Where does Putin stand in relation to the attempted global coup d’etat?

Read Time:10 Minutes

For a long time now since the start of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, various signs have appeared which have suggested to me that – contrary to what I had assumed to be the case until then – Russia, or to personify the country, Vladimir Putin, its president, is not on the side of the so-called Davos ‘elites’ regarding their current, putative global coup d’etat.

This might surprise some readers; I know that some of my friends at Real Left differ fundamentally from me regarding this belief. Besides, because information in the fraught space of a global information war is never complete, or entirely trustworthy, I may still be proved wrong.

I hope this will not be the case, because if I am right, Russia is a powerful adversary in the struggle against the bunch of neo-fascist technocrats comprising the nucleus of our would-be overlords in the neo-feudal totalitarian society they envisage.

Hence, what is it that persuades me that Putin is fighting against the neo-fascists? There are too many items of information which point in this direction to list here, so I shall have to be selective. First, it is notable that, in November of 2023 Russian president, Vladimir Putin, signed a decree to the effect that 2024 will be the ‘Year of the Family’ in Russia, which contrasts glaringly with the ‘woke’ agenda regarding gender change, cancel culture, and everything associated with it, in western countries, particularly the United States and Europe. In the article linked above, RT reports that this ‘…initiative aims to “promote state policy in the field of family protection and preservation of traditional family values” – a sure sign (the way I read it) that Putin and his government are light-years removed from the deliberate undermining (systematically promoted by ‘woke’ culture) of the family as cohesive, ideally safe social space where parents and children are able to provide mutual psychological and spritual strength.

This impression is reinforced by the news that Putin recently took time off to celebrate Christmas with the families of soldiers who had lost their lives in the military conflict with Ukraine/NATO. Significantly, he assured these family members that, whenever they need help from the Russian state, they would receive it. One cannot ignore the signal sent by Putin’s stance to those – like the members of the World Economic Forum (WEF) – who seem to be going out of their way to destroy the family as fundamental repository of traditional values.

Small wonder that citizens of Britain and EU countries have been denied access to the important Russian news agency, RT, which, compared to western mainstream media outlets, provides balanced news coverage through correspondents in countries around the world. It is not easy to verify the accuracy of this report (or this one), but if there is any validity to it, Putin has openly shown his antagonism to the WEF. Some may argue that, even if Putin did in fact make this statement, it is simply a means to hide his true affiliation, which is with the WEF. I, for one, am not so sure, however.

It may also be objected that I am relying on non-mainstream, alternative sources to substantiate my claims – although members of Real Left, and sympathetic readers of articles on this website would probably not be among those raising such objections. The point is, as most these readers know, usually one won’t find an indication of Putin’s principled opposition to the WEF in mainstream media, which have all been captured by the billionaire technocrats involved in the present (attempt at a) global power-grab. Sometimes, however, signs of the mainstream registering the antagonism between the Davos crowd and Putin, or more broadly, between the West and Russia, do slip through, as evidenced in these two articles from Politico. Putin did not pull his punches in early 2021 when he unexpectedly joined a virtual meeting of the WEF and in his address warned that, unless serious preventative action were taken, the present global situation ‘might result in a fight of all against all’. In this article it is further reported that:

Putin, whose appearance at the Davos Agenda summit was not listed on the preconference schedule, added that such a fight would mean not only the ‘destruction of traditional values’ but also of fundamental freedoms. A common responsibility today was to avoid such a dystopic future, he added.

Are these the sentiments of someone who is (covertly) advancing the agenda he ostensibly opposes resolutely? I don’t believe it is, while simultaneously acknowledging the prudence of the rule-of-thumb – of which Rusere Shoniwa has reminded me – that in political commentary it is not what an individual says that matters, but what he or she does. It seems to me that Putin’s actions, some of which are reflected in the words he has (or reporters, referring to him, have) used in the contexts referred to above – such as joining bereaved Russian families – corroborate the impression created by his own words.

