Is Putin's "Traditional Western Patriot Rescue" Migration Program Really About Saving White Western Christians?

The Allah is in the details.

Our friends over at TopWar, a bastion of older generation Russian conservatism, are sounding the alarm about the new migration measures that Putin unveiled to such fanfare several weeks ago. It turns out that there is both less and more to the proposed reforms than meets the eye.

Here:

In August, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a decree allowing foreigners to be granted a residence permit without knowledge of the Russian language if they share traditional Russian values. This is a decree called «On the provision of humanitarian support to persons sharing traditional Russian spiritual and moral values ».

(…)

Some bloggers and experts enthusiastically adopted this law — they called it a breakthrough in the repatriation of compatriots from far abroad, and also noted that it would apply to white Christians fleeing the West fleeing the imposed LGBT party.

However, is this really so? Indeed, in the text of the decree there is not a word about Christians — we are talking about «individuals sharing traditional Russian spiritual and moral values ». However, there is no specificity as to what exactly is meant by traditional values? On the basis of what will citizenship be granted to such people?

Usually, I’ve found, that when something seems too good to be true it is invariably a kind of scam. Like when a Nigerian prince emails you offering to share his fortune as soon as you share your credit card details with him. Or when a drug dealer tells you that the first hit is for free simply because he likes the cut of your jib, champ. Or when a priest tells you that your sins will be forgiven if you whisper all of the potential blackmail and kompromat that you or members of your community have hanging over their heads to him through a screen door.

Putin signing a decree to provide safe haven to White Christians fleeing from analic tyranny in the West? A free citizenship delivered to your door upon providing proof of you administering a beatdown to a homosexual?? DEUS VULT???

Doesn’t that sound just a little bit too good to be true?

Anyway, the article takes a little tangent on the history of what “Traditionalism” used to mean, which you can skip, but which I found interesting. Here:

Traditionalism and traditional values

Before answering these questions, let's figure out what traditionalism and traditional values are.

The term «traditionalism » was originally used to characterize the views of Catholic thinkers of the late XVIII — early XIX century (Louis Bonald, Joseph de Mestr), who sharply criticized the rationalistic ideology of the Enlightenment, which they opposed the concept of the eternal religious foundations of society and all its institutions (including the absolute monarchy).

The concepts of traditionalism and conservatism are extremely close, which is logical, because conservatism as an ideology of conservation, conservation, continuity will always uphold traditional values. Many conservative thinkers are called traditionalists because they defended the centuries-old tradition of state-legal development. In modern theoretical studies, the traditional — is a mandatory component of conservatism. K. Mannheim considered traditionalism a form of conservatism, so he denoted universal, natural conservatism *.

Nevertheless, traditionalism is not identical to conservatism, especially if we talk about the school of integral traditionalism of Rene Genon, whose concept «The Tradition » is not originally associated with the conservatism of the New Age, but, on the contrary, opposes the whole complex of ideas of our time. Unlike traditionalism, conservatism does not deny the evolutionary development of society. At the same time, it should be noted that traditionalism as a scientific concept was created within the framework of theoretical conservatism.

Mark Sedgwick, author of a systematic study on traditionalism «Against the modern world: traditionalism and the secret intellectual history of the 20th century », defines it as an ideology that is designed to protect «the Tradition », first of all, as beliefs or practices transferred from time immemorial, or, rather, as beliefs.

So, traditionalism — is a commitment to any tradition (in morals, customs, religion, art, etc.) and the requirement of unconditional tradition, its preservation or restoration. Traditional values are an unchanging component of traditionalism.

Traditional values, which are the basic elements of any culture, are, first of all, national, ethnographic, religious. For each nation, they will thus be different, since the traditions of different peoples are sometimes very different from each other.

