52 Comments
User's avatar
Peter Taylor's avatar

Totally agree, the dying beast of the Deep State, WEF Cabal, threshes in its death throes, pray Trump and the true U.S patriot rises to pit down this rebellion, arrest Soros and Son and every other U.S hating Democrat… these people are repugnant and to be loathed.. scum the lot of them, the true detritus of humanity, their litany of lies not cutting it any longer… frustrated they strike out the only way they know… violently, live by violence punished by the same I say…

Kia Kaha (stay strong) from New Zealand

Expand full comment
Peter Taylor's avatar

Thank you for your comments I supported Trump and the Qanon movement deciphering and following a lot of that messaging on the boards, however, like yourself I’m beginning to think … firmly, that we are being played… a lot of his decisions as I note just don’t square or add up, the case in point his attitude to Gaza and plight of the Palestinians, plans to develop Gaza.. truly sick, psychotic if I might say, yet he rabbits on about Ukraine, the killing, the death, the bloodbath, the sheer violence, now tell me, where is the difference?

One human death, violent or worse, orchestrated and contrived, commensurate directly aiding and abetting the very same as we note is occasioning both theatres, is one death to many, there can be no justification for supporting one over the other, yet that is precisely the world we have thanks to BIC, bloviater in chief… Trump or AIC… Adumbrater in Chief , take your pick, both sum his approach up, it’s truly sick, the U.S involvement in both, I’ll sum up Russias attitude to the latest strikes as regards Trump BIC, AIC, as captured nicely regarding Trumps position by Russian intellectual Alexander Solzhenitsyn… “ "We know that they are lying, they know that they are lying, they even know that we know they are lying, we also know that they know we know they are lying too, they of course know that we certainly know they know we know they are lying too as well, but they are still lying.“

Strategic ambiguity, I’m unsure but what I do know is that Russia are no fools, they realise and know what’s going on, the worst aspect being these demented fools from the CIA, MI6 believed they can target abusing a clause in the treaty Russia is a party unto regarding part of their Nuclear triad parked on Airfield aprons in the open, add the fact a nuke sub base attack was attempted but thwarted by Russia and the previous over the horizon early warning ( nuke attack) Radars that were hit and these sociopaths are playing with real fire, thankfully Putin has exercised despite provocation after provocation real restraint, put the boot on the other foot and imagine the world we would be living in if the boot was on the other foot and Russia attacked (3 x ) U.S Nuclear Triad assets and Early Warning Radars…ni shudder, Kosovo, Iraq, Libya all recent examples, Yemen as well. tell you the immaturity and lack of restraint the U.S has for such… we would be in a Nuclear exchange if it was Russia attvking Western assets, yet the Western warmongering fools believe they can act with such impunity… I say we are fortunate Russia is the adult in the room and won’t know how close to full conflict with Nukes we have actually come… Trump knows Putin knows, that he’s lying just as Solzhenitsyn states… In short im going off him big time, this administration worse than the first, don’t know what they’ve got on him, but man oh man is he singing to the financiers, deepstate tune,…

Domestically though he’s doing all of the right things… I say therein is the lesson, close the bases overseas, bring the troops home, focus on fixing the U.S and stay out of the domestic issues other nations, it’s neither wanted, liked or condoned and many overseas are truly despising the U.S for such animus and behaviour, in fact it’s making a laughing stock of a once great nation… that did truly lead the world until the wheels began to fall off and greed and avarice became the pre occupation under blow me off Clinton, which is a shame because I really noticed the decline about 15 years ago, albeit it had started as noted under Clinton and was evident my many many trips up there… getting worse with each trip until it has become so bad the country is almost non recognisable… great people though, kind, friendly, polite, courteous, do anything for you, well, those who can think, the rest getting lazier, non caring… sad really, hence focus on the U.S and butt out of overseas ventures, follow the founders advice to stay out of foreign conflagrations, wars, disputes.. imagine how wealthier the nation would be… unbelievable really and hardly rocket science.

