As if determined to lend credence to those who claim he is suffering from dementia, President Biden logged on to his Twitter account and opined:

Putin has the gall to claim that he is de-Nazifying Ukraine. This lie isn’t just cynical; it’s obscene. President Zelensky was democratically elected. He is Jewish; his father’s family was wiped out in the Nazi Holocaust.1

Biden is giving expression to what could be called the a priori school of foreign policy, according to which he can deduce a statement about reality from abstract principles. So, there can be no Nazis in the Ukraine because its president is Jewish. Another member of this school of foreign policy is Catholic neocon pundit George Weigel, who said much the same thing, dismissing any references to actual Nazis in Ukrainian army units like the Azov Brigade as chimeras evoked by conspiracy theories. One of the most puzzling features of the current war in the Ukraine is the alliance between Jews and Nazis which makes up its current government. When Weigel was confronted with this fact, he dismissed it as an inherently impossible piece of “prevarication,” just as President Biden, who is normally on the other side of the political spectrum, had done:

Ukraine is a country with a democratically elected president of Jewish heritage whose first language was Russian. To say, as Putin did, that this man and the government he leads require “denazification” set a new low for Kremlin prevarication.2

As if to outdo his Jewish mentors Max Boot and Bill Kristol, who have also called for military intervention in Ukraine and regime change in Russia, Weigel thumps his chest in an even more bellicose manner, demanding that the Biden administration “pour western aid into Ukraine ... including anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry,”3 insuring that innocent people will die in a futile attempt to stop a Russian invasion which has already decapitated the Ukrainian military. Like his Jewish mentors, Weigel makes these demands from the safe confines of his desk at his own Washington think tank, the Ethics and Public Policy Center. In making these claims, Weigel must surely know that President Zelensky has called for volunteers to take up their AK-47s and defend the gay disco known as Ukraine, but as of this writing neither Weigel, nor Boot, nor Kristol have announced plans to fly to Kiev.

But let’s be fair here. Weigel, Boot, and Kristol may not be simply despicable cowards who want the goyim to die for their agenda; they may be despicable cowards who are genuinely confused, because the situation is certainly confusing. Why would Jews ally themselves with Nazis? The statement seems a priori preposterous. It’s every bit as absurd as claiming that there were 13 bioweapons labs in Ukraine, a claim that was soundly denounced by the fact checkers, until Victoria Nuland made the same claim in testimony before the U.S. Senate, because unlike the fact checkers who are paid to lie, Nuland is paid to lie unless she is testifying under oath. Where are the fact checkers when we need them to dispute the obviously false claim that Jews would ever lower themselves to work with Nazis? Well, we’re still waiting, and we’re not holding our breath because it isn’t going to happen. Reality has intervened canceling another category of the mind whose shelf life as propaganda just expired.

The first crack in this dam occurred when Facebook changed its hate speech policy. The same platform which banned Nazis from spreading their hate now allowed its followers to praise Nazis, as long as those Nazis were spreading their hate while fighting under Ukraine’s Jewish president. The same is true of death threats, which are now definitely okay as long as Washington chest thumpers like Lindsey Graham call for the death of Vladimir Putin, as Graham did on his Twitter account with impunity.

Before long, however, the same mainstream media which could no longer deny reality decided instead to spin what they could no longer deny. And so we read in the Washington Post that Nazis “have been recruited by groups like the Azov Battalion, a far-right nationalist Ukrainian paramilitary and political movement.” The Post then went on to tell us that the Nazi Azov Brigade “was absorbed into the Ukrainian national guard in 2014 and has been a basis for Putin’s false claim that Ukraine’s government is run by neo-Nazis.”

Wait a minute. No one, least of all Vladimir Putin, is claiming that “Ukraine’s government is run by neo-Nazis.” The claim is that the Jews who run the government have incorporated Nazi brigades into their military, which is what the Post just admitted in its article. So why is this a false claim? Is it false because the Post deliberately misstated what is really going on? The Post goes on to say that “Though Azov remains a fringe movement in Ukraine, it is a larger-than-life brand among many extremists. It has openly welcomed Westerners into its ranks via white-supremacist sites. Azov stickers and patches have been seen around the globe....” Then things get really confusing:

because Western white supremacists and neo-Nazis, for the most part, do not support the current Ukrainian government — and not simply because of its ban on antisemitism, President Volodymyr Zelensky’s Jewish heritage or other specific matters. Ukraine is a developing democracy, which far-right extremists oppose as contrary to the fascist governments they want to see. As the administrator of a popular German and English neo-Nazi chat group wrote while urging members to join Azov, “I am not defending Ukraine, I am defending National Socialism.”

At this point the ADL got involved, but the organization which has been demonizing critics of Jewish behavior as anti-Semites and neo-Nazis only succeeded in muddying the waters even more. On March 4, the Anti-Defamation League published an article by Andrew Srulevitch, its director of European affairs, in an attempt to defuse the increasingly embarrassing Nazi problem in Ukraine. On March 15 ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt republished the article in an attempt to explain how “anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and other misinformation” linking Zelensky and the neo-Nazi Azov Brigade are “spreading in the wake of the invasion.”