Something else which may be regarded as an action of sorts – albeit a vicarious one – on Putin’s part, is the release of a 2000-page report by Russia on the ‘manufacturing’ of the Covid ‘pandemic’ by the ‘US deep state’ and ‘big pharma’. Planet Today reports on this as follows:

Russia has publicly accused Big Pharma and US Deep State actors of manufacturing the Covid-19 pandemic to take over the world, listing Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and George Soros as co-conspirators in the plot against humanity. “Russia wants justice for the creation and release of SARS-CoV-2, while the West covered up the origins and censored scientists and journalists,” the Russian Embassy in the United States said on Thursday. Russia has submitted all their evidence to the UN, which amounts to over 2,000 pages worth of reports proving their claims over the last 18 months.

Admittedly, it would be a masterful disguise on Russia’s (Putin’s) part if it (he) were so-called ‘controlled opposition’, that is, covertly a member of the New World Order (NWO), fronted by the WEF, while overtly engaging in such apparent acts of denouncing and exposing the NWO. It reminds me of a document that circulated on the internet some time ago, supposedly penned by members of this ‘order’, claiming that they would achieve their (nefarious) goals by, among other things, appearing to fight one another mercilessly, while in fact striving for the same end result. Yet, if this were the case, I believe that the mask would slip intermittently. I have not come across any such slippage, however, which strengthens my conviction that Putin is on the level.

Not too long ago, in a speech at the Valdai International Discussion Club, Putin said the following, reinforcing once again his image as someone who wishes to promote a fair, just and peaceful international order. After remarking, in solidarity with the delegates at the meeting, that ‘our objective is basically to build a new world’, he continues:

In the early 21st century, everybody hoped that states and peoples had learned the lessons of the expensive and destructive military and ideological confrontations of the previous century, saw their harmfulness and the fragility and interconnectedness of our planet, and understood that the global problems of humanity call for joint action and the search for collective solutions, while egotism, arrogance and disregard for real challenges would inevitably lead to a dead-end, just like the attempts by more powerful countries to force their opinions and interests onto everyone else. This should have become obvious to everyone. It should have, but it has not. It has not.

Correlating with this address by Putin and filling in some content to the president’s observation, above, Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, in a speech at the UN, recently took western countries – particularly the US and NATO – to task for their persistent subversion of attempts to implement ‘the principle of equality in international relations’. Echoing President Putin’s description of the West, Lavrov called it the real ‘empire of lies’. RT further reports on what he said:

The world has a chance to achieve “authentic democratization” in international relations by establishing a multipolar order, marking the first such opportunity since the end of World War II, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told the UN General Assembly (UNGA) on Saturday.

The US and its Western allies seek to prevent such a development by stirring up new conflicts to divide humanity and keep their “hegemony of the global minority” in place, he added.

Would the Russian Federation really go to such lengths to fool the rest of the world into believing that it enthusiastically promotes a ‘multipolar order’ – in contrast to the ‘unipolar order’ advanced by the West – when it is surreptitiously endorsing what the West, and in particular the NWO, wants? I doubt it.

Add to this the fact that Putin has warned against genetic research and engineering enabling the development of a destructive weapon, as well as his claim that ‘Russia is invincible – not the idle boast it appears to be, but an allusion to the indomitable spirit of the Russian people – then it seems even more likely that he is diametrically opposed to the would-be technocratic ‘rulers of the world’ at the WEF. Regarding the first of these examples, RT reports on Putin’s address to Russian schoolchildren on 1 September 2023, at the beginning of the academic year, as follows:

“[Genetics] is important and dangerous, according to experts. It is said that those who take the leading positions in the field of genetics will have a weapon of terrible destructive power in their hands,” Putin stated.

Russia, however, remains committed to maintaining an ethical approach to genetics research, Putin continued. The country will make sure that the “positive foundations” behind genetics will not turn into a “threat to the whole of humanity,” he added. 

And as far as the putative invincibility of his country goes, in the same address to the country’s students (see the second link, above), RT reports that:

Russia has always been and remains “absolutely invincible,” President Vladimir Putin told a group of students at an open lesson marking the start of the academic year on Friday. The mentality of the Russian people makes it impossible for the country to be defeated by anyone, he added.

