PropOrNot, the Anti-Russian Propaganda Bill, and Why Some of Us Prefer Russian News to American


– 5 December 2016 –


Patulcius-sqIn the aftermath of Trump’s election victory, the American Left is fighting bitterly to overturn, ruin, and disrupt the results. One of the ways they have tried to discredit the various anti-establishment voices is this “fake news” narrative. They seem to be wildly aiming this campaign against the Alt-Right, the #Pizzagate movement, and the alternative news media, along with Russian news outlets and their sympathizers.

On November 24, a Washington Post article warned against the horrors of various—mostly alternative—news outlets which, they say, frequently sympathize with Russia, including popular sites like Zerohedge, Infowars, and the Drudge Report. Most of my personal favorites are included, in fact. The Post cites a report by some mysterious and well-funded organization called PropOrNot which formed at the end of October to bring attention against what they view to be undue Russian influence in various irregular news sites across the political spectrum. It’s actually a useful list; I’ve found some pretty good news sites that I had never heard of. (Watch for them to break their links.)

This PropOrNot business seems to be growing teeth with the passage on 30 November of H.R. 6393: Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017. A seemingly ordinary and uncontroversial budget bill passed to fund our intelligence services with 390 votes in favor and only 30 opposed. Yet tucked within its verbiage is the ominous section 501, which relates to “active measures by the Russian Federation to exert covert influence over peoples and governments.” From Zerohedge:

A quick skim of the bill reveals “Title V—Matters relating to foreign countries”,  whose Section 501 calls for the government to “counter active measures by Russia to exert covert influence … carried out in  coordination with, or at the behest of, political leaders or the security services of the Russian Federation and the role of the Russian Federation has been hidden or not acknowledged publicly.”

The section lists the following definitions of media manipulation:

  • Establishment or funding of a front group.
  • Covert broadcasting.
  • Media manipulation.
  • Disinformation and forgeries.
  • Funding agents of influence.
  • Incitement and offensive counterintelligence.
  • Assassinations.
  • Terrorist acts.

As ActivistPost correctly notes, it is easy to see how this law, if passed by the Senate and signed by the president, could be used to target, threaten, or eliminate so-called “fake news” websites, a list which has been used to arbitrarily define any website, or blog, that does not share the mainstream media’s proclivity to serve as the Public Relations arm of a given administration.

Curiously, the bill which was passed on November 30, was introduced on November 22, two days before the Washington Post published its Nov. 24 article citing “experts” who claim Russian propaganda helped Donald Trump get elected.

Of course some of us on the Right have grown to prefer our top news from or other Russian sites, and we have come to see the Russian perspective as the usually pro-White, pro-Christian counter to the corrupt lies and manipulations of the major American news outlets. To us, the only country in the world that seems to be moving firmly in a sensible direction is Russia. We don’t have to be propagandized to see this. We genuinely prefer the traditionalist Russian perspective and have deliberately sought it out.

Are there Russian connections to the American Right? Very likely so. Russia has a vested interest. The Obama regime has worked to isolate Russia and overthrow its government. If the U.S. can transform into an ally via Russian influence, great. But if the U.S. falls into civil war and balkanizes, that will work, too. In either scenario, the U.S. will stop working to push Russia into World War III.

Does Russia have America’s best interests in mind? I think they want us to stay out of their sphere of influence but otherwise don’t really care what we do. We should regard them the same way. Russia is following a Russia-first policy; the U.S. should focus on our own interests. The two don’t have to conflict.

Did Russian influence cause Hillary Clinton to lose? No way. Pro-union white men in the rust belt tipped the balance against Hillary. Lack of black turnout didn’t help her either. The establishment is just using this as a cover to attack the anti-establishment Right.

Perhaps the American establishment has good cause to worry about the rise of the white Right.


The Left still whines about Joseph McCarthy and the House Committee on Un-American Activities. During the Forties and Fifties, those two entities kept the Commies in check. But they didn’t go far enough, and ultimately the Left won out, ushering in the dystopia we have today.

The pro-white, pro-Christian American establishment of the 1950’s rightly grew concerned over the growth of Marxist influence (much of it influenced by the USSR). And today’s anti-white, anti-Christian establishment likewise fears the resurgence of a popular and angry pro-white and pro-Christian movement, one that has finally inoculated itself against the Alinskyite tactics of the Left.

In the 1950’s, the Leftists successfully defeated a Joseph McCarthy who, while correct about Communist infiltration, overextended himself, with the cucks of the time successfully sabotaging his efforts. Basically the Constitution tied the hands of the Right against an enemy who uses our laws against us.

Today’s establishment isn’t about to give up without a fight like the overly-civic and overly-sensible white establishment of the 1950’s. They will attempt to repress any influential reaction against them.


Alexander Dugin: Third World War Has Never Been So Close


– 19 September 2016 –


Janus-smallAlexander Dugin expects that the Western elites will jump-start World War III to prevent the election of Donald Trump.

Via Katehon:

The globalist US leadership obviously cannot rule the whole world and, what’s more, the threat posed by Trump puts their control over America itself into question. Now, while the puppet Barack Obama is still in office and the globalist candidate Hillary Clinton is falling apart in front of American voters’ very eyes, is the last chance to start a war. This would allow them to postpone elections or force Trump, if he were to win, to begin his presidency in catastrophic conditions. Thus, the US neoconservatives and globalists need war. And fast, before it’s too late. If Trump gets into the White House when there will be peace, then there will be no such war, at least for the foreseeable future. And this would spell the end of the omnipotence of the maniacal globalist elites.

Thus, everything at this point is very, very serious. NATO’s ideologues and the US globalists falling into the abyss need war right now – before the American elections. War against us. Not so much for victory, but for the process itself. This is the only way for them to prolong their dominance and divert the attention of Americans and the whole world from their endless series of failures and crimes. The globalists’ game has been revealed. Soon enough, they’ll have to step down from power and appear before court. Only war can save their situation.

[. . .]

The fatality of the situation lies in that, if Washington decides to opt for war now, then we cannot avoid it. If they will insist and repeat the September 17th situation again and again, then we will have to either accept the challenge and go to war, or knowingly admit defeat.

