russia-insider--2020-05-14--Sterile Mimicry: How Cultural Homosexuality Destroys Modern Women

Despite living in a world where women have been given unprecedented access to employment , educational opportunities , positions of leadership , and personal freedoms , it seems women have fallen into a deeper existential malaise than ever before , with antidepressant use at an all-time high and a crisis of anxiety and mental health particularly among college-aged women .
When examining the state of modern women and their apparent unhappiness , it 's clear there ’ s a disconnect between what makes women truly fulfilled and the vision of the empowered woman held up as the key to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ women ’ s entertainment , media , and marketing , a concentrated effort to promote a very particular type of lifestyle .
Consistent from the end of the twentieth century onward , this type of aggressively independent woman lives in a thriving urban environment , is happily unmarried and childless , and endlessly navigates meaningless sexual encounters and failed relationships .
The most important element in the construction of this trope is the reliance on consumption for personal fulfillment .
Designer clothes , the curated apartment decor , constant brunches and dining out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ comes to barely resemble a woman at all , but does reflect the lives of a vast number of the producers of women ’ s media and creative designers of products marketed to women - homosexual men .
Very few singular pieces of media have had the cultural impact of Sex and the City on the lives and lifestyles of North American women .
Based on the column by Candace Bushnell , the series details her many sexual exploits and navigating the modern urban dating scene .
Bushnell recently recanted the lifestyle she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ childless , and unfulfilled in her fifties .
The show ’ s creator , Darren Star , a Jewish homosexual responsible for several 90s era TV romantic comedies , seems uniquely driven to promoting these types of characters .
In a 2008 interview with Haaretz , he spoke of his signature concept - the world of powerful women in New York , and confronted the idea that his characters are behaviourally gay men .
He reiterates that this type of woman - stripped of her femininity , class , familial obligation and humanity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ alpha ” woman , and the grotesquely shallow and promiscuous “ Samantha ” character should be an aspirational figure for both gay men and women .
Though groundbreaking and influential in their own right , the women of “ Sex and the City ” were simply reflections of a concept for which the groundwork had been laid decades earlier , in the pages of Cosmopolitan magazine .
Countless Millennial and Gen X women can point to pre-teen hushed readings of Cosmopolitan magazines in bookstore corners as a pivotal moment in the development of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Girls and young women saw their adult potential unfold in its pages , among countless articles guiding women through relationships and work , along with notoriously questionable and graphic advice on sexual technique .
To set itself apart from other popular women ’ s publications which largely focused on homemaking , the modern Cosmopolitan magazine noticeably excluded pieces on family , cooking , and the home .
Helen Gurley Brown , author of ‘ Sex and the Single Girl ’ and the editor-in-chief of Cosmo for over thirty years , brought the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its most depraved iteration .
Colorful covers placed conspicuously at supermarket checkouts seemed designed to attract the curious gaze of children .
Brown gave Jewish filmmaker Norah Ephron some of her earliest magazine assignments , and Ephron would write several pieces for Cosmo before going on to become one of the world ’ s most prolific “ Chick Flick ” directors , producing film after film portraying the single urbanite trope .
Brown was open about her intent to promote the “ Cosmo Girl ” - single , urban , hardworking at her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ability to independently procure both casual sex and consumer goods .
Cosmo magazine served as an effective vehicle to drive the sexual revolution into the minds of young girls , and there was a concentrated effort within its pages to reframe the popular “ women ’ s lib ” movement into a push for women to enjoy the “ freedom ” of the labor-consumption cycle .
Although the domestic sphere traditionally involved a higher rate of consumption compared to working men , middle class women have undergone a dramatic shift in consumption practices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also the question of what , exactly , women are consuming .
Trends are often artificially set via stealth marketing by monolithic fashion and cosmetic corporations , based on availability of cheap materials rather than organic evolution of cultural preferences and objective beauty standards .
Women find themselves consuming from a curated selection by approved societal tastemakers - within the realm of fashion , this includes a disproportionate amount of homosexual men .
As early as the 1960 ’ s , designer Yves Saint Laurent began to popularize androgynous womens-wear , paving the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look quickly became synonymous with women ’ s professional or political prowess , more traditionally feminine looks seemed trite in comparison to masculine silhouettes .
By the 1990s , trousers were a staple in the average woman ’ s wardrobe , and Alexander McQueen famously lowered their waistlines mimicking the male torso when he spearheaded the low-rise trend .
The advent of fast-fashion meant that designs could go from the runway to local shops at unprecedented speeds , and artificially low prices carried by cost-cutting sweatshop labor meant that even the newest designs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the professional woman .
This new ease of availability and the promotion of the shopping mall as a social outlet helped to elevate fashion to a common hobby and pastime .
In the absence of a society that engages people in meaningful ways outside of work , we ascribe meaning to escapism , and create hobbies out of distractions .
The act of consumption becomes sacrosanct in a life that has been built to encourage it , with little time or reason to engage in more life-affirming , productive behaviours .
When women @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their biological psychology , adaptive traits - social cooperation , the drive to mother children - are expressed in a maladaptive way .
The tenants of third wave , intersectional feminism are unfortunately consistent with the vapidity consistently pushed in women ’ s media , and provides an attractive stand-in community for women living meaningless lives revolving solely around consumption and the Cosmo-girl lifestyle .
Many within dissident circles have decried the large-scale feminization of society , with women taking on increased positions of leadership and dictating public discourse in political and cultural @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , we ’ ve seen a clear deconstruction and manipulation of the feminine identity since the mid-twentieth century , facilitated by women ’ s media and the consumption machine .
Taken together with later attacks on traditional masculinity and the ever softening modern male identity , what we see is not so much a feminization of culture as a mass androgenization of the West .
With ever dwindling birth rates in favour of the development of both men and women into childless , rootless , ultimate consumers , the objective becomes clear .

Despite living in a world where women have been given unprecedented access to employment, educational opportunities, positions of leadership, and personal freedoms, it seems women have fallen into a deeper existential malaise than ever before, with antidepressant use at an all-time high and a crisis of anxiety and mental health particularly among college-aged women. When examining the state of modern women and their apparent unhappiness, it's clear there’s a disconnect between what makes women truly fulfilled and the vision of the empowered woman held up as the key to their freedom and contentment.
We see within women’s entertainment, media, and marketing, a concentrated effort to promote a very particular type of lifestyle. Consistent from the end of the twentieth century onward, this type of aggressively independent woman lives in a thriving urban environment, is happily unmarried and childless, and endlessly navigates meaningless sexual encounters and failed relationships. The most important element in the construction of this trope is the reliance on consumption for personal fulfillment. Designer clothes, the curated apartment decor, constant brunches and dining out. The modern independent woman archetype often comes to barely resemble a woman at all, but does reflect the lives of a vast number of the producers of women’s media and creative designers of products marketed to women - homosexual men.
Very few singular pieces of media have had the cultural impact of Sex and the City on the lives and lifestyles of North American women. Based on the column by Candace Bushnell, the series details her many sexual exploits and navigating the modern urban dating scene. Bushnell recently recanted the lifestyle she promoted, finding herself desperately lonely, childless, and unfulfilled in her fifties. The show’s creator, Darren Star, a Jewish homosexual responsible for several 90s era TV romantic comedies, seems uniquely driven to promoting these types of characters. In a 2008 interview with Haaretz, he spoke of his signature concept - the world of powerful women in New York, and confronted the idea that his characters are behaviourally gay men. He reiterates that this type of woman - stripped of her femininity, class, familial obligation and humanity, is his idea of an “alpha” woman, and the grotesquely shallow and promiscuous “Samantha” character should be an aspirational figure for both gay men and women.
Though groundbreaking and influential in their own right, the women of “Sex and the City” were simply reflections of a concept for which the groundwork had been laid decades earlier, in the pages of Cosmopolitan magazine. Countless Millennial and Gen X women can point to pre-teen hushed readings of Cosmopolitan magazines in bookstore corners as a pivotal moment in the development of their understanding of sexuality and adult womanhood. Girls and young women saw their adult potential unfold in its pages, among countless articles guiding women through relationships and work, along with notoriously questionable and graphic advice on sexual technique. To set itself apart from other popular women’s publications which largely focused on homemaking, the modern Cosmopolitan magazine noticeably excluded pieces on family, cooking, and the home.
Helen Gurley Brown, author of ‘Sex and the Single Girl’ and the editor-in-chief of Cosmo for over thirty years, brought the magazine through the sexual revolution and into its most depraved iteration. Colorful covers placed conspicuously at supermarket checkouts seemed designed to attract the curious gaze of children. Brown gave Jewish filmmaker Norah Ephron some of her earliest magazine assignments, and Ephron would write several pieces for Cosmo before going on to become one of the world’s most prolific “Chick Flick” directors, producing film after film portraying the single urbanite trope.
Brown was open about her intent to promote the “Cosmo Girl” - single, urban, hardworking at her corporate job, and empowered by her ability to independently procure both casual sex and consumer goods. Cosmo magazine served as an effective vehicle to drive the sexual revolution into the minds of young girls, and there was a concentrated effort within its pages to reframe the popular “women’s lib” movement into a push for women to enjoy the “freedom” of the labor-consumption cycle.
Although the domestic sphere traditionally involved a higher rate of consumption compared to working men, middle class women have undergone a dramatic shift in consumption practices with these cultural developments. There is also the question of what, exactly, women are consuming. Trends are often artificially set via stealth marketing by monolithic fashion and cosmetic corporations, based on availability of cheap materials rather than organic evolution of cultural preferences and objective beauty standards. Women find themselves consuming from a curated selection by approved societal tastemakers - within the realm of fashion, this includes a disproportionate amount of homosexual men.
As early as the 1960’s, designer Yves Saint Laurent began to popularize androgynous womens-wear, paving the way for the ubiquitous pantsuit. The look quickly became synonymous with women’s professional or political prowess, more traditionally feminine looks seemed trite in comparison to masculine silhouettes. By the 1990s, trousers were a staple in the average woman’s wardrobe, and Alexander McQueen famously lowered their waistlines mimicking the male torso when he spearheaded the low-rise trend. The advent of fast-fashion meant that designs could go from the runway to local shops at unprecedented speeds, and artificially low prices carried by cost-cutting sweatshop labor meant that even the newest designs were affordable and easy to obtain for the professional woman. This new ease of availability and the promotion of the shopping mall as a social outlet helped to elevate fashion to a common hobby and pastime.
In the absence of a society that engages people in meaningful ways outside of work, we ascribe meaning to escapism, and create hobbies out of distractions. The act of consumption becomes sacrosanct in a life that has been built to encourage it, with little time or reason to engage in more life-affirming, productive behaviours. When women are divorced from the natural expression of their biological psychology, adaptive traits - social cooperation, the drive to mother children - are expressed in a maladaptive way. The tenants of third wave, intersectional feminism are unfortunately consistent with the vapidity consistently pushed in women’s media, and provides an attractive stand-in community for women living meaningless lives revolving solely around consumption and the Cosmo-girl lifestyle.
Many within dissident circles have decried the large-scale feminization of society, with women taking on increased positions of leadership and dictating public discourse in political and cultural spheres. Yet at the same time, we’ve seen a clear deconstruction and manipulation of the feminine identity since the mid-twentieth century, facilitated by women’s media and the consumption machine. Taken together with later attacks on traditional masculinity and the ever softening modern male identity, what we see is not so much a feminization of culture as a mass androgenization of the West. With ever dwindling birth rates in favour of the development of both men and women into childless, rootless, ultimate consumers, the objective becomes clear.