Just saying…

Kia Kaha (stay strong) from New.Zealand

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

Graham is one of the most prominent Deep State globalists, and he is a close golf buddy of Trump.

Expand full comment
Peter Taylor's avatar

One thing I will add to my comments made about 47… it’s sad that on the one hand he can demonstrate true leadership as true leadership ought really be … yet regarding the international conflagrations that the U.S is neck deep involved with, his judgment is so poor, I cannot accept that Trump is swayed readily or is being compromised by some around him, his personality type is such… being strong, an alpha male, that I just cannot accept he can be so easily manipulated… Trump needs to take responsibility for the genuine mess that is his foreign policy, unless it is all going to plan, his plan… whilst his decision making for domestic related issues seems to be right on point, a dichotomy, juxtaposition… hardly, more indicative he knows and is acutely aware of what’s being done at least one positive result is that there isn’t any concern about his acuity, unlike his predecessor…. Just saying

Kia Kaha (stay strong) from New Zealand

Expand full comment
Realist's avatar

Both the first and second Trump administrations were loaded with war-mongering Deep State globalists. I have contended that Trump is a Deep State asset.

Expand full comment
Peter Taylor's avatar

Doesn’t that tell you all you need to know about BIC, Bloviator in Chief Trump, he’s playing as I believe despite Alexander’s opinion offered, a double game, hence his reticence at truly ending a conflict we know he fuelled in its earliest stages by supplying Javelins, “beautiful Javelins that stopped a lot of Russian tanks reaching Kiev” who can forget, plus he has ensured intelligence, ISR, arms still find their way to Ukraine, worst of all, CIA SAC/SOG Paramilitaries together Military personnel including serving officers of the U.S military operate actively in Ukraine whether on the ground or in Command centres, in other words BIC is still all he can to prosecute this war while speaking as he does about preventing death, talk about evil, because that is truly evil, add the fact despite his claims of not knowing, the U.S was neck deep in the latest strikes ( Submarine base attempt, Nuclear Weapons Storage, thankfully both suppressed) on Russia’s Nuclear Triad assets … first there was the over horizon radar attacks, now these Aircraft, vulnerable because of the Treaty obligations we know Russia takes seriously of having the aircraft parked to be visible on the airfield aprons… note also Russia hasn’t terminated any treaty it’s been a signatory unto, every cancelled treaty has been at the U.S and or Wests insistence, Russia adheres to and takes its obligations seriously…

In short the human filth that is N.C Globalist Neocon Senator Lindsay Graham has been a water carrier for BIC, he and the Brits, their MI6 providing BIC the plausible deniability he utilises living in the alternate universe he occupies, contrast his messaging about death with his attitude to GAZA, it’s sick, in short and simply put.. it is pure evil, so much for divine intervention saving him in that Philly field.. for what, to obfuscate, lie, enable death, injury and destruction on industrial scales… sorry but I don’t buy the bull shitzen swirling nor share what is if the leadership in Russia truly believe, that Trump is trying to end the conflict, a belligerent, still bellicose and belligerent mediating peace? Tell me how that square fits a circular hole… it doesn’t and that’s the real issue… it never will. Trump knows it and is happy in that space foreign policy square in hand as he wonders about bloviating and adumbrating aloud achieving nada… just saying.

Kia Kaha (stay strong) From New Zealand

Expand full comment
Melvin Clive Bird (Behnke)'s avatar

This text, while rhetorically charged, is an exceptionally dangerous piece of extremist propaganda. It exemplifies a toxic blend of conspiratorial thinking, dehumanization, incitement to violence, and ideologically motivated disinformation. A sustained critique must proceed across ethical, logical, rhetorical, and political-philosophical dimensions, integrating each aspect into the unfolding argument.

