Perfidious Albion and Completing the Eurasian Civil War

What is one of the biggest lacks in contemporary historical, civilizational and geopolitical reflection? Almost completely ignoring the Anglo-Saxon role in planning, preparing and provoking both World Wars, and then leading them to achieve specific goals, with the importance going far beyond the superficially described current games of powers.

We must see it in a context of the all Anglo-Saxon will to complete the World War 1914-45 – what should also be very instructive for Europeans, especially those from the East, particularly Poles, since we have been used for a reignition of this global conflict. It is equally important to understand position of Germany, which are solely blamed for both parts of the World War, being actually also a little-conscious, manipulated misdirected tool of bigger powers.

Fallen Angel of Peace

How great was the determination of the British elite - we can see on the example of the (apparently ...) domestic policy of the UK. The leaders of the country preferred to establish serious constitutional crisis, only to force an abdication of a man naively convinced that he was able to save the European peace (needed to take care of transforming the United Kingdom into a "normal" state, focused on solving social problems, which has risen for Centuries – instead of being just the carrier for the parasitic international Financière). The overthrow of Edward VIIIwas therefore not exactly a turning point (as a politician the King had no chance against The City and The Wall Street acting together), that was some kind of a marker, showing the acceleration of the countdown to the War. War, which was in turn just another step closer to the de-Patrisation of the World.

Of course, the only one King of Britain worth attention – was not the King of Peace, but a political loser. Well, he was probably the only man unwilling to acknowledge and accept the inherent role of the British Monarchy, just like the Anglican Church established only to ensure the complacency of the English Middle Class because of keeping Lower Class in line, towards prosperity of the City and the Upper Class. He wanted two things which were forbidden for him to want - Briton's rule over Britain and peace.

In both cases he tried to go against the World ruling class interest, so he had to leave. And even so he was lucky. Those who wanted to save Europe before him, like Archduke Franz Ferdinand and ... Rasputin– died in the War with the Ocean and Financière. Edward VIII, however, was decided to be killed more cruelly – by murdering the memory of him.

Important element of defamation of the King without the crown – is presenting him (especially in the popular form, also in alternative stories of all kind) simply as a collaborator, in the best (?) case as a candidate for "the English Quisling", etc. In fact, it was no coincidence that German leaders also associated their naive hopes for arranging a modus vivendi with Albion with the person of Prince of Windsor. But a parasite, which has preyed on the body of England since the Fifteenth Century – wanted the Great Game. And this power has known exactly what was going for and why it was going, as probably the only one player. In this game it has skilfully used such as threats, and as encouragements to War (e.g. throwing a Polish spot on the table), as well as deluding peace and finally (at a convenient time for itself) performing full-scale military operations.

The case of Poland tossed by the English as a cheese in a mousetrap for Germany – is already known and described, so let's look a wee at two other illustrative episodes of the Second World War, which anniversaries we have been celebrated not far ago - in a very different style and atmosphere: Germany's attack on the USSR and the landing of Western Allies in Normandy. 

Parteigenosse Heß has Completed the Task

The decision to assault the USSR was suicide from Hitler's point of view (stories about the "pre-emptive attack" come straight from Goebbels' laboratory, repeated today by ignoramuses[i]).So, one of the most important questions for modern history is: What prompted the Führer (although remembering the experience of the Great War) to decide to fight on two fronts again? One of the hypotheses on this subject is the doubt about the event a few weeks earlier, coming to to the following question: Did Heß's mission really "faild" – or on the contrary, maybe it met all Hitler's plans, but drew that way the Third Reich into a deadly British trap?

Historians today agree that the burning of documents with which Heß had come to the Isles – is just ...a smoke and Churchill and UK decision-makers known the essence of Hitler's proposal (proving his boundless naivety and lack of understanding of the meaning of the War that he supposedly "caused"). It was brought to the guarantee of the inviolability of the Empire and even the promise of future distribution of influence all over the World - in exchange for even practical neutrality in the German-Soviet War.

The official version is known – Britain did not take up negotiations, the Führer dismissed its No. 3, etc. OK, but why in that case did the Reich risk? Explaining the realization of the Barbarossa Plan (only) by Hitler's madness is of course possible – but at least the same possible was an alternative scenario. Because what if in fact, Heß had met his beloved agreement with Albion[ii], information about it in some way came to Berlin, the Wehrmacht started – and then the only thing left was to repeat "Gott strafe England"? Again…

Sure, this is just a conspiracy theory, but it has also a double educational dimension. Firstly – pointing once again that (geo)politic is on the one hand plans hidden in plans, and on the other ONLY interests. And these are strategic interests, written not even for decades, but for entire civilization trends, lasting (usually almost imperceptibly) for Centuries. Secondly, and finally, by destroying the anachronistic dreams of some Europeans (including even Poles and ... Russians) about "marching with Hitler to Moscow". How could anyone go anywhere with a leader who was only a child in the fog all his life, led by the hand and played in internal German affairs by the great capital and international financiers, and then in the international cases by forces hostile to the Germans (and to the whole Europe).