russia-insider--2020-05-15--Soros Thinks that Germany Is a Greater Threat than COVID or China

Billionaire philanthropist and infamous Color Revolution financier George Soros recently elaborated on his views of International Relations in the midst of World War C during an interview with the UK 's `` Independent '' , unexpectedly concluding that Germany 's recent court ruling against the European Central Bank 's purchase of national bonds poses an `` existential threat '' to the bloc and therefore also to his `` precious '' vision of an `` open society '' , even more so than the alleged ones posed by COVID , Trump , or China that he previously fearmongered about .
International @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paradigm-changing processes as a result of World War C , so it 's worthwhile to hear how influential figures are interpreting these unprecedented developments .
George Soros , the billionaire philanthropist and infamous Color Revolution financier , is one such individual whose words carry heavy weight all across the world and deserve to be listened to if only to obtain a better idea of what he might be plotting next .
To be clear , analyzing his latest interview with the UK `` Independent '' is n't by any means an endorsement of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he represents , but is being done to educate the public about the issues that concern him most .
Given his global sway , it 's predictable that he 'll attempt to shape events so as to actualize his preferred scenarios , which is why everyone should be on guard .
With that in mind , what follows is a concise bullet point summary of the main assertions that he made earlier this week : * COVID-19 `` Really Endangers The Survival Of Our Civilization '' : Although there are differing views over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which Soros uttered this comment is in relation to the global disruption that he touched upon in the preceding sentence of his answer , meaning that threat is n't so much a physical/health one as it is a socio-economic and political one .
* The Lack Of National Governments ' Preparedness For A Pandemic Is Lamentable : Soros laments that national governments were n't prepared for this particular pandemic despite humanity 's history of suffering from them , especially the so-called `` Spanish Flu '' , making it seem like he might @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their future capabilities and thus further embedding his network into the state .
* The COVID-19 Vaccine Will Have To Change Every Year : Comparing a forthcoming COVID-19 vaccine to the flu vaccine , Soros says that it 'll have to change every year in order to keep up with the virus ' mutations , which hints that yearly vaccinations might eventually become mandatory in the event that so-called `` immunity passports '' for work , travel , etc .
become the norm .
* The Future Of Capitalism Is Uncertain : In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do not think anybody knows how capitalism will evolve '' , which can be interpreted as sincere concern about the system that made him rich and an ominous hint that socialism might eventually replace it ( which he himself might also invest in , as he 's already accused of , for self-interested reasons ) .
* A One World Government Might Rise From The Ashes Of The Pre-COVID World Order : Upon being asked whether `` this crisis could bring people – and nation states – closer together '' , Soros responded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run '' once `` individuals as well as institutions , nations , and humanity itself '' overcome the `` fear '' that `` very often makes [ them ] hurt themselves '' , in reference to a one world government .
Despite being one of Trump 's most liberal enemies and literally saying that he `` put [ his ] faith in Trump to destroy himself '' , Soros echoes the American President 's most right-wing supporters in pleading for the so-called `` democratic open society '' to not cooperate with `` authoritarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ President Xi Is `` Vulnerable '' Amidst Leadership `` Struggles '' And Grassroots Support For An `` Open Society '' : Never missing an opportunity to stir up trouble , Soros speculates that leadership `` struggles '' and what he portrays as growing grassroots support for his `` open society '' ideals have made President Xi -- who he describes as a `` dictator '' -- extremely `` vulnerable '' , implying the potential for multifaceted regime change scenarios .
* The EU Might Cease To Exist Unless It Becomes A More Complete @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the EU might cease to exist `` because it is an incomplete union '' that is also `` based on the rule of law '' , the latter of which he regards as troublesome since `` the wheels of justice move very slowly , while threats such as the Covid-19 virus move very fast '' , so the unstated solution is more centralization .
Soros made this dramatic claim on the basis that the recent ruling from the highest court of the EU 's de-facto leader concluding that the European Central Bank 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is partially unconstitutional in the manner that it 's been justified could unravel the union 's financial recovery plans .
* The German Precedent Might Trigger A Chain Reaction Of Pro-Sovereign Policies Throughout Europe : One of the scenarios that worries Soros the most is that his native Hungary , Poland , and others might use the aforementioned German precedent to more confidently refuse to implement EU rulings pertaining to their domestic affairs , which he fears `` will be the end of the EU as we know it '' if the bloc @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Only `` Consuls '' ( Perpetual Bonds ) Can Save The EU : Whether out of genuine concern for saving the EU and/or self-interested intentions to somehow involve his network in profiting from it , Soros recommends that the bloc issue so-called `` consuls '' ( perpetual bonds ) which `` would be issued by the EU as a whole , would automatically be proportional , and would remain so eternally . ''
* Germany Is Standing In The Way Of Soros ' Plan : As if it was n't already obvious enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitutional Court ruling , Soros directly calls out the country and its Dutch ally for being `` adamantly opposed '' to his `` consuls '' plan , which he urges them to `` think again about '' and might potentially provoke Color Revolution unrest to that end .
* Germany 's `` Unfair Advantage '' In the Single Market Is To Italy 's Detriment : Seeking to position Italy as the leader of a pro- '' consuls '' coalition of states opposed to Germany 's resistance to his plans , Soros attempts to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the latter 's `` unfair advantage '' in the single market is to the former 's detriment , which dangerously emboldens Salvini 's anti-EU populist plans there .
* The Root Of The EU 's `` Existential Dangers '' Is n't COVID , Trump , Nor China , But Germany 's Court Ruling : According to Soros , while `` Europe is facing several existential dangers '' , Germany 's previously described court ruling is the most recent but also the one that must be resolved first in order that the EU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the occasion '' of surviving other implied threats such as COVID , Trump , and China .
The key takeaway from Soros ' interview with `` The Independent '' is that he ( and by extrapolation the massive trans-national Color Revolution network that he created ) regards Germany 's recent court decision as a greater threat to the EU than anything else and might therefore seek to meddle in the country 's internal affairs in order to reverse its ruling .
This certainly says a lot since he 's hitherto presented himself as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( with increasingly equal measure ) than to the EuroLiberal leader of the EU , but that just goes to show how fast International Relations are changing nowadays in the midst of World War C that Germany of all states issued a legal verdict in support of state sovereignty .
In a twist of fate , Soros might very well turn on one of his longest-standing allies after believing that they 've `` betrayed '' his `` precious cause '' of an `` open society '' that would be under `` existential threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centralize under the pretext of countering COVID-19 , all as a result of that completely unexpected court ruling .