Also: the Traditionalists thought that they could detect and reconstruct a perennial core/root religion that lay at the origins of all the major religions. That there was a sort of common mystical root to all the religions. Eventually, Guenon and his people wrote an appeal to the Catholic Church to work on revitalizing a kind of mystical version of the faith, which failed, of course, and so Guenon went into spiritual exile by becoming a Sufi mystic. Sufiism is basically undercover gnosticism with a superficial Islamic veneer that was adopted to avoid extermination in much the same way as the Hesychast tradition in Orthodoxy is also a gnostic “heresy” that miraculously managed to limp along hidden within the camp of the enemy for centuries.

Point being: Traditionalist ideas were soundly rejected by all the major religions and institutions that these people reached out to though. Yes, Tradition was rejected, but Ecumenism has been aggressively pursued by all the major Churches for close to a century now. Anyway, nowadays, Dugin claims the title of being the pre-eminent Traditionalist scholar. That’s all well and good and I am happy for him, as I am sure you all are too, but, sadly, I can’t make any sense out of what he is saying no matter how much I try. I believe that this is possibly because he is deliberately engaging in obfuscation, like many Plato-inspired philosophers have done throughout history. The alternative is that he is a very bad thinker and an even worse writer. And no, it doesn’t become any clearer when read in Russian. Between the two options, I think he’d prefer to be considered evil, not incompetent, so we will just grant him that going forward.

I believe that if the masses ever understood what the philosophers were actually chattering and pontificating about, we’d bring back the hemlock due to popular demand and start administering it quite liberally.

Disclaimer: I don’t think that the traditional Traditionalists got much right in terms of their worldview or conclusions about religion. But I do appreciate all of the comparative religion studies that they produced or inspired. They were able to explain occult and eastern and pagan/shamanistic concepts to modern minds who had forgotten them for centuries. That means that they contributed a lot to the rebirth of occultism and various forms of paganism in the West and in Russia. Without agreeing with all of their assumptions and views, I think we can admit that we owe them an intellectual debt, that is for sure.

There are apparently Rene Guenon memes on the internet. What a time to be alive (and on the internet).

We continue our philosophical speculation as the author asks: “What even are traditional Russian values?”:

What are traditional values in Russia?

The concept of «traditional values » in domestic media and the blogosphere are quite common, but the meaning that is put into this concept is most often not disclosed. As mentioned above, traditional values can be defined as conservative values that express ideological commitment to traditional order, social and religious doctrines. Traditionalists and many conservatives consider the preservation of the traditions of society to be the main value.

But what traditions have been preserved in Russia? On the Internet, the author came across a very good text that he would allow himself to quote from.

«The Soviet anthropological experiment deprived people of all roots. Mercilessly mixed tens of millions of people across the country. The country lived without private property, in addition, initially the country was a beggar and peasant. No one received anything from the ancestors of the first half of the twentieth century (except for a handful of liberal-chekists in several large cities). All property — is a low-quality late Soviet housing. The entire inheritance — is an old, minimalist Soviet home. The habitats of the narrow-minded ancestors — the peasant yards were desolate ... No mass movement „can be seen to return to the roots of “ — to come back to these lands of grandfathers and great-grandfathers and to revive them. In fact, the young nation (Soviet and post-Soviet) has been living from [day zero] since the second half of the twentieth century. Both materially and culturally.»

Indeed, it is difficult to disagree with this. The Bolsheviks completely destroyed the traditional way of the patriarchal family and the role of the Orthodox Church in society. Now for someone (elderly people) to return to «traditional values » — it is to return to Brezhnev stagnation, and for young people «tradition » — it is generally the 2000s (where more calm than today's time, and therefore remembered with nostalgia).

Nostalgia = memes about Heroes of Might and Magic III.

The Russians have [less to gain from] traditions than other indigenous peoples of Russia — the authorities at least somehow support their movements for their own native land, language and traditions of small nations, which cannot be said of the Russian people.