From the outset, the language is steeped in dehumanization. When the text describes Democrats as having “transformed millions of men and women into biological thrash,” it removes their humanity entirely. The phrase “Dems are a criminal gang” collapses the complexity of political affiliation into a criminal category. Calling them “public enemies” uses the language of war, painting political opposition as existential threat. These forms of rhetorical violence echo the darkest precedents in modern history: the Nazi regime’s characterization of Jews as vermin, or genocidal Hutu rhetoric against the Tutsis in Rwanda. Once individuals or groups are stripped of humanity and depicted as contaminants or enemies of the state, violence becomes not only imaginable but rationalized as necessary.

The rhetoric builds toward an eliminationist fantasy. Phrases such as “crash the insurrection with iron hand and moral conviction” are not mere hyperbole they are blueprints for authoritarian action. The author does not shy away from admiring figures like Vladimir Putin, presenting him as a model of uncompromising leadership: “Putin wouldn’t hesitate… they provoked the war in Ukraine.” Such idealization of strongmen is a classic hallmark of authoritarian fantasy, in which democratic compromise and legal procedure are discarded in favor of immediate, unflinching force. There is a fantasy of moral clarity here, but it is moral clarity of the most dangerous kind: one that annihilates dissent and installs righteousness as an absolute weapon.

But this apparent moral conviction is built on foundations of incoherence. The logic of the text is riddled with contradictions, unsupported claims, and blatant fallacies. How can Democrats be both grossly incompetent and omnipotently dangerous? The claim that Soros and his son have “created cells” that have been “activated” is unmoored from evidence, a classic post hoc fallacy dressed up as revelation. The overgeneralization is total Democrats are not individuals with varying beliefs and actions, but a single monstrous actor. Complexity is dissolved into simplicity. That is the essential function of propaganda: to make thinking unnecessary and replace it with fear.

Layered throughout is conspiratorial paranoia, where everything is a secret war, every protest a puppet show orchestrated by hidden hands. “Deep State,” “cells created by Soros,” and “nationwide conspiracy” are all terms that function as emotional triggers more than factual descriptors. Events are not allowed to have mundane or human causes. Everything is manipulated. This totalizing paranoia is deeply political. It offers the illusion of knowledge to those who feel disempowered, while preparing them to act with certitude and hostility against imagined enemies. The collapse of distinct historical contexts into one paranoid script is particularly clear in the line “LA = Maidan.” This symbolic equivalence is not analytical it is myth-making, collapsing geopolitical tensions in Ukraine into a domestic American culture war.

The author calls repeatedly for action cloaked in virtue: to act with “moral conviction,” to protect “innocent children,” to defend the country from degeneracy and collapse. This is weaponized moralism, in which the very notion of virtue is corrupted into a justification for destruction. Historical parallels abound. Every authoritarian movement cloaks itself in protection of purity of race, family, nation, or divinity. What’s being defended here is not democracy or freedom, but a mythic identity constructed out of resentment and fear.

There are also echoes of anti-Semitic dog whistles, especially in the invocation of George Soros, a figure repeatedly targeted in far-right conspiracy theories. The term “globalist” is frequently used as a euphemism in such discourse, gesturing toward an international, elite, often Jewish cabal allegedly orchestrating the world’s ills. The mention of “cells” and covert orchestration adds to this texture. Though it stops short of overt slurs, the implication is unmistakable to anyone versed in the tropes of extremist rhetoric.

The phrase “Untergang des Abendlandes” evokes Oswald Spengler’s grand historical pessimism about the fall of the West, but it is reduced here to a slogan. Rather than a meditation on civilizational change, it becomes an apocalyptic outcry. Everything is collapsing, the author suggests, because of the liberals, the Democrats, the outsiders. There is no analysis only melodrama. The use of German, with its cultural weight, adds a pseudo-intellectual tone, but beneath the surface is the simple logic of panic.