In this situation, the outcome of the struggle for peace which is, as always, fully in our interests, does not depend on us. We really need peace, to buy time until November 8th, and then everything will be much easier. But will the collapsing colossus allow us this time?

God forbid that this happens. But those who could pray prayed on the eve of the First and Second World War. In any case, our goal is always and only victory. Our victory.

The Americans our bombing our guys. A Third World War has never been so close.

Whether the election is postponed, or Trump wins, or Hillary, the Western elites want World War sometime in the next few months or the next few years.

Our best chances lie with the genius of Putin to prevent the war, as he did our intervention in Syria, and the election of Donald Trump to possibly thwart the elites’ foreign policy. Possibly.

Without divine mercy, the odds of avoiding the war are low.

We in the West deserve to be thrashed.

Nevertheless, if the war must happen, may God thrash us most mercifully.

East and West Have Swapped Roles: Western Cultural Marxism vs. Russian Christiandom


– 4 August 2016 –


Janus-smallA Danish woman, after visiting Russia, sees the salvation of the nihilistic West through the resurgence of Christianity in the East.

Via American Orthodox Institute via Russia Insider:

The subject of this interview is a Danish journalist and theologian who hosted a series of five programmes, entitled “From Russia with Love” on Danish national public service radio, Radio24syv, with the sub-heading “An Unbiased Look at Putin’s Russia.”

Inspired by Emperor Constantine, she believes Christianity in the West can be rejuvenated by looking to the East. Iben is aware of the sheer enormity of this task. “Such, alas, is the depth to which Western hatred for Christianity has sunk,” says the theologian, who does not hesitate to defend President Putin, on whom the Western media delights in heaping derision and scorn.

[. . .]

What was your impression of Russia?

“I experienced a fantastic energy, a moral energy similar to America in the ’50s with the old moral values. I met helpful, poetic and cultured people with a spirit of self-sacrifice I have not seen before. The atmosphere in Moscow is completely different from that of any capital in Europe, and unlike here in the West, I feel much more spiritually free in the East.

While the West is deriding and disowning Christianity and Europe revels in self-loathing, Russians are returning to Christianity in a modern and contemporary context. Bear in mind that Christianity was suppressed under Communism, which was atheistic. Russians are familiar with the bitter fruit of atheism and have no appetite for the bleak and barren wasteland it produced.

The interesting thing is, that in Russia, Christianity is associated with being modern and progressive. It is the spirit of the young, the hip, the wise and the wealthy, who express their Christianity as a completely natural and straightforward way of life. Christianity is simply fashionable, but not in the superficial Western pop manner. Christianity’s roots grow deep in the soil of Russian life, and they look with amazement at how we guard, or rather, disregard, our spiritual heritage.

Not only that: They discern in our obsession with political correctness, and the social liberal opinion policing of the general media and academia, a new manifestation of the terror of totalitarianism they counted themselves blessed to escape after 75 terrible years.

After the Cold War, East and West swapped roles spiritually, culturally and morally. Cultural Marxism now holds unrestrained sway in the West.

It’s interesting that this fortyish Danish woman, Iben Thranholm, has managed to embrace a traditional view of Christianity despite the overwhelming secularism of her culture, where her fellow women have absorbed feminism and rejected their femininity. Here is Thranholm’s story.

And perhaps she is correct about the East eventually saving Christian civilization in the West.

It wouldn’t be the first time.

Rather than a smooth and steady growth over the centuries, the collected nations of Christianity (Christiandom) have shifted back and forth in power and influence at one time or another.

Generally speaking, the Byzantine East preserved Christian civilization and protected the weak and fallen West from the threat of Islam from a period stretching from the rise of Muhammad in the seventh century to the beginning of the Renaissance in the 1300’s.

By the time Constantinople fell in 1453, the West had just absorbed the knowledge preserved by the Eastern empire and had begun to advance Christiandom at the expense of Islam in Spain, and then around the world. At the same time, Christianity in the East suffered under Muslim and Mongol rule.

Christiandom reached a peak in the world by 1914, with the West dominating the globe, while in the East the Turks had retreated from the Balkans and Russia had grown into a powerful Orthodox empire. The World Wars once again suppressed Christianity in the East under atheist Communism while Christianity continued to grow around the world through the efforts of Westerners.

But today we find a gradual turning of the tables, with Christian civilization in the West suppressed by cultural Marxism and infiltrated by Islam while Christianity resurges in Eastern Europe.

It’s not too difficult these days to imagine that the West might collapse much like the Soviet Union did from 1989 to 1991. Or that the United States might suffer a Marxist-type revolution. Maybe Russia can provide spiritual leadership to eventually rebuild Christiandom in the fallen West.

Aleksandr Dugin Gives Fascinating Assessment of Russia’s Current Geopolitical Situation


– 3 November 2015 –


Janus-smallAleksandr Dugin is a Russian nationalist who openly calls for the restoration of some form of Greater Russia that would dominate an even greater alliance of nations called Eurasia.  His views have influenced Russia to a significant, if debatable, extent. While he is supposedly part of Putin’s circle of advisers, he has openly expressed his anger and frustration with Putin’s foreign policy, saying it isn’t aggressive enough.

Neocons warn us that Dugin is a fascist or imperialist, saying that he wants to restore Russian influence over the former Soviet Union, that he is the evil mastermind behind the rise of the new Hitler—Vladimir Putin—who will start World War III. Perhaps the Neocons are right in some ways, though the Neocons act as though the West is simply an innocent princess working for peace and freedom rather than another contestant in a world power game.

One thing is certain: Aleksandr Dugin has an influential vision for Russia, and NATO stands directly in the way of that vision. It need not be the case; the West could work with Russia, particularly against Muslim terrorists, but the powers-that-be would rather have us destroy one another as we did in two previous world wars.

In any case, Dugin is a very intelligent geo-political philosopher with a fascinating vision for his country. Frankly, he is a little frightening, which only adds to the fascination.

Below are excerpts of an interview he gave to Novorossiya, translated to English at Fort Russ:

After nearly a year of silence, Alexander Gelyevich discussed the current results of the Russian Spring, the war in Syria, and the inevitability of a final battle in Donbass in an exclusive interview with “Novorossiya.” [. . .]