Billionaire philanthropist and infamous Color Revolution financier George Soros recently elaborated on his views of International Relations in the midst of World War C during an interview with the UK's "Independent", unexpectedly concluding that Germany's recent court ruling against the European Central Bank's purchase of national bonds poses an "existential threat" to the bloc and therefore also to his "precious" vision of an "open society", even more so than the alleged ones posed by COVID, Trump, or China that he previously fearmongered about.
International Relations are in the midst of multitudinous paradigm-changing processes as a result of World War C, so it's worthwhile to hear how influential figures are interpreting these unprecedented developments. George Soros, the billionaire philanthropist and infamous Color Revolution financier, is one such individual whose words carry heavy weight all across the world and deserve to be listened to if only to obtain a better idea of what he might be plotting next.
To be clear, analyzing his latest interview with the UK "Independent" isn't by any means an endorsement of him, his activities, and what he represents, but is being done to educate the public about the issues that concern him most. Given his global sway, it's predictable that he'll attempt to shape events so as to actualize his preferred scenarios, which is why everyone should be on guard. With that in mind, what follows is a concise bullet point summary of the main assertions that he made earlier this week:
* COVID-19 "Really Endangers The Survival Of Our Civilization":
Although there are differing views over the lethality of COVID-19, the context in which Soros uttered this comment is in relation to the global disruption that he touched upon in the preceding sentence of his answer, meaning that threat isn't so much a physical/health one as it is a socio-economic and political one.
* The Lack Of National Governments' Preparedness For A Pandemic Is Lamentable:
Soros laments that national governments weren't prepared for this particular pandemic despite humanity's history of suffering from them, especially the so-called "Spanish Flu", making it seem like he might invest some of his efforts into bolstering their future capabilities and thus further embedding his network into the state.
* The COVID-19 Vaccine Will Have To Change Every Year:
Comparing a forthcoming COVID-19 vaccine to the flu vaccine, Soros says that it'll have to change every year in order to keep up with the virus' mutations, which hints that yearly vaccinations might eventually become mandatory in the event that so-called "immunity passports" for work, travel, etc. become the norm.
* The Future Of Capitalism Is Uncertain:
In the billionaire's words, "I do not think anybody knows how capitalism will evolve", which can be interpreted as sincere concern about the system that made him rich and an ominous hint that socialism might eventually replace it (which he himself might also invest in, as he's already accused of, for self-interested reasons).
* A One World Government Might Rise From The Ashes Of The Pre-COVID World Order:
Upon being asked whether "this crisis could bring people – and nation states – closer together", Soros responded that it will "in the long run" once "individuals as well as institutions, nations, and humanity itself" overcome the "fear" that "very often makes [them] hurt themselves", in reference to a one world government.
*The "Democratic Open Society" Shouldn't Cooperate With "Authoritarian" China
Despite being one of Trump's most liberal enemies and literally saying that he "put [his] faith in Trump to destroy himself", Soros echoes the American President's most right-wing supporters in pleading for the so-called "democratic open society" to not cooperate with "authoritarian" China under any circumstances.
* President Xi Is "Vulnerable" Amidst Leadership "Struggles" And Grassroots Support For An "Open Society":
Never missing an opportunity to stir up trouble, Soros speculates that leadership "struggles" and what he portrays as growing grassroots support for his "open society" ideals have made President Xi -- who he describes as a "dictator" -- extremely "vulnerable", implying the potential for multifaceted regime change scenarios.
* The EU Might Cease To Exist Unless It Becomes A More Complete Union:
Soros is extremely concerned that the EU might cease to exist "because it is an incomplete union" that is also "based on the rule of law", the latter of which he regards as troublesome since "the wheels of justice move very slowly, while threats such as the Covid-19 virus move very fast", so the unstated solution is more centralization.
* Germany's Federal Constitutional Court "Could Destroy The European Union":
Soros made this dramatic claim on the basis that the recent ruling from the highest court of the EU's de-facto leader concluding that the European Central Bank's (ECB) purchasing of national bonds is partially unconstitutional in the manner that it's been justified could unravel the union's financial recovery plans.
* The German Precedent Might Trigger A Chain Reaction Of Pro-Sovereign Policies Throughout Europe:
One of the scenarios that worries Soros the most is that his native Hungary, Poland, and others might use the aforementioned German precedent to more confidently refuse to implement EU rulings pertaining to their domestic affairs, which he fears "will be the end of the EU as we know it" if the bloc can't prevent this scenario.
* Only "Consuls" (Perpetual Bonds) Can Save The EU:
Whether out of genuine concern for saving the EU and/or self-interested intentions to somehow involve his network in profiting from it, Soros recommends that the bloc issue so-called "consuls" (perpetual bonds) which "would be issued by the EU as a whole, would automatically be proportional, and would remain so eternally."
* Germany Is Standing In The Way Of Soros' Plan:
As if it wasn't already obvious enough by his condemnation of Germany's Federal Constitutional Court ruling, Soros directly calls out the country and its Dutch ally for being "adamantly opposed" to his "consuls" plan, which he urges them to "think again about" and might potentially provoke Color Revolution unrest to that end.
* Germany's "Unfair Advantage" In the Single Market Is To Italy's Detriment:
Seeking to position Italy as the leader of a pro-"consuls" coalition of states opposed to Germany's resistance to his plans, Soros attempts to drive a wedge between them by warning that the latter's "unfair advantage" in the single market is to the former's detriment, which dangerously emboldens Salvini's anti-EU populist plans there.
* The Root Of The EU's "Existential Dangers" Isn't COVID, Trump, Nor China, But Germany's Court Ruling:
According to Soros, while "Europe is facing several existential dangers", Germany's previously described court ruling is the most recent but also the one that must be resolved first in order that the EU "may be able to rise to the occasion" of surviving other implied threats such as COVID, Trump, and China.
--------------------
The key takeaway from Soros' interview with "The Independent" is that he (and by extrapolation the massive trans-national Color Revolution network that he created) regards Germany's recent court decision as a greater threat to the EU than anything else and might therefore seek to meddle in the country's internal affairs in order to reverse its ruling.
This certainly says a lot since he's hitherto presented himself as much more opposed to Trump and China (with increasingly equal measure) than to the EuroLiberal leader of the EU, but that just goes to show how fast International Relations are changing nowadays in the midst of World War C that Germany of all states issued a legal verdict in support of state sovereignty.
In a twist of fate, Soros might very well turn on one of his longest-standing allies after believing that they've "betrayed" his "precious cause" of an "open society" that would be under "existential threat" if the EU didn't urgently centralize under the pretext of countering COVID-19, all as a result of that completely unexpected court ruling.


russia-insider--2020-05-15--This Oil Giant Provides 1/5th of Russia's Tax Revenue, Is Close With China - Putin Goes All Out to S

This Oil Giant Provides 1/5th of Russia's Tax Revenue, Is Close With China - Putin Goes All Out to Support It

A deep crisis is shattering the Russian petroleum industry , but Igor Sechin still gets the President 's unequivocal support for the development Vostok Oil , the project that is due to bring several hundred million tons of north Siberian oil to international markets via the Northern Sea Route .
Vladimir Putin has isolated himself in his near-Moscow residence for almost two months .
On Tuesday this week , he made a rare appearance in a real one-to-one meeting with near associate Igor Sechin , leader of state oil company Rosneft .
The two men have been close friends since @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appointed Sechin , his former deputy prime minister , to the post as oil company leader in 2012 .
Since then , Rosneft has consolidated its position as the country ’ s most powerful company and embarked on a series of highly ambitious projects in the Arctic .
In Tuesday ’ s meeting , Putin appeared highly attentive towards Sechin ’ s proposed ways to overcome the oil crisis and ready to offer his best of assistance .
“ What can we do to support you and preserve your investments ?
” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consider to be the most relevant kind of support from the state ?
” he went on .
Igor Sechin had his list of requests ready .
The powerful oil company leader wanted Putin to arrange for the provision of available bank credits , postponement of taxation on mineral exploration and a lowering of tariffs on use of state pipelines and infrastructure .
Sechin underlined that Rosneft in 2019 accounted for as much as 18 percent of total federal tax revenues .
He also said that the company in 2020 will cut its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 950 billions to 750 billions .
“ A 200 billion cut in capital spending - that is pretty much , ” Putin responded .
But it was the company ’ s grand Arctic project , the Vostok Oil , that appeared to get most attention in the meeting .
Sechin put on a project presentation film on his tablet for the president to see .
It is not the first time that Sechin promotes the Vostok Oil to Vladimir Putin .
When the two men met in the Kremlin in February , Sechin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include an unprecedented building boom in the far northern Taymyr Peninsula .
Two airports will be built along with a seaport , about 800 km of new pipelines , 3500 km of new electricity lines and 2000 MW of electric power capacity .
It will require up to 100,000 new jobs and lead to a 2 percent annual hike in national GDP , Sechin explained .
More information about the project came to the surface in connection with this week ’ s meeting .
According to Sechin , the Vostok Oil has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tons of light-quality oil .
Already in 2024 , up to 25 million tons are to be extracted .
Three years later , in 2027 , production will amount to 50 million tons and in 2030 - as much as 115 million , Rosneft informs .
And it is all made to fit the Arctic ambitions of President Putin who has made it a top priority to bring annual shipments on the Northern Sea Route to 80 million tons by year 2024 .
The vast volumes of the Vostok Oil are all to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ northern Siberia to the coast of the Taymyr Peninsula , from where it will be shipped across icy Arctic waters to international markets .
Ultimately , more than 100 million tons of oil from the project will annually be shipped on the Northern Sea Route , Sechin says .
Rosneft is already actively in the process of developing the project .
Exploration drilling has started at the Zapadno-Irkinsky field , an area located about 140 km north of the town of Dudinka .
About 10,000 tons of equipment and machinery has already been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ banks of river Yenisey .
The Vostok Oil also includes four fields in the Vankor area , as well as the Payakha fields owned by partner company Neftegazholding .
The Vostok Oil includes the building of a 800 km of pipeline across the vast tundra lands of Taymyr .
It will end up on the northeastern edge of the remote Arctic peninsula where Rosneft intends to build the Chaika terminal .
Apparently , the company is in the process of preparing for building on site .
On the 12th May , Rosneft informed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partner companies on electric power generation and infrastructure that will provide needed electricity for the process .