Judging by the examples of love shown between Russian people in extremely difficult circumstances, which testifies, according to the Russian president, to the irrepressibility of their spirit, he is no ordinary person; in fact, he comes across as an empathic, but strong leader, who is invested in the cultural values of the Russian people. This should come as no surprise, when considering the thought of an important Russian philosopher, Aleksander Dugin, whose daughter, also a philosopher, was (erroneously) assassinated, presumably by Ukrainian agents targeting Dugin himself, not too long ago. Dugin is a friend of Putin, and reading his work – which is difficult to come by; he is persona non grata in the West – one is struck by its resonance with Putin’s pronouncements and actions. In The Fourth Political Theory (Arktos, London, 2012), for example, Dugin writes (p. 10):

To move forward towards the development of a Fourth Political Theory, it is necessary to:

• Reconsider the political history of recent centuries from new positions beyond the frameworks and clichés of the old ideologies;

• Realise and become aware of the profound structure of the global society emerging before our eyes;

• Correctly decipher the paradigm of postmodernity;

• Learn to oppose not the political idea, programme or strategy, but the ‘objective’ reality of the status quo, the most social aspect of the apolitical, fractured (post-) society;

• [and] Finally, construct an autonomous political model which offers a new way and a project for the world of deadlocks, blind alleys, and the endless recycling of the ‘same old things’ (post-history, according to Baudrillard).

Does this not contain echoes of Putin’s insistence that we must move beyond the old order of ‘unipolarity’ to a ‘multipolar’ world, where countries can pursue their own interests, but in cooperation with others? From Dugin’s analyses of the present situation and how we got here it is clear that he has a profound grasp of philosophy, politics and history. Small wonder that, compared with western ‘leaders’ – and it is a joke to include demented puppet Biden among these (such as they are! Sunak is a bit of a joke too) – Putin stands out as a leader who can think and speak for himself; with someone like Dugin as conversation partner, it is hard not to.

33 thoughts on “Where does Putin stand in relation to the attempted global coup d’etat?

  1. Curious choice of expression, that: “reinforcing once again his image as someone who wishes to promote a fair, just and peaceful international order. ”
    I’m looking at Putins wars, and the brutal carnage he has forced on many weaker neighbouring states: as well as the unfortunate and spectacular demise of his political opponents through defenestration – and worse.
    He is not a man of Peace – and as for supporting the family values, we know that the further East in Europe one goes, the more conservative, gay-bashing, misogynistic and patronising it gets.

    1. You may prove to be right, Robert; what primarily interests me is what appears to me to be his unwavering stance against the WEF. For now that is enough.

  2. Wokeness is not an important part of the agenda, and a bunch of countries like israel, poland, india, china don’t push that, but push the v axes, the war on cash, the medicalization of dissent, the surveilance. And Putin did the pandemic unlike Lukasenko. The wef’s 8 predictions for 2030 preditcts multipolarity instead of America’s unipolarity. So that’s also not contradicting anything. Plus its not like any of the presidents or prime ministers are “in it”. They are blackmailed little guys in the story

    1. M, interesting that woke is not given priority in those countries. I see its important role in the US especially in the same light as Naomi Wolf’s observation, that the NWO wants to destroy western values, specifically, because they stand in their way.

  3. Sorry, no.
    Russia went along with lockdowns, murders in hospitals, and dangerous shots. Not mRNA but still dangerous if you ask any Russian.
    Also, when it came to war, they don’t seem to tell the USA and Israel that they’re illegally in Syria which is Russia’s ally. Cowards or bullshitters? Who knows.
    They did fucking nothing to prevent the Libya disaster.
    They did nothing many other times… And the dumb shit at the UN.
    When they have the upper hand and can veto just like the US does, they don’t do shit. They abstain like puppets do..
    Read this blog to wake up.

