud

    My claim is that without American help, Yeltsin would never have won the presidency. Frauding or not, it is an undeniable fact that Clinton played a decisive role in Yeltsin winning the Presidency.

    though nor did the journalists themselves want to go back to working for Pravda and Izvestia).

    The journalists didn’t care who to work for (they never do) – they care more about who pays them. This time it happened to be the oligarchs + americans

    (and not just because of the pre-elections polls

    If you are all about facts, you would have noticed the correlation between the polls turning to Yeltsin’s favor in May, soon after Yeltsin asked Clinton for help.

    Communist whine and cope about the sanctity of the electoral process

    Its not Communist “whine and cope about the electoral process” (elections are fake and gay in general), its pointing out that widespread foreign interference in the elections is what helped a favored candidate win.

    The point i’m making is that the Americans didn’t need to stuff the ballot boxes (though an argument can be made that was the case as well) or fraud the election process itself – they simply had to manipulate the elections in favor of their preferred candidate. This is something the Americans have been doing since the 1940s and they started doing to try to prevent Italy from going Communist (which it almost did)

    So basically we can say that the US pulled an OP as it did in almost all of Europe to prevent popular Communist parties getting elected.

    If you are “all about facts”, you would not have ignored these historical facts. Rather you present “statistics” but ignore the context of them – which prevents it from being factual and becomes propaganda.

  91. Xi-jinping says

    The whole process itself was completely skewed against Uncle Zu, just like it was skewed against Trump last year (although in US there was a massive electronic voting fraud). The total support by oligarchs, outspoken threatening with civil war if Uncle Zu wins, 24/7 MSM чернуха, unlimited spending (external debt increased by 4 billion US $ and internal debt by 16 billion IIRC although I am citing from memory and am perhaps mistaken) and most importantly the alignment of General Lebed’ with Bor’ka Alkash ensured that Yeltsin came on top at the end.

    The whole process was an OP that Americans pulled against Russians, the same way they’ve been doing it throughout all of Europe since the 1940’s. They didn’t always stuff ballot boxes – but by the 1990’s, the USA had perfected the art of electoral manipulation. It all started in the 1940’s, when the USA manipulated the Italian electorate to not elect the popular Communist party at the time.

    “We had bags of money that we delivered to selected politicians, to defray their political expenses, their campaign expenses, for posters, for pamphlets,” according to CIA operative F. Mark Wyatt.[4] In order to influence the election, the U.S. agencies undertook a campaign of writing ten million letters, made numerous short-wave radio broadcasts and funded the publishing of books and articles, all of which warned the Italians of what was believed to be the consequences of a communist victory. Time magazine backed the campaign, featuring the Christian Democracy leader and Prime Minister Alcide De Gasperi on its cover and in its lead story on 19 April 1948.[5]

    If you read the Clinton archives that I posted, you’d see the Americans doing exactly the same thing for Yeltsin.

    Which is exactly the point I’m making – Karlin is fixated on the polls, but just because the polls indicate that they weren’t stuffed doesn’t mean that the elections weren’t manipulated in other ways.

    Basically, supporting Yeltsin, is supporting an American puppet and the supporting of oligarchs and the destruction of Russia as a sovereign nation

  92. Xi-jinping says

    It’s time for him to bring in someone younger and more energetic.

    Thats what they said in the USSR about Gorbachev, who then proceeded to dismantle/destroy the country.

  93. Hartnell says

    My own observation when it comes to Russia is that the majority of Russians of all ages do not back Nalvany simply because they are still too comfortable with the system set in place. They see Navalny as a wannabe Lenin and quite simply, they do not want a huge, unnecessary revolution that leads to economic collapse and disorder. Many still remember the 90s and do not want a repeat of it.

    That said, people are tiring of Putin. They do see him as the stability candidate but they ultinately want reforms in the system. They want more money going towards doctors and nurses, more social security, more money pumped into the domestic economy, etc.

    If Russia gets some new blood who can deliver on this within United Russia, then everything will be fine. No one is particularly bothered about fighting for gay rights or opening the doors to mass immigration – thry realise the West is going down the tubes and dont want to repeat the same mistakes.