On the contrary, often the authorities hinder some events dedicated to Russian history — for example, this year the authorities of the Tver region banned the festival of historical reconstruction dedicated to the era of Ancient Russia «the Bull coast ». But instead, many «fetal festivals » are held and many new Tajik cultural centers are opened.

In the decree of the President of Russia on what «traditional spiritual and moral values » are, these very values are defined very vaguely: these are human life, dignity, human rights and freedoms, patriotism, citizenship, service to the Fatherland, high moral ideals (which ones?), strong family, humanism, etc.

In general, in fact, we are simply dealing with a set of common phrases.

Buzzwords and platitudes. That’s the best that we can expect from Putlet. In contrast, I know very well what true Russian culture and tradition is. But nobody is asking me so …

Now finally we get to the meat of the question: who are these Traditionalist immigrants that Russia is encouraging to come over?

In connection with the foregoing, the question — who falls under the decree «On the provision of humanitarian support to persons sharing traditional Russian spiritual and moral values »?

Given that these very values are very vaguely defined, completely different categories of people can fall under this decree. As notes political analyst Yuri Baranchik:

«Children's dreams are one thing, and reality — is different. Therefore, on the principle of burning yourself on — milk, you suddenly have certain questions.

[NOTE: no, I don’t understand what this means. Older generations communicate in a kind of Soviet code that only bears superficial resemblance to Russian.]

For example, will some of our local migration lobbyists on the ground and their western patrons understand this decree as permissiveness? Well, for example: English Muslims who are currently running through the streets of the cities of England, catching, cutting and pounding the local British, they are actually also against LGBTK + and other similar perversions prohibited in Russia. Will we, as usual, get all the lobbyists already on their heads, and not white Christians, atheists and people of secular education“? And then, having received then, will we begin to establish horizontal human connections? »

Here, say, Muslim refugees from Palestine, who are actively accepted by one Muslim republic [Tatarstan, in Russia]— are they «Traditionalists »? Against LGBT people? Yes. So they qualify. The same can be said of Muslims from England, whom Yuri Baranchik spoke about. That is, in practice, it often turns out that «traditional values » increasingly refers to Islamic fundamentalism, despite the fact that historically Russia has always been a Christian country.

Thus, the fears of Yuri Baranchik are quite understandable — given the vagueness of this law and the blurred concept of «traditional values », unfortunately, not only white Christians from the West and compatriots from far abroad can fall under the law.

The executive summary: nowhere does it say in the bill that this is a bill being passed to help out “Christians” or “Westerners” or “Whites” or “Europeans” or “Anal-Saxons” or “NATO-Nazis” even. It is for people who don’t speak Russian and who have “traditions” and practice a form of social conservatism.

Which … yeah.

But pretending that the criteria for entry into Russia is based on moral values of any kind is absurd and infantile. How would they even check for that? An ideological purity test? What prevents people from lying to get in? No sane country could allow for such a policy. Besides, most Western Christians are pro-LGBT nowadays. Like, Tucker Carlson wouldn’t qualify under this law and he’s considered an Extremist Terrorist Incel-Nazi by polite society in the West. Even when I was still there 15 years ago, you already had the entire NE coast of America flying that flag in their small colonial-style downtowns. They’ve moved on to tranny stuff now because literally no organization whatsoever anywhere in the West stands against homosexuality anymore and hasn’t for at least a decade. Period. None.

In contrast, even the basic gay thing still struggles to gain acceptance in Russia (and Ukraine for that matter, which is more Christian and socially conservative on average). If there are any “traditional” Christians in the West, I am simply unaware of their existence. The only anti-LBTQWERTY Christians that I know of are young internet extremists harassing journalists on Twitter who have to hide their views at school, among their families, and especially in Church.

Furthermore, most Christians in the West support mass migration from brown and black countries into formerly White countries to boot because they hate their own race and work actively to wipe it out to please their fell deity. If you let Lutherans or God forbid, Catholics, into your country, they will start organizing mass refugee resettlement schemes the very next day. That’s literally what their strategy has been for a century in America to achieve more political power and to force-convert the country so there is no point in denying that they employ this strategy to subjugate target nations.