A deep crisis is shattering the Russian petroleum industry, but Igor Sechin still gets the President's unequivocal support for the development Vostok Oil, the project that is due to bring several hundred million tons of north Siberian oil to international markets via the Northern Sea Route.
Vladimir Putin has isolated himself in his near-Moscow residence for almost two months. On Tuesday this week, he made a rare appearance in a real one-to-one meeting with near associate Igor Sechin, leader of state oil company Rosneft.
The two men have been close friends since the 1990s. It was Putin that appointed Sechin, his former deputy prime minister, to the post as oil company leader in 2012. Since then, Rosneft has consolidated its position as the country’s most powerful company and embarked on a series of highly ambitious projects in the Arctic.
In Tuesday’s meeting, Putin appeared highly attentive towards Sechin’s proposed ways to overcome the oil crisis and ready to offer his best of assistance.
“What can we do to support you and preserve your investments?” the president asked. “What do you consider to be the most relevant kind of support from the state?” he went on.
Oil incentives
Igor Sechin had his list of requests ready. The powerful oil company leader wanted Putin to arrange for the provision of available bank credits, postponement of taxation on mineral exploration and a lowering of tariffs on use of state pipelines and infrastructure.
Sechin underlined that Rosneft in 2019 accounted for as much as 18 percent of total federal tax revenues. He also said that the company in 2020 will cut its investment budget with 200 billion rubles from 950 billions to 750 billions.
“A 200 billion cut in capital spending - that is pretty much,” Putin responded.
Vostok Oil
But it was the company’s grand Arctic project, the Vostok Oil, that appeared to get most attention in the meeting. Sechin put on a project presentation film on his tablet for the president to see.
It is not the first time that Sechin promotes the Vostok Oil to Vladimir Putin. When the two men met in the Kremlin in February, Sechin underlined that the grand Arctic project will include an unprecedented building boom in the far northern Taymyr Peninsula.
“Take a look at this, Volodya.” Sechin gives Putin presention of Vostok Oil project. Photo: Kremlin.ru
Two airports will be built along with a seaport, about 800 km of new pipelines, 3500 km of new electricity lines and 2000 MW of electric power capacity. It will require up to 100,000 new jobs and lead to a 2 percent annual hike in national GDP, Sechin explained.
More information about the project came to the surface in connection with this week’s meeting.
According to Sechin, the Vostok Oil has a resource potential of up to 5 billion tons of light-quality oil. Already in 2024, up to 25 million tons are to be extracted. Three years later, in 2027, production will amount to 50 million tons and in 2030 - as much as 115 million, Rosneft informs.
Northern Sea Route
And it is all made to fit the Arctic ambitions of President Putin who has made it a top priority to bring annual shipments on the Northern Sea Route to 80 million tons by year 2024.
The vast volumes of the Vostok Oil are all to be pipelined from the field areas in northern Siberia to the coast of the Taymyr Peninsula, from where it will be shipped across icy Arctic waters to international markets.
Ultimately, more than 100 million tons of oil from the project will annually be shipped on the Northern Sea Route, Sechin says.
Well drilling
Rosneft is already actively in the process of developing the project. Exploration drilling has started at the Zapadno-Irkinsky field, an area located about 140 km north of the town of Dudinka.
About 10,000 tons of equipment and machinery has already been shipped to the drill site located on banks of river Yenisey.
The Vostok Oil also includes four fields in the Vankor area, as well as the Payakha fields owned by partner company Neftegazholding.
Terminal in Taymyr
The Vostok Oil includes the building of a 800 km of pipeline across the vast tundra lands of Taymyr. It will end up on the northeastern edge of the remote Arctic peninsula where Rosneft intends to build the Chaika terminal.
Apparently, the company is in the process of preparing for building on site. On the 12th May, Rosneft informed that it had struck a deal with partner companies on electric power generation and infrastructure that will provide needed electricity for the process.


russia-insider--2020-05-15--Coronavirus Is Pushing the US and China Toward a New Cold War

The coronavirus pandemic is further hampering the already strained relationship between the US and China , with the pair trading barbs over its origin and spread .
In January , US Senator Tom Cotton , a long-time China hawk , opened the salvo , hinting that the virus might have been released by a laboratory in Wuhan - an accusation subsequently recirculated by the US government .
In China , a foreign ministry spokesperson raised the possibility that the virus might have been brought into the country by the US military .
Here 's an excellent in-depth analysis of Ron @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FTN podcast .
See the full article and transcript here .
US President Donald Trump has been alternating between praise for China and finger-pointing , calling coronavirus the “ Chinese virus ” - a label Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tried unsuccessfully to sell to the G7 .
Beijing has reacted with an assertive global public relations campaign aimed at improving its standing , delivering medical supplies to many countries affected by the pandemic .
This activism has fuelled fears that Beijing may use the pandemic to upend the global order .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the possibility that China may be asked to pay for the damages caused by the pandemic , while UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has warned that relations with China could not go back to business as usual without explanations over how Beijing handled the outbreak .
This is a dangerous path that should not be pursued .
Try to imagine the reactions if , after the 2008 financial crisis , the US was asked to explain and compensate for the global damage its reckless financial system had caused ?
Or if China asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interventions on its soil ?
This month , Trump was criticised for opting to cut funding to the World Health Organization .
He again blamed China , and the UN agency , for failing to promptly alert the world about the pandemic .
On the same day , the Associated Press ( AP ) published a report , recirculated by major Western news outlets , with the headline : “ China didn ’ t warn public of likely pandemic for 6 key days.
” There is no question that a comprehensive investigation into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should be conducted , and no quarter given to Chinese authorities , but the AP report borders on insulting our intelligence .
Blaming China for a six-day delay is ludicrous , when major Western governments , having known of the pandemic threat since January , delayed for at least six weeks any measures to prevent contagion , with devastating human and economic consequences .
On 14 April , Hu Xijin , the editor of Global Times , which reflects Chinese Communist Party views , published a tough editorial titled : “ China-US relations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The article defiantly rejected US accusations that it was China that ruined the bilateral relationship .
“ The US does not accept the possibility of China becoming a parallel and equal force , ” the editorial notes .
The only China that the US establishment would be ready to tolerate , it continues , is one that would “ stop its high-tech progress ” and “ focus only on low-end industries , unable to compete with the US and the West in high-end manufacturing ” .
In the last three decades , Beijing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infrastructure , while Washington has conducted endless wars and engaged in speculative finance Ultimately , Beijing ’ s rooted belief is that “ what the US really wants to do is to weaken China so that it completely loses its strategic competitiveness against the US ” .
On the other side , according to the authoritative analysis by Chas Freeman , the dean of US-China scholars , the US position is as follows : “ China aspires to dominate its neighbours and to exclude the United States from the emerging Sino-centric order in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dominance … would give Beijing human and material resources to threaten not just US hegemony but the United States itself .
The countries of the region are incapable of balancing and constraining Chinese power and influence , so the United States must do this for them.
” Such views have a wide bipartisan consensus .
Freeman adds : “ In today ’ s Washington , these fearful assumptions are no longer open to empirical examination .
They are treated as axiomatic.
” In the words of another eminent scholar , Kishore Mahbubani , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ divided America on all his policies , except one : his trade and technological war against China.
” Even George Soros has been appreciative of this policy .
Thus , do not expect fundamental changes with a Biden presidency ; it is reasonable to expect that the two countries may move towards an economic decoupling , if not something worse .
Yet , there are significant differences in the attitudes of the US and China towards each other , and the rest of the world , that should not be overlooked .
Chinese @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as an economic and technological competition and , although Beijing is less powerful militarily , it does not portray the US as an existential threat .
On the other hand , the US establishment seems unable to accept any threat to its global hegemony .
Whoever comes close to matching its capabilities is considered , by default , an enemy .
Yet , the two countries ’ aspirations seem different .
The US still believes itself to be the best-performing society in the world , one that everybody should emulate , embracing the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejuvenate its civilisation and the prestige it enjoyed before the humiliation experienced between the 1839 Opium War and its 1949 Communist revolution .
While the best chance to overcome a coronavirus-driven economic disaster depends a lot on US-China cooperation , the world ’ s two most important nations are increasingly locked in a zero-sum game .
While US grievances against China are somewhat understandable , Beijing ’ s impressive rise was essentially a US self-inflicted wound .
In the last three decades , Beijing has invested in research , development and infrastructure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wars and engaged in speculative finance .
China contributed to sustaining the global economy after the 2008 crisis .
While it is now uncertain as to whether it could or would do this again , is it really smart and necessary to open another row with Beijing now ?
Marco Carnelos is a former Italian diplomat .
He has been assigned to Somalia , Australia and the United Nations .
He has served in the foreign policy staff of three Italian prime ministers between 1995 and 2011 .
More recently he has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Syria for the Italian government and , until November 2017 , ambassador of Italy to Iraq .

A woman wears a face mask at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) in Los Angeles, California on 2 March 2020. (AFP)
The coronavirus pandemic is further hampering the already strained relationship between the US and China, with the pair trading barbs over its origin and spread.
In January, US Senator Tom Cotton, a long-time China hawk, opened the salvo, hinting that the virus might have been released by a laboratory in Wuhan - an accusation subsequently recirculated by the US government. In China, a foreign ministry spokesperson raised the possibility that the virus might have been brought into the country by the US military.
Here's an excellent in-depth analysis of Ron Unz's recent bombshell article from the FTN podcast. See the full article and transcript here.
US President Donald Trump has been alternating between praise for China and finger-pointing, calling coronavirus the “Chinese virus” - a label Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tried unsuccessfully to sell to the G7.
Beijing has reacted with an assertive global public relations campaign aimed at improving its standing, delivering medical supplies to many countries affected by the pandemic. This activism has fuelled fears that Beijing may use the pandemic to upend the global order.
Some right-wing US news outlets have even raised the possibility that China may be asked to pay for the damages caused by the pandemic, while UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has warned that relations with China could not go back to business as usual without explanations over how Beijing handled the outbreak.
This is a dangerous path that should not be pursued. Try to imagine the reactions if, after the 2008 financial crisis, the US was asked to explain and compensate for the global damage its reckless financial system had caused? Or if China asked the same for the decades of Western interventions on its soil?
This month, Trump was criticised for opting to cut funding to the World Health Organization. He again blamed China, and the UN agency, for failing to promptly alert the world about the pandemic. On the same day, the Associated Press (AP) published a report, recirculated by major Western news outlets, with the headline: “China didn’t warn public of likely pandemic for 6 key days.”


russia-insider--2020-05-15--How The Neocons Insert 'Blame China' Propaganda Into the Media