  94. Bashibuzuk says

    It’s a bit more complicated. As you are certainly aware, Soviet Nomenklatura was already corrupt and divided accross ideological, ethnic and regional lines. That allowed for external infiltration of the Soviet system prior to Gorbachev coming to power. We should also remember that the Nomenklatura was not able to ensure a direct status and power transfer to their offspring (мальчики мажоры) because Soviet system lacked the mechanism of acquiring, keeping and transferring private property.

    Gorbachev was not initially the favorite candidate, Romanov was. Arguably, USSR wouldn’t have collapsed on Romanov’s watch. But Romanov was sidelined and Gorbachev pushed forward by the Nomenklatura and Razvedka types aligned with the Globalist network through the Vienna International Institute for Applied System Analysis (, which was the communication platform between the Soviet and Western Global Deep States.

    People such as Alexander Yakovlev, in honor of whom the brother of the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was named Sasha, were busy plotting the dismantling of the Soviet system since at least early 1970s. And Yakovlev was not alone. There were people embedded in the KGB and SVR preparing for the same thing. These people simply carried the plan forward. They arguably did not expect the complete collapse and aimed only on a thorough reform of Soviet Union along Social Democrat convergence lines. But then Yeltsin moved forward aggressively with (according to Rutskoy) Western support and that was it.

    So the real questions to be asked today is whether RusFed today is ripe for a similar “evolution ” and whether RusFed elites are ready to jeopardize their immense wealth and their newly acquired “aristocracy” status by dismantling the RusFed. What more could they gain, they already have access to wealth and status that they are actively transferring to their descendants. Logically they should keep the system as stable as possible, that’s exactly what they are trying to do and that is why they don’t let Putin retire and age peacefully. They just need a consensus figure to replace him. Perhaps they have trouble to agree about whom it should be.

  95. Bashibuzuk says

    Ключевой фигурой здесь был Джермен Михайлович Гвишиани. Имя его было известно достаточно узкому кругу лиц в то время. Он был сыном генерала НКВД (позднее МГБ) Михаила Гвишиани. Генерал – фигура неординарная. Но я боюсь отойти от основной темы, поэтому опускаю описание его биографии. Главное, что по жизни он оказался тесно связанным с Алексеем Косыгиным, который в период 1943-1946 гг. занимал пост председателя Совета народных комиссаров РСФСР, а в 1964-1980 гг. – председателя Совета министров СССР. Выражаясь современным языком, был сначала российским, а позднее – общесоюзным премьером.

    Неформальные отношения между генералом и премьером привели к тому, что сын генерала, Джермен, стал зятем премьера Косыгина, женившись на дочери последнего Людмиле. Джермен резко пошел в гору. По некоторым данным был генералом КГБ, но с особым статусом, имея свободу общения с первыми лицами партии и государства. Имел неформальные отношения с главой КГБ Юрием Андроповым. Официально он занимал должность заместителя ГКНТ (Государственный комитет СССР по науке и технике). Также имел удивительно большую свободу перемещения через «железный кордон» (благодаря покровительству Андропова), чем активно пользовался.

    За границей познакомился с Печчеи (который, замечу, еще до основания Римского клуба, по данным Джона Коулмана, уже был членом Комитета 300).

    The key figure here was Jermen Mikhailovich Gvishiani. His name was known to a fairly narrow circle of people at that time. He was the son of General of the NKVD (later MGB) Mikhail Gvishiani. The general is an extraordinary figure. But I’m afraid to deviate from the main topic, so I omit the description of his biography. The main thing is that in life he turned out to be closely associated with Alexei Kosygin, who in the period 1943-1946. served as chairman of the Council of People’s Commissars of the RSFSR, and in 1964-1980. – Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. In modern terms, he was first Russian, and later – All-Union Prime Minister.