In fact, the Hart-Cellar immigration act that threw open America’s borders to the Swarthlands, was passed as part of an alliance between Jewry and Catholics (supported by the Kennedy family!) in America against the White Protestant majority. This alliance had formalized and become the modern Democrat Party at the turn of the 20th century. So, for decades in America, it was Irish, Italians and Poles (Catholics) + Jews + Blacks working as a coalition against White people. Similarly, the Catholics who want to immigrate to Russia want to immigrate to Russia to convert Russia to Catholicism because of a prophecy some Portugese lady made a century ago. The Protestants who immigrate to Russia literally work for the CIA and they want to do the same thing. Unlike the Catholics though, who are incompetent, the Protestants are actually having a lot of success. This is mostly because of how repulsive and corrupt mainstream Orthodoxy is (or perceived as being) and because of all the social benefits that membership in Protestant churches provides for lower-income families.

Further-furthermore, the United States has just imported 20k Christian Haitians into small-town Ohio and they’re running around terrorizing the locals there. If Christianity is so important to you, why don’t you go live in the Christian Congo? Or in Christian Nigeria? Or in Christian Venezuela? Christian Ethiopia? I don’t want to import a single Christian into Russia. Period. I would only allow pro-Russian Whites into Russia (and cute young asian girls). Even if they happen to be Christian, well, that’s unfortunate, but we can always cure them of their ideological infection in time. Not so with a Bantu. A Bantu will always be a Bantu and he will always be a scourge and a bio-blight onto any country that he decides to latch onto.

The real reason why these Westerners want to flee the West now is because they are fleeing ethnic diversity. The browns and the blacks. But they are also trying to avoid speaking the truth and hiding it behind euphemisms, because they are repulsive cowards and have no spines to speak of. Their ancestors weep and gnash their teeth in shame that these modern Westerners share any blood relation to them. It is the whole “we’re looking for a neighborhood with better schools” line but applied to entirely different countries now. These people should be relentless bullied and beaten and mocked until they confess their real reasons for emigrating. It is the only way that we can start honestly confronting the problems that are facing our countries instead of spending another century hiding behind euphemisms and other forms of vaginal obfuscation just so that we can morally preen in front of our peers on Sunday mornings.

This is simply a luxury that huWhyte people can no longer afford to indulge in, I’m sorry.

Anyway, my big point here is that the author of the article is right to be worried.

Muslims are more “traditional” than any Christian in the West. If we are using “traditionalism” as our new ideology to decide who comes in, then we are essentially providing ideological justification for the Islamification of Russian society. This is already the plan though, so this talk of “tradition” is probably just providing a fig leaf for the Kremlin to continue doing what they already want to be doing. Most pro-Putin people refuse to acknowledge the fact that Putin is flooding Russia with millions of hostile “traditional” foreigners deliberately and that he brags about the continued “traditionalization” of Russian society with glee.

So the conversation can go no further than this point.

But if they acknowledged the disastrous “Great Replacement” policies pursued by the Kremlin, they’d be far more skeptical of claims that Putin is offering safe harbor to disaffected Westerners.

After all, why would someone who imports millions of swarthlanders into Russia decide to provide safe haven to White Westerners? Isn’t that somewhat inconsistent at least? Like, if he cared about the cultural or ethnic preservation of the European peoples’, wouldn’t he show some indication of this at home first? With his “own” people first and foremost?

Wouldn’t we have heard Putin speaking positively about White people by now?

Wouldn’t he be taking measures to restore Russian ethnic tradition, memory and pride?

Wouldn’t he be shutting down anti-Russians as doggedly as he shuts down anti-Islamics or anti-Chabadniks?

Wouldn’t he be doing something to combat the worst demographic crisis that Russia has ever faced in her entire history?

…

Food for thought.