[. . .] I’ll repeat once more: the Russian Spring is a requirement of our Russian historical existence. Russia will either be great, or will not be at all. Great Russia – this is not only a territory or expansion, as we do don’t need anything else. And I’m not against the existence of a sovereign Ukraine, if only it would be our ally or partner or, in the least, a neutral, intermediate space. We would like to be together in one state, but on this the citizens of Ukraine must decide. But what exactly shouldn’t be allowed is an Atlanticist occupation of Ukraine. This is a geopolitical axiom. Our enemies perfectly understand that Russia can become great again only together with Ukraine, either unified or having built some kind of balanced alliance. There is no other way. The Russian Spring is impossible without a Eurasian pivot in Ukraine, no matter what form, peaceful or not, that it takes. [. . .]

[. . .] I’ll explain. As we see in Afghanistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, and even in the North Caucasus, trends towards an increase in the influence of ISIS are growing. And if we were not fighting ISIS in Syria, then we would have to do it in Central Asia and then, perhaps, on the territory of the Russian Federation. 

This is the plan of the Americans. Islamic fundamentalism has traditionally been an instrument in the structure of American and Atlanticist geopolitics, and this is an obvious point. The Islamic State is an American special operation directed against the opponents of American hegemony in the Middle East, and this includes (and is primarily) against us. 

When we, at the request of Assad, invaded Syria, we once again returned to history, again appealing to the diastole of the Russian heart. This comes after a stupor, Minsk, indecision, hesitation, trade offs, and a dubious tug of war. After a bloody pause.

Look at what is happening now. We are fighting against the essence of the pro-American, crypto-Atlanticist, fundamentalist sect that is ISIS, in order to inflict a blow on it as far away as possible from our borders. Otherwise, we will fight with them here. This indicates the presence of a strategic, geopolitical conscience among the leadership of the country, and this is encouraging. Support for Assad is also a part of the Russian Spring, the assertion of Russia as a subject, not an object of history, a gesture towards strengthening our sovereignty. [. . .]

[. . .] Another point. The fact of our military support for Assad in Syria, although real and effective, is still without a guaranteed result (the immediate results are generally very impressive and positive). Therefore, the Americans are vitally interested in an escalation of hostilities in Donbass in order to make the whole situation more difficult for us. And anyway, Poroshenko, who received little support in recent elections in Ukraine, is interested in the same. For him, the war is now the only way to maintain power.

The war in Donbass will be imposed on us by Washington and Kiev. Not we, but they, despite the Minsk agreements and our attempts to get out of direct confrontation by any means, will launch hostilities. Accordingly, we return to the point which I interrupted with a commentary on events.

As I predicted, the situation cannot have another solution other than the defense of Novorossiya from the pro-American, neo-Nazi junta, which was a junta and remains a junta, and whose neck it is time to snap. Sooner or later, we will return to Novorossiya. Of course, it’s already late, but not critically late. He who controls the border of the DPR and LPR with Russia controls everything. [. . .]

[. . .] Our bet is not to allow the Ukrainians to impose war on us and not give them the opportunity to take control of the border. This is the main indicator: as long as the republics of Novorossiya control the border, the situation can more or less be characterized as normal, but if it’s given up, then this will be a fully fundamental failure.

Much is being decided now and history is again open. We haven’t resolved the issue of Novorossiya, and have merely postponed its resolution. It reminds us of ourselves. Accordingly, the Minsk Agreements, which we will try to hold on to, will be gradually destroyed and abolished in different ways. We will see soon. [. . .]


Members of the armed forces of the separatist self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic

[. . .] It’s necessary to recognize a simple truth: they won’t leave us alone, and it its best to recognize this immediately. History is always a choice, often a choice in the face of death. The average person runs away from this and tries to barricade himself from problems, but if a government behaves like a layman, then this government is transitory. History begins when the top of the vertical power takes an existential – historic – decision, and this means looking death straight in the face.

It’s possible to try and run away, but history catches up to us no matter what and there are signs that she’s catching up with us. We at least cannot leave Syria without victory. And if they challenge us and rip up the Minsk Agreements in Donbass, then we will need not one victory but two. And I am sure that we are quite ready for this and we can do it. But we need to give up the politics of half a glass. 

Is Russia on the Verge of a Christian Awakening: The Rise of Radical Orthodoxy and Dmitry Enteo’s “God’s Will”


– 25 August 2015 –


Patulcius-sqIncreasingly energetic actions and protests by Orthodox Christian groups in Russia such as the Union for Orthodox Citizens, the Movement in Support of 200 Churches, the Movement of 40 by 40, and God’s Will suggest the beginnings of a new spiritual awakening in that country:

An article in the current issue of Sovershenno Sekretno asks whether there is a line between Russian Orthodox Church activists and those who engage in pogrom-like violence. It concludes sadly that there is not — and that church activists and those engaged in attacks on other groups are increasingly one and the same people.

The monthly’s Dmitry Rudnyev writes that he decided to focus on this issue after the fights between those who want to build more Orthodox churches in Moscow and those who oppose these being put in what are now public parks and Father Dmitry Smirnov’s shutting down of a concert that he said was disturbing prayer.

Such incidents, he continues, “are taking place ever more frequently, and the causes which generate among Orthodox [activists] such an incommensurately stormy reaction are becoming ever more varied.” That raises the question as to why Russian Orthodoxy has “suddenly acquired hysterical aspects” and seems to be trying to find occasions to be upset.

“Five to ten years ago, the phrase ‘Orthodox radicalism’ would have elicited a condescending smile,” Rudnyev says. “Today however, this has become one of the realities of Russian religious life.” So far, “thank God,” it hasn’t claimed human victims in the way that nationalist or Islamic radicalisms have,” he said.

“But the problem of radicalism in the church exists,” he continues, “and today people talk about it in a serious way.”


Orthodox militias such as United Fatherland are active in the Ukrainian civil war.

Spiritual Awakenings

I am convinced of the overall accuracy of the generational theories of Strauss and Howe, in which world events affect different generations in different ways based on their respective ages at the time of those events.

In the case of Russia, the time is arriving when a new generation of youth are starting to come of age who have no memory of the collapse of the USSR and Russia’s subsequent miserable economic strife.