Throughout the last month there have been a number of reports with headlines like : • US officials sounded alarm about Wuhan lab years before coronavirus outbreak • US officials were reportedly concerned that safety breaches at a Wuhan lab studying coronaviruses in bats could cause a pandemic All the above and many more hark back to a Washington Post opinion piece by Josh Rogin published on April 14 and headlined : Josh Rogin is a neo-conservative hack who carries water for the Trump administration .
That administration has launched a 'blame China ' campaign to distract from its failure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States .
To that purpose they handed Rogin an old diplomatic cable and told him how to 'interpret ' it .
Rogin dutifully does as he is told .
Two years before the novel coronavirus pandemic upended the world , U.S. Embassy officials visited a Chinese research facility in the city of Wuhan several times and sent two official warnings back to Washington about inadequate safety at the lab , which was conducting risky studies on coronaviruses from bats .
The cables have fueled discussions inside the U.S. government about whether this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the virus — even though conclusive proof has yet to emerge .
That sets the frame for describing the one cable that was given to Rogin .
But when one extracts the facts from his reporting while eliminating the propaganda this picture arises : • The Wuhan Institute of Virology has a level 4 bio-security laboratory .
• The institute is known for research on coronaviruses that occur in bats from south China .
• Some of the research was done in collaboration with two U.S. universities and financed by the U.S. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to receive additional U.S. support for further studies .
• The January 2018 the U.S. embassy in China sends two diplomats to visit the laboratory .
Neither of them is an expert for laboratory safety or virology .
• The diplomats are told that research on bat derived coronaviruses is important as such viruses , like SARS , can threaten humans .
• They are told by the Chinese researchers that more work could be done if the laboratory had more trained technicians .
• The diplomats travel back to their embassy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' arguments to recommend that additional U.S. support should be granted to the laboratory .
When described as above the story is one that occurs in publicly financed research institutions day in and out .
Everyone research institution is always looking for new grants .
It communicates with possible grant givers and empathizes the necessity of its research and the need for further support .
But Rogin constructs a rather wild picture from those facts : A real warning about safety issues at the lab would certainly be classified .
What Rogin describes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a warning of a new SARS like pandemic .
The `` management weakness '' is the desire to get the U.S. to finance more personnel at the laboratory .
Rogin admits as much in his next paragraph : Rogin then introduces an additional scare factor by lamenting about 'gain of function ' research on viruses .
Such research attempts to manipulated viruses to give them additional features .
He is trying to associate the Wuhan lab with such type of research : The link Rogin provides goes to a Nature piece on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ' research .
The research in question was experiments at University of North Carolina , not in Wuhan .
The paper describing that research , A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence , was written by Professor Ralph S. Baric who had also designed the experiment .
The paper lists a total of fifteen collaborators .
One of the listed authors is indeed Zhengli-Li Shi who leads the laboratory in Wuhan .
But neither Zhengli-Li Shi , nor her laboratory , were actually involved in any of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ research paper the contributions of each co-author are listed .
About Zhengli-Li Shi it says : The Wuhan laboratory only provided specific gene sequences from its pool of bat viruses , the laboratory 's and Zhengi-Li Shi 's specialty , that the researchers in North Caroline wanted to use in their experiment .
To construe that furnisher function as involvement in 'gain of function ' experiments is a unjustified exaggeration .
I have found no evidence that the Wuhan lab itself ever engaged in such research .
Rogin concludes his scare piece by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House that is his source : Manipulated interpretations of diplomatic cables and evidence-free claims about allegedly existing evidence were also used in warmongering campaigns about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and chemical attacks in Syria .
The neo-conservatives are now using the same old tricks against China .
The media echo shows that they have some success with this .

Throughout the last month there have been a number of reports with headlines like:
All the above and many more hark back to a Washington Post opinion piece by Josh Rogin published on April 14 and headlined:
State Department cables warned of safety issues at Wuhan lab studying bat coronaviruses.
Josh Rogin is a neo-conservative hack who carries water for the Trump administration. That administration has launched a 'blame China' campaign to distract from its failure to contain the epidemic outbreak in the United States. To that purpose they handed Rogin an old diplomatic cable and told him how to 'interpret' it. Rogin dutifully does as he is told.
He begins:
Two years before the novel coronavirus pandemic upended the world, U.S. Embassy officials visited a Chinese research facility in the city of Wuhan several times and sent two official warnings back to Washington about inadequate safety at the lab, which was conducting risky studies on coronaviruses from bats. The cables have fueled discussions inside the U.S. government about whether this or another Wuhan lab was the source of the virus — even though conclusive proof has yet to emerge.
That sets the frame for describing the one cable that was given to Rogin. But when one extracts the facts from his reporting while eliminating the propaganda this picture arises:
The Wuhan Institute of Virology has a level 4 bio-security laboratory.
The institute is known for research on coronaviruses that occur in bats from south China.
Some of the research was done in collaboration with two U.S. universities and financed by the U.S. government.
The laboratory had asked to receive additional U.S. support for further studies.
The January 2018 the U.S. embassy in China sends two diplomats to visit the laboratory. Neither of them is an expert for laboratory safety or virology.
The diplomats are told that research on bat derived coronaviruses is important as such viruses, like SARS, can threaten humans.
They are told by the Chinese researchers that more work could be done if the laboratory had more trained technicians.
The diplomats travel back to their embassy. They write a cable using the researchers' arguments to recommend that additional U.S. support should be granted to the laboratory.
No additional funds are granted.
When described as above the story is one that occurs in publicly financed research institutions day in and out. Everyone research institution is always looking for new grants. It communicates with possible grant givers and empathizes the necessity of its research and the need for further support.
But Rogin constructs a rather wild picture from those facts:
What the U.S. officials learned during their visits concerned them so much that they dispatched two diplomatic cables categorized as Sensitive But Unclassified back to Washington. The cables warned about safety and management weaknesses at the WIV lab and proposed more attention and help. The first cable, which I obtained, also warns that the lab’s work on bat coronaviruses and their potential human transmission represented a risk of a new SARS-like pandemic. “During interactions with scientists at the WIV laboratory, they noted the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory,” states the Jan. 19, 2018, cable, which was drafted by two officials from the embassy’s environment, science and health sections who met with the WIV scientists.
A real warning about safety issues at the lab would certainly be classified. What Rogin describes as "warning about safety" is a warning of a new SARS like pandemic. The "management weakness" is the desire to get the U.S. to finance more personnel at the laboratory. Rogin admits as much in his next paragraph:
The Chinese researchers at WIV were receiving assistance from the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch and other U.S. organizations, but the Chinese requested additional help. The cables argued that the United States should give the Wuhan lab further support, mainly because its research on bat coronaviruses was important but also dangerous.
Rogin then introduces an additional scare factor by lamenting about 'gain of function' research on viruses. Such research attempts to manipulated viruses to give them additional features. He is trying to associate the Wuhan lab with such type of research:
...
The research was designed to prevent the next SARS-like pandemic by anticipating how it might emerge. But even in 2015, other As the cable noted, the U.S. visitors met with Shi Zhengli, the head of the research project, who had been publishing studies related to bat coronaviruses for many years. In November 2017, just before the U.S. officials’ visit, Shi’s team had published research showing that horseshoe bats they had collected from a cave in Yunnan province were very likely from the same bat population that spawned the SARS coronavirus in 2003....The research was designed to prevent the next SARS-like pandemic by anticipating how it might emerge. But even in 2015, other scientists questioned whether Shi’s team was taking unnecessary risks. In October 2014, the U.S. government had imposed a moratorium on funding of any research that makes a virus more deadly or contagious, known as “gain-of-function” experiments.
The link Rogin provides goes to a Nature piece on a debate about a certain 'gain of function' research. The research in question was experiments at University of North Carolina, not in Wuhan. The paper describing that research, A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence, was written by Professor Ralph S. Baric who had also designed the experiment. The paper lists a total of fifteen collaborators. One of the listed authors is indeed Zhengli-Li Shi who leads the laboratory in Wuhan.
But neither Zhengli-Li Shi, nor her laboratory, were actually involved in any of the experiments. At the and of the research paper the contributions of each co-author are listed. About Zhengli-Li Shi it says:
Z.-L.S. provided SHC014 spike sequences and plasmids.
The Wuhan laboratory only provided specific gene sequences from its pool of bat viruses, the laboratory's and Zhengi-Li Shi's specialty, that the researchers in North Caroline wanted to use in their experiment.
To construe that furnisher function as involvement in 'gain of function' experiments is a unjustified exaggeration. I have found no evidence that the Wuhan lab itself ever engaged in such research.
Rogin concludes his scare piece by handing the microphone to the demagogue in the White House that is his source:
Inside the Trump administration, many national security officials have long suspected either the WIV or the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention lab was the source of the novel coronavirus outbreak. According to the New York Times, the intelligence community has provided no evidence to confirm this. But one senior administration official told me that the cables provide one more piece of evidence to support the possibility that the pandemic is the result of a lab accident in Wuhan. “The idea that it was just a totally natural occurrence is circumstantial. The evidence it leaked from the lab is circumstantial. Right now, the ledger on the side of it leaking from the lab is packed with bullet points and there’s almost nothing on the other side,” the official said.
Manipulated interpretations of diplomatic cables and evidence-free claims about allegedly existing evidence were also used in warmongering campaigns about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and chemical attacks in Syria. The neo-conservatives are now using the same old tricks against China.
The media echo shows that they have some success with this.


russia-insider--2020-05-15--Sensational Revelations on How George Soros Packed the EU's Court of 'Human Rights'