In order to downplay the present-day cult of Stefan Bandera and support for Nazism in Ukraine, the ADL finds it necessary to rewrite some history and in doing so ends up promoting Holocaust denial. Srulevitch’s article takes the form of a Q&A with David Fishman, a professor of Jewish History at the Jewish Theological Seminary who is also a member of the academic committee of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.

“We’ve seen torchlit marches in the middle of [Kiev] with the red and black flags of UPA … and pictures of Stepan Bandera, who allied with the Nazis during WWII.” Srulevitch asks, “Isn’t that evidence of Nazism in Ukraine?”

“For Ukrainian nationalists, UPA and Bandera are symbols of the Ukrainian fight for Ukrainian independence. The UPA allied with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union for tactical – not ideological – reasons,” Fishman responds.

So, Nazis are okay now with the ADL? No, that would be too simple and too close to admitting the current situation in Ukraine contradicts everything that the ADL claims to stand for. So, according to Fishman’s reading, “allying with the Nazis” is still “unforgivable under any circumstance” because “historians have documented that Ukrainian nationalists participated together with Germans in the murder of many thousands of Jews in Ukraine,” according to Fishman.4

Okay, that means we have to condemn the Zalensky government then, right? Well, no, that’s not the ADL position either because the same Azov Brigade which descended from “Ukrainian nationalists” who “participated together with Germans in the murder of many thousands of Jews in Ukraine” and sport swastikas on their helmets are not really Nazis because they “allied with Nazi Germany against the Soviet Union for tactical – not ideological – reasons.” So just to contextualize this, the Canadian truckers who were protesting COVID restrictions are Nazis because “Honk Honk equals Heil Hitler,” as one Jewish member of Parliament said, but the people who openly identify with Nazism and its goals are not because they are working with Jews, who have Jewish privilege, which allows them to make truth the opinion of those who control the media through organizations like the ADL.

Got that? No? Well, don’t feel bad. I don’t get it either. Full of perplexity, I was relieved to get an invitation to take part in a debate over the Ukrainian situation sponsored by the Scandza Foundation. Surely, we could get to the bottom of this in free and open debate. Because Frodi Mitjord, Scandza’s founder, was having trouble narrowing the topic, I proposed my own: “White Nationalists should come to the aid of the Jews and Nazis who are using the Ukrainian people to advance NATO’s agenda against Russia.” For some reason Frodi modified my wording to “Nationalists should support the Ukraine.” Why this reticence to talk about whiteness on of all places the Scandza Forum, the ultimate white guy operation? As the day of the debate neared, the topic got neutered back to simply a debate on the Ukraine, until I insisted that the original topic be restored, which it was not.

Greg Johnson, my opponent in the debate, seemed equally reluctant to use the word white, forcing me to bring the discussion back to reality by citing something apropos which he had already written. White Nationalism, according to Mr. Johnson:

should be a one-issue political outlook. White Nationalism is for the interests of Whites and against the interests of our racial enemies. Period. Anything else is beside the point. That means that White Nationalists must work to unite all Whites into a self-conscious racial community, rallying around our common racial interests. White Nationalism has only one message for homosexuals: White homosexuals have more important interests in common with other Whites than they do with non-White homosexuals. We have to resist falling for any form of the divide and conquer strategy used by our enemies to destroy our solidarity as a prelude to destroying our race. Battles between gays and straights, men and women, pagans and Christians, Nordics and Mediterraneans, Celts and WASPs, Germans and Slavs, etc. have no place in the White Nationalist movement. These will always be used by our enemies to divide and subvert us.5

During the debate, I asked Mr. Johnson why he supports pitting Slavs against Slavs when he is against pitting Germans against Slavs. If race is the fundamental issue in this conflict, could he please tell us if the Ukrainians are white or if the Russians are white. I never got an answer to this question, for reasons I will discuss later, because Mr. Johnson's ideology isn’t about race, it's about homosexuality and Johnson’s attempt to make homosexuality an acceptable part of the White Nationalist movement. At this point, I started to understand that this conversation wasn’t really about race. During the debate, my mug and my bowtie were clearly visible in a way that Johnson’s face and whatever he was wearing were not. Instead of a live video, Johnson put up an icon of Janus with his two faces facing in opposite directions, also reminiscent of the symbol of Epimetheus and Prometheus, but even more indicative of the two-faced nature of the man I was supposed to be debating.

The infallible sign that you’re dealing with a commissar arrives when the representative of the movement—be it conservatism or White Nationalism—announces that it’s time to broaden the movement to include homosexuals. This is what Charlie Kirk did a few years back for conservatism; Greg Johnson did the same thing for white nationalism. The commissar in question could be doing this for personal reasons, or he could be doing it for money. Kirk is a Kochsucker. Johnson is a promoter of the homosexual agenda, and until he tells us why, we are free to conjecture that it may be because he is getting money or for more personal reasons.