As the text proceeds, it descends into cultural and political nihilism. Greta Thunberg’s fictional kidnapping by Israel, her association with Palestinian rights, and the dismissal of both as irrelevant to the West indicates a collapse of moral consistency. The author mocks humanitarian concerns, flattens all political action into enemy behavior, and frames the West as already spiritually dead. There is no constructive vision offered only resentment and collapse.

The real-world implications of such rhetoric are dire. If taken seriously, this text legitimizes violence against political opponents. It undermines the legitimacy of democratic institutions, elections, and laws. It encourages identification with foreign autocrats and calls for a permanent war against internal enemies. The logic of the piece is not to persuade but to mobilize. And what it mobilizes is a posture of total war against liberals, against immigrants, against the media, against any principle that might sustain a pluralistic society.

This is not simply a case of “controversial opinion.” It is a text that uses the shell of political language to pursue the death of politics itself. The author does not merely argue against Democrats they deny them moral status, existence, citizenship. They are not wrong; they are evil. That is the essence of proto-fascist thought: the reduction of opposition to pollution and the assertion that salvation lies in purification, not persuasion.

To respond to such a text is not to disagree with a bad argument. It is to recognize that this is not argument at all it is a form of ideological violence masquerading as truth. It substitutes myth for analysis, incitement for reasoning, and hatred for vision. It must be named as such, exposed for its brutality, and rejected without equivocation.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jun 12Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Melvin Clive Bird (Behnke)'s avatar

This dismissive comment on Dugin’s writing and the comparison he draws between the Maidan protests and events in Los Angeles deserves a rigorous critique—not only to evaluate the substance of the critique itself, but to scrutinize its rhetorical assumptions, factual grounding, and philosophical implications.

The opening line—“Duh! Dugin’s Substack. Shocking!”—immediately signals a refusal to engage seriously with the source material. The writer replaces argumentation with ridicule, undermining their own credibility from the outset. By employing sarcasm rather than evidence, they preclude any deeper inquiry into what Dugin might be asserting, however flawed. This gesture typifies dismissive ad hominem rhetoric, where the identity of the speaker (here, Dugin) replaces an actual engagement with the argument. Philosophers from Socrates to Habermas have warned against this: to refute an idea by attacking its origin, rather than its logic or evidence, is intellectually lazy and rhetorically hollow.

The writer complains that the original post was “way too lengthy for a comment - much less for this audience of Dugin comrades.” This introduces a problematic assumption: the notion that readers of Dugin are unworthy of extended thought or discourse. It presupposes homogeneity and ideological conformity among Dugin’s readers without proof, thus collapsing the potential for any nuanced readership. Even if Dugin’s platform attracts ideologues, critical discourse should still aim at refutation by precision, not dismissal by prejudice. Furthermore, suggesting that brevity is required due to audience expectations avoids confronting the complexity of the issues. This again veers toward a Popperian falsification fallacy: refusing to test the argument on the grounds that the environment isn’t worth it. As any public philosopher—Arendt, Ricoeur, or even Foucault—would remind us, difficult ideas require rigorous unpacking, even—or especially—among disagreeable company.

The original Dugin claim being mocked—“LA riots are cut and paste of Kiev’s Maidan. The same methods, same picture…”—may indeed be a stretch, but it is not inherently “ninety-nine percent false” without a proper comparative analysis. While there are clear differences in cause, context, and scale between the twenty-thirteen–twenty-fourteen Maidan uprising in Ukraine and recent civil unrest in Los Angeles (such as during the George Floyd protests), Dugin’s rhetorical strategy relies on analogical reasoning, not empirical equivalence. To critique such analogies meaningfully, one must deconstruct the structure of both protests (grassroots or top-down?), the symbolic framing (liberty versus state authority?), the role of foreign or internal manipulation, and the sociotechnical means (media, logistics, riot control, slogans). It is intellectually dishonest to assert “ninety-nine percent false” without examining these parameters. For example, both protests involved memetic protest cultures, police violence, and media spectacle. However, Maidan was a revolutionary moment aimed at reorienting Ukraine’s geopolitical trajectory, while most US protests revolve around racial justice and systemic policing. These are important points of disanalogy, but they must be demonstrated, not presumed.

