Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The infiltration of Nazis, Nazi sympathizers, descendants or not from Nazis, and Nazi collaborators, into the corridors of Western power does not mean a newly seized opportunity for the glorification and whitewashing of all those who were on the opposite side of the Russian, Soviet or Bolshevik divide. This authentic movement to rewrite history and reuse the ideological potential that has been installed represents, above all, the closing of a historical circle, initiated by the most reactionary and fascistic sectors of the Western elite.

Canada is the perfect example of this historical loop closure, namelly, about reusing this ideological installed capacity and recycling it (and bleaching it) in historical terms. That’s why the episode that took place in the Canadian House of Representatives, which in unison paid tribute to Yaroslv Honka as a fervent freedom fighter, as having “fought the Russians in the Second World War”, was very far from being a simple fluke, a lapse of judgment on the part of Anthony Rota — the House speaker — or a mere courtesy on the occasion of Volodomyr Zelensky’s visit.

Like Yaroslav Honka, countless figures from the Ukrainian diaspora, especially from Galicia, who have been documented as having collaborated with the Nazi forces and, above all, as having participated in crimes against humanity, have been or are remembered, honored and paid tribute to, on an ongoing basis, in Ukrainian society. From involvement in political parties, to public office election, to the funding and promotion of educational and academic activities, these figures with a dark past have found in contemporary Canada the perfect habitat for their historical recycling and recovery. Just as they have found in this country the perfect refuge for their economic recovery.

When Franklin Roosevelt, on the subject of the “Safe Haven” project — which aimed to identify and seize the wealth that the Nazi elite kept in neutral countries — said that if the Nazi elite managed to keep their wealth, they could later use it to regain power, perhaps he wasn’t too far off the mark. Indeed, Roosevelt should not have been unaware that people like the Dulles brothers (Allan Dulles and John Dulles) supported the Third Reich in various ways — including by raising funds on Wall Street — and, at the same time, not only participated in the U.S. Council of Foreign Relations, but, in the case of Allan Dulles, was also an agent of the OSS (Office of Strategic Services), which preceded the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency).

People like the Dulles brothers, supporters of the project to rearm Nazi Germany in order to use it as an element in the fight against “communism”, promoted this operation, supporting it financially in banks like the BIS (Bank of International Settlements), or even in J.P. Morgan, which called Roosevelt a “class traitor”, not only supported the strengthening of Nazi Germany and the Berlin-Rome axis, but later recruited prominent Nazi operatives to establish what would become the CIA and the U.S. secret services, in general.

This is why what is happening in Canada, particularly at the University of Alberta — but not only there — and with the CIUS (Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies), represents nothing more than the materialization of the fears of people like Roosevelt, who, while not fervent communists, were also far from representing the most reactionary factions of the Anglo-American financial elite.

Thus, when Petro Savaryn founded CIUS, it was he himself who made real the fears of those who knew what it would mean to house people of Bandera’s stature in free societies. Having been whitewashed and retrained, these figures, with their in-depth knowledge of how to fight — with extreme violence, it must be said — the Soviet enemy first and the Russian enemy second, could now be used as if they were prominent examples of the fight for freedom. In its memorial, the UCC (Ukrainian Congress of Canada) gives a recent account of Savaryn’s life, but carefully erases everything that didn’t happen in Canada. The dark past is not to be repeated, and to achieve this outcome these people relied on the description and complicit silence from Canadian authorities. Thus, Savaryn is presented as an honorable Ukrainian who, from “1982 to 1986, was Chancellor of the University of Alberta,

The University of Alberta’s memorial to Petro Savaryn says everything about this historical recycling and whitewashing: not a word about his participation in the infamous Waffen-SS Galician Division, which committed such brutal massacres against civilian populations of Poles, Jews, Gypsies and Soviets. It’s as if no such thing had ever happened and as if the most important event in Petro (Peter) Savaryn’s life was the founding of CIUS and not his collaboration with the Nazi forces. To say that Ukrainian diaspora organizations in Canada honor and sing the stories of Petro Savaryn in their ceremonies would be redundant. After all, Canada was one of the destinations for thousands of these operatives, who emigrated there from 1945 onwards. Many of them should have been present at Nuremberg, but instead they are honored in the “very democratic” Western parliaments.

