36 thoughts on “Justin Raimondo on Russian TV”

  1. This was a terrific little feature story, and it illustrates — once again — the extent to which our prestige press is controlled. Can anyone imagine a piece like this being run by an American news organ, rather than a Russian one?

    It was a source of passing mirth, of course, to hear the familiar epithet “fascist” used to describe “an enemy of the State,” as opposed to one who worships the state. Some verbal habits are apparently very difficult to shake.

  2. Unfortunately, Strauss half understood Nietzsche, and provided his acolytes with a pseudo-philosophical system to consider all terms subject to being revalued, ad hoc and toward any rhetorical purpose that forwarded the Straussian program. The old Trotskyites had the same tendency, and the Neo-Cons have taken up the habit with a vengeance. So “Fascist” loses all content and becomes merely a term of abuse, used as well simply to confuse and distract.

    The Russians did well to interview Raimondo, and Raimondo did well in response.

    There was a report some months ago that the Russian Federation had plans to open an office in New York City to help the citizens of the United States design and implement democratic reform in the United States.

    One trusts that was no satire.

  3. If you watch Russia Today’s war coverage, it doesn’t take a genious to see that they are way more of what real journalism and news reporting should be. All their newscasters appear very unbiased and conduct themselves very professionally without ever voicing opinions. Not only that, their segments are up to 25 minutes long! When have you ever seen a report on Iraq on any of our news programs that lasts any longer than 2 minutes? Not to mention the dozens of eyewitnesses they interview, as well as victims. They also show all the damage, homes blown up. THey show casualties and the dead. Both civilians, UN peacekeepers, and soldiers from both sides.

    After being brainwashed my whole life into believing that Russia had no free press, I was completely shocked at how much better and and lets face it, honest broadcasts not filled with lies.

    This should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that our media is complete propaganda since the 5 corporations took over all of our radio, tv, and newspapers since Reagan and Clinton deregulated the media to allow these huge foreign multi-nationals now own our media, not to mention our debt, gold, homes, banks, tollroads, infrastructure, ports, and who knows what else…

  4. I agree with mosco and all the above comments, and, of course, with Raimondo here. Thanks, Justin; thanks Russia Today.

  5. I'm a big fan of antiwar.com and always glad to see them get media attention — in the Georgia v Russia thing — I have no dog in this fight, I just wish it hadn't happened — but the russian tv piece along with their other coverage seems to be as much a piece of propaganda as fox news. I watch the english tv channel from time to time and they seem as biased as the warparty media in the US. I agree the US media coverage of russia is biased and favors the Georgians and describes them in a black and white 'russians are bruts and enemies of all that is good but thats how they describe Chavez as well — thats not gonna make me pro-Putin or pro-Chavez just a lonely feeling anti-war libertarian…

    As an aside if Raimondo or anyone else wants to chain smoke heroin laced cigars on TV, god bless him, I'm not gonna take him less seriously — I'll judge him by what he says.

    1. Why? Russians smoke and drink freely. Why should Justin subscribe to the American PC culture thats vomited upon us daily. For all the supposed “freedoms” Amerikans hoot and holler about it seems sticking ones nose into someone elses business is job one!

  6. Don’t expect any of the American networks to ever give Justin any face time.

  7. “Some people call him a fascist” AND an “enemy of the state”??? Yeah, we all know how fascists are opposed to the state–and war, too, I suppose…????

    1. By the way, I love the cigarette. It’s great to see a wonderfully curmudgeon anti-establishment writer smoking a cigarette on TV while he laughs at the REAL fascists.

  8. And now its announced that Poland has accepted the missle “shield” proferred by Bush. So much for the myth of providing a defense against Iran. This whole enterprise could not now be understood as anything but directed at Moscow. The Poles, it is said, even acknowledge that their acceptance has been triggered by the Russian response in Georgia. The ones they should fear are the ones with whom they’ve cut their deal. The United States literaly has managed to turn back the clock and recreate the cold war. Its absolutely insane.

    It is perhaps instructive now to read an interview Pravda undertook with Josef Stalin in 1946:


    Feel the wind of history in your hair?

    1. Yes, we feel. But… why rulers of the US think that they can do it again? Fool me once – your fault, fool me twice?

      Why the implied belief that Russia now is weaker then former USSR? Russia now can be compared to the USSR circa 1949 – in terms of self esteem and lack of illusions. The late USSR was much weaker – thus it collapsed.

