A NOVUS ORDO WATCH SPECIAL REPORT
 

Exposing the "Communism is Dead" Myth

Putin and Stalin: Revising the past (1. tidy up blood stains, 2. apply whitewash)
"In most countries, the future is impossible to predict, but the past doesn't change. In Russia, it's just the opposite.

"President Vladimir Putin, when he is not busy restoring autocracy to a country that has known little else, has taken on the task of refreshing Russian history with a novel perspective -- his own. He is on record lamenting the collapse of the Soviet Union as 'the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.' It was worse, apparently, than World War I, worse than World War II -- worse, even, than the creation of the Soviet Union.

"Last year, the president informed a group of history teachers that Russia 'has nothing to be ashamed of' and that it was their job to make students "proud of their motherland." His government has tried to help by commissioning guidelines and books that present a more balanced picture of Joseph Stalin, described in one approved volume as 'the most successful Soviet leader ever.'"

Related link:
Lenin slips from pedestal, joins Stalin in era of catastrophe

NOW Comments: Putin is finally showing his true colors¼or should we say "color," as in red. After nearly a quarter of a century of Russia's apparent moving away from Communism, "former" KGB agent Putin seems intent of retrofitting Stalin's image with some nice new, state-of-the-art 21st century revisionism. Yes, as the new textbook states, Stalin was "the most successful Soviet leader ever," that is if by this is meant most successful mass murderer.

In approving this sanitizing of Stalin's bloodstained regime Putin is himself engaging in the Stalinist tactic of conveniently eliminating from the records anything that ceases to fit into the current party line. Flush those killings down the memory hole and they never happened. All a lie, of course, an exercise in thought control well described  as "doublethink" and "controlled insanity" by George Orwell in 1984. There he wrote about a totalitarian society based largely on Stalin's Russia, where people were conditioned to believe what they knew to be lies :

Doublethink is a form of trained, willful blindness to contradictions in a belief system. Doublethink differs from ordinary hypocrisy in that the "doublethinking" person deliberately had to forget the contradiction between his two opposing beliefs — and then deliberately forget that he had forgotten the contradiction. He then had to forget the forgetting of the forgetting, and so on; this intentional forgetting, once begun, continues indefinitely. In the novel's notes, Orwell describes it as "controlled insanity".

This is something that was an established practice not only during the Stalin years, but really pretty much throughout the Soviet enslavement of Russia and indeed is a distinguishing mark of Communism wherever it is found. It part of the daily lot of those in such countries, where they must forget that their lot in life never improves, that food shortages never go away, that poverty abounds throughout the land, in a word, that Communism is an economic failure and a big lie; they must forget all of this and believe that they live in a "workers' paradise," a veritable heaven on earth (albeit a godless "heaven"). Such brainwashing only goes so far, as maintaining one's stance as a true believer can only be sustained so long in a climate of terror; when such realism gets the upper hand, then the those awakened to the truth are seen to go into the fight or flight mode of existence: the Hungarian Revolt of 1956, the Germans who escaped the grips of the Reds or died trying via the Berlin Wall, the "boat people" from Cuba and Vietnam for whom death at sea was deemed a better fate than the status quo, freedom fighters in Spain and Mexico, etc.

Denial in reverse
But today there is also a different form of controlled insanity going on in the West, where reports of the "death of Communism" have been enthusiastically, though uncritically, embraced by the masses, encouraged in this dangerous belief by the assurances of their governments, other leaders of note and by analyses and reports in the news media. Here the doublethink is self-induced to a degree, as people, relieved at the though that a major threat to world peace has changed its way, are all to ready to forget everything they know about the "masters of deceit" (as the Communists rightly have been called) and to accept at face value the "conversion" of Putin from his position with Russia's brutal secret police to post-Soviet democrat. We might call it "denial in reverse." 

