Posted on 01/19/2024 10:34:27 AM PST by daniel1212
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/putin-orders-hunt-for-property-of-russian-empire-soviet-union/ar-BB1gW27F?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=HCTS&cvid=5a8da436df714788b011cfd688399a27&ei=34
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Putin is trying to locate Imperial Russia’s gold, which disappeared at the time of the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917.
The Nazis looted a lot of art from western Europe. And for decades, people have tried to retrieve the looted items and return them to the rightful owners.
The Bolsheviks looted a lot of stuff that belonged to the czars (ex. Faberge eggs). But the world has never cared about that.
https://www.pbs.org/treasuresoftheworld/faberge/flevel_2/flevel2_after_whereabouts.html
Perhaps they should return the real estate that they stole from Ukraine first.
I hope they find their amber room and all the wealth that was taken from them. It would be interesting if they found their stolen wealth and it was announced who has it.
Technically the looted art and stuff that belonged to the Romanovs was state property, as is the usual treatment of property that belongs to a monarch. European monarchs have routinely lost their personal property (lands, palaces, art, jewelry, financial investments) when deposed.
The French, Spanish, Italian, Bavarian, Prussian/German, Serbian/Yugoslav, Greek, Romanian, Austrian, Hungarian, etc. monarchies lost all or most of their stuff in just the same way as the Romanovs.
Details vary as to what some of them were permitted to keep, but the general case is consistent.
As for private property, that is another matter. The Nazis for the most part looted private property. Some private parties have managed to recover lands and buildings in Eastern Europe.
As far as I know Russia has never permitted the return of Bolshevik-siezed private property.
I don’t think it is that they cared, but they were preoccupied with Soviet Russia trying to export socialism around the world and it also hasn’t really been talked about. The Bolsheviks war with the the West distracted the West for about 70 years.
Germans have it. Start looking in Argentina.
Trying to find their possessions before the globohomos globalize them. The entire world, excluding the decadent, globohomo west, is running away from such threats. The countries lining up for BRICs, Global South and others who don’t kneel before woke globohomoism understand the danger.
Mexico has a better claim to Texas and the Southwest and Ukraine does to Crimea and the Donbas
Maybe you would prefer to start there first.
The reason Mexico is facilitating the illegal migration is so they can use bodies to take back their lost territory. From old tequila bottles, it seems that they think they lost the West coast all the way up to Washington state.
Socialism:
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
Quantitative Ease:
The process of a Central Bank arbitrarily creating money and using it to lend that money to a central government who is borrowing it in order to spend beyond tax revenues, thereby injecting that arbitrarily created money into the economy.
Just which is worse? The philosophy focused on society owning the economy, or the philosophy of whimsically created money owning an economy?
Both are lies. Socialism is the pathway to oligarchism.
Quantitative easing doesn’t Quantitative ease.
I would submit that Socialism retains some meaning to money.
Arbitrary, whimsical creation does not. It exposes the nothingness that is the source of that money.
At least socialism intends to benefit society. Quantitative Ease can’t possibly have an intention because the money comes from nothing.
I don’t mean to be unkind, but only stupid people really believe the socialist when he says that he’s doing it for you. He’s doing it for himself. Karl Marx fully intended to use socialism to replace the traditional monarchies of Europe and replace them with one of his making, with him as being the Emperor.
The typical liberal wants socialism because he gets to socialize his risks while privatizing the benefits. The liberal does not care if you end up keeling over in a ditch from over work trying to compensate for the wealth taken from you while you pay your bills and he eats bon-bons.
“European monarchs have routinely lost their personal property (lands, palaces, art, jewelry...”
But the issue is not the evils of one.
The issue is the lesser evil of one vs the other. The definitions suggest a benefit for society.
The other has no meaning at all. It exposes the emptiness of money. Consider all the pressures on people who borrow this substance created from nothing and face interest payments on that borrowing — leading to divorce, illness, suicide.
Which is more evil?
Ukraine has referendums and elections to prove its claims, which is the modern gold standard of national justification, since 1919.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.