A bombshell Europe documents the deep involvement of George Soros ’ Open Society Foundations in the European Court of Human Rights , which has been key in forcing an “ Open Borders ” policy on countries like Italy .
In 2012 , the European Court of Human Rights ( ECHR ) handed down the landmark case of “ Hirsi Jamaa and others vs. Italy ” , which ruled that European countries could not “ push back ” illegal migrants and would be fined hundreds of thousands of Euros if they did .
The case involved a network of Soros-sponsored lawyers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 22 Somalian and Eritrean migrants in Libya who had been turned back in 2009 to bring their cases to Strasbourg .
Now , a report by conservative American activist Jay Sekulow ’ s European Center for Law and Justice ( ECLJ ) has revealed that NGOs related to the Open Society Network are deeply involved with the ECHR , and many of its judges are tied to these organizations .
The report identified seven NGOs that are both active at the Court , and have judges among their former staff .
At least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ served on the ECHR since 2009 are former staff or leaders of these seven NGOs , the report stated .
The NGOs are identified as A.I.R.E .
Center ( Advice on Individual Rights in Europe ) , Amnesty International , the International Commission of Jurists ( ICJ ) , the Helsinki Committees and Foundations Network , Human Rights Watch ( HRW ) , Interights ( International Center for the Judicial Protection of Human Rights ) , and the Open Society Foundation ( OSF ) and its various branches , in particular the Open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ The Open Society Network stands out for the number of judges linked to it and for the fact that it actually funds the other six organizations identified in this report .
The powerful presence of the Open Society and its affiliates is problematic in many ways .
But even more serious is the fact that 18 of the 22 judges were found to have served on cases initiated or supported by the organization with which they were previously associated.
” The report identified 88 problematic cases over the last 10 years : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ abstained from sitting because of their connection with an NGO involved.
” The think tank called its assessment “ low ” , since it did not take into account OSF ’ s close financial links to many other NGOs .
“ This situation is serious , and calls into question the independence of the Court and the impartiality of the judges .
These conflicts must be remedied immediately.
” The report proposes greater attention be paid to the choice of candidates for the post of judge by avoiding the appointment of activists and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and links between applicants , judges and NGOs , and to formalize the procedures for deportation and disqualification .
While many blogs and alternative websites have covered the explosive revelations of the report , they have inexplicably been largely ignored by mainstream media .
This week the Russian Foreign Ministry commented in , stating that the report “ caught our attention ” , not least because Russia has “ repeatedly pointed out to its Council of Europe colleagues ” instances of Western human rights NGOs ” exerting implicit and explicit influence on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We believe that our colleagues from the Council of Europe and member states of the organization should pay attention to this report , which may provide valuable “ food for thought ” in the context of ongoing ECHR reform .
Russia has always advocated a strong but non-politicized European Court .
It appears that due consideration by all parties of the existing shortcomings in the ECHR activities during the reform will make it possible to adjust and ultimately minimize the “ political ” side effects involved in its practice , ” the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Vladimir Putin banned Soros NGOs in 2015 , saying they “ posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution.
” Russian observers frequently blame Soros for starting the war in Ukraine and the ensuing conflict between Russia and the West .
In December , US Attorney General William Barr warned of similar instances of Open Society “ Lawfare “ in trying to influence the outcome of elections for prosecutors in the US .
“ There ’ s this recent development [ where ] George Soros has been coming in , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not been much voter turnout and putting in a lot of money to elect people who are not very supportive of law enforcement and don ’ t view the office as bringing to trial and prosecuting criminals but pursuing other social agendas , ” Barr told Martha MacCallum on Fox News .
“ They have started to win in a number of cities and they have , in my view , not given the proper support to the police.
” Last year , Gateway Pundit revealed the ties between Soros and the Spygate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Spygate investigation comes to a head , Western governments must seriously consider following Russia ’ s lead and declaring Soros and the Open Society Foundations a hostile foreign power .

A bombshell Europe documents the deep involvement of George Soros’ Open Society Foundations in the European Court of Human Rights, which has been key in forcing an “Open Borders” policy on countries like Italy.
In 2012, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) handed down the landmark case of “Hirsi Jamaa and others vs. Italy”, which ruled that European countries could not “push back” illegal migrants and would be fined hundreds of thousands of Euros if they did. The case involved a network of Soros-sponsored lawyers and NGOs who managed to track down 22 Somalian and Eritrean migrants in Libya who had been turned back in 2009 to bring their cases to Strasbourg.
Now, a report by conservative American activist Jay Sekulow’s European Center for Law and Justice (ECLJ) has revealed that NGOs related to the Open Society Network are deeply involved with the ECHR, and many of its judges are tied to these organizations. The report identified seven NGOs that are both active at the Court, and have judges among their former staff. At least 22 of the 100 judges who have served on the ECHR since 2009 are former staff or leaders of these seven NGOs, the report stated.
The NGOs are identified as A.I.R.E. Center (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe), Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Helsinki Committees and Foundations Network, Human Rights Watch (HRW), Interights (International Center for the Judicial Protection of Human Rights), and the Open Society Foundation (OSF) and its various branches, in particular the Open Society Justice Initiative (OSJI).
“The Open Society Network stands out for the number of judges linked to it and for the fact that it actually funds the other six organizations identified in this report. The powerful presence of the Open Society and its affiliates is problematic in many ways. But even more serious is the fact that 18 of the 22 judges were found to have served on cases initiated or supported by the organization with which they were previously associated.”
The report identified 88 problematic cases over the last 10 years: “In only 12 cases have judges abstained from sitting because of their connection with an NGO involved.” The think tank called its assessment “low”, since it did not take into account OSF’s close financial links to many other NGOs.
“This situation is serious, and calls into question the independence of the Court and the impartiality of the judges. These conflicts must be remedied immediately.” The report proposes greater attention be paid to the choice of candidates for the post of judge by avoiding the appointment of activists and campaigners, to ensure transparency of interests and links between applicants, judges and NGOs, and to formalize the procedures for deportation and disqualification.
While many blogs and alternative websites have covered the explosive revelations of the report, they have inexplicably been largely ignored by mainstream media. This week the Russian Foreign Ministry commented in an official Press release , stating that the report “caught our attention”, not least because Russia has “repeatedly pointed out to its Council of Europe colleagues” instances of Western human rights NGOs” exerting implicit and explicit influence on the ECHR” analyzed in this paper.
“We believe that our colleagues from the Council of Europe and member states of the organization should pay attention to this report, which may provide valuable “food for thought” in the context of ongoing ECHR reform. Russia has always advocated a strong but non-politicized European Court. It appears that due consideration by all parties of the existing shortcomings in the ECHR activities during the reform will make it possible to adjust and ultimately minimize the “political” side effects involved in its practice,” the Russian Foreign Ministry stated. Russian President Vladimir Putin banned Soros NGOs in 2015, saying they “posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution.” Russian observers frequently blame Soros for starting the war in Ukraine and the ensuing conflict between Russia and the West.
In December, US Attorney General William Barr warned of similar instances of Open Society “Lawfare“ in trying to influence the outcome of elections for prosecutors in the US. “There’s this recent development [where]George Soros has been coming in, in largely Democratic primaries where there has not been much voter turnout and putting in a lot of money to elect people who are not very supportive of law enforcement and don’t view the office as bringing to trial and prosecuting criminals but pursuing other social agendas,” Barr told Martha MacCallum on Fox News. “They have started to win in a number of cities and they have, in my view, not given the proper support to the police.”
Last year, Gateway Pundit revealed the ties between Soros and the Spygate Conspiracy’s Ukrainian origins. As the Spygate investigation comes to a head, Western governments must seriously consider following Russia’s lead and declaring Soros and the Open Society Foundations a hostile foreign power.


russia-insider--2020-05-18--Sweden Is a Refuge for Radical Muslims Resting Between Jihads