Somehow the talk about a post-Communist Russia already was starting to sound more than a little stale even before Putin's latest nod to the "good old days." There were plenty of indicators, for those paying attention, that all is not as it seems, such as an increase in Russian spy activity, and war preparation (including joint military exercises with Communist China), to cite but a couple of potential red flags. Yet these indicators are being shrugged off, such as the State Department spokesman who dismissed Putin's announcement in August of the resumption of a long-range nuclear bomber patrol as a reason for concern by stating: It’s a different era." Of this cavalier response, syndicated columnist Jeffrey Nyquist wrote:

It’s as if the Russian military had resumed stamp collecting or archery. There is no strategic alarm, no threat, no difficulty and no discomfiture. Let them play with their obsolete toys. We are living in a new era, and these activities no longer trouble us. The Cold War ended and the animosity between the great powers is gone. Say good-bye to it. Any evidence to the contrary is not evidence. We’re living in “a different era.” Anyone who doesn’t know this, even if they are the president of the Russian Federation, is out-of-step.¼
 

"Any evidence to the contrary is not evidence." Doublethink, no doubt about it, but this is exactly the sort of the "see no evil" posture that permeates the halls of powers through much of the world. And while none of this denial in reverse should surprise, given that Westerners would musch prefer to think that Russia is now being run by a sensible, peace and freedom-loving man, rather than the dictator who bellows: "We will bury you!"

The trouble with all of this is that no matter how rosy a picture one wants to paint of the past 20+ years, there is an unsettling reality that stubbornly refuses to go away, and that is the we were being being warned that so-called fall of the Iron Curtain was a fraud not as it was unfolding before a shocked world, but before it was even considered as a possibility. This pseudo-reform and transformation of the Soviet regime and its East European satellites was openly predicted with stunning accuracy more than two decades ago, but the warning of the Trojan Horse campaign was mostly ignored and suppressed by the powers-that-be. As will be shown, it is one of greatest frauds ever foisted on a credulous world, and one that continues to deceive most people to this day. 

The impossible becomes reality
In 1984, a year before the "nice guy" dictator Mikhail Gorbachev rose to power in the Soviet Union, a work by Russian defector and ex-KGB agent Anatoliy Golitsyn hit the shelves of bookstores around the US. In New Lies for Old, Golitsyn warned that a clever scheme had been hatched in the highest circles of Soviet intelligence to disarm the West (both figuratively and literally) by feigning liberalization of the USSR, the collapse of the Iron Curtain and overtures of friendship towards non-Communist nations. Golitsyn certain came with credentials. When he defected in 1961 the information he provided lead to the exposure a number of Red moles within Western intelligence, including Kim Philby, who, as a high-ranking, but traitorous member of Britain's M16 leaked classified information to the KGB that "caused the deaths of scores of agents."

So this was not vague theorizing on Golitsyn's part about the bogus reforms, but something quite plausibly discussed as a stratagem in the shadowy world of Soviet intelligence. In his book he outlined such then seemingly impossible retreats by the Communists: what would later be referred to as "glasnost" and "perestroika" within Russia, the formation of a "coalition government" in Poland and the reunification of Germany following "the demolition of the Berlin Wall," were a few of the "reforms" he explicitly mentioned. In overview, what he was describing was the more-or-less complete dismantling of the Soviet empire by the Soviets themselves. In other words, it would appear that they would symbolically raise a white flag to the non-Communist West, while crying out: "You won! You've won the Cold War!" (Paul VI would have called it the "autodestruction" of the Soviet Union.)

Which, is course, is precisely what's happened, dramatically punctuated by the leveling of the Berlin Wall.

As preposterous as it seemed to many at the time, subsequent events confirmed nearly everything he predicted. After examining the book point-by-point, American intelligence analyst Mark Riebling declared: "of Golitsyn's falsifiable predictions (here "falsifiable" does not mean false, but rather able to be disproved), 139 out of 148 were fulfilled by the end of 1993 -- an accuracy rate of nearly 94 percent (emphasis added)." (Despite the implications of the books predictions, which read like a who-done-it—or, better, who-was-going-to do-it—and hence the work's great potential as a bestseller, a curious thing happened. Publisher Dodd, Mead & Company abruptly ceased carrying it and copies of it quickly disappeared from book racks. No second edition was ever printed by them. No explanation was given for such a move as far as we know, and today that decision remains shrouded in mystery.)