The phrase “this piece of dreck puddles from its very first hilarious sentence” further substitutes aesthetic scorn for argument. Here, “puddles” is a metaphor meant to evoke instability, messiness, and shallowness—yet ironically, the critique itself becomes puddled by refusing sustained analysis. The rhetorical move mimics the very quality it mocks. Effective critical language should be dialectically constructed—not based on derision, but structured disagreement.

Finally, the critique misses a valuable opportunity to address what is genuinely dangerous or deceptive in Dugin’s rhetoric. Dugin’s analogies are not meant to be factually accurate in a journalistic sense—they function as mythopoetic constructions in the Heideggerian or Schmittian mold. His goal is to reveal what he sees as the metaphysical collapse of the liberal order. If one seeks to contest Dugin, it would be better to expose the metaphysical assumptions underlying his Eurasianism, his perverse adoption of Western philosophical traditions (such as his misuse of Heidegger and Evola), and his propagandistic deployment of civilizational binaries (chaos versus order, West versus East). The superficial dismissal of his writing bypasses these deeper, and more pressing, concerns.

This critique fails not because it is entirely wrong to challenge Dugin’s analogy—it likely is flawed—but because it never attempts to engage with the analogy as an analogy. By leading with sarcasm, conflating audience with ideological coherence, and relying on aesthetic scorn rather than evidentiary refutation, it mirrors the very intellectual weaknesses it purports to reject. A meaningful confrontation with Dugin’s ideas must be more than performative. It must be analytic, contextual, and philosophically grounded. Only then can his distortions be meaningfully unraveled.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Jun 13
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Melvin Clive Bird (Behnke)'s avatar

Critique scorns not for pure collapse

but spins itself in glass delight,

its effort flares then wilts perhaps

where irony starves in barren light.

A tangle of analogic dust,

the mirror cracks with stage regret,

it twirls in loops of misplaced trust,

a syntax trapped in half-lit fret.

Aesthetic sneers outpace the ground,

context retreats, disfigured shade,

the audience in silence drowned,

confusion’s mask too loosely laid.

The analytic fails to bite,

rebuke in jest reveals no code,

to pry the knots with brackish sight,

we need more than this mock abode.

Wonder’s weird and strange must twine

a method not by scorning bred,

where logic bends to fault the line

and mirrors speak in tongues unsaid.

Sarcasm’s blade, so finely forged,

collapses when it cuts the air,

the target, cloaked and wild, engorged

on ridicule it does not share.

Critique thus fakes its clever role

and shadows flicker on the wall,

not real but echoes in the shoal

of thought too proud to let truth fall.

So let it not be mimicry,

but labyrinthine in its scope,

a walk through warped philosophy,

where every turn undoes our hope.

To meet the shape, not just its name,

to enter in and twist askance,

is not to play a clever game

but dance within the ghost’s expanse.

The wrongness must be met with wrong

whose rhythms know the same descent,

the logic cracked, the language long,

its sense in fragments—foul, unmeant.

Then critique might begin to see

not from the heights, but underground,

no distant lamp of clarity—

just circuits where the dead rebound.

Not dismissal but descent,

not scorn but study strange and wide,

where terms distort, the speech is bent—

a form where thought and night collide.

Expand full comment
Jonathan's avatar

Alexander, in your view - does Russia have a Deep State? What is it? What are its goals?

Expand full comment
2033ICP's avatar

Jonathan….🤣

Expand full comment
Jonathan's avatar

Yes I know 😁It sounds silly on the face of it. But I mean does it have the Deep State with globalist goals, or another Deep State with other goals?