      Granted, it’s possible to reboot Cold War, but it is very difficult to drain now very practical Russia (can be capitalist, can be state owned, can have socialist elements – whatever does the job best ideology), in tandem with China factory into the same self-isolation and poverty. Very important – Stalin WAS afraid to let people travel and know the West first hand. Russia has none of that. Same as China.

      Objectively the events of this Summer push Russia and China together. West is working hard to turn tactical alliance into strategic. Also, keep in mind that at the individual level – Russians don’t feel that they are better grade, compared to Chinese, and the reverse is true as well. Seems like countries are in a good match for a union.

      So, remember the Soviet time joke – “Optimists study English, pessimists – Chinese, and realists – machine gun”. Guess can swap English with Chinese, and study Topol-M to bring the joke into 21st century.

      1. Vassily,

        A pleasure to hear from you!

        “Why the implied belief that Russia now is weaker then former USSR? Russia now can be compared to the USSR circa 1949 – in terms of self esteem and lack of illusions. The late USSR was much weaker – thus it collapsed.”

        Interesting observation.

        “Very important – Stalin WAS afraid to let people travel and know the West first hand. Russia has none of that. Same as China.”

        But you report that in terms of self-confidence and lack of illusions the Soviet Union was at a kind of peak in 1949, and this a time when Stalin’s concerns with Western exposure were so preoccupying that it birthed a whole series of pedagogical show-trials from, say, 1949 beginning with Rajk in Hungary right through the Slansky affair in Czechoslovakia in 1953. If this were strength, how are we to understand either Chinese or Russian openness as strength today?

        “Objectively the events of this Summer push Russia and China together. West is working hard to turn tactical alliance into strategic.”

        Yes, sadly. It is the most imbecilic of policies.

  9. oh, and that's nice too – sorry if i drift geographically but it's part of the same "Game":

    "We now have to really pull our socks up in Afghanistan with greater numbers, more commitment and a better plan and then get in step with the Americans. We have a chance of winning in Afghanistan and we should not flinch from achieving it.” (Col Tim Collins, who commanded an infantry battalion during the 2003 invasion)"

    … or was it a quote from 1842..?

  10. Am from Palestine living in Dubai just want to say its an amazing interview, have been reading his column for years now and its nice to put a face on what I have been reading.Wish in the middle east we had had atleast one guy like this at His honesty is very refreshing. What I like most though is the cigarette, how can you not love a guy who is doing it on tv.

  11. wasnt Poland some years ago the reason why old Britannia had to send an expeditionary force across Europe – and then hitchike back to Dunkirk..? Confucius says: ha ha, i’ve seen it all before :)

  12. One minor quibble- Bush HAS used force against some protesters. Any world protests? Any domestic protests?

  13. I’ve been watching RT for a while now and watched it throughtout the Russian/Georgian conflict. If Mikheil Saakashvili is such a champion of democracy then why did the South Ossetians evacuate to Russia instead of to Tibilisi? I think Raimondo’s comments are spot on.

  14. Indeed. Only neocon-Likudniks, comments-section trolls, and other pure haters would so backwardly call Justin a fascist. Total guilt projection. It shouldn’t have been considered; but chalk it up to naiveté on the part of the Russia Today editor.

  15. You live in Dubai? I wouldn’t mind working in dubai or Quatar..Even though the sunni regimes in the Gulf area have proven themselves to be puppets of the anglo-american-Zionist empire that helped set-up saddam….Poor man, really think about it..Encouraged by the CIA and supported by the Saudis, Kuwaitis and Quataris when he fought Iran and won some well-deserved coastline…Then, when the poor Iraqis are up to their eyeballs in war debt after the conflict all these Sunni puppets ramp-up oil production and drive down the price..To add insult to injury the Americans show the Kuwaitis how to slant-drill into Iraqi oil fields ( Kuwait-the country that used to be part of Iraq )..Then Ambasssador April Glasbie gives our “ally” ( no one with that much backbone could ever be a trustworthy puppet ) the green light to take back Kuwait and “the Sting” is in place..The only characters missing are Shaw,Newman and Redford…

    1. Even at 68 there was an appropriate recognition in her case. :-)

      But what’s wrong with the area just below Raimondo’s left eye? Almost looks as though a bee stung him.

  16. One could very easily show that Pat Buchanan is a ‘fascist,’ though for practical reasons a tastefully subdued one. Personally, I wouldn’t start a crusade against Buchanan just because of that, but I damn well will not accept that he should write out of one side of his face here, and out of the other side of his face at WorldNetDaily. Buchanan, I mean.