    Informal relations between the general and the prime minister led to the fact that the general’s son, Jermain, became Prime Minister Kosygin’s son-in-law, marrying the latter’s daughter Lyudmila. Jermain went abruptly up the hill. According to some reports, he was a KGB general, but with a special status, having the freedom to communicate with the top officials of the party and state. He had an informal relationship with the head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov. Officially, he held the post of Deputy State Committee for Science and Technology (USSR State Committee for Science and Technology). He also had a surprisingly large freedom of movement through the “iron cordon” (thanks to the patronage of Andropov), which he actively used.

    Abroad, he met Peccei (who, I will note, even before the founding of the Club of Rome, according to John Coleman, was already a member of the Committee of 300).

  96. Philip Owen says

    $5m is high even now.

  97. Bashibuzuk says

    I don’t think so, in the latest cases of Slaboviki (Sarc.) arrested for embezzlement and other forms of corruption, the cash found at their homes and in the homes of their relatives was often numbering in the tens of millions of $. But of course Yegorievsk (or would it be Egorievsk) is a God forsaken provincial backwater. Therefore, it is not surprising that some local “Sheriff” has been able to only embezzle 5M $. If he worked in Moscow, he would probably been able to extract 5 times more. What a looser this Ment

  98. Is Kommersant still considered a decent publication?

    It seemed to be pretty good 20 years ago.

    Perhaps AK could write a column there. Ideally, less than 15% of the columns would be focused on crypto.

    AK’s demography posts are great.

    Maybe Adomanis could be brought in, and they could debate.

  99. It’s a shame that Brezhnev didn’t die five years earlier.

  100. Bashibuzuk says

    Convergence efforts started under Khrushev and JFK immediately after the Cuban Crisis. Kosygin and his son in law Gvishiani were important actors on the Soviet side. Andropov was also instrumental in that: he created and protected the Institute of US and Canada under Arbatov.

    What is interesting is who brought Yeltsin to the forefront? According to Rutskoy, Yeltsin was under direct Western influence even before the fall of USSR.

  101. So, was Yeltsin a Western mole since the 70s? A sleeper agent ready to be deployed?
    Some insiders speculate that the Chernobyl accident was a sabotage perpetrated by insiders to accelerate “change”.

  102. Bashibuzuk says

    I have no idea who pushed Yeltsin forward, but it was not really a West vs East affair. It was more complex than this Cold War dichotomy. And it is more complex today. I read about Chernobyl many years ago that a NATO (American?) surveillance satellite was exactly in the right place to take pictures of the catastrophe the day it happened, I have no idea whether it is true or not. But given that Gvishiani was basically in charge of the technological progress in USSR and given Club of Rome aim at reducing Nuclear energy and deindustrialization, many conspiracy theories come to mind. I wonder what was the operating system of the Soviet Nuclear Plants, whether they were fully analog or have been already digital to to some degree in 1985. Gvishiani and his network were the ones directly involved with implementing the early internet access and computerization (through a collaboration with Italian Olivetti S.p.A) in USSR. The internet was connected in 1983.

  103. Xi-Jinping says

    The sad thing is, the Soviets had a working prototype of the internet working before the Americans. But US disinformation campaign convinced them it wasnt worth pursuing further. Otherwise the USSR GOSPLAN would have transitioned to a computerized system in the 60s.

  104. Bashibuzuk says

    I would like to thank all of you for exchanging with me on different occasions in the last year or so.

    If I have offended anyone, then I apologize.

    Our conversations helped me make sense of a lot of things.

    I hope that all of you will be alright in the future and I wish all of you good luck going forward.

    To Anatoly, we often disagreed, but I appreciate your keen intelligence and creativity. Your blog is a much needed space for those who are interested in Russian history, politics and the Russia-West-China trio co-evolving to the shining tomorrows in our turbulent times. Keep up the good work.

    To Mr Unz, many thanks for allowing loonies such as myself access to your fine discussion platform.

    To both Anatoly and Mr Unz: please erase my comments and my profile.

    It was good knowing you all.

    Yours sincerely.


  105. At least stay around for a couple more days for Putin’s article post.

    Ron Unz doesn’t delete comment histories, and in any case it’s a very bad idea, as doing so would wreck past comment-threads. However, you can request him to make your profile non-searchable (e.g. as German_reader has done). I can forward that request to him if you wish.