Spiritual awakenings are often messy affairs as compared to the previous “high”, a high being the time that society has restored order after a great war or crisis.  From Strauss and Howe’s The Fourth Turning:

An Awak­en­ing ar­rives with a dra­matic chal­lenge against the High’s as­sump­tions about benev­o­lent rea­son and con­ge­nial in­sti­tu­tions. The outer world now feels triv­ial com­pared to the inner world.

New spir­i­tual agen­das and so­cial ideals burst forth—along with Utopian ex­per­i­ments seek­ing to rec­on­cile total fel­low­ship with total au­ton­omy. The pros­per­ity and se­cu­rity of a High are overtly dis­dained though covertly taken for granted. A so­ci­ety searches for soul over sci­ence, mean­ings over things. Youth-fired at­tacks break out against the es­tab­lished in­sti­tu­tional order. As these at­tacks take their toll, so­ci­ety has dif­fi­culty co­a­lesc­ing around com­mon goals. Peo­ple stop be­liev­ing that so­cial progress re­quires so­cial dis­ci­pline. Any pub­lic ef­fort that re­quires col­lec­tive dis­ci­pline en­coun­ters with­er­ing con­tro­versy. Wars are awk­wardly fought and badly re­mem­bered af­ter­ward. A eu­phoric en­thu­si­asm over spir­i­tual needs eclipses con­cern over sec­u­lar prob­lems, con­tribut­ing to a high tol­er­ance for risk-prone lifestyles. Peo­ple begin feel­ing guilt about what they ear­lier did to avoid shame. Pub­lic order de­te­ri­o­rates, and crime and sub­stance abuse rise. Gen­der dis­tinc­tions nar­row, and child rear­ing reaches the point of min­i­mum pro­tec­tion and struc­ture.

Other awakenings from the past include the Revolutions of 1848 in Europe, the Progressive Era in the United States from about 1880 to 1910, and the 1960’s Consciousness Revolution.  Now perhaps Russia is beginning their own new spiritual awakening.


1960’s radicals wanted to overturn the spiritually sterile white, Christian establishment of the 1950’s. Why wouldn’t the radicals of today’s Russia want to overthrow the sterile social Marxism of today just as their fathers overthrew political Marxism?

A Rising Generation in Russia

Most people in Russia support Vladimir Putin because he restored order and relative prosperity to Russia after the chaos and exploitation of that country in the 1990’s. Now we have a generation who is reaching college age who have little or no memory of the difficult times that their parents endured. Many of these young people see their society being constantly attacked by foreign forces that would undermine their spirits with “madness and abomination”. They might see the secular order of Putin’s Russia as lacking enough spiritual enlightenment to stop these evil forces for the sake of peace, order, and prosperity. If a large portion of this generation embraces the fundamental teachings of Orthodox Christianity and desires to restore the religious foundations of Russia, then they might well try to put an end to the cultural and spiritual filth gushing into Russia from the West, and they might also threaten the balance of order carefully established during the 2000’s and 2010’s.

Russia has little history of individual liberty and democratic government, but they do have a history of spiritual mysticism and of following strong leaders, be they religious or civil.

From Culture Smart! Russia:

“Bez tsarya v golove”—“with­out a tsar in his head”—is a Russ­ian say­ing about some­body who does not know what he is doing. Or, rather, who does not lis­ten to the tsar telling him what to do.

In the nine­teenth cen­tury even Russ­ian lib­er­als cited au­toc­racy as one of three foun­da­tion stones of the Russ­ian state, to­gether with spir­i­tu­al­ity and a com­mu­nal spirit. The tra­di­tion of a pow­er­ful leader, be it a tsar or a pres­i­dent, is still strong in Rus­sia today.

Al­though the Russ­ian pres­i­dent often re­peats that he would like the pub­lic to see him as a per­son they have hired for the job, opin­ion polls show that he is pri­mar­ily re­garded as a fa­ther fig­ure, as some­body who pro­vides ma­te­r­ial ben­e­fits and who dis­ci­plines or pun­ishes cor­rupt civil ser­vants and thiev­ing oli­garchs.

Un­for­tu­nately, the Russ­ian au­to­cratic tra­di­tion was often based on the rule of fear, as in the reigns of Ivan the Ter­ri­ble or Peter the Great. The per­va­sive­ness and in­ten­sity of fear reached its nadir dur­ing the bloody regime of Joseph Stalin, and this fear and the ne­ces­sity to obey or­ders cre­ated a fun­da­men­tal con­tra­dic­tion in the Russ­ian at­ti­tude to au­thor­ity.

“A peas­ant will lis­ten to what the mas­ter has to say, but will do it his own way,” says a Russ­ian proverb.

“The po­lit­i­cal regimes change, lead­ers with dif­fer­ent tem­pera­ments and in­ten­tions come to power, po­lit­i­cal sys­tems get re­placed, and yet there is one thing, that re­mains con­stant in Rus­sia: the power is al­ways “them,” and the peo­ple are al­ways “us,” writes the Russ­ian philoso­pher Shapo­valov.

These con­trast­ing at­ti­tudes, re­spect for and sup­port of the top “fa­ther fig­ure” and total dis­re­spect for law and au­thor­ity, are yet an­other Russ­ian con­tra­dic­tion.


The Russian President is “pri­mar­ily re­garded as a fa­ther fig­ure, as some­body who pro­vides ma­te­r­ial ben­e­fits and who dis­ci­plines or pun­ishes cor­rupt civil ser­vants and thiev­ing oli­garchs.”

Dmitry Enteo and “God’s Will”

One strange leader called Dmitry Enteo has been making headlines in Russia since 2012 through his public stunts against anti-Christian art, anti-Christian laws, and pro-abortion, pro-homosexual activists. He is the leader of the Orthodox activist group “God’s Will“. (Here is Google’s English translation.)

Enteo’s followers, about 500 in all in twelve Russian cities, are mostly young men and women in their twenties, like Enteo himself.  This is contrary to most current religious movements in the United States, which seem to have a high representation of older people, particularly Baby Boomers.  A Christian movement full of young people is one that points the way towards a spiritual awakening.