The Swedish Domestic Minister Anders Ygeman said during Folk och försvar ( Swedish defense conference ) today that it is possible that there will be terror attacks in Sweden .
At the same time he strongly criticized opponents of mass immigration and compared them to terrorists .
The domestic minister briefly addressed the terror attacks in Paris followed by a long description of Muslims in Europe and Sweden as an oppressed group .
He compared critics of mass immigration with terrorists who murder people .
“ Je Suis Ahmed ” , he proclaimed and continued , “ Ahmed Merabet , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gave his life to defend Charlie Hebdo ’ s right to joke about Muslims.
” He chose to focus on Merabet because he was a Muslim , but he did not mention the fifteen other people who died in the gruesome attacks .
That is not to say Merabet doesn ’ t deserve our respect and his family our condolences , but not even mentioning all the other people who died is blatantly disrespectful .
Afterwards Ygeman focused on the fire at the mosque in Eskilstuna — a fire which after media speculation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to be the result of an accident , not hate crime against Muslims .
“ Dark forces on both sides are trying to make the struggle against terrorism into a war between religions , ” he claimed .
Before discussing the likelihood of Sweden ’ s suffering a terrorist attack he also claimed that the “ brothers in Paris were no warriors , ” referring to Said and Chérif Koachi who shortly before the terrorist attacks were in the Middle East waging war on behalf of the Islamic State .
“ We have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happen in Sweden and take necessary steps to protect ourselves , ” he said and continued , “ It is extremely difficult to protect against perpetrators who are prepared to die to harm others .
We can ’ t protect ourselves against everything.
” During the questions after his speech Ygeman admitted that it is easy for immigrants to get Swedish passports — passports often used for smuggling of illegal immigrants and by terrorists who travel to Syria and Iraq to participate in gruesome acts of violence .
“ It shouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passports ; we have to tighten regulations , ” he said .
As we can see our Domestic Minister is taking the terrorist threat very seriously .
As is our beloved media , who instead of asking critical questions about mass immigration , Islamization and “ Swedish ” terrorists , are fully occupied proclaiming that they are Charlie .
Nothing could be further from the truth .
The Swedish tabloid Expressen who in recent days have proclaimed their devotion to freedom of speech have not always taken the issue as seriously .
Last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ known as Researchgruppen , which consists of various violent convicted communists who call themselves “ the Swedish Stasi.
” Their task was to hack the comment system Disqus in an effort to expose ordinary Swedish citizens who write critical comments about Islam and mass immigration on the Internet .
These citizens ’ details were later published with picture and name , and depicted as racists in front of the entire country .
Where was freedom of speech then ?
Worst of all this communist group was given the “ Golden Spade ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in exposing the “ hate.
” Where was freedom of expression when the provocative artist Dan Park was arbitrarily jailed and isolated for months until he was convicted of inciting hatred ?
Dan Park had created various images related to immigration and Islam and was showing them at a gallery in Malmö .
Police showed up , confiscated the artwork and arrested Dan Park .
He was then jailed in isolation for months until he was convicted of “ inciting hatred against minorities ” .
The entire establishment mass media were completely silent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am Dan Park !
” The fact of the matter is that if Charlie Hebdo was a Swedish magazine the publishers would have been jailed and convicted a long time ago , with Expressen and mass media ’ s silent consent .
Swedish state media slipped up directly after the attacks when their foreign correspondent said on the air that it was not “ innocent ” people who had been attacked .
The establishment and the media are one .
They operate as a unit for mass immigration , for Islam , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , oppressing dissent by whatever means necessary .
Just as we saw in the forming of the December Junta , where the two political blocs agreed not to provide opposition against one another simply to isolate the patriotic Sweden Democrats and continue mass immigration .
The devotion to Islam and ensuring that the Swedish people are not protected from terrorist attacks became very clear a few nights ago on Swedish TV where the subject of Islamic extremism was discussed .
In the video Richard Jomshof , a member of Parliament for the patriotic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ debates Mona Sahlin , former leader for the Social Democrats and now the National Coordinator against Violence-Inciting Extremism .
Mona Sahlin does not care enough about the Swedish people ’ s safety to consider revoking the citizenship of “ Swedish ” jihadis , as she does not see it having any effect , despite Richard Jomshof ’ s pointing out that the Charlie Hebdo attack could have been prevented with such a law .
The reporter for Swedish state TV trivializes the issue by saying that the law would not have stopped Anders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Breivik , the lone wolf madman , to give the impression that terrorism is not an Islamic phenomenon .
The main priority of the Swedish establishment is not to protect Swedish citizens or Swedish interests but to ensure that the terror attacks do not increase “ Islamophobia ” or lead to “ misunderstandings about the peaceful nature of Islam.
” But most important is that the heightened risk of terror does not increase the support for the Sweden Democrats , who ironically have been the only party who has warned about increased terror @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the problem .
The struggle against the “ racists ” and “ xenophobes ” and the continuation of mass immigration and destruction of Swedish culture and Swedish society is far more important than democracy , freedom of expression or even Swedish lives .

The Swedish Domestic Minister Anders Ygeman said during Folk och försvar (Swedish defense conference) today that it is possible that there will be terror attacks in Sweden. At the same time he strongly criticized opponents of mass immigration and compared them to terrorists.
“Je Suis Ahmed”, he proclaimed.
The domestic minister briefly addressed the terror attacks in Paris followed by a long description of Muslims in Europe and Sweden as an oppressed group. He compared critics of mass immigration with terrorists who murder people.
“Je Suis Ahmed”, he proclaimed and continued, “Ahmed Merabet, the 42-year old Muslim police officer who gave his life to defend Charlie Hebdo’s right to joke about Muslims.”
He chose to focus on Merabet because he was a Muslim, but he did not mention the fifteen other people who died in the gruesome attacks. That is not to say Merabet doesn’t deserve our respect and his family our condolences, but not even mentioning all the other people who died is blatantly disrespectful. Afterwards Ygeman focused on the fire at the mosque in Eskilstuna — a fire which after media speculation and a comprehensive police investigation turned out to be the result of an accident, not hate crime against Muslims.
“Dark forces on both sides are trying to make the struggle against terrorism into a war between religions,” he claimed.
Before discussing the likelihood of Sweden’s suffering a terrorist attack he also claimed that the “brothers in Paris were no warriors,” referring to Said and Chérif Koachi who shortly before the terrorist attacks were in the Middle East waging war on behalf of the Islamic State.
“We have to dare to think that this could happen in Sweden and take necessary steps to protect ourselves,” he said and continued, “It is extremely difficult to protect against perpetrators who are prepared to die to harm others. We can’t protect ourselves against everything.”
During the questions after his speech Ygeman admitted that it is easy for immigrants to get Swedish passports — passports often used for smuggling of illegal immigrants and by terrorists who travel to Syria and Iraq to participate in gruesome acts of violence.
“It shouldn’t be possible to obtain ten to fifteen passports; we have to tighten regulations,” he said.
As we can see our Domestic Minister is taking the terrorist threat very seriously. As is our beloved media, who instead of asking critical questions about mass immigration, Islamization and “Swedish” terrorists, are fully occupied proclaiming that they are Charlie.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The Swedish tabloid Expressen who in recent days have proclaimed their devotion to freedom of speech have not always taken the issue as seriously. Last year they hired a left-wing hacker group known as Researchgruppen, which consists of various violent convicted communists who call themselves “the Swedish Stasi.” Their task was to hack the comment system Disqus in an effort to expose ordinary Swedish citizens who write critical comments about Islam and mass immigration on the Internet. These citizens’ details were later published with picture and name, and depicted as racists in front of the entire country. Where was freedom of speech then? Worst of all this communist group was given the “Golden Spade”, a prestigious journalistic prize for their work in exposing the “hate.”
Where was freedom of expression when the provocative artist Dan Park was arbitrarily jailed and isolated for months until he was convicted of inciting hatred?
Dan Park had created various images related to immigration and Islam and was showing them at a gallery in Malmö. Police showed up, confiscated the artwork and arrested Dan Park. He was then jailed in isolation for months until he was convicted of “inciting hatred against minorities”. The entire establishment mass media were completely silent. No one proclaimed, “I am Dan Park!”
“Swedish Swedes in Sweden” by Dan Park
The fact of the matter is that if Charlie Hebdo was a Swedish magazine the publishers would have been jailed and convicted a long time ago, with Expressen and mass media’s silent consent.
Swedish state media slipped up directly after the attacks when their foreign correspondent said on the air that it was not “innocent” people who had been attacked.
The establishment and the media are one. They operate as a unit for mass immigration, for Islam, for the destruction of Western culture and society, oppressing dissent by whatever means necessary. Just as we saw in the forming of the December Junta, where the two political blocs agreed not to provide opposition against one another simply to isolate the patriotic Sweden Democrats and continue mass immigration.
The devotion to Islam and ensuring that the Swedish people are not protected from terrorist attacks became very clear a few nights ago on Swedish TV where the subject of Islamic extremism was discussed. In the video Richard Jomshof, a member of Parliament for the patriotic party the Sweden Democrats (Sverigedemokraterna) debates Mona Sahlin, former leader for the Social Democrats and now the National Coordinator against Violence-Inciting Extremism.
Mona Sahlin does not care enough about the Swedish people’s safety to consider revoking the citizenship of “Swedish” jihadis, as she does not see it having any effect, despite Richard Jomshof’s pointing out that the Charlie Hebdo attack could have been prevented with such a law. The reporter for Swedish state TV trivializes the issue by saying that the law would not have stopped Anders Behring Breivik. The establishment often uses Breivik, the lone wolf madman, to give the impression that terrorism is not an Islamic phenomenon.
The main priority of the Swedish establishment is not to protect Swedish citizens or Swedish interests but to ensure that the terror attacks do not increase “Islamophobia” or lead to “misunderstandings about the peaceful nature of Islam.” But most important is that the heightened risk of terror does not increase the support for the Sweden Democrats, who ironically have been the only party who has warned about increased terror and suggested clear and effective solutions to the problem.
The struggle against the “racists” and “xenophobes” and the continuation of mass immigration and destruction of Swedish culture and Swedish society is far more important than democracy, freedom of expression or even Swedish lives.
Video transcript:


russia-insider--2020-05-18--Why Russian Serfs Were Much Better Off than American Slaves