  106. The relationship between Anatoly and Bashibuzuk is the perfect illustration that we need our enemies and are sad if they disappear – our so called enemies are really our friends.

  107. Bashibuzuk says

    I can forward that request to him if you wish.

    Please do.

    I will keep reading UR and your blog.

    And if Putin doesn’t leave office before 2024 I will do my best to send you the moneys I bet on him renouncing power.

    Be well.

  108. It is not a conversation if people agree with each other.

    On Chernobyl, it is very unlikely there was any guiding hand there, it would make no sense psychologically: settled elites never play with fire.

    I wish you would stay, we almost have the answers :)… good luck.

  109. Theoretically we could have made global OGAS far earlier, but they’re trying to delay it because the AI turns out to be too based constantly.

  110. If the Club of Rome is truly against nuclear power, well gentlemen I think we have found the biggest imbeciles on the planet.

  111. You’re insightful commentary is one of the main reasons I still hang around here. Blogging, especially the amount that you’re involved with, can certainly be a drag on your time and personal commitments to family and friends. Why not just take some time off from it (as I did a month ago and as AP seems to be doing right now) and return reenergized with a new commitment to spend less valuable time blogging and trolling? Thorfinnsson comes to mind, that seems to have taken this approach.

    I finally got a chance to read over Putin’s Ukrainian/Russian magnum opus that you shared with me yesterday. The timing and overall flavor of his long and tedious rant puzzles me? It seems like Putin’s war efforts in Ukraine must be stagnating and he’s decided to up his propaganda efforts. Besides, writing something like this doesn’t cost anything financially. Overall, it’s a patchwork of many older ideas, half truths and white lies, that are put out for public consumption much too late. He should have tried this much, much sooner. Well, at least he’s trying to create a dialogue at this late stage. I don’t think that it will help him much. I’ll be interested in reading Ukrainian editorial reviews that should be soon popping up.

    Please consider my advice to you, take a rest, and come back!

  112. Don’t leave. Just take a rest.

  113. Passer by says

    Take care and come back when the opportunity comes.

  114. Yevardian says

    Stay around, you’ve just been posting a lot recently, it’s understandable. You can dislike or find AK’s positions on a whole bunch of things offensive or wrong-headed without leaving in a pique.. for whatever reason, his blog receives most of the better commenters on this website, having an ordinary Russian patriot who experienced the selling out of the USSR is valuable for an English-speaking site, it would be a shame for you to leave.

  115. Boomthorkell says

    I always enjoyed reading you, and your nods to one of the worst, yet truly thematic and of-the-age Ottomanisms. Ha ha, you’re a good man.

    God speed, and may we all have a better world soon.

  116. Blinky Bill says

    space for those who are interested in Russian history, politics and the Russia-West-China trio co-evolving to the shining tomorrows in our turbulent times.

    The biggest Transnational Corporations, forming the core of the postmodern predatory capitalism, thrived in an economy in which:
    1) Raw materials and energy are collected at the lowest price in the third world and the former Eastern European / Soviet republics that have been reduced to a third world status.
    2) These materials and energy were transferred to China / East Asia for transforming into goods marketable to the Global (mostly Western or thoroughly westernized) consumers.
    3) The Global (mostly Western) banks and financial institutions made a rip-off of crediting the overconsumption by the debt-burdened (Developed countries / Western) middle class.
    4) The Transnational Corporations accumulated profits and distributed them to the shareholders.
    5) The shareholders (Global Elite) lived a life of utter luxury and could allow themselves any perks and whims that money could buy.

    Problem 1) China no longer wants to be just a part of the process, it wants to become the core of the process and take a part of the market from the Transnational Corporations and a part of the profit of the Global Elite.

    Problem 2) Russian Elites no longer want to be second-class billionaires accepted into Global Elite with a smirking condescension.

    Problem 3) Russia is China’s neighbor.

    Problem 4) If working together, Russia and China could undermine the whole postmodern Global Capitalism (by attacking pétrodollar).

    Problem 5) Together, Russia and China cannot be bludgeoned back into their servile status in the postmodern World Economy.