However, Petro Savaryn’s example is far from the only one, and it has to be said that this reality is not unknown to the Canadian public. Several media outlets — more alternative than mainstream — have warned of the real scandal of “Nazi” subsidies at the University of Alberta. The “Honka” episode triggered the unearthing of a reality that was supposed to remain hidden for some time, until nothing could be done. Or until the generations who remember the Nazi horror die off. That’s why the Governor General of Canada’s office itself apologized for awarding the Order of Canada to a veteran of the Ukrainian SS Galicia Division. The recipient was none other than Petro Savaryn. Was it incompetence? Lack of knowledge? Don’t you investigate someone before awarding him or her a prize? Believe what you like, but it’s the practice that counts.

And the fundamental question remains. How is it possible that people like Savaryn, or Petro (Peter) Jacyk — who applied for conscription to the same Nazi forces and who has his name engraved on countless initiatives, organizations and academic programs in Ukraine, Canada and the USA — have managed to go unnoticed by anyone who repudiates Nazi ideology, however masked as it is?

This question is answered by the attitudes that today whitewash Stepan Bandera and the Kiev regime’s cult of this figure, as well as the slide of Western politics to the most backward ideologies (in so many ways), under the cover of this whitewashing and the resurgence of Russophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia and the deepest and most atrocious reactionaryism. Petro Savaryn himself was president of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta, a so called “center-right” movement with a name likely to encompass the entire liberal, neoliberal and conservative political center.

People like Honka, who contributed $30,000 to CIUS, a sum that the University of Alberta has said it will return, are just the tip of a veil that courageous people like Owen Schalk, Taylor C. Noakes, Pers Rudling and Harrison Samphir have been uncovering and denouncing. Other paradigmatic examples of Nazi collaborationists who have gone unscathed and whose finances and CVs have flourished in the so-called “liberal democracies” are Levko Babij or Roman Kolinsnyk, both also from the SS Galician Division. The fact that there are monuments across Canada glorifying the 14th SS Division (14th Waffen SS Grenadier Division (1st Galician)) and the fact that they have been “vandalized” with graffiti denouncing their Nazi record, was not enough to cause an uproar, nor even from from those who present themselves as champions of Western democracy.

Millions of dollars for scholarships and study programs on “Ukrainian nationalism”, told under the fashion that, for example, appears in the Ukrainian Encyclopedia translated and published by CIUS, whitewashing Nazi collaborationism on the part of “Ukrainian nationalists” and sneaking Nazi-fascist ideology into Western academia, explain much of what is happening today and why it is possible to witness this Russophobic drift that could lead the world to a nuclear confrontation, without a vehement and comprehensive peace movement emerging. This episode, which took place in Canada, is no different from what is happening in many other places, particularly in the U.S. and throughout Europe. In Ukraine, it’s not even worth talking about. No one can say they don’t know.

But then, why don’t Jewish academics say anything? Why don’t they denounce it? This is where the connections are made between twin doctrines, daughters of the same father and mother, equally supremacist, extremist, sectarian and segregationist. This is the case of Zionism and Nazism. As Jeremy Appel points out in the “Expats & Allies” podcast, the exchange is simple: Ukrainian academics flag students and professors who take anti-Israel stances and, in return, the powerful Zionist academic diaspora turns a blind eye to the growing Nazism in Western academia.

For those who consider the Zionist-Nazi connection impossible and have learned nothing from the experience of Theodor Herzl (one of the fathers of Jewish Zionism), who considered anti-Semites to be his main allies, history has proved him right once again. When it comes to Palestine and the suppression of its national identity, Zionism’s most urgent priority, Nazism allies itself with this equally supremacist, extremist, genocidal and dictatorial form of governance. And this is another circle that is closing, demonstrating that the whitewashing and recycling of Nazi ideology is not a historical accident, but a project, which initially failed because the strength of the USSR and its peoples defeated it, but which, reused, recycled and whitewashed by the USA and its allies, is now, in a second historical opportunity, fulfilling its original role. The establishment of a world superfederation under U.S. leadership. The same superfederation that Mackinder spoke of with regard to the British Empire and its salvation.

The reality we are witnessing now is nothing more than the closing of a circle that began with the creation of fascism at the beginning of the 20th century, during the period of the decline of the British Empire, and which Cinthya Chung describes so well in her masterly book “The Empire on Which the Black Sun Never Set: The Birth of International Fascism and Anglo-American Foreign Policy”, in which she masterfully exposes, documents and substantiates how fascist doctrines were an instrument of the British and Western imperial and capitalist elite. In that initial phase of the fascist circle, which resulted in Nazism itself, at a time of vital challenge imposed by the very existence of the USSR, it wasn’t as easy as it is today to clearly identify in these doctrines their instrumental character in relation to Anglo-Saxon imperialism and the advanced, Western capitalist system itself, today known as neoliberalism, globalism or North American hegemonism and which corresponds to the imperialist phase of capitalism itself.