Most recently, Enteo has made Russian headlines for his attack on a museum that displayed anti-Christian art.  On August 14, Enteo and eight or nine followers visited a museum exhibit of underground art from Soviet times, including several that mocked or blasphemed Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and John the Baptist. Enteo and his followers smashed up some of the particularly blasphemous pieces, refusing to leave until the end of the exhibit. Police, however, arrested them and ultimately charged Enteo a token fine of 500 rubles (about $7 US), a fine that Enteo vows he will not pay.

This is one of the interesting aspects of these God’s Will protests, the fact that the ruling authorities are either letting them go or giving them token punishments. Good for Russia!


Dmitry Enteo and his supporters praying at the walls of the Moscow City Court while it heard appeals against the sentence of Pussy Riot.

I had a difficult time learning about Enteo, as almost all of the articles about him and his movement are in Russian. Google Translate interpreted these articles rather poorly.

The following is a cleaned-up translation of Enteo’s article from the Russian site  It’s likely that I made several small mistakes in interpreting Google’s mess, but the overall facts should be correct:

Dmitry Tsorionov (b. February 13, 1989), also known under the alias Dimitri Enteo or just Enteo, is a Russian Orthodox activist, the founder of the movement “God’s Will”, and a member of the Prophet Daniel Orthodox Missionary Movement. He is known for his outrageous and provocative actions, which involve many militant actions estimated by human rights activists to be illegal. As a young-earth creationist he considers unscientific the theory of evolution.

Dmitry Tsorionov was born on February 13, 1989 in Moscow (according to other sources – in North Ossetia). His Mother was Russian and his father was an Ossetian. By his own request, in 2012 he graduated from the Moscow State Institute with a degree in economics and served in the Airborne Forces of the Russian Federation. He also studied at the correspondence theologian school at Saint Tikhon’s Orthodox University, where he was expelled for academic failure in August 2013. In 2010 he converted to Orthodoxy [from “neo-Buddhism and Hinduism“], at about the same time joining the “Prophet Daniel Orthodox Missionary Movement.” As of 2014, he was unemployed.

Dmitry Tsorionov advocates a theocracy, believing that the Bible has in itself the answers to all current challenges of our time.  He opposes scientism, is a young-earth creationist and a geocentrist, believing that all heavenly bodies revolve around the earth, whose age is 7522 years (2013).  He calls the theory of evolution an unscientific and unproven theory, advocating the abolition of its teaching in schools. He is a staunch opponent of abortion, convinced that human life originates at the time of fertilization. He opposes the propaganda of homosexuality, considering the latter a disease and calling it “sodomy”. Enteo’s followers call themselves Orthodox missionaries, considering Orthodoxy the only true Christianity from which all other Christan religions flow. Infidels and their supporters are wrong. Enteo supports the deputy Vitaly Milonova. In an interview he said that he positions himself as a civic activist, and that the actions of his organization are not beyond the law.

Promotions and actions
Dmitry “Enteo” is known for his outrageous and provocative actions and deeds. Some of them, according to the people affected by them, as well as human rights defenders, are against the law.

On August 27, 2012 in the Paveletsky railway station in Moscow, Enteo and a group of supporters approached a young man inside the train and tore off his T-shirt with the image of punk band “Pussy Riot” [the image showed a derogatory depiction of the Virgin Mary]. Activists attacked a supporter of the group, shouting, “Holy Rus, keep the Orthodox faith! So it will be with any scoffer!” Video of the action was published on YouTube. The owner of the T-shirt, Alex Myslivets, went to the police, where they refused to initiate a criminal case, citing lack of evidence under article “Deliberate destruction or damage of property” due to the fact that the material damage amounted to 800 rubles, too small for the initiation of proceedings under this article. Also, the police had not seen in the actions of the activists a gross violation of public order, socially dangerous action, degrading treatment of citizens, or religious hatred, and they referred to the lack of witnesses of the incident. In turn, Paul Pins, Chairman of the Human Rights Society “Agora”, commented on the situation, pointing out that in the jurisprudence of these attacks, they qualify as robbery. The South West transport prosecutor’s office in Moscow later deemed the decision not to institute criminal proceedings illegal and cancelled it, the case for an additional test.  Subsequently Enteo said in an interview that ripping the T-shirt was not an action, but it was his “personal act as a citizen and as an Orthodox believer” with the act described in the following words: “I believe that this is a normal reaction of any normal citizen, for whom God and His Mother is a real person.”


The shirt in question.

On the same day, 27 August 2012, Enteo entered the Moscow theater documentary play “Theatre.doc” with a group of supporters where they tried to disrupt those who were there at this point in the show, which was dedicated to the cause of Pussy Riot.

The next day, shortly before midnight Enteo and his followers entered the museum of erotic art “Point G”. One of the protesters carried a book with an Orthodox cross on the cover, the other a package with a brick. A participant of the action recorded the event on an iPad. Activists demanded to see the museum director Alexander Donskoi, who was at the time in Arkhangelsk. Without waiting for the Director, Enteo handed the brick to the museum administrator who perceived this as a threat to his own life. Enteo explained his action by the fact that he was outraged by the abundance of advertising from the museum, including distributing leaflets to young children, and the “donated” brick is interpreted as a symbol of the crucifixion and repentance. Don in an interview denied these claims, stating that the museum is located in an inconspicuous place, and the flyers, in which there is a sign of the age limit “18+”, were handed out only to adults.

August 17, 2013, activists of the movement “God’s will”, headed by Dmitry Enteo participated in the dispersal of an unauthorized procession of the Pastafarians in Moscow, called “Pasta course.” Enteo’s marchers squirted ketchup on the marchers, accompanied with curses. The procession was also met with riot police who arrested eight marchers. The Pastafarians that were squirted with ketchup went to the police.

On Thursday, November 28, 2013, Tsorionov and companion Mila Yesipenko tried to disrupt the play “An Ideal Husband” directed by Konstantin Bogomolov, who was walking in the Chekhov Moscow Art Theater. Coming on the scene at the time of the prayer of the homosexual priests, the activists began chanting “Do you not understand?” “This is sacrilege” and “Stop”.  As a result, they were expelled from the theater by security guards. Some spectators applauded the instigators. The General Directorate of the Ministry of Interior of Russia in Moscow announced the arrest of two young men for disorderly conduct at the theater. In an interview with Argumenty i Fakty Enteo said in a statement that he considered it an insult to the feelings of believers, and that this led him to his attempt to ruin the play. The activist also initiated a petition for its ban.