The "death" of the Russian Communist empire
By 1993 the most astounding of all had already taken place two years prior: Gorbachev steps down as head of Soviet Union, which effectively leads to its seeming dissolution. Succeeding him as president of the newly-established Russian Federation is Boris Yeltsin, a self-described "democrat" intent on transforming the Communist planned economy to a capitalist market economy.

Curious thing is that Yeltsin had been a member of the Communist Party since 1961and rose in its ranks to become a member of the powerful Politburo. Then, out of the blue in 1990 he announced his resignation from the party only a year before taking the reins of power. His suddenly became visible to the West in August '91, when photos of him standing on a tank in defiance of a purported coup Communist hardliners made worldwide headlines.

So when did Yeltsin suddenly learn his new ideology? (Perhaps while a Politburo member  at night he secretly was busy studying course from some "Institute for Democratic Ideas" correspondence school.) And then what of Putin, who followed him as Russian president, who also is the leader of a "non-Communist" country. Amazingly, though he to is regarded as a "democrat" and makes no effort to correct such a label, unlike Yeltsin, who ostensibly left the Communist Party,  Putin, according to the above Wikipedia link on him, "has never formally resigned from it." And yet we're told over and over that Communism is dead.

The only sane way to view the situation in Russia is with a very critical eye, mindful of what has been revealed. The sane way to view it is as Britain's Conservative MP Christopher Gill declared on the floor of Parliament when discussing Golitsyn's second book, The Perestroika Deception: "It stretches credulity to its absolute bounds to think that suddenly, overnight, all those who were Communists will suddenly adopt a new philosophy and belief, with the result that everything will be different (emphasis added)."

Indeed it does. On the other hand, it is quite easily believed that men who are part of a criminal conspiracy in which lying has always been a valuable tool to advance its ends, a criminal conspiracy in which front groups are formed pretending to be non-Communist and a criminal conspiracy in which spies infiltrated governments and other organizations (such as the Catholic Church) posing as non-Communist members of such groups, would have no problem in implementing a plan to deceive the West through a phony movement for democratization.

Changelings, dupes and plants
But there are other reasons to suspect, as well. When Germany established a Federal Republic after the Third Reich, it was careful to see that the men it had leading it had no ties to the old regime. (East Germany, the so-called German Democratic Republic, on the contrary, as a nation occupied by a Communist invader, had no trouble with ex-Nazis, since totalitarians tended to be able to operate as well in a different slave state, especially those involved with the secret police.) The first two chancellors were Konrad Adenauer, an devout Catholic who was once imprisoned under suspicion of being in on a plot to assassinate dictator Adolph Hitler, and Ludwig Erhard, was a fairly non-political type who spent the war years in marketing and whose writings on a postwar peace were greatly frowned on by the Nazis as counter to their "total war" policy. But as we've seen, Putin and Yeltsin were up to their necks in Communist activities, which is another reason to doubt the "freedom movement." Likewise, after World War II many Germans were forced by the Allies to undergo "denazification" to purge them of prior attitudes and beliefs. No such program was instituted by the Russians after Gorbachev; in fact, visitors to Russia over the past few years have noted that Lenin's body (or more properly, a wax effigy of it) is still prominently on display at Red Square, that both the red star and hammer and sickle, symbols of the Communists can still be seen used in official ways (the latter is used, for example, by the Russian [and former Soviet] national airline, Aeroflot—imagine the outrage that would occur if Germany decided to dust off the swastika for special uses), statues of Soviet leaders quietly have been put back on their pedestals and Russian history textbooks under Putin are being published that extol the career of Stalin as a great leader of his people (again, think of the firestorm of protest—or worse—were current German Chancellor Angela Merkel to throw her support for the publication of revisionist texts that would rewrite history to make Hitler "the greatest German leader of the 20th century." Yet somehow the "new Russia" and its leaders are largely exempt from such a level of criticism (Putin might be taken to task about the historical rewrites, but it amounts to a mere slap on the wrist compared to what Merkel would be obliged to endure). 