However, at the end of this circle, Nazism and its father, fascism, are once again used as an instrument of aggression against peoples who oppose Western imperialism, now in the era of financialized, transnational, imperial capitalism. Financial, rentier capitalism and its transnational, federative dimension, of which Ursula Von Der Leyen’s European Union is a corollary, emerged in the upper phase of capitalism. Once again, Nazism, as with Germany in the 1930s, is used, this time in relation to Ukraine, to contain, combat and attack any Russian, Chinese or other opponent that represents an acute or strategic threat to Anglo-American hegemonic designs.

In this sense, Zionism is not a different experience, implemented in a similar way by academia and the centers of political power. In this case, Israel and Jewish Zionism, as a reactionary, colonial and supremacist expression of Judaism, are used against the peoples in the Middle East who oppose U.S. hegemonic domination. Just like in Taiwan, the Philippines, or what about Venezuela, Argentina or Brazil, where the most reactionary and traitorous bigots, reminiscent of Pinochet and today (wrongly in my view) directly linked to Trump, is used to contain sovereigntist movements that resist handing over their natural resources to the supranational power of the USA.

And all this is happening at breakneck speed, not with Trump, but with the Biden administration. And right in the era of Macron, Von Der Leyen, Baerbock, Sholz, Costa and Sunak, in which the European Union is once again governed by a majority of ultra-reactionary, Russophobic executives, who make the rewriting of the history of the Second World War their red carpet (save the etymological error of the color used) for power. A power that annihilates sovereignties and submits peoples to rentier elites who make happen what they claimed that would only happen under socialism, but which is now happening instead and precisely under the advanced phase of capitalism: the suppression of individual property held by the working classes and its transformation into rentier property by the richest 1%.

Fascism, in the form of Nazism or Zionism, will always be the most violent, reactionary, chauvinistic and supremacist form of protecting the vital interests of the elite owners in the age of advanced capitalism. First, in its nationalist form, and today, taking it and using it as a way of imposing rentier, hegemonic and globalist imperialism. One and other coincide in handing over the property to a restricted owner elite, protected, rewarded and fed by the neoliberal state, born out from the Washington consensus and the Chicago school of thought.

And lest there be any doubt about the importance of this inhuman doctrine — such as Ukrainian Nazism — for neoliberal, globalist, transnational and supranational capitalism, disguising it under a cloak of “libertarian nationalism” against Russia’s opponent, Nazi-fascist ideology coexists not only with the most aggressive Zionism, but also with the most radical Wokism. Who hasn’t seen headlines like “Ukraine is gay” or “Azov is gay”? Who hasn’t seen the news in the NYT about the creation of LGBTQIA+ units in the Ukrainian army? Another circle closing!

They are tools of the same reality, covering a wide range of sectors in Western societies. From the radical feminist, to the homosexual, to the tattooed, machine-gun-wielding male, everyone feels comfortable under the Ukrainian trident flag, the Star of David or the U.S. flag, NATO or the starry blue of the EU. There is something that unites them all, even if, here and there, they sometimes seem different. This unity is built on the idea that, under the aura of empire, everyone fits in, as long as they don’t want the forbidden fruit of fighting imperialism and defending the sovereignty of the people. In attacking sovereign countries like Russia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Iran, Syria, Cuba, People’s Korea, Vietnam or China, everyone converges, despite the superficial and epidermic ideological differences between them.

Both the LGBTQIA+ and the more musculated Trumpists coincide in their defense of the Kiev regime, their attack on Bolivarian Venezuela or Sandinista Nicaragua. Basically, those are all forms of affirmation of national sovereignty, of nation states that don’t bow to the Western superfederative yoke. No, it’s not communism that scares them: it’s the sovereignty of the peoples. And under this umbrela, everyone is united, with or without rainbows, with or without Palestine. The Palestinian struggle, in this respect, represents no more than a setback, not divisive enough to alienate them. Because the Palestinian struggle can be transported to the individualistic dimension of human dignity.

But when they address those who defend, with violence if necessary, this national dignity, aiming to reclaim it as a pilar of a desired nation-state, as a proud sovereign people and not as an oppressed people or as”helpless” victims of Zionist brutality, Trumpists and LGBTs don’t hesitate to agree again and to consider Hamas a “terrorist” entity. When the victim turns to armed resistance and starts conquering it’s future collectively and through war — and even brutality — then all the previous plaestinian victims are sudenly classified as terrorists, by the same that vowed to defend them as unprotected victims. However, the same that classify those palestinian fighters as “terrorists”, are the same that only exceptionaly classify Israel as a terrorista state, and never, but never, classify it’s vital supporter — USA — under such designation.

After all, it’s Hamas that’s fighting, and with Hamas the poor man’s discourse ends and the fight against what unites them begins: the empire that convinces them that they live in freedom. Even though, every day, more and more of them wake up without a home, without a job, without their health and without prospects in life. Forced to emigrate and forced to receive emigration, because it’s important for those in charge to keep wages low and accumulation circles ever more intense. This is not about praising Hamas or not, it’s abou recognising that, when treated with violence, every victim has the write tu use it against the opressor and, it’s not posible to treat someone with violence and not expect violence in return.

This puerile idealism and political childishness, which does not take into account real life but an image constructed and implanted in their minds by a system of education created and perfected for this purpose, is the same thing that explains why Nazi ideals have been able to coexist, shape and prosper in a society that believes itself to be free. Because this society doesn’t take into account what is real, what is practical, as Marx and Engels pointed out, but an idyllic construction that exists less and less in their lives. What matters is “being”, even if you “are” living under a bridge, starving and with no prospects in life.

Freedom doesn’t lie in being independent of material economic burden; freedom is sold as a discourse that can be shared. Sharing discourse is very easy, it’s more difficult to share wealth. And in this fair sharing, yes, there would be the most challenging of freedoms and the most realistic of democracies, a democracy that is not measured by the amount of money with which each person lobbies, finances, promotes and makes famous their favorite candidates. Only then would their choice be validated by the blind vote of the masses.

And this is how Western history, in the aftermath of the Second World War, secretly took advantage of, recycled and promoted the Nazi potential that had been installed, without seeming to do so. When the Canadian parliament welcomed Yaroslav Honka, it was simply giving voice to the normal practice that exists in society. The practice that nobody sees, but which exists, despite the idealistic appearance that says it doesn’t accept Nazism! Only those who start from concrete, objective practice can identify it. And this is a merit not to be overlooked when seen in the light of socio-political engineering. How can you do something while, on the surface, you appear to be doing the opposite?

After all, when something reaches a parliament, it means that the practice that embodies that proposal already exists in practice, in real life. Therefore, the tribute to the member of the SS Galicia was only intended to formally recognize a practice that had already been instituted and especially promoted and intensified after the start of the Special Military Operation. Did all the idealists wake up at that point? Where were they until then? Where were they when people like Honka and Savaryn were thriving in Canadian society? Calling those who denounced them as “Putin propagandists”!

All of this is the result of a lengthy process, which began, first, with the whitewashing of Nazism and fascism, comparing it to communism — when you compare something unacceptable to something accepted, you make the unacceptable acceptable and the acceptable unacceptable — denigrating the USSR by system and by resorting to the worst and most perverse infamies invented — or inventable — by Goebbels. On the other hand, this misrepresentation was done by hiding the still existent Nazism, pointing to the non-existent communism — read also “Russianism” — as the main enemy. We’ve even gone so far as to find the “conservative” press accusing China of being the main promoter of the globalist hegemonic strategy of Davos. As if all the Western elites in power weren’t triumphantly parading in Davos, and as if the Chinese weren’t there in disguise and to make up the fluff (like many others and carefully chosen).

And this is how populations end up hating what is not a threat and not knowing what deeply threatens them. This is a very well thought-out process, which finds its practical expression in the naturalization of the Nazi past by those who, instead of being sent to Nuremberg for the trial they deserved, went to London, Toronto or Washington.

In this upper phase of the circle, the collective West, the Western superfederation, is betting everything! It is once again in this mortal struggle that we find ourselves and it is in this historical period, both dangerous and fascinating, that we are moving and that we will see the final defeat of a project that began a century ago. Will the peoples of the world be able to defeat it? The answer lies in the multipolar world and its ability to provide the world with an alternative model. Without this alternative model, we are doomed, because without it, what already exists will always prevail, using fascism and Nazism as an instrument of domination. Again and again, as many times as necessary.

It is essential to close the circle of Nazi existence. The defeat of the Kiev regime is a fundamental step in this direction.