In the evening of February 20, 2014 Enteo, in the company of another young man, presumably another member of the movement “God’s Will”, Alexander Fomichev, entered the Moscow Museum of History of the Gulag where they attacked bookshop officer and Orthodox believer Dmitry Davydov. A surveillance camera captured Tsorionov spitting at the employee of the museum, while a second young man walked around the counter, behind which the employee stood, and began to beat Davydov. According to the testimony of the victim, the attackers forced him to publicly apologize for a statement he’d made in an interview about one of the participants of the disturbance of the performance at the Moscow Art Theatre, and in the case of Davydov’s further disobedience they threatened to beat him even more. Earlier, Davydov had said in an interview with “” that the girl Mila Yesipenko had not taken communion in the Church for two years. Alex Fomichev, after the incident, announced on his social network page his withdrawal from the “God’s Will” movement. ATS Tver district of Moscow adopted a statement on the attack on Davydova.

The activities and views of Dmitry Enteo undergo tough criticism from both the Liberals and by Orthodox religious leaders.

Leonid Y. Gozman has condemned the actions of Enteo and, after an interview with him, said: “I am extremely upset that the  absolutely wild, medieval attitude expressed by our guest today received the support of 56 percent of our listeners. It makes a very worrying outlook for the future of our country.”

Deacon Andrei Kuraev accused the activists of not understanding the scriptures in a rude manner by offering to reduce the temperature and the last stop “wank on schedule.” He also pointed out that the activist might have had the wrong mentors, and he called for Enteo’s speedy understanding and to correct his errors.

Philosopher Alexander Zelichenko called Enteo an “anti-clerical propaganda genius“, and suggested that his movement can be used by secret detractors to discredit the Russian Orthodox Church.

God’s Will has also worked to pass Russia’s anti-gay propaganda law, disrupted Russian concerts for Marilyn Manson and Cannibal Corpse, and thrown a pig head this year at another theater showing Oscar Wilde’s “An Ideal Husband”.


The pig’s head thrown at Moscow’s prestigious Chekhov Moscow Art Theater in protest of a staging of Oscar Wilde’s comedy “An Ideal Husband,” which deals with issues of promiscuity and adultery in contemporary Moscow and features a naked woman hung on the ceiling, representing the crucified Jesus, while an actor representing a homosexual priest worships her.

Enteo also gave an interview for Pravda back in 2012, when he first began to make headlines, where he describes how he began his crusade and what his beliefs are.  A few excerpts:

In 2009 I went to the mission school of Father Daniel Sysoev – thirty days after the murder of Daniel. The air was permeated with all the beauty of martyrdom, a feat, because for a Christian death for Christ is the highest that can be. . .

. . . The priest Daniel Sysoev made a spiritual explosion, he inspired thousands of people around the world to missionary work, and he clearly outlined the theological problems and their solutions. I learned in the missionary school of Daniel Sysoev, and for three years have been actively engaged in missionary work in many different directions, one of my directions – neo-Hinduism. . .

. . . I work in the service of helping people affected by the oriental cults, and we have met dozens of people suffering from eastern practices—yoga, meditation, reiki, occultism, Hare Krishna, and so on. We are engaged in a variety of missionary directions, working with prisoners, homeless people, migrant workers, giving them leaflets, telling them about the Orthodox faith, conducting interviews, and the Moscow mission trip tours across Russia. At the moment, this is my missionary work. . .

. . . My public activity began in the spring of this year, after we continuously followed every attack on the Russian Orthodox Church. In general, many Christians, after seeing the attacks on our shrines have ceased to be lukewarm, and they have realized that such attacks fundamentally undermine our moral values, and we also started to be more active and united. . .

. . . Many people turn to me through my page on the site “Vkontakte”, and we interact: one written on the site, other components of press releases, others pray for us, the fourth provides legal assistance and vseostalnye go with us for stocks. So it turns out that we combine active believers as well as Russian citizens who are not indifferent to what our society will be tomorrow. Our organization does not have a name, we are ordinary citizens who want to build a civil society that takes into account the interests of most citizens. A majority is Orthodox, who are now driven back over the fence, and were converted to marginalized sectors of society, but for them it will not be so. We are working on the social level because when society says the government is taking care of a problem, as long as society is silent, the government does nothing. Therefore, we learn not to simply pass by, but to transform the world around us, not just to pray, but also to act. . .

More information about them, in their own words, can be found here.

Does Enteo Go Too Far?

I am impressed by this Dmitry Enteo fellow.  His actions may seem over-the-top to us, but whom has he really hurt?  Without seriously injuring anyone, Enteo has fought against those forces who are deliberately trying to undermine Christian society through their endless promotion of corruption and filth under the guise of peace and liberty.


Enteo pelts eggs at homosexual rights protesters at the walls of the Russian Duma. The protesters were picketing against Russia’s adoption of the anti-gay propaganda law.

Notice that Enteo is not simply attacking non-Christians or homosexuals because they exist, but those who are advancing agendas to degrade Christian morality and society, either deliberately or through direct, visible support.

In fact, Enteo’s attacks are less than half of his work: he serves as a missionary to non-Believers in Russia and helps the homeless.  I doubt that he is cursing his would-be proselytes and squirting them with ketchup to convert them to Christ.

Do we who are Christian believe that our faith is an absolute, universal truth for all of humanity? Or is Christianity just one path out of many and it doesn’t really matter what people believe so long as we are all nice to one another?  It’s long past the time for us to live our faith and stand up for it!

I know that I myself can shed more worldly attitudes and possessions and work for the benefit of Christ’s church.  If we who are Christian all take our faith more seriously, not only by improving our lives and helping the lost, but by standing up to our enemies, then we could drive away the forces of evil, with God’s help and mercy, and restore sanity to our lands.


Clusivius-sqThe faith of Dmitry Enteo is something to admire, but his physical attacks against people do go at least a little too far.

Tearing an anti-Christian shirt off of an unsuspecting man, or roughing up an Orthodox museum director for unjust statements against another follower, such actions violate Christ’s teachings.  Should we physically assault our enemies or destroy their property in defense of our Lord?  Did He not say that we must love our enemies and pray for our persecutors?