Expand full comment
Eoin Clancy's avatar

Of course it has globalist retards shuffling around in the backstreets getting a few quid from Soros and Co but if you mean an institutional globalist elite, then I must ask the obvious, what planet are you on?

Expand full comment
Tom Hamilton's avatar

It is NOT bloody insurrection. It is children acting out.

Riots are NOT insurrections!!!

Expand full comment
Alex's avatar

Yeah yeah yeah it’s aaaaaall about the Dems and WEF “you will own nothing and be happy”. Can’t find your keys? Blame the ‘left’

Now enter MAGA “you will own nothing and be angry”

This analysis and the fake right rebellion that begs the state to send in the jack booted thugs is pathetic. You are not for freedom, you are cheering on the burning of your own constitution and the slide further into a police state. Brainwashed and moronic just like the other side you spend half your waking life whinging about.

If you think Trump is battling the Deep State you are as dumb as a bag of hammers

Expand full comment
Eric Engle's avatar

Russia is dying and here we see some Russian dude imagining what's happening to his own country is happening somewhere else.

lol!

Expand full comment
Leslie Burzacki's avatar

Alexander, with all due respect, Trump and his technocratic buddies ARE the Globalists!! They’re clearly using immigration as cover in order to push the globalist agenda of digital ID’s, smart cities, etc. Complete control through technocratic fascism. And btw, these protests are about ICE. ICE has been acting like the Gestapo. Everything they’re doing is wrong on so many levels. And there are clearly provocateurs who have infiltrated the protests in LA. So the question I’m now asking myself is, are you being fooled like so many others? Or are you also a bad actor? Trump is not who you think he is.

Expand full comment
JuniorPlan's avatar

Thank you for confirming what many have already observed. Your statements reflect a serious lack of judgment and have become a liability to your own network. This reckless article discredits not only you but those associated with you. It's a clear example of ideological degeneracy at play. As someone with extensive experience organizing within the U.S. and actively opposing both Democratic and Republican establishments, I find your article not only ignorant but laced with arrogance. It disregards the realities on the ground and undermines those of us who have truly engaged in this struggle.

Expand full comment
Joseph M McClune's avatar

Jesus Christ, people take this shit seriously? I have two books from Dugin, I'm tossing 'em.

Expand full comment
Papibori. Can You Refuse?'s avatar

LA riots are a profesional operation.

Expand full comment
Kamran Blourchi's avatar

The Beast is part Democrat and par Republican.....

Expand full comment
Franz Kafka's avatar

Canada will serve as a base for the regime change op by MI6 and the palace. Carney is their man in the British colony.

Expand full comment
2033ICP's avatar

No. Not like in the US or in the whole western hemisphere. Russia does have a need to protect itself against the western deep state which is the western CIO-influenced support that wants to undermine the Russian state of sovereignty. The CIA-supported separatists in Chechnya was a brutal reminder for the Russians some decades ago and when the Chechen rebels realised they were used by the US CIA, they turned eventually around and became lojal to the Russian federation. Today Chechens are fighting alongside the Russian troops against the nazi-nationalist/NATO forces in Ukraine.

Expand full comment
Anna Maria's avatar

Elon Musk, se sei un vero patriota,è arrivato il momento di dimostrarlo : fai quadrato intorno a Trump.

Expand full comment
robert agajeenian's avatar

Anna Maria, non e solo Lei che lo dice. Ma piu che lo dicono meglio e. (Chiedo scusa per il mio italiano.)

Expand full comment
Anna Maria's avatar

Signor Roberto , Le sono molto grata per la condivisione ideale e per la grande cortesia di averla espressa in italiano. Cordiali saluti

Expand full comment
Simone Perry's avatar

I read on Patrion that Elon Musk's mission to Mars may actually be a plan to take Globalists to a safer place than Earth. He's not the good guy.

Expand full comment
Simone Perry's avatar

How can the US overcome the crippling deficit it inherited from the fake Biden regime and thrive again?

Expand full comment