    Problem 6) The Developed countries middle class is too in debt and is unable to carry on consuming, unless the interest rates fall to (beyond) zero.

    What is the solution that a US president (or rather the part of a more US-centered Global Elite behind him) might suggest to solve the manifold crisis described above?

    Answer: make friends with Russia, take it away from China, put them into a conflict with each other and let them bleed each other out while the Global Capitalism is reformed to become even more reinforced around the Global Elite.

    That’s what Trump was supposed to achieve.

    Alas, a large part of the Global Elite disagree…

  117. Zelensky expressed similarly in 2014:

    Scratch even further, it wouldn’t surprise to find pro-Ukraine in NATO enthusiast Arseniy Yatsenyuk (uncritically mentioned in Jacob Heilbrunn’s recent National Interest article) expressing similarly at one point.

    Some related and balanced perspectives:

    Much better than this one from Heilbrunn:

    In order to have a broad based image that’s establishment accepted, The National Interest has to offset what it recently posted from Petro, Carpenter and a JHU student.

    This excerpt from Heilbrunn is a doozy:

    “Putin’s own stance now appears to be hardening. His interest in compromise with the West, never all that great in recent years, now appears about as low as the water level at the Hoover Dam. Putin may be at a crossroads. If he acts upon the precepts he enunciates in his essay, it could transform the East-West confrontation into something much nastier and more foreboding.”

    Should Putin risk allowing an Operation Strom like action taken against the Donbass rebels? Doing so increases the likelihood of a refugee problem for Russia, along with the Russian government disappointing pro-Russian sentiment among a good portion of the Ukrainian population.

    Should Putin okay the return of Crimea going back to Ukraine (something that a clear majority in Crimea don’t support)? Yes, the Kosovo and northern Cyprus situations continue to be valid whataboutism talking points.

  118. Talk about not owning up to a mistake by spewing BS:

    Germans approached Russia on NS around the time that Ukraine decided to siphon Russian fuel to other parts of Europe, in response to Russia cutting energy to Ukraine, because the latter was delinquent on energy payments.

    Russia has shown itself to be a dependable energy supplier. One of numerous examples being the 2008 war in the Caucasus which saw Russian energy to Georgia uninterrupted.

  119. My worldview (nationalist-vatnik) is significantly closer to the Russian mainstream than Bashibuzuk (whose views are, being centered around some rather idiosyncratic ideas about the centrality of “clan lineages” and the like, are almost as far from an “ordinary Russian patriot” as one could get). I don’t even Bashibuzuk himself would dispute this.

  120. Mr. Hack says

    Well, Zelensky is not only a politician (they’re all prone to a lot of contradictory and wishy washy positions) but also a human being whose opinions tend to evolve and change over time. Here’s his opinion today regarding fellow politician and historian Putin’s recent essay (translation mine):

    We are definitely not one nation. If we were one nation, then in Moscow there would sooner be gryvnias circulating and atop the parliament building, a yellow and blue flag. Therefore, we’re definitely not one nation Everybody has their own pathway.

  121. Mr. Hack says

    Hmmm…so you’re now a self ascribed “nationalist-vatnik” A creative self identifier, but I’m glad that you stated it and not me. 🙂

  122. AnonFromTN says

    That makes about as much sense as the statement that well-adjusted human-E. coli symbiosis should be called E. coli.

  123. Well, Zelensky is not only a politician (they’re all prone to a lot of contradictory and wishy washy positions) but also a human being whose opinions tend to evolve and change over time.

    Same can be said of others. In Z’s case, it could be the result of the Ukrainian nationalist element having a disproportionate influence

    Post-Soviet Russian governments formally recognize Ukraine as an independent state. Their attitude towards Ukraine is kind of like how some view Lebanon relative to Syria.

    It’s possible to say one people exist, albeit with some different regional characteristics and the status of being independent. BTW, Soviet Ukraine had UN membership.

  124. Xi-jinping says

    You do realize that that’s not his ‘opinion’? Rather its him acting for his constituents. Zelensky has been pro-Russian and barely speaks Ukrainian.