During the course of the debate, however, Johnson made it clear that he is an avid supporter of the gay disco known as Ukraine. Johnson is an equally avid supporter of the narrative of the American empire. When I mentioned that he sounded as if he had been listening to CNN, he categorically denied ever having watched that network’s coverage of the war. He even endorsed fact checkers as a good source of information, while at the same time denouncing everything I mentioned as Russian propaganda, including commonplaces like Victoria Nuland’s role in the 2014 coup d’etat which overthrew Ukraine’s democratically elected government.

Which brings me to my main point. Mr. Johnson’s position on the Ukraine is identical to the position of Jewish neocons like Max Boot and Bill Kristol. Mr. Johnson’s ultimate allegiance lies not with the White Nationalists but with the American Empire because that empire supports both homosexuality and the racial narrative. Like the two-faced Janus he chose as his symbol during our debate, Johnson is duplicitously willing to espouse White Nationalism while using his supporters to advance the cause of the Great Satan who presides over the gay disco. Perhaps this is why talking with Greg Johnson is like talking to the devil. It’s not just because he is so ardent in defending the policies of the Great Satan. (If any of my Satanist friends are offended by this comparison, I apologize.) I say this because I have read Goethe’s Faust, and in that play Mephistopheles describes himself in the following way, “Ich bin der Geist der stets verneint.” Which roughly translates as “I am the spirit who constantly negates everything you say.” Which is the best characterization I can give of his performance in the debate. As Mr. Johnson must know from when he was a Catholic studying philosophy, evil is the privation of being. Every time I made a statement which corresponded to a category of reality, like my claims about Nuland, Johnson felt compelled to rob that statement of its being by denial. There are obvious connections between Johnson’s debating style and the sterility of homosexual intercourse, but these became apparent to me only after the fact. In the heat of logomachy, all I could feel was a sense of exasperation, which will become apparent if Frodi ever releases the recording of our debate.

Sensing before the fact that this might be the case, I crafted my opening statement around a short survey of Ukrainian history in an attempt to show that the conflict there had nothing to do with race, as the term is currently understood.

The country we call Ukraine is a land of constantly shifting borders which only became an independent country in 1991. During the late classical and early Byzantine period, Ukraine was known as Khazaria, after the tribe that converted to Judaism in the 9th century.

In 1236 Nicholas Donin, a rabbi who had converted to Catholicism, met with Pope Gregory IX and asked him if he knew about the blasphemies in the Talmud. Full of indignation, Pope Gregory turned to Raymond Penaforte, then head of the newly created Dominican order, and told him to organize a campaign to convert the Jews. The campaign enlisted St. Thomas Aquinas, who wrote the Summa Contra Gentiles with that purpose in mind, as well as Raimondo Martini whose contribution was Pugio Fidei adversos Iudeos et Mauros (The Dagger of Faith against Jews and Moors), and it culminated in the Disputation of Tortosa, which took place from 1413 to 1414. The disputation had disastrous consequences for the Jews who dissembled about the blasphemies that former rabbis exposed. The fact that they were unable to give a rational defense of their religion led to massive conversions on the part of the Jews.

By the end of the 15th century, western Europe was effectively Judenrein because the Jews living there had either converted to Christianity or, more importantly for our purposes, moved to Poland, whose boundaries at that point included what is now the Ukraine. Beginning in 1264 with the promulgation of the Act of Kalisz by Duke Boleslaus the Pius, the Polish nobility granted Jews unprecedented legal rights, turning the Ukraine into the paradisus Iudeorum. The Jews reciprocated by abusing their privileges and enslaving the peasant population through the monopolies they enjoyed in usury and the production of alcohol.

Four centuries later, the inevitable reaction arrived in 1648 when the Cossack hetman Bogdan Chmielnicki inaugurated a series of pogroms which eventually plunged Ukraine into war and revolution.6 According to Wikipedia, “Khmelnytsky was a petty nobleman and Cossack officer who, [was] unable to obtain justice for wrongs suffered at Polish hands.” According to Heinrich Graetz, the father of Jewish historiography, a Jew by the name of Zachariah Sabilensky “had played him a trick by which he was robbed of his wife and property. Another had betrayed him when he had come to an understanding with the Tartars. Besides injuries which his race had sustained from Jewish tax farmers in the Ukraine, he, therefore, had personal wrongs to avenge.”7

The Chmielnicki pogroms took place roughly three decades after the term white was first used to describe human beings in a play about the Virginian tobacco plantations. The term white as a description of groups of people had no bearing any place else on the earth other than the British colonies in North America, and it had no bearing whatsoever on the Chmielnicki pogroms or any other conflict in the kingdom of Poland and Lithuania, where the fault lines were ethnic and religious.

After the first partition of Poland in 1791, Ukraine became the southern part of a largely Jewish region known as the Pale of the Settlement. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, “the Pale had a Jewish population of over five million and represented the largest component (40 percent) of the world Jewish population at that time.” In spite of what they suffered at the hands of Chmielnicki, the Jewish population in the Pale increased by 300 percent during the period which stretched from 1795 to 1918…..

[…] This is just an excerpt from the May 2022 Issue of Culture Wars magazine. To read the full article, please purchase a digital download of the magazine, or become a subscriber!

(Endnotes Available by Request)