What then are we to make of the vast number of people, headed by most of the world's leaders, who have believed that the changes are genuine" While the most of these clearly fall under the contemptuous name "useful idiots," which was coined by Stalinists to refer to those who in the West who trusted them at their word and unwittingly helped them go forward with their plans for world domination. That hasn't changed a whit in 80 years. But dupes aside, it is our firm belief that there are not a few Kim Philby-style betrayers around; that is, those who are conscious agents of the Communist conspiracy bent on doing their part in bringing the earth under domination.

One who well may have been in the latter category, in fact one of the chief operatives, was none other than John Paul II. Certainly, at the very least he can't be called ignorant of geopolitical realties, as any thorough biography quickly reveals. There are many legitimate reasons to wonder about his level of involvement in the stratagem: the Marxist-influenced textbook he wrote in the early 1950s for Catholic schools in Poland that, in total contradiction to Pope Leo XIII's Rerum Novarum, but quite in keeping with Marxist-Leninist theory, says workers in non-Communist countries may use violence to achieve their ends; his lack of any significant opposition to the Communist government there (preferring "dialogue" to resistance); his ability to leave the country as he pleased while principled Catholic leaders behind the Iron Curtain, like Hungary's Joseph Cardinal Mindszenty, suffered dry martyrdoms; the fact that he was never once silenced by Communist authorities; his sacrilegious reading of a Communist theoretical journal while sitting in the Sistine Chapel and his utter lack of contrition when confronted with the fact; his friendly relations with Gorbachev, etc.). So much was his background enigmatic that just months after his election a journalist for the French-language publication Didasco would write: "No one capable of coherent thought will easily believe that a Cardinal from behind the Iron Curtain can be anything but a Communist plant." (For this and more on the subject, see Part Fourteen of Piers Compton's book, The Broken Cross) Make no mistake, the help John Paul II gave to the stratagem, witting or not, was invaluable. Gorbachev even went so far as to say that without the "pontiff's" help of the "dismantling" of Communism would have been impossible (for source of that quote see the John Paul II Wikipedia link above).

'Perception is reality' and the conversion of Russia
There is a colloquialism that in recent years has been oft-repeated in the business world: Perception is reality. Logically speaking, this is an absurdity, of course, as it would mean there were as many realities as there as there are people who perceive, yet as used in a limited sense, there is a truth to it.  A good example of its applicability is a demonstration used by a marketing professor to show his class the importance of consumer perception in determining the marketplace viability of a product.

The professor has the following props: an egg, eleven fake eggs, an egg carton, a clear drinking glass and a dish towel. The lecture begins as the professor explains how vital viewing the concept of product is from the standpoint of how the consumer perceives it. At the same time  the carton is unwrapped, placed on the towel and positioned so the students aren't able to get a clear view of the contents. Next, the takes the real egg from carton, cracks it open on the rim of the glass and pours the contents into the glass in full view of the class. Then, the professor grabs the carton and heaves the contents high in the air towards the students.

The students, of course, react as though real eggs have been thrown their way, with shrieks and attempts to move out of the way, but when they've stopped laughing at being fooled, the professor asks:  "Which determined your behavior? The perception of what was inside the egg carton or the reality therein?" Clearly, the answer is the perception, as the students allowed their expectation of broken eggs splattering on their clothes to dictate their behavior. 

The demonstration only would work if the students truly believed there were real eggs headed there way, because only then were the eggs real to them. And yet, perception aside, the eggs were just as plastic and just as empty as before and no amount of believing could change that into reality. Please note, though, their perception was faulty due to a trick. So it equally could be said here that deception is reality.

And so it is with the phony democracy movement in Eastern Europe; as much as Westerners want to believe it to be real, it is just as hollow and artificial as the prof's eggs. The "reality" certainly seemed to be there and, in this case, the conspirators were able to blend in some real events to add to the air of authenticity. The razing of the Berlin Wall has been mentioned already, but there was one real event that topped that for drama: the trial and execution of Romania's Communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu , who essentially was pushed under the bus by his "Comrades" to drive home to the Western "consumers" the legitimacy of the "reform" movement. Walls and tyrants are expendable and can always be as when needed, so long as the deceptive end achieves its goal. (This concept clearly has other applications relevant to the current state of affairs, both as far as some of the leaders in the counterfeit "Catholic" church and in secular power, as well, where deception is often the rule of the day. Make no mistake, infiltration has taken place.)