Michael Brown at WND has a good article relating to this subject:

3) Jesus explicitly taught against fighting back. In the Garden of Gethsemane, shortly before His crucifixion, He told Peter to put down his sword, explaining that all who lived by the sword would die by the sword (Matthew 26:51-54).

4) The entire testimony of the New Testament is against us violently fighting against our persecutors. Instead, we are called to pray for them (Matthew 5:43-48), we are described as lambs going to the slaughter (Romans 8:35-39; 1 Peter 2:21-23), we are promised persecution (2 Timothy 3:12; John 15:18-20), and only those who suffer with Jesus will reign with Him (Romans 8:16-18). Great is their reward in heaven (Matthew 5:10-12).

5) Jesus told His disciples that if they were persecuted in one city, they should flee to another (Matthew 10:22-25). He could have given military alternatives as well, but He did not.

Granted, Brown is talking about fighting against Christian enemies with the sword (and in fairness to Brown, he lists some examples where it is acceptable for Christians to use the sword).  Enteo isn’t fighting people with deadly weapons, but his use of physical force against the enemies of Christ follows the spirit of the sword too closely.

Enteo’s other non-violent actions, such as disrupting plays and harassing politicians, fit (just) within the acceptable bounds of Christian activism, and are commendable.

But Christians should be wary of following Enteo’s violent example.


ConcorditasIt is difficult to decide the best ways to resist the all-pervasive wickedness that Western culture produces, yet Christians must resist it if we want ourselves and our children to keep the faith in the West.

Most of us choose a defensive posture.  We live our lives, trying to improve ourselves with God’s help, to resist evil, but very few of us take the offensive against our enemies.  It often seems like a struggle just to walk our faiths.

But our desire to get along and play nice has led our Christian nations to fall into darker and darker places for at least the past one hundred years, and definitely the last fifty.

When someone rises up who takes the fight for Christianity to the dens of the enemy, who causes them no real physical harm, just shock and humiliation, are we going to nitpick his tactics while we ourselves remain passively in our seats?

Jesus Himself overturned the tables of the money changers in the Temple in Jerusalem, and He forcibly drove them out.  Surely the Jews of His day considered His actions to be shockingly violent.

Enteo’s actions are extreme, but the actions of the enemy are even more extreme.  Enteo might sometimes err a little too far towards violence in his exploits, but he has never destroyed anyone’s life the way the Left has done.  He has consistently fought for the faith against the forces of evil.

Enteo deserves our support.

A Green Light For Russian Invasion in Ukraine, But Putin Won’t Take the Bait


– 1 September 2014 –


Janus-small“It is not in the cards for us to see a military confrontation between Russia and the United States in this region,” said Barack Obama during a news conference after complaining about a much-hyped Russian invasion of Ukraine on August 27.

“It’s in the interests of Ukraine, Europe and Russia that the crisis should have a political, not a military solution,” said Federica Mogherini, the EU’s prospective foreign policy head.

With such assurances that the West will do nothing to stop him, it’s tempting to wonder why Putin hasn’t already invaded Ukraine in full force.

While there is no doubt that the West lacks the resolve to militarily support their sponsored government in Kiev, Putin is probably hesitent to draw his country into another potential Afghanistan. He might even smell a Western trap. Nevertheless, he boasts that the Russian army could take Kiev within two weeks, but history is riddled with such failed bluster.

Suppose that this simple invasion of Ukraine was bogged down.

After failing to quickly conquer Ukraine, Russia would expose itself as a fraud that can’t even project its power at its own doorstep, let alone the world stage. Right now, Russia is gaining international respect as a counterforce against the West, but this would evaporate overnight should the Russians flounder in Ukraine.

With Russia tangled in Ukraine, the West could feel free to topple the Assad regime in Syria even without political justification from the conveniently horrifying gnats of the Islamic State-ISIS(L). Pro-Russian governments in Belarus, Armenia, or Kazakhstan might face Western-backed color revolutions. Western-sponsored street protests like those of 2011 to 2013 could threaten Putin in Moscow with impunity, just as they were used to topple Ukraine last spring.

Even if Putin could conquer Ukraine in two weeks, he would be foolish to do so. The Western Ukrainians want no part of Russia, and he would face a Western-backed insurgency there for years. Russia can ill afford it.

At best, if easy victory is certain, Russia could limit its occupation to “Novorossiya” and avoid most of the insurgency.  But what would Russia gain by such a token invasion either economically, politically, or militarily?  Not enough to justify the risk.

Putin is too smart to gamble everything on an open invasion of Ukraine.

Instead, with essentially a green light from the West, Russia will probably step up military aid to the Eastern Ukrainian rebels, and it’s possible that the rebels could even gain some ground in the next few months (though this seems doubtful, considering the rebels’ lack of success so far). And the much ballyhooed Russian invasions might well continue and increase, assuming that they’re real to any extent.

And what does this mean for the people of Ukraine? With neither the East nor the West willing to make a strong commitment to their proxies, that poor country must endure a long, drawn-out war.

Ukraine and the West: Let Crimea Go



Patulcius-sqNow that the Ukrainian protesters have succeeded in chasing Viktor Yanukovich from office, the world seems surprised that the Russians have acted so decisively to retain their influence in the Crimean Peninsula, where ethnic Russians form about 60% of the population and Russian speakers almost 80%.

Yes, the West must make a show of collectively wringing their hands while urging the Russians to withdraw or else the great leaders of the West will consider imposing the terrifying reprisals of economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation. In other words, the West will do next to nothing despite having encouraged this situation from the start.

And the West should do nothing.

The West should have stayed out of Ukraine since the beginning of these pro-EU protests, which were largely fanned and fed by Western NGO’s. What are our interests in this game, besides irritating Russia? The nearly bankrupt country is no political or economic asset for the EU or US. Presumably this is a game to provoke Putin into looking like a despot in order to justify more meddling within Russia itself, or perhaps to help justify a war later on. If the Western manipulators could fan a civil war in Ukraine, then maybe enough Russian people would grow sick of Putin’s government that they would rally in the streets until he resigns or flees as Yanukovich did.

