Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Anti-Russian propaganda insists that Putin is just like Hitler and that everyone needs to stop him; otherwise, he will conquer the entire world. This propaganda is far from original, and for two reasons: first, because NATO leaders always compare the villain of the day to Hitler; second, because anti-Russian paranoia has been more senseless in the past. In Imperiofobía y leyenda negra, Spanish historian María Elvira Roca Barea recounts that in the mid-19th century, Australian newspapers seriously discussed whether the Russians would invade Melbourne or Sydney first. As crazy as Kaja Kallas is, I don’t think she can imagine Putin ruling over kangaroos.

However, if we compare the way Putin is treated by Western powers to the way Hitler was treated, we see a great difference. Except for Churchill, Western leaders never said that Hitler would wage expansionist wars until he was stopped by military means, even though he had written down in a book his intention to conquer Lebensraum in the East. Most likely, they believed that Hitler was a Russian problem, and the Russians didn’t matter. A liberal might counter that Chamberlain’s negligence served as a lesson for future generations, who would therefore worry about new Hitlers.

However, there is a much more similar precedent: Oliver Cromwell’s narrative against Spain, the epitome of papism that would never stop expanding and with which there could be no negotiation. Let us read an excerpt from a speech he made to parliament in 1656, shortly after trying to seize the Hispaniola island and taking Jamaica instead: “your great Enemy is the Spaniard. He is a natural enemy. He is naturally so; he is naturally so throughout,-by reason of that enmity that is in him against whatsoever is of God. […] You could not get an honest or honourable Peace from him: it was sought by the Long Parliament; it was not attained. It could not be attained with honour and honesty. I say, it could not be attained with honour and honesty. […] The French, all the Protestants in Germany, all have agreed, That his design was the empire of the whole Christian World, if not more.” This is the script used today in the Ukrainian War: Putin is the incarnation of evil (they just don’t talk about God because they are atheists); it is impossible to negotiate with Putin; Putin, if he lets himself, will conquer even France.

Some people also point out that Russia generates hysteria in the West because of its conservatism. In this I see another analogy with Cromwell’s stance: his fear was that the power with the oldest religion on the continent would regain authority over his subjects, who were often its followers. In England, Protestantism was imposed from top to bottom on the population. First, the Anglican monarchs repressed the Catholics, and then Cromwell continued the repression of Catholics – including the Irish, whom he barbarously conquered – and extended it to the Anglicans, due to their support for the king. Combined, Catholics and Anglicans in Great Britain made up the majority of the population; nevertheless, he legitimized his government by protecting minorities. In Guizot’s words, “he effectively protected Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, Millenarians, and sectarians of all kinds from one another, reminding them that they had all been persecuted a short time ago and that they owed each other charity and support” (République d’Angleterre, vol. 2, p. 152). In addition, he invited the Jews to return to England, guaranteeing them freedom of worship equal to that of other sects.

Thus, Cromwell has in common with today’s liberal elites the fact that he governs for minorities while repressing majorities. Today’s liberal elites not only use Gay Pride as an indicator of civility (Israel has a large one, Gaza has none) and, in some countries, can send to jail anyone who does not believe that women do not have penises. They do this while considering themselves kind and democratic – because conservatism is the work of the devil or, in atheist times, the work of Hitler.

Putin’s Russia is disturbing not only for external reasons, economics and geopolitics, but also for internal reasons. Russia shows Western subjects that there is a place on the planet where people with common sense can be free and normal. It is, therefore, a constant call for internal rebellion, which must be exorcised at any cost.