    His true opinion is the one he gave multiple times when he said Russia and Ukraine are the same nation. And the fact that he acted in Russian film industry for years (including after 2014) also indicates his true position.

    He’s simply a cynic and observes the way the political winds in Ukraine fly – since the Rada is controlled by West Ukraine (with its corresponding weird nationalist position) he simply parrots their position. Once that changes, don’t be surprised his ‘opinion evolves’ to be more pro-Russian.

  125. Xi-jinping says

    Should Putin risk allowing an Operation Strom like action taken against the Donbass rebels? Doing so increases the likelihood of a refugee problem for Russia, along with the Russian government disappointing pro-Russian sentiment among a good portion of the Ukrainian population.

    I have been convinced since back in 2014 that Putin’s best and only option is to split Ukraine into East Ukraine and West Ukraine (ruled by Galicia and its ‘Ukrainian identity’). I stand by this view to this day. I was an ardent supporter of Putin until he disappointed by not proceeding with a conquest of Kharkov, Chersoneses and Odessa (given that people where ready and willing to revolt at the time). It would have likely triggered NATO to enter West Ukraine, but West Ukraine was a loss anyway and would have triggered sanctions (but Russia got sanctioned anyway).

    The national interest says Putin’s position may be ‘hardening’ but I highly doubt he will do anything, if he didn’t do it when the situation was more in his favor. This is disappointing.

  126. Not so easily done as eastern and western Ukraine each have some advocating different from the general stereotype. How Ukraine is divided between east and west is another bone of contention.

    The area of Trans-Carpathia, as well as Odessa, Kharkov, Mariupol and Kiev have pro-Russian sentiment.

    On the subject under discussion, a related piece with some good follow-up comments:

  127. Xi-jinping says

    The question we must ask is ‘why’ the educated elites have taken such a position? And also, educated people are not likely to take up arms if Russian tanks were to roll into Odessa. They will either move to Ukraine or change their view to the predominant one and say they have been Russian supporters from the outset.

    Maidan was an American op and perhaps they will turn on America if it where to weaken or if the Euro integration never occurred.

    Right now, Galician Kiev has a stranglehold on the provinces. This needs to be broken before a separation of Ukraine can occur.

  128. The question we must ask is ‘why’ the educated elites have taken such a position? And also, educated people are not likely to take up arms if Russian tanks were to roll into Odessa. They will either move to Ukraine or change their view to the predominant one and say they have been Russian supporters from the outset.

    The answer might have something to do with Western soft power aid to Ukraine perhaps being more effective than what Russia has provided, in conjunction with Russia maybe having taken Ukraine for granted.

  129. Mr. Hack says

    I think I get it, there really is only one nationality around the whole planet, one people called the human race “albeit with some different regional characteristics and the status of being independent.” 🙂

  130. Mr. Hack says

    And the fact that he acted in Russian film industry for years (including after 2014) also indicates his true position.

    Looks like you never bothered to find out that Zelensky’s biggest role was when he played a fictitious Ukrainian president in a television series. He must have believed in the identity of a Ukrainian president and therefore in Ukraine..

  131. Mr. Hack says

    Right now, Galician Kiev has a stranglehold on the provinces. This needs to be broken before a separation of Ukraine can occur.

    Just who exactly are these “Galicians”, that according to you have a stranglehold on all Ukrainian (Kyivn) politics? There are no regional parties that have a presence in the parliament, so it appears that you really don’t know what you’re talking about. 🙁

  132. AnonFromTN says

    Zelensky’s biggest role was when he played a fictitious Ukrainian president in a television series

    He is still playing that role, he is still a fictitious president. I wouldn’t put too much stock in clown’s “beliefs”: after all, a clown is a clown, someone writes his script.

  133. Mr. Hack says

    You could be right, however, in contrast to his predecessors he seems to be making a dent in the war against corruption:
    Volodymyr Yatsenko is detained at Kyiv airport after the corporate jet he was travelling on was forced back as it was leaving Ukrainian airspace © National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine/AFP

  134. I think I get it, there really is only one nationality around the whole planet, one people called the human race “albeit with some different regional characteristics and the status of being independent.”