    1. I have also found that blog to be very helpful in understanding the priorities of the Russian authorities!

    2. Thanks for that link, Rob; and again, I have not denied any of the things you refer to. My sole concern here is victory over those (the NWO) who would commit democide against the rest of us – a victory I believe Putin/Russia can help us achieve. I do not see him as an angel, but then, which politician is?

    3. Agreed. Despite being totally provoked by US/NATO into invading Ukraine, all of Russia’s military interventions are purely for its own strategic purposes, not principled humanitarian purposes.

    4. Riley Waggaman (aka Edward Slavsquat) is a moron.
      As the highly regarded geo-political analyst Xoaquin FIores of New Resistance states “ I am familiar with Riley Waggaman (aka Edward Slavsquat) and – to put it mildly – his reports should be treated with great caution in my opinion.”

  4. I hope one day we can leave the now meaningless word ‘Woke’ It came originally from a blues singer meaning stay awake, aware alert and was adopted by the civil rights movement. surely we all need to do that in the face of the machinations of those in power. If you mean appropriation of grass roots struggles for equality amongst us all then be clear. Woke feels like such lazy , confused shorthand , meaning dishonest moral zealots , to some and politically aware and fighting for genuine rights to others. It’s a deeply divisive word. The working class is diverse whether you like it or not, that’s a fact. Should all the working class lesbians, gays and trans folk shut up and get back in the closet just because the disgusting elite pretend to champion us? Long before Imperialism and Capitalism, many cultures recognised more than one gender. It is Colonialism that introduced hierarchical binaries.
    I seem to remember the Tory John Major and other Tories being very keen on ‘traditional family values’ It has been recognised that abuse can take place in some so called respectable heterosexual families .Whatever the nature of the family, extended, heterosexual, gay etc, the main thing is that it is a place of safety and genuine learning and support for creative, independant thought etc.
    Apart from that , I am pleased if Putin really has challenged the dominant Big Pharma Covid scandal and could form some sort of even imperfect opposition to US Imperialism and the attempted take over by the paper tigers in the WEF.

    1. Thanks, Maggie. ‘Woke’ has indeed been abused by the people behind the not so great reset, and of course, in rejecting their programme as something aimed at weakening social ties, one should not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater.

  5. Thanks for that link, Rob; and again, I have not denied any of the things you refer to. My sole concern here is victory over those (the NWO) who would commit democide against the rest of us – a victory I believe Putin/Russia can help us achieve. I do not see him as an angel, but then, which politician is?

  6. As mentioned in another reply, the blog https://edwardslavsquat.substack.com/ is very helpful in understanding the priorities of the Russian authorities. There are no challenges to WEF-promoted economic trajectories from Putin, let alone to a profit-based system.

    The rejection of queer ideology, in Putin’s case, is a means to reinforce the family in order to address the demographic issue of falling birth rates, an economic problem. It is not being done for principled reasons, that is, to defend the rights of women and gay people, nor to safeguard children.

    I think the article also presents a fundamental misunderstanding of imperialist conflict, that is, the geopolitical struggle over resources and markets. BRICS countries want a seat at the WEF table, but if they are not welcome, they will continue on their way in promoting their own economic development and seeking expanded markets, just like every other country. Powerful countries are able to use economic clout, and ultimately military means, to try to get their way. It’s important we get this right and don’t look to false heroes or saviours. Otherwise we are blinded to the signs of impending major wars between these powers, wars that are paid for with ordinary people‘s lives and standard of living. It’s in the interests of ordinary people in all countries to reject whatever corporate priorities are the flavour of the day, and the inevitable drive to war due to economic competition. We need to organise to resist, instead of being dupes for one imperialist bloc or another!

    1. Thanks for that, Lorraine. However, I differ from you regarding Putin’s stance towards the WEF – he may have been on the Schwab young leaders programme, – which explains why Schwab has called him a traitor – but everything points in the direction of him opposing their lethal project fundamentally, whatever ulterior motive he may have.

    2. Riley Waggaman (aka Edward Slavsquat) is a moron.
      As the highly regarded geo-political analyst Xoaquin FIores of New Resistance states “ I am familiar with Riley Waggaman (aka Edward Slavsquat) and – to put it mildly – his reports should be treated with great caution in my opinion.”