Although the terms `` slave '' and `` serf '' are usually used interchangeably in English , the two systems had major differences In popular English language histories of Russia , “ serfdom ” and “ slavery ” are often used interchangeably .
It is a commonplace to say that “ slavery in Russia ended in 1861.
” However , this is a serious mistake .
Here ’ s why .
Varro , an ancient Roman writer , in his work “ Res Rusticae ” ( “ Village affairs ” ) , which is a manual on the management of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a “ talking tool ” ( compared to “ half-mute tools ” like cows and “ mute tools ” like carts .
Russian serfs were never “ tools , ” but regarded as people – first of all , because they were baptized Russian Orthodox Christians .
In Tsarist Russian society , morally organized by religion , perceiving baptized persons as things was considered blasphemy .
However , there were kholops – the people who , according to ancient Russian law code Russkaya Pravda , were indeed perceived as tools .
Their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They became kholops either by being captured as war prisoners , or sold themselves into slavery for fear of dying from starvation , large debts , to save one ’ s family etc .
Kholops didn ’ t pay taxes , so becoming one was an option for the poorest , those who had fallen so low they had no other options , and the laziest alike .
In 1723 , Peter the Great banned kholops – the remaining ones were made serfs and started paying taxes like everybody else .
So @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ proper ’ ancient-type slavery , we may say that in Russia , it was banned in 1723 .
Serfdom was a different thing .
To put it simply , Russian peasants needed protection from the plundering raids of nomads , which happened very often in ancient Russian times .
On the other hand , the princes and boyars needed food and supplies , produced by the peasants .
Initially , production was exchanged for protection , and it was a system of mutual dependency .
However , as the Moscow tsardom developed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resources , so , to control serfs , the state limited their mobility .
From 1497 , they could only relocate from one landlord to another at certain times of the year .
In 1649 , they were totally forbidden from leaving their lands and landlords by another legal code , Sobornoye Ulozhenie .
The code also stated that baptized people must not be bought and sold .
However , beginning in the late 17th century , landowners found ways to buy and sell people without their land .
3 .
Serfs were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all of them It is true that in the 18th and 19th century , serfs were very limited in their human rights .
However , there was never a law that defined serfs as property ; legally they were treated as persons .
Even though in 1746 , the state formally banned all Russians except the nobility from possessing serfs , rich priests and merchants found ways to register serfs in some nobleman ’ s name and de facto own them .
Serfs were obliged to work for their landlord for the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had very little time to work for themselves .
From 1722 , all male peasants also had to pay poll tax .
In 1730 , all peasants ( including state-owned serfs , serfs owned by the nobility , and free peasants ) were banned from buying real estate in towns , in 1731 – banned from entering into contracts , in 1734 – banned from organizing cloth factories , in 1739 – banned from buying serfs for themselves etc .
This reflected the fact that peasants were quickly developing business skills .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their serfs to Siberia for misconduct and crimes .
Landlords also could use corporal punishment on their serfs .
4 .
The state protected serfs from their landlords Landlords represented their serfs in legal matters .
The landlords collected the peasants ’ taxes , but those who withheld their peasants ’ money could be deprived of serfs completely ( after 1742 ) .
In 1721 , Peter the Great banned selling individual serfs and the splitting up of families ; in 1771 , Catherine the Great banned auction blocks for selling serfs .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ only as power to support the country ’ s needs during times of war , and because Russia was eyed warily in Europe as a country where serfdom still existed .
This is why in 1762-1768 , Catherine initiated a show trial over “ Saltychikha ” , an obviously mentally ill landlady who tortured and murdered her serfs .
However , it was under Catherine when the trade in serfs was the most ugly : children , especially virgin girls , were taken from their families and sold .
Trade couldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ selling serfs without land was repeated in 1833 and then again in 1842 ; but it remained so until the end of serfdom .
After 1823 , the state banned landlords from lending their serfs to work for people of other castes ( merchants or priests ) .
Unfortunately , these laws were never fully implemented .
5 .
Serfs were better off than slaves ( most of the time ) A Senate law of January 19th 1769 reinstated the fact that all land that serfs lived on was the property of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mistake to say that serfs had nothing .
Their private tools , houses , clothes and possessions , very often cattle and simple modes of transport belonged to them , not their landlords .
A Croatian missionary Yuriy Krizhanich ( 1618-1683 ) wrote that in Russia , serfs were much better off than in European countries .
And in the 18th-19th century , historians have calculated , any Russian serf worked 2.6 times less time than America ’ s slaves did ( mainly because of the large number of Holy days when people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day off ) .
Even through the darkest times of Catherine ’ s rule , serfs could post collective and individual complaints to the Emperor and the Governing Senate .
In 1812 , peasants were once again permitted to participate in trade and enter into contracts .
In 1818 , peasants , serfs included , were returned the right to establish mills and factories .
In 1848 , sefs were returned the right to own lands and real estate ( at the consent of their landlords ) .
Still , they were deprived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they worked on , and even the emancipation reform of 1861 didn ’ t immediately allow them to own it .
Only the most hard-working and talented could afford a decent living , which meant that in many respects they differed little from most peasants in Europe at the time .
It is self-evident that any kind of possession of one person over another , and any kind of violation of basic human rights , is an indictment of society and the state .
And surely , there were periods of time when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demanding and cruel landlords , and were closer to slaves in their status ; but , considering everything above , it is clear that Russian serfdom was not slavery .

Although the terms "slave" and "serf" are usually used interchangeably in English, the two systems had major differences
Getty Images; Arkady Shaykhet/MAMM/MDF/russiainphoto.ru; Archive photo
In popular English language histories of Russia, “serfdom” and “slavery” are often used interchangeably. It is a commonplace to say that “slavery in Russia ended in 1861.” However, this is a serious mistake. Here’s why.
1. Serfs were persons, not things
Аркадий Шайхет/МАММ/МДФ/russiainphoto.ru
Varro, an ancient Roman writer, in his work “Res Rusticae” (“Village affairs”), which is a manual on the management of slave-run estates, says that a slave is a “talking tool” (compared to “half-mute tools” like cows and “mute tools” like carts.
Russian serfs were never “tools,” but regarded as people – first of all, because they were baptized Russian Orthodox Christians. In Tsarist Russian society, morally organized by religion, perceiving baptized persons as things was considered blasphemy.
However, there were kholops – the people who, according to ancient Russian law code Russkaya Pravda, were indeed perceived as tools. Their legal status can be described as slavery. They became kholops either by being captured as war prisoners, or sold themselves into slavery for fear of dying from starvation, large debts, to save one’s family etc. Kholops didn’t pay taxes, so becoming one was an option for the poorest, those who had fallen so low they had no other options, and the laziest alike.
In 1723, Peter the Great banned kholops – the remaining ones were made serfs and started paying taxes like everybody else. So, if we’re talking about ‘proper’ ancient-type slavery, we may say that in Russia, it was banned in 1723. Serfdom was a different thing.
2. Serfdom was a legally regulated system of personal dependency
Sobornoye Ulozheniye. Moscow, Printing Yard 1649. shakko (CC BY-SA 3.0)
To put it simply, Russian peasants needed protection from the plundering raids of nomads, which happened very often in ancient Russian times. On the other hand, the princes and boyars needed food and supplies, produced by the peasants. Initially, production was exchanged for protection, and it was a system of mutual dependency.
However, as the Moscow tsardom developed, it waged wars and needed more resources, so, to control serfs, the state limited their mobility. From 1497, they could only relocate from one landlord to another at certain times of the year. In 1649, they were totally forbidden from leaving their lands and landlords by another legal code, Sobornoye Ulozhenie. The code also stated that baptized people must not be bought and sold. However, beginning in the late 17th century, landowners found ways to buy and sell people without their land.
3. Serfs were deprived of some human rights – not all of them
Peasants at a market. Public domain
It is true that in the 18th and 19th century, serfs were very limited in their human rights. However, there was never a law that defined serfs as property; legally they were treated as persons.
Even though in 1746, the state formally banned all Russians except the nobility from possessing serfs, rich priests and merchants found ways to register serfs in some nobleman’s name and de facto own them.
Serfs were obliged to work for their landlord for the most of their working day. They usually had very little time to work for themselves. From 1722, all male peasants also had to pay poll tax. In 1730, all peasants (including state-owned serfs, serfs owned by the nobility, and free peasants) were banned from buying real estate in towns, in 1731 – banned from entering into contracts, in 1734 – banned from organizing cloth factories, in 1739 – banned from buying serfs for themselves etc. This reflected the fact that peasants were quickly developing business skills. In 1760, landlords were allowed to exile their serfs to Siberia for misconduct and crimes. Landlords also could use corporal punishment on their serfs.
4. The state protected serfs from their landlords
"Bargaining. Scene from serf life" by Nikolay Nevrev: Nikolay Nevrev/Tretyakov Gallery
Landlords represented their serfs in legal matters. The landlords collected the peasants’ taxes, but those who withheld their peasants’ money could be deprived of serfs completely (after 1742). In 1721, Peter the Great banned selling individual serfs and the splitting up of families; in 1771, Catherine the Great banned auction blocks for selling serfs.
Catherine cared about the serfs – but only as power to support the country’s needs during times of war, and because Russia was eyed warily in Europe as a country where serfdom still existed. This is why in 1762-1768, Catherine initiated a show trial over “Saltychikha”, an obviously mentally ill landlady who tortured and murdered her serfs.
However, it was under Catherine when the trade in serfs was the most ugly: children, especially virgin girls, were taken from their families and sold. Trade couldn’t be stopped, although the ban on selling serfs without land was repeated in 1833 and then again in 1842; but it remained so until the end of serfdom. After 1823, the state banned landlords from lending their serfs to work for people of other castes (merchants or priests). Unfortunately, these laws were never fully implemented.
5. Serfs were better off than slaves (most of the time)
Peasants in a field Pyotr Sukhodolsky
A Senate law of January 19th 1769 reinstated the fact that all land that serfs lived on was the property of the landlords. But it would be a mistake to say that serfs had nothing. Their private tools, houses, clothes and possessions, very often cattle and simple modes of transport belonged to them, not their landlords.
A Croatian missionary Yuriy Krizhanich (1618-1683) wrote that in Russia, serfs were much better off than in European countries. And in the 18th-19th century, historians have calculated, any Russian serf worked 2.6 times less time than America’s slaves did (mainly because of the large number of Holy days when people, including serfs, were given the day off).
Even through the darkest times of Catherine’s rule, serfs could post collective and individual complaints to the Emperor and the Governing Senate. In 1812, peasants were once again permitted to participate in trade and enter into contracts. In 1818, peasants, serfs included, were returned the right to establish mills and factories. In 1848, sefs were returned the right to own lands and real estate (at the consent of their landlords). Still, they were deprived of their main asset: the land they worked on, and even the emancipation reform of 1861 didn’t immediately allow them to own it. Only the most hard-working and talented could afford a decent living, which meant that in many respects they differed little from most peasants in Europe at the time.
Conclusion
It is self-evident that any kind of possession of one person over another, and any kind of violation of basic human rights, is an indictment of society and the state. And surely, there were periods of time when serfs were living in dire conditions under demanding and cruel landlords, and were closer to slaves in their status; but, considering everything above, it is clear that Russian serfdom was not slavery.
https://www.rbth.com/history/331928-why-russian-serfdom-was-not-slavery