We owe a debt of gratitude to Anatoliy Golitsyn for having providing us with information to help us see past this false "reality," which, if heeded, could one day help prevent world enslavement. We say "help prevent," because this devilish scheme has been allowed to go forward towards its goal unabated for a decade-and-a-half. Many of the building blocks of a one world government are in place or are be fitted into place as you read this—the hour be later than we think. Now, more than ever, we must pray that Russia finally be converted to the Catholic Faith. (Contrary to what some have mistakenly argued conversion means in the context, such as a return to the schismatic Russian Orthodox Church or a "conversion of manners," there is no doubt whatsoever that when our Lady called for this at Fatima she meant in the traditional Catholic sense. And we know this because it is the sense with which various Popes and other leading officials in the Church consistently have always taken it.)

Since it is evident that Russia hasn't been converted (though her false reforms have deceived many Catholics into believing so), our prayers are so important. The fact that this conversion hasn't occurred is cause for both great concern and great hope: Concern, because as the crypto-Communists who still have power in Russia continue to have world domination in mind, there is a definite threat of a great war (perhaps in the Middle East, should they decide to defend Iran) looming on the horizon, especially as our guard is down, and hope, because our Lady has promised that the consecration will take place, though at point late in time. Further, there is a certain solace for traditional Catholics, because such a consecration can only be done by valid pope and bishops, which means a shake-up in Modernist Rome must first occur and will occur. To accomplish this, let us always keep before the mind's eye the words of 19th century mystic Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, who, in remarking about a vision she'd seen of the future plight of the Church, stated: "The faithful must pray above all for the Church of Darkness to leave Rome." This, then, must go with our prayers for the Russia, as the Church of Darkness that currently controls Rome is incapable of a valid consecration. X

Pray daily for the conversion of Russia!

"In the end my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate
Russia to me, and  she will be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world."

NOW Recommends:
Once upon a time in the West - Exposing the Twenty-first-century Communist conspiracy This blogsite analyzes the news in light of the revelations of Anatoliy Golitsyn. Since we've just run across the site ourselves, we we're not prepared to give it a blanket endorsement, but from what we've seen, it is a breath of fresh air as far as monitoring how the day-to-day implications of this great deception are playing out and what we need to look out for. We heartily stand behind the premise of blog, in fact, we're making it a favorite!
Jeff Nyquist's official website Nyquist is another who's removed the blinkers and sees things for what they are. Besides his own columns, he carries those of other analysts who view the 21st century geopolitical landscape base on insights gleaned from the Golitsyn books. Another keeper!

Also see:
Fatima Perspectives: 'Conversion of Russia' Update
Fatima Issues
The Conversion of Russia to the Catholic Faith|
Overtures with Russia pose danger
Putin's Russia—Stalin Lite
Putin as Stalin
New Lies for Old (commentary and links)
Stalin's Tower of Babel (Now, if Putin really wants to do something for Stalin.¼)
Putin in call to 'rescue' Stalin
Putin rehabilitates Stalin

For the record: Off the subject, one thing stated by Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman in the first link above needs correcting. In discussing the Putin-approved history books, he disagrees with the comparison they make, likening of Stalin to 19th century German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck, noting that although like the Russian, "Bismarck fought his neighbors on the battlefield, he didn't make war on his people. The latter habit is what distinguishes Stalin." Well, it all depends of what is meant by make war on his people. True, Bismarck didn't kill off millions of his countrymen through Gulags, political purges, artificial famines and the like, but it is also true that he mightily persecuted a third of the German people, Catholics and the Catholic Church, in his so-called Kulturkampf ("culture struggle") that sought to put an end to the Church's influence in the nation by such measures as the expulsion of the Jesuits, government supervision of seminaries, the restriction of Church disciplinary laws and mandatory civil ceremonies for weddings. [A much more in-depth article from the Catholic perspective can be found here.]

Return to News & Analysis page

This page is best viewed using INTERNET EXPLORER or MOZILLA FIREFOX.
(If you don't have one of these browsers, please click an above link for free download.)