    Jenny James, English, living in Colombia

    1. Jenny, you have made my day! I was beginning to wonder if I was the proverbial ‘voice in the wilderness’ – you have proved to me that my reading of the situation is not completely crazy! THANK YOU for that.

    2. Jenny, you have made my day! I was beginning to wonder if I was the proverbial ‘voice in the wilderness’ – you have proved to me that my reading of the situation is not completely crazy! THANK YOU for that.

  8. Putin is far to intelligent to be “woke” and as an obvious man of integrity and supporter of traditional family values and just plain commonsense he “s not going to submit himself or his country to all this fascistic Western nonsense and power grabbing of the WEF disguised as concern for peoples health.etc Lets have more positive press about him. He’s head and shoulders above most Western “leaders”.

  9. Putin is far too intelligent to be “woke” , too much a family man and an Orthodox Christian, and in obvious opposition to “Western “values” to be fooled by WEF power grabs disguised as concern for public health etc.

  10. It’s an interesting debate. Personally, I can’t decide which way Putin leans, perhaps even both at the same time. There seems to be evidence both ways. I think I agree with Lorraine Pratley that ordinary folk should be very wary about looking to false heroes and saviours. It’s probably wise to question the nature of all and any information we receive, and to be able to deal with uncertainy for a protacted time. Im more inclined to think local and invest in community resilience.

    1. Thanks for that, Simon – I fully agree with you on prioritising local and community investment, which is exactly what my partner and I do, but at the same time I try and keep an eye on what is happening globally. And Lorraine’s advice on eschewing belief in false heroes is sound, which is why my views on Putin are provisional, and subject to revision. But I do believe, at present, that he is not part of the cabal. Here is another news item that supports my belief – a report on Putin expressing his conviction that, for the Russian population to remain stable and viable, parents should have at least three children: https://www.rt.com/russia/591304-russian-families-need-three-children/ This is a far cry from the WEF’s and WHO’s depopulation agenda!

  11. Excellent article Bert.
    James Corbett, Catte Black, Iain Davis, Riley Waggaman (aka Edward Slavsquat) and others use the example of the “pandemic” to suggest that China and Russia are fully onboard with the Technocratic New World Order.
    However, Chinese and Iranian officials have accused the US of releasing SARS-CoV-2 in China and Iran as a bioweapon.
    Also, Russia has raised concerns at the number of US funded biolabs in Ukraine which may target particular individuals or Slavic people.
    The actions by Iran, China and Russia to control their citizens by technology maybe a result of them wanting to monitor their citizens and the activities of foreign influence within their countries to stop fifth column infiltration by the US and other Western foreign powers particularly if they believe the West used the virus as a bioweapon against them.
    Also, both China and Russia compete in the capitalist system and they both had non mRNA “vaccines” to sell on the world stage.
    This doesn’t mean China, Russia and the US are all involved with each other in some shadowy conspiracy controlled by a tiny Global Elite.
    With North Korea admitting to defeating Covid it would mean they are also being controlled by this shadowy Global Elite which is just plain ridiculous.

    1. Thank you fort that, Geoff – Yes, i must admit that, my tentative support of Putin notwithstanding, there are still many things I don’t get, or are unsure about, such as the relations between Russia and China. The latter seems more likely to me to be part of the cabal, although I can’t be sure. I would opt for saying that Russia and China’s relations seem to me to be strategic – Putin is a great strategist – and it does not signal like-mindedness on all issues, for example CBDCs. China seems to have gone the whole hog on those, with a social credit score to boot, but although Russia has introduced CBDCs, it seems, from what I know, that this is an option people may use if they want to, and does not rule out the use of cash. I would not mind such a system; when these financial entities are used – the way they are planned to be in the West – for complete control, abolishing cash in the process, it becomes unacceptable, though. And even if they are imposed as the ‘only’ option, they can be resisted, the way the Nigerians have done, forcing their government to abandon CBDCs.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.