Thousands of Russian Nationalists Rally Against Putin

Anastasia Gorelova and Alissa de Carbonnel, Reuters, November 4, 2012

Thousands of black-clad Russian nationalists marched through central Moscow on Sunday, marking a “National Unity Day” holiday created by Vladimir Putin by calling for an end to his rule and voicing hostility to ethnic minorities.

Putin instituted the holiday in 2005 to replace the annual Soviet-era celebration of the Bolshevik revolution. But civil rights activists say his own flirtation with ethnic nationalism has stoked a rise in far-right violence, and is partly to blame for the hijacking of the holiday by hardline militants.

The marchers, mainly young men with closely cropped hair in black leather jackets, shouted “Russia without Putin” and anti-immigrant slogans, carrying Russian Orthodox icons, waving imperial flags and chanting “Russia for Russians”.

Police said 6,000 people turned out under grey skies for Sunday’s far-right rally, which was given official permission for the first time to march through the heart of Moscow.

Many expressed hostility to migrants from Russia’s own mainly Muslim southern regions and other parts of the former Soviet Union, saying Russia should tighten its visa requirements and bolster domestic restrictions on internal migration.


The newly-reconstituted holiday commemorates a Moscow uprising against Polish-Lithuanian occupation 400 years ago. Putin marked it at an event flanked by leaders of the Russian Orthodox Christian church and the three other faiths the Kremlin regards as traditional in Russia—Islam, Buddhism and Judaism.

“People united their forces in the name of Russia, in name of the Motherland, rising above class, national, religious and other differences,” Putin said after laying a wreath at a Red Square monument. “People freed Moscow and the country from the occupiers and those who sold and betrayed Russia.”


Sunday’s march was mostly calm although some protesters made Nazi-style salutes and set off smoke bombs. Police said 25 were detained for wearing swastika arm-bands and trenchcoats.


Putin has promoted nationalism to help fill an ideological void left by the collapse of Communist rule in 1991 and feed his vision of a resurgent Russia, emboldened by booming oil revenues, during two terms as president from 2000 until 2008.

But Russia’s nationalists now feel he has betrayed them by welcoming migrant laborers and sending billions of dollars in subsidies to the majority Muslim regions of the North Caucasus.

Right-wing activists who once backed the Kremlin have joined liberals and leftists in a nascent, patchwork protest movement fed by popular anger over corruption, failing social services and allegations of vote fraud denied by the authorities.


Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • jack ryan

    Got to love the Russians. I am very, very proud to be 25% Russian. My family was originally German/Nordic in Russia but I note that my great Aunt  (lived in France after we lost Russia to the Communists) is very Slavic.

    My Russian Slavic blood seems to have immunized me to all things “liberal” and “Libertarian”. Russians throughout Russia’s entire history from Czarist times, through Soviet times to now post Soviet, quasi National Putin times has always been ruled by tough Russians. The only “liberal” leader in Russian history was some Jewish liberal named Krensky right before the Bolsheviks did a coup de tat.

    Give the Georgian Slav Stalin – the Devil his due – he was many bad things, but not a liberal or  libertarian.

    Just put yourself in the place of some nasty, mountain Muslim bandit, terrorist in Chetnia, Afganistan, Pakistan or some Muslim slum in France or England – who who you prefer to mess with;

    The English?
    The Dutch?
    Jimmy Carter and Lib Americans?



    Compared to most Russians, Romania’s Vlad the Impaler, Count Dracula looks liberal.

    GO RUSSIANS – and they have very pretty female tennis players.

    • What is wrong with being libertarian?

      • curri

        Do you agree with the greatest living libertarian thinker, Hans-Hermann Hoppe?
        “There will be no fully-libertarian world, under Hoppe’s plan, because otherwise we’d have nowhere to exclude people to. Because much though Hoppe’s rhetoric appeals to my increasingly Austrian nature, one final quote does give me pause for thought:

        ‘There can be no tolerance toward democrats and communists in a libertarian social order. They will have to be physically separated and expelled from society. Likewise, in a covenant founded for the purpose of protecting family and kin, there can be no tolerance toward those habitually promoting lifestyles incompatible with this goal. They – the advocates of alternative, non-family and kin-centred lifestyles such as, for instance, individual hedonism, parasitism, nature-environment worship, homosexuality, or communism – will have to be physically removed from society, too, if one is to maintain a libertarian order. ‘ “

        • Looks like I disagree on a purely semantic level. I agree with just about everything Hoppe has written on the subject. 