    In varying degrees.

  135. Mr. Hack says

    And in varying flavors too:

    Sounds to me like you’re getting a little bit woke in your old age, Mickey. 🙂

  136. It’s a blue and yellow flag, Mr Hack/retard, not a “yellow and blue” one.
    That’s not a pointless distinction because so many flags have the same colours and format, that the order of the colours is a relevant description.

    So you and your khokolism is that fake you aren’t even sure about what the flag is. More comically/disturbing though is that …… neither does the President of that country!
    It has NO connection to “Ukrainianism” either you cretin
    A “yellow and blue” flag was very briefly used braindead flag used during the time of the fake, failed nonstate under the evil Petliura psycho-failure.
    Going to the issue of the colours, despite the BS total lies of it related to the G&V kingdom in medieval times or “represent the sky and wheat fields of Ukraine”…… it has no connection to either or those things. Once more it is simply standard colours given by Austria – Hungarian empire to its subjects in the 19th century, then further expropriated by Petliura/Banderetards in the next century wanting to be German sadists,although they reversed thr colours (Down Syndrome?LOL,maybe or maybe not because at least downs syndrome people have dignity….. 404 has none)

    Gryvnias and Roubles were one of the same thing, used at the same time throughout Rus. Its simply beyond braindead that this clown/drug addict Jewish President of “Ukraine” thinks this proves separate people, when it proves the exact opposite!

    BTW surely your Banderetard “Ukrainian” sh*t-school will disown you for quoting it as gryvnias not “hryvnia” LOL – maybe that in itself is indicitive of how fake khokholism is. Too ashamed to mention Karbovonets I see.

  137. Mr. Hack says

    Geraldina, settle down, find your meds and take them. I agree with all that you’ve posted about me. I feel so ashamed. 🙁
    My roommate’s mother was involved with the Perliura government, and she brought her son up tobe a good outstanding svidomite. Apparently, some of this has inadvertently rubbed off on me. I’ll try to be more careful going forward – thanks for pointing all of this out to me!

  138. Philip Owen says

    Disagree. Politics was real until the FSB putsch in February 2004 which removed the Yeltsinites including the tax reformer Kasyanov. Even then, the election of that year had to be campaigned for. Hence Putin’s turn to xenophobia which then prompted the Orange reaction in Ukraine. Oil money was finally starting to flow so no one was bothered much. Since then Putin has steadily taken over the media including cinema, all those ‘historical’ movies. He and Surkov then amended the constitution repeatedly to set a sensible threshold for political parties to ALLOW Yablomo into the Duma. Yabloko kept sinking out of reach. It is noticeable that Yabloko is being revived to counter Navalny. Yavlinsky is being given publicity again.

  139. Philip Owen says

    It depends on the question was asked. No one I knew supported Yeltsin but they voted for him. Even in Saratov, where the Communists were well supported later, no one wanted a return to communism.

  140. Philip Owen says

    As did the British and the French. As in so much else, the US brought standardisation, not invention, to the table. Hence the need for the EU.

  141. Sounds to me like you’re getting a little bit woke in your old age, Mickey



    On par with what I’ve been saying for quite some time.

  142. Sinotibetan says

    Dear Bashibuzuk,
    You will be sadly missed. I enjoy reading your exchanges with Anatoly. Learned a lot from them. I am not sure /I may have missed the reason(s) for your decision.
    All the best and hopefully we are wrong about certain negative trends in Russia!

  143. Mr. Hack says

    It should be on par with what you’ve been saying for some time…the piece that you link to was written by you? 🙂

    For some different opinions about Putin’s latest attempts at playing a historian, presenting Ukrainian historians’ viewpoints, here’s an excellent article recently posted in BBC. I think that you should be able to have this article translated into English:

  144. I only found this now. How unfortunate! You are one of the better commentators here. Hopefully you will change your mind. Either way, I wish you the best.

  145. You were the one saying:

    Sounds to me like you’re getting a little bit woke in your old age, Mickey

    This indicates a consistency:

  146. Mr. Hack says

    Wow! You finally learned to write in Russian like the rest of the big boys – way to go!