  17. I dn’t agree with all of pat’s ideas either but imagine the mainstream media without him. there would be no one.

  18. Really, how could one easily show that Patrick J. Buchanan is a “fascist”? Especially bearing in mind that fascism grew out of the Leftist socialist camp…It was basically the gentile socialist reaction to Judeo-Bolshevism in Europe..In Germany it was particularly odious since it was based on the alleged superiority of the Germanic people..Actually, long term, this made it weaker than Soviet bolshevism since it alienated the other people ( Slavic and Latin ) that border Germany…In Italy it was based on culture and nostalgia for the ancient Empire so it wasn’t as bad…In Spain? That can’t be called fascism at all since it was linked to the Church and Gen Franco and the Royalists only wanted to save spain fm the communists and save the throne for Juan Carlos..Hitler always regretted lending his air power to Franco’s cause..Why? Because, in his words, ” the Church would have been wiped out of Spain” if he hadn’t intervened and because Franco never allowed German troops to cross Spain and take the British base at Gibraltar which may have changed the war in N. Africa if they had..This was acknowledged by Churchill after the war…Of course given the way the war ended: 1. the Soviets holding onto 1/2 of Europe for 45 yrs..2. the Communists taking control of China and 3. the anti-Christian talmudic Zionists taking control of the Holy Land..One has to wonder..But I guess that makes me a “fascist” too..

  19. Hello Bill,

    You say:

    “Especially bearing in mind that fascism grew out of the Leftist socialist camp…It was basically the gentile socialist reaction to Judeo-Bolshevism in Europe”

    I believe this statement to be a bit facile, actually. Certainly, Mussolini had a socialist identity during the early years of WWI but had concluded by its end that socialism was an utter failure. Early fascism was nationalistic, and egalitarian, opposing the notion of class war. Hitler was always a product of the forces of German nationalism. The choice of the name, National Socialist German Workers Party, was made to give his movement mass appeal, and even though there were those in his entourage that took the “socialist” claim seriously, Strasser notably, its expression always identified the common national reality, not narrow class interests. In any case, Stasser was suppressed as was Roehm and the SA where certain, more purely class related sentiments were more likely to be harbored.

    You also make an unfortunate and highly dubious identification of Judaism and Bolshevism here as though the two were linked as a kind of unit. And later you speak of an “anti-Christian talmudic Zionism” as though such a phemomemon, if ever it existed, were a foredrawn conclusion. Again, a bit facile, I’m afraid. While I understand that this blog is hardly the place for scholarly writing, I don’t think it benefits from loose, undisciplined observations either.

  20. The National Socialists in Germany WERE Socialists..your displeasure doesn’t change the reality…They believed in total govt control of industry, culture, religion..in short, everything…If that’s not Socialism then what the hell is?

    1. Socialism is the belief that the state should own (not just “control”) the “means of production”. Which industries did the Nazi German government own? Did German corporations pay dividends to the Nazi government or to their stockholders? Saying the Nazis were socialist is no more valid than saying Justin Raimondo is a fascist.

      1. Yes, indeedy.

        Hitler’s concept of the collective was that of the German Volk, or people, taken together with their culture and history. The state was envisioned as a organizing tool around which this organic concept of the Volk could be developed, not as the vehicle for the redistribution of wealth along class lines, the sole exception being the way in which it operated in the dispossession and redistribution of Jewish wealth and property after the enactment of the Nurenberg Laws in 1935. Hitler looked to the elimination of class perspectives in service of the common purpose. I can recall years ago seeing filmed speeches that Hitler gave prior to his ascendance to power in which he pointed to the confusion of national purpose attending the existence at the time of thirty-four political parties and for the need for national “unity” organized around one concept. None of this had a Marxian feel. To the contrary, the uprooting of the Marxian mindset was necessary to achieve it. Such is not socialism in any classical sense, it is fascism, purely and simply.

  21. The more I hear about “unity” and “working” together from both Dems and Repubs the more I realize they’re really two factions of a one-party state. Seriously. When ever one or the other starts to make their “opponent” cry you begin to hear the wailing and moaning with the predictable “can’t we just get along” mantra over and over again. In the mean time everything else is going to hell. This has to be deliberate. And I was always under the assumption that “nazi” i.e. National Socialism was exactly what it claimed to be and not socialism-heavy as opposed to socialism-lite. Just taking a gander at present Amerika and its ultra nationalistic/patriotic brudern und schwestern, the idolatry with flag and military, and the deafening silence from the party organs (the media) with regards to fingering Big Brother, you’d be mistaken not to assume fascism or nationalism… take your pick, was a alive and well.

Comments are closed.