      • jack ryan

        Mike, there is a reason “libertarian” sounds a lot like “liberal” – both go with the idea that Blacks should be allowed to do pretty much whatever they want to do.

        Liberals and Libertarians are simply treasonous on racial issues, open borders immigration from the NW 3rd world being the worst treason.

        • Open immigration would not be a problem if all land was privately owned and there were no anti-discrimination laws/welfare state. What we have been subject to in the U.S. is not open immigration but forced integration. 

          • jack ryan

            Oh Shut up!

            The invasion of tens of millions of non White, barbarians has always been a huge problem for any White Indo European civilization. There is a reason the Chinese built the Great Wall of China – to keep hordes of Barbarians out of China, it had nothing to do with Libertarian fairy tale dreams about private property.

            Mike – the Know it All Libertarian, will now try to explain to us that the 300 Spartans who faced down the Asiatic hordes of Persia, they could have just stayed at home if there was more private property and “free markets” in Sparta and the rest of Greece. Liberals and Libertarians are the same, cowards, traitors, #*$(#$ idiots – they deserve to be sent to Black ruled Zimbabwe armed only with some Milton Friedman books and then they can try to save their pathetic cowardly lives telling Robert Mugabe’s rapist thugs that “we’re on your side”, “we just want to share the gospel of free market economics that will make your country as prosperous as old Rhodesia. @(#*($ !

    • Michael_C_Scott

      How ’bout fighting Scotsmen, Germans or Japanese?

      Nobody has a monopoly on determination.

  • whiteyyyyy

    Bit surprised by this, I thought Putin was respected more by russian  right wing.

    • No.

    • Sherman_McCoy

      Yes, IF Putin REALLY were a Russian White Nationalist, I’d be brushing up on my Russkii and getting ready to move.

  • Michael_C_Scott

    Hard to blame the protesters.  After the Soviet collapse, the “Stans” became independant… and then immediately began flooding Russia with their own unskilled poor.  That sort of thing annoys me when Mexicans do it here.

    • A huge number of rapes and murders against Russian children and women are committed by Muslims from the “Stans.” Moreover, atrocities such as the Beslan Massacre and the Moscow Theater attacks have only futher hardened Russian hatred against both Islam and anyone from the “Stans.” That is why you have Russian thugs beating the tar out of immigrants shouting Russia for Russians! The fact that Putin is not going after the Muslim aliens who are raping and killing Russian citizens is a source of great anger among Russians, and against Putin in particular.

      • Michael_C_Scott

        Rape of local women and girls, the way Muslims do everywhere else they have been allowed?  Now THERE is a suprise!

      • Sherman_McCoy

        ” . . . you have Russian thugs beating the tar out of immigrants shouting Russia for Russians!”

        Oooh!  Say it AGAIN!!!!

        • Michael_C_Scott

          Call them not thugs until the Cossacks have their swords, whips and horses back, and even then do not call them anything insulting.

          During their Great Patriotic War, they took casualties at rates that make every nation other than Japan and Scotland look like sissies, and on both sides it seems, as some Russian and Ukranian units fought to the death at “Juno” beach, attacked by Canadian forces at Normandy.

          The Germans were astounded at Russian “stubbornness” even early on in Operation Barbarossa.  The British army cynically used Scottish units as lead elements in major attacks from 1916.  Scots were especially feared by Germans, because they almost never took prisoners.  The usual rule is that an Englishman fights when he must, but the Celts fight because they honestly like it.  Japanese sailors were amazed at the horrendous amount of fire a Brooklyn-class cruiser could deliver, which they referred to as “six-inch machineguns” even in their own reports.  It was only ten rounds per minute per barrel, but a good crew could do 15 for a little while.  The six-inchers on HMS Belfast could do only six or seven per minute per barrel.  A Brooklyn or a Cleveland would have been truly frightening in one of the night battles in the Solomons.

          Russians have no monopoly on anything.

          • Zorro

            Currently, the only thing that the Russians seem to monopolize is the will to do something to defend their families. The Golden Dawn Greeks are a close second.

        • If you know anything about Russia or Ukraine, to which I have blood ties, you would call them thugs too. Unlike the U.S., young Russian men are thugs out of necessity, life is hard in Russia and many of these men have few opportunities in life. That is why Russia has lots of men behind bars, even though they do not jai; anywhere near as many people per capita as the U.S. does. Cossacks are however making a comeback in Russia, and they along with the Spetznatz units are the ones Muslims truly are afraid of. And to be frank, that is what white men are going to have to become here too in order to drive back, expel, and destroy the darkie hordes that are doing the same thing to whites Americans Indeed, they will have to become American Cossacks, not just thugs. 

        • Zorro

          Russian thugs? You mean native Russians that are attacking the ones who have attacked their women and children? So, who are the real thugs?

  • The__Bobster

    Thousands of swastika-wearing Russian nationalists march through Moscow in protest against immigration
    By Daily Mail Reporter
    PUBLISHED: 19:12 EST, 4 November 2012 | UPDATED: 19:12 EST, 4 November 2012

    Thousands of Russian nationalists, some wearing swastikas, marched through Moscow on Sunday to protest against immigration.

    There were chants of slogans such as ‘Russia for the Russians’ to protest President Vladimir Putin’s government.

    Expressing resentment at the number of migrants from the Caucasus and Central Asia living in the country, they chanted: ‘Moscow is a Russian city.’ Nationalists accuse the Kremlin of lavishing privileges on migrants and minorities while ignoring ethnic Russians.

    • Michael_C_Scott

      Were I Russian, I would still never wear a swastika; things must be vile there before a Russian would wear that.  As a Celt and Amerind,  I have never called Slavs my brothers and sisters, but I will now; please do not do this to yourselves.

      Surely you know better than that.  We have a better symbol for rights, and that is the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia.  When you protest, use the Stars and Bars and not the Hackenkreuz.


      • Sherman_McCoy

        Mike, I haven’t seen Swastikas (although, they certainly MIGHT be wearing them) being worn by Russian Nationalists.  I HAVE seen (and wear on occasion a hat emblazoned with) the sun sign.  I suppose the leftist, antifas retards in the press refer to it as a Swastika so that they can paint the pro Russians as Nazis.  BTW, if anyone asks me what it means, I tell them it is the symbol for the University of Arizona sports teams.

        • Michael_C_Scott

          This one at least points in the correct direction, and is thus a symbol of good luck.  I suspect the other one was deliberately drawn the way it was, as a sort of warning.  Everyone in the world knows what it means now, at any rate.

          The Boers used to use three numeral sevens as a sort of swastika as a counter to the “666” they thought of Marxism and the Beast that created it.

      • skara_brae

        Go back to organizing your neighbourhood boycott of British goods.

        • Michael_C_Scott

          I’ve actually been to Skara Brae in the Orkneys.  You put a smile on my face just thinking about it again.

  • We might  need Drones for the coming battles, how difficult would it be to marry a Raspberry Pi to a GPS unit and a model Glider, piloted autonomously. 

    • Lop_Eared_Galoot

      Already been done.

      The big problem is that payload for height is lousy and overall performance is still too poor to exploit airpower’s real advantage in making multiple attacks beyond the ability of the threat to maneuver in response to those protected.

      In this, American airpower risks teaching a lesson in arrogance: namely that expecting to win a war of COIN type proportions ‘as an assumption of secure airspace’ (because nobody will challenge us) is always a leap inwards wherein the focal point of the battle becomes oriented around units (at risk) rather than /missions/ undertaken.

      It can still be effective of course, because drones are much more amenable to stealth than manned aircraft (cockpit+canopy+hogs nose radar+supersonic big gulp inlets = very bad news LO wise) and much more flexible in terms of radius vs. time on station or even sacrificial range as combat persistence.

      Even as they are drastically cheaper to purchase and operate in huge numbers.

      And that is one key to understanding UAV/UCAS technology at the micro level.  You are essentially pointing a flashlight at the dirt at your feet.  The more you have the wider the instantaneous mosaic image.  But you are still operationally fixated you become on the threat which is ‘in range’ of your drone’s tracking capabilities and with a fast mobile or preemplaced infiltration force, that can mean the enemy is inside your zone of action before you can react and suddenly your view of him is his understanding of your position: predictably exploitable.

      A better system, especially over the vast depths of places like Russia is called ‘CCD’ or Coherent Change Detection’ in which you have multiple POV spots but rather than moving at say 40mph of a quadricopter or even the 110mph of an RQ-1 Predator or 200mph of a Reaper, are gallumphing along at the 450 knots of a conventional fighter.  Because this allows even a few spotlights pointed at the dirt to develop raster pattern scans with faster refresh and area shift to cover sudden points of high interest/high threat with multiple perspectives.  While their height and speed gives them sensor graze angles and near immunity from trashfire threats.

      Such also gives you the ability to do what powered-sailplanes cannot: advance -ahead of- units and sweep their axes of advance to some depth before returning, obliquely.   A Predator simply cannot do this reliably because it lacks the speed to bring those all-of-two Hellfire or four Griffin weapons to bear, quickly, if the associated ground unit gets into trouble.

      Encryption of the signal is also an issue and one which allowed the USAF Predator fleet in SWA to be exploited, fully, on multiple occasions as counter-ISR ‘early warning’.  CCD systems have enormous mass video memories which literally sort and overlay snapshots to provide pixel to pixel change indication of movement down to individual soldiers.  Because of this onboard filter and the ability to fly high and fast to a handoff point, they can use point to point microwave burst capabilities that are nearly unexploitable.

      • Michael_C_Scott

        We tested something similar as the HiMAT fighter project.  The original idea was that by removing the human pilot, the aircraft could be lighter and smaller, and in a maneuver no longer limited by human endurance but only by the airframe’s structural considerations.

        • Kurt Plummer

          HIMAT (Highly Maneuverable Aircraft Technologies) was an early-80s attempt to test variable static margin and control configurations via an advanced FLCS and plug’n’play wing, tail and canard designs, including forward sweep and double delta designs. I don’t believe they ever got past the baseline semi-swept configuration with four tails and the canards.

          The intent was always for application to manned systems (witness the ‘painted on’ canopy through which the main flight camera looked) but by removing the manned flight control backup option, they also pulled 10,000lbs of cockpit, radar, canopy and associated lifesupport/cooling systems off the front end. This allowed them to use a non afterburning J85 engine as principle powerplant while retaining high thrust to weight ratios.

          You have to remember that this was a period of (AFTI, Advanced Fighter Technologies Integration) when the Cold War was alive and well and it seemed the military R&D base was completely secure for those corporations which invested in ‘the next generation’. For Rockwell, it was agility, for Grumman, transonic drag reduction and aeroelastics (X-29)

          As the Cold War essentially collapsed with perestroika and glasnost as the falling of the Berlin Wall and the dissolution of the USSR in 1987/89/92 respectively, individual corporate attaboy investments really meant nothing as the product of the F-22 (ATF) program showed a very conventional airframe with particular applique technologies in specific areas largely superceded any specialist knowledge set, making the ‘general’ prime contractors a better bet and the need to essentially run with the government R&D base herd as opposed to pioneering specific aspects of the field, far more important.

          And at least as regards PSTM (Post Stall Tactical Maneuevering) or ‘superman’/euvering, this makes sense because the more you flat plat an airframe, the more the combination of presented area, aspect deflections that expose untreated slab-sides and even the air itself (as high G vortices) comes to defeat RFLO while giving visual and IR boosts to signature that can increase the see-point-shoot response range by an order of magnitude.

          None of which would be that big a deal because the fighter has a gas tank far bigger than any rocket motor on an AAM but for the fact that G onset rates basically restrict the pilot to a range 250-350 knots with a hard and soft limiter to prevent rapid onset GLOC (G induced loss of consciousness). At these airspeeds, a sudden repoint of the aicraft’s waterline index doesn’t cause enough of a subesequent translation further along the newly adjusted velocity vector to escape the prox zone of any passing missiles directed blast warhead.

          Now you -can- do this, via what is called accelerative stall which is to say snapping the wing out of lift (shutting down flow over the top surface) before the natural stall can occur (as a function of accelerative load vs. the combination of thrust and lift known as P/S or feet per second specific excess power). And the neat thing is that you can even do this in such a manner that the jet doesn’t bleed down all it’s speed (because most HOBS missiles don’t really need a lot of angle off improvement). But you are talking about a shift from 6-9G in a windup turn to an instantaneous 11-15G which is close to the 1.5 limit of the airframe and well beyond the point at which compression of blood vessels in the brain happens so suddenly that you get induced unconsciousness before you can make any kind of stress (M1/L1) maneuver or even rely on an active suit to save you.

          Point Blank: Most airforces cannot OOB muster more than 40-60 airframes, of which perhaps half are of recent enough generation to be a threat. Couple this to the ability of the USAF to fight the high-fast battle in the 40-50K foot ASL range and at Mach points on the order of 1.3-1.5, and any subsonic threat which wants to save itself from being shot in the face from 80nm or more away, needs to be able to execute a passive-cued snapup intercept somewhere along side the (USAF/Allied raid) ground track. And most simply cannot manage that. Especially as we can now routinely bomb from 15-25nm out on the BRL which means the threat air reaction launch has to come out a considerable ways further yet, just to avoid the ‘burner lights twinkling in the distance’ effect of refused engagement.

          Under such conditions, the better solution is to put the microturbine on the missile and avoid the purchase price of what amounts to an oversized bus-booster (fighter) airframe altogether. A turboSAM which can be launched from a catapult off a 5 ton truck, fly out 200-250nm and HOLD for half an hour before returning to dispersed landing points for airbag recovery, suddenly lets you shift from 40-60 airframes which can’t CAP their own airbase to perhaps 300 for the same price. Giving you massively better coverage in the first week or two of an airwar during which attrition can be held high by the simple fact that every turbosam is a Red Baron out of the box (no training costs) and each missle costs perhaps 1,5-2 times what an AMRAAM-D does (say 3 million per recoverable interceptor), making it very hard to justify the price of shooting arrows with arrows.

          At which point, your next step is something like a productionized Y/ABL-1 COIL. Wherein, the original advertising print (See Aviation Week with the X-32 cover) made it clear that ‘high’ (above obscurrant/anaprop) targets -behind- missile tracks, to include satellites and airliners, were vulnerable out to 400km. Or more.

          This is what makes life hard for the conventional airforce development. Manned airpower in a properly developed technology evolution would be at a severe KT boundary equivalent dropoff in risk vs. benefit payout and we would be making a mad rush for unmanneds, across the board, tactically.

          Backing this up for ‘strategic depth’ type targets (with deepbackfields like China) using Rod From God delivery from TAV/FOBS type aerospatials.

          To return to your original comment, the sequel to HiMAT was a late 90s program called ‘ICE’ for Improved Control Effectors. It combined things like spoiler slot deflectors, tiperons and assymetric flap movement. A British program (Daemon) went a step further and looked at using active suction to deflect these surfaces. All of which point towards the obvious: If you can use cheap, simple, controls /inside/ the moldline of the airframe (and thus safely behind a ‘blunt’ edge treatment for stealth) you can make throwaway drones that work, dirt cheap.

          At which point, the security of the mission force is less about how much any one asset does to evade increasingly capable defensive mechanical or DE intercept (speed of light = zero miss distance) but rather about how much the enemy wants to trade a generic drone for exposure of an expensive air defense vehicle/site. If you are in range, so is the enemy. And a 60-100 million dollar SA-21 site is not something you want to be trading for the likes of a 10-15 million dollar drone firing (boosted) 3 million dollar turbomissiles of it’s own based on a rapid handoff of netcentric targeted (see the laser flash, squirt the bearing as a secure RF burstfeed, somebody offboard coordinates the bearing lines to a useable acquisition footprint, they send launch signal to a heavy-bus drone which fires a missile from well over the local horizon…).

          The Talon SWORD program tested this very ability with the Blk.50d F-16C firing HARMs with upgraded GCUs on passive targeting handed from RC-135 Rivet Joint long baseline sensors, none of the shooters having LOS on the target.

          Difference: (in the 1990s of ONW/OSW period), the F-16C ran about 5,700 dollars per flight hour. A drone can be configured to run around 2,500.

  • Smeagol2

    Слава России!