The Great War was the European Civil War, and the Second World War was the Civil War within dimension of Eurasia. At the same time as a Pole, I have to understand, that the First brought Poland temporary independence, and in the Second German attack on the USSR saved the Polish nation from destruction, what situate Poles in very specific position in these conflicts. Our own interests, and therefore decisions were distinctively different than within the rest of the conscious World powers. National interests, however, do not absolve anyone from the obligation to understand what games we used to be pawns and to see the whole game.

Omaha Beach

Just like we should look completely cold at the whole course of the Second World War, including its key points, all the time coming from the game for the post-War balance of power, and truly the entire transformation of Civilization, initiated Centuries ago, continuing in our time and directed to the still unknown future. Especially in the current conceptual confusion, the obviousness must be repeated – that the genocidal German occupation ended with the joint offensive of the Red Army and the Polish Army, hence we can look realistically and geopolitically on the history of the Western Front, such as the Normandy landing. First, understanding it as American and British attempt to contest Berlin first, contrary to the agreements of the Powers – to increase their influence/occupation in Germany (but only in Germany, no "freedom from the West" went to the Eastern Europe). Just opposite, after the War, if there was no buffer in form of communist Germany - the strategic position of us all in the East would be much worse and the threat to our Western borders – greater.

Arnhem and the Ardennes were needed for the Anglo-Saxons to understand that the Soviets could not be overtaken. Hence the sudden change of attitude, towards "keeping commitments" and the diplomatic sharing of influence, not only in Germany. After all that was rather the Soviet policy which was characterized by the tendency to excessive and too long respect for the agreements signed – what was proved e.g. by Stalin'sattitude to Greece, contrasting with the British hatching out Yugoslavia from the emerging Eastern Bloc.

Secondly, it must be noted that the American occupation of Europe has symbolically began with the Omaha Beach (slightly disturbed by details such as the self-liberation of Paris and especially de Gaulle's later policy), continuing uninterruptedly to this day, and now has also spread over Poland and almost all Eastern Europe, strengthened by announcements about increasing activity of the US Army, especially on the territory of Poland, Romania and the Baltic States. So, if the conquest of Berlin was a necessary caesura, indispensable for the ending of an inherently vicious Nazi experiment, which directed the European thought and practice to the dead end, with final catastrophe – insomuch as the D-Day anniversaries are certainly not the right occasion to celebrate for European nations, even those particularly affected by the crimes of the Hitlerism.

Hitler as Trotsky of Nazism

Hitlerism was a real "Dead End" of dreams about playing an independent geopolitical role by the (tightly understood) Old Continent or rather its Western part. It is worth to reach for the opinion of one of the most intelligent minds of those times - although this opinion was completely ... wrong. Otto Strasser, because it is about him – sometimes confused his dreams and wishes with reality, e.g. calling his rival, Adolf Hitler, "Kerensky of the German Nazi Revolution". Meanwhile, analogies with the history of Communism, of course, existed - but rather with… alternative history. For the truth Hitler was more like Lev Trotsky of Nazism. Trotsky, who had won - and against all senses - spread the Nazi Revolution all over Europe and the World, simultaneously realizing the interests of the Great Financière. Exactly the same would be a course and result of LevDavidovich’s rule in the Soviet Union, if Stalin was not there. Unfortunately, none of the Strasser brothers was Koba ...

Even today, the ideas of European nationalism (wrongly seeking their roots in the Hitler’s tendency within the Nazism) would not be completely meaningless – but certainly they are like that in countries with their own national idea not being used yet. This applies to the Central and Eastern European nations as well as to the new Nationalisms of the old Western nations, currently fighting for independence, such as the Scots and Catalans. Above all, however, it is historical experience, the experience of Europe and then whole Eurasia defeats in both parts of their Civil War - what teaches us that we must never allow third part of this tragedy to become the reality. This would be the ultimate victory of the forces of the Ocean, Financière, Globalism and Anti-Civilization.

Especially because the largest of World Games has not yet come to an end. And it will never do. The pessimist will say: The worse for us!Optimist: Phew, that means we still have some time to vegetate ...!And realist? That there is always a good time to become wiser.