But Russian opposition isn’t very likely. Russians seem to be rallying behind Putin in this affair, which only makes sense. Most of them see this as a patriotic cause, with Russians and Russian supporters under a perceived (and admittedly exaggerated) threat from the nationalist Ukrainians, or from a passive-aggressive West. Would Americans respond any differently if the tables were turned and Russians were encouraging pro-Cuban protests in Puerto Rico, or socialist forces in Mexico, that ultimately overthrew their governments?

Ukraine falls well within Russia’s sphere of influence where it has remained for hundreds of years. Half the people support Russian influence there. The country is home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. No one could realistically expect that Putin would do nothing while Ukraine slips into the arms of the European Union and NATO.

At the very least Putin must protect Russia’s naval interests in Crimea, which is proving quite easy to accomplish because of the large Russian population. Additionally, he can fan separatist interests in southern and eastern Ukraine like he did in Georgia, where Russian troops have secured the independence of the de facto statelets of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Or he can once again take advantage of the inevitable disunity and corruption among Ukraine’s political elites in order to restore that country to Russia’s fold, as Russia ultimately did after the Orange Revolution, a scenario that seems unlikely because the protesters are specifically calling for closer integration with the EU.

Pro-Western Ukrainians should welcome any separation of these provinces because it will dilute the electoral power of their political opposition within the remainder of Ukraine. Even the loss of Crimea and Sevastopol, with their overwhelming pro-Russian political tilt, would boost the chances for a permanent pro-Western electoral domination of the rest of Ukraine. But monetary interests play a part as well, and these regions (particularly those of eastern Ukraine) contribute to much of the country’s economy.

If the West really cared about the liberty of the people of Ukraine, they would accept the separation of Crimea and any other portions of eastern and southern Ukraine that might demand secession. Do the wishes of this part of Ukraine count for less than those of the western half? The West could negotiate its acceptance of these breakaway territories on the condition that these lands remain technically independent nations (rather than Russian annexes). This would seem a reasonable approach considering Western support for the secession of Kosovo from Serbia in 2008, which Russia opposed.   And because of the Georgian example, it’s very possible that Putin would accept such a compromise.

However, the West has little interest in the well-being of the Ukrainian people, nor of peace with Russia. Our nihilistic elites are more interested in spreading pro-Western progressivism into Russia, even if it takes another world war to do it. If a few million Ukrainians die in the process, well, it wouldn’t be the first time, would it? The Ukrainian protesters are just pawns in their nasty little game.


Russian military movements in Crimea as of March 3.


Clusivius-sqIt is difficult to say how much the recent protests were fed by Western meddlers and how much arose from legitimate demands by a sizable portion of the Ukrainian people. Certainly the people of Ukraine have much to complain about in their corrupt government.

If the people of western Ukraine have legitimate grievances against their government, and they are calling for their EU neighbors to intervene, does the West have any interest in helping them? Maybe the under-the-table support that we’ve given them so far is about as much as we can responsibly give, and perhaps we might negotiate with Russia over the partition of the country.

Another question comes to mind, however: is a military clash between the United States and Russia inevitable?

If yes, then we should do everything possible to weaken and isolate the Russians before we provoke them to either strike the West or to give us an excuse to attack Russia ourselves. The current situation does share some similarities with events that led to the German invasion of Czechoslovakia in 1938, an event that demonstrated Hitler’s expansionist intentions and served as a precursor to World War II.  If war is truly inevitable, it is better to fight Russia when it is weak and divided.

But so far, Russia has not shown expansionist intentions and seems only interested in operating within its traditional spheres of influence: the far east of Europe, the Caucasus, and parts of Central Asia, and perhaps the Slavic portions of the Balkans.

It is the West that has encroached within this sphere, presumably with the consent of the affected nations. And so far Russia has accommodated most of this expansion, particularly the growth of the EU into Eastern Europe.

But Putin has shown less accomodation to the spread of Western influence in the Caucasus and Ukraine. If Russia’s response to the Rose Revolution in Georgia is any example of what we could expect in Ukraine, then Russia will militarily support breakaway republics.

At worst, Russia could simply invade Ukraine and set up a puppet government. I doubt that the West would do much more against a blatant invasion and overthrow than we are doing against Russia’s takeover of Crimea, and this Western weakness might well provoke Putin to invade, especially since the Russian Duma has granted Putin the authority to do that very thing. But this would embroil Russia in an insurgency or even a civil war, a situation that Russia can ill afford economically and that Putin would pay for politically. As time passes without a full-fledged Russian invasion, such a scenario seems less and less likely.

In any case, this is no recipe for inevitable conflict with Russia. If there will be war, it will arise because of Western meddling and provocation, not Russia’s hunger for expansion.

Many people believe that the Western nations are the “good guys”, the peaceful ones who stand up for the civil rights of oppressed peoples and extol freedom for all. In some ways, this is correct. Certainly Russia and (especially) China are no beacons of individual liberty.

But increasingly the West, particularly the UK and United States, has shown a darker side. People have more freedom to consume than ever before, be it physical products or drugs or sex of almost any sort. But real liberties are on the wane. Increasingly, we are being monitored, tagged, silenced, and fenced in. And the Western elites are on the move to expand their power across the world, sowing unrest in previously stable nations and using their economic power to raise one group over another, to corrupt officials, and to manipulate public opinion.

Seemingly only a few nations, such as Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, stand in their way. I have a feeling that a world war is intended to deal with these nations as well as to quell domestic resistance in the nations of the West.

Is war with Russia inevitable? Only if the West makes it so.


ConcorditasIt is a pity that the people of Ukraine have no real prospects for liberty and self determination. Their leaders from just about any political stripe have shown themselves to be corrupt sell-outs to outside interests, and Ukrainian grievances are fanned by these same outside interests to promote foreign power and influence rather than the well-being of the people. Freedom-loving Ukrainians are encouraged to fill the streets only to get shot down, and what good will come from their sacrifices?

While the West should stand behind the pro-Western people in Ukraine and seek a diplomatic solution to Ukraine’s political troubles, we should refrain from meddling in their internal affairs and certainly accept that the Russian-speaking portions of the country, and Russia itself, have legitimate interests there as well.

Instead the West will destabilize Ukraine in an attempt to get at Russia.

  • May 2018
    S M T W T F S
    « Feb    
%d bloggers like this: