The belief that the Russian Revolution was the 'action of the Antichrist in the form of Israel is as beyond doubt', wrote another champion of the defeated Russian Idea, 'as will be the brutal awakening after the crowning of the Antichrist, in the person of a Urn fersal Despot from the House of David, foretold to us by the Apocalypse and now manifestly being prepared to enter the scene by the Jew-Freemasons with the worldwide support and complicity of "Christian" governments, three-quarters composed of representatives of the "chosen people" and their Christian hirelings, the proteges of the an+i-Christian Freemason-Ь ke secret alliance!'39
As we see, after almost a century of change in the Russ in Idea catechism that spanned three generations, its supporters remained politically chaste. Even into the 1920s, they still did not comprehend that the solution of the land ques. on was incomparably more important in peasant Russia than the Jewish question — however 'final' its solution — and that, after three years of carnage, what the country thirsted for most of all was peace, not the realization of imperial ambitions. The great adversary of the Russian Idea, Russian Marxism, did understand this. A young dynamic, and fie: ble Utopia of left-wing extremism, unencumbered by prejudices or a reac onary political constituency, it promised Russia what the old, moribund utopianism of right-wing extremism and imperial fantasies could not. The Russian Idea could not offer land to the peasants (it supported the landlords), nor peace to the people (that would contradict its sense of patriotism and the dream of Constantinople), nor self- determination to the national minorities (because of its dogma of the 'unified and indivisible' empire), nor, finally, even one-party dictatorship (because of its traditional hatred of political parties and attachment to absolute monarchy). Therefore it was doomed from the moment the leaders of Russian Marxism offered, and were able to deliver, to Russia all these things (not for long, it's true, except for the dictatorship).
But even such an elementary political analysis did not occur to the supporters of the emigre Russian Idea. The shock of their defeat, which seemed final at the time, disposed them rather toward an eschatological and metaphysical explanation of their calamity. For them, the Bolsheviks" victory
testifies with irrefutability that a force is operating in the world . . that is steadfastly striving to realize its dream — the affirmation of the worldwide supremacy of the 'chosen people', and which now already heads Russia officially and covertly runs all other states. For there is literally not a single state in the world where behind the representatives of official power aren't standing kikes, the true power-brokers of international politics and inspirers of internationalist socialist forces [which include the] representatives of all socialist parties, without exception, and of the working class — blind executors of the will of the 'Internationals' — tool of the Freemason-Kike potentates.40
In his book Russia and Germany, in a chapter 'Hitler's Mentors Walter Laqueur provides documentary evidence to show that the very 'idea of anti-Bolshevism as a central plank in Nazi ideology and propaganda and [the equation of] Bolshevism with World Jewry'41 was adopted by Hitler from Russian emigres ,:ving in hopes that, Russia too would one day be able to boast ot a Hitler movement.'42 Entire fortunes taken out ot Russia were disposed of by the inhabitants of 'Russian Koblenz' to support right-wing extremism in Germany.43 All that, in Laqueur's opinion, gives us grounds to speak about the 'Russian sources of National Socialism 44 Advocates of the Russian Idea, having suffered an epoch-making defeat in iheir own country, scattered throughout the world and doomed, t seemed, to political extinction, nevertheless managed to find themselves a surrogate homeland in Germany as it marched toward fascism — that same Germany which not too long ago they had characterized as 'possessing no ideals except those it has borrowed from Jewry' N E. Markov, a deputy of the Russian Duma famous for his pogrom speeches and one of the apostles of the degenerate Russian Idea, ended his days as a consultant for ihe Gestapo on Russian affairs.
There is, of course, a cruel irony in this, all the more so because, in a certain sense, the emigre proponents of the Russian Idea were right to mourn over Russia. Nothing good could be expected for her under the left-extremist Utopian regime tor which, as for any Utopia, degradation was in store. It too was to degenerate and its ideology be transformed into one of political idolatry. It is no coincidence that Moscow in 1951 — at the height of a regime of counter-reform — was more reminiscent of Sharapov's vis>on than Lenin's. Yet, none the less, unhkc the Russian Idea, the left-wing ideology found in itself the strength for fierce self-criticism, for the destruction of its own cult of political idolatry and for a desperate new attempt at reform in the 1960s. But that's already a different story, 6ne with other heroes and one which is the subject of another of my books.45
For now, let's just say that for anyone who agrees with the historical approach toward Russia that forms the basis of my analysis of the evolution of the Russian Idea, the mistake of its emigre proponents is obvious: eschatology had nothing to do with what began in Russia in 1917. As for the Antichrist, I can only paraphrase the answer of Laplacc to Napoleon: an historical explanation of the Russian tragedy does not require this hypothesis. In fact, in none of Russia's historical cycles, beginn ng with the m ddle of the sixteenth century, has her reformist potential been capable of more than two efforts at reform. Furthermore, after both of these had ended in defeat, a brutal counter- reform »variably took their place, transforming Russia nto a dictatorsl p, and at times a fortress state. (The difference between Russia's counter-reforn st regimes is nportant and we will come back to it in the conclus on.) By October 1917, alter the failure of both reformist attempts (one n 1905—07 and the second in 1917 from February to September), a counter-reform was, in essence, predetermined. The only tb'ng that wasn't clear, and was only dec ded in the course of a bloody civil war, was wh'ch of the two extremist Utopias, left- or right-wing, Commur st or fascist, would win the titanic struggle over who should determine the ideology of Russia's new counter-reform (and thereby to decide her fate in the twentieth century). The left won, the Commumst Utopia. However, metaphysics were not to blame for this, nor were the machinations of an approaching 'Universal Despot from the House of David'.
We know now that the victory of V. Lenin and L. Trotsky's Communist government was indeed a great misfortune for Russia. What we don't know is whether the victory of a N Markov and V. Purishkcvich fascist government would have been a greater or lesser misfortune. Wouldn't such a government have restored Russia to a garrison-state empire under the banner of the world-wide struggle against the Freemason —Kike conspiracy? We can obtain some kind of idea of the possible program of such a government just from the following prophecy of Yu. M. Odinzgoev, which should not be forgotten.
The same path is in sture for Europe . . . The day of reckoning lor mindless complaisance toward the scum of the earth approaches, and the peoples of Europe, who have been deceived by their own leaders, shall not be long in realizing from their own experience the nightmarish future that's been prepared for them, the Socialist-Bolshevik Eden, under the power of the Jewish Sovnarkom, which will, without a doubt, not delay in revealing its true essence — that of an inhuman, misanthropic and anti-Christian super-government striving to reduce everyone to a common denominator, to turn them into slaves of the 'chosen people' and its tsar-despot of Zionist blood. The catastrophe is near, it is at the doors 4Л