Lecture by: Diana Panchenko1 Published: April 21, 2026 On: YouTube Панченко LIVE
Title: Three Types Of Ukrainians: How We Were Divided
Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 02:30 Part I: Three Types of Ukrainians 04:53 How does the hierarchy work in Ukraine? 06:33 What is life like for “third-class” people in Ukraine? 08:31 Ukraine’s plan to destroy “second-class” people 10:10 How Zelenskyy betrayed his own mother 11:25 Taras Shevchenko – a second-class Ukrainian 14:21 Part II: Shame 17:00 How Zelenskyy’s complexes destroyed Ukraine 17:50 Part III: Who is Ukrainian? 19:05 How did the USSR create Ukraine? 20:58 The history of nationalism in Ukraine 24:05 Ukraine under the USSR vs. Ukraine under Zelenskyy 27:44 Who built Ukraine? 28:37 Conclusion
This is a very important and very personal video. It tells you everything you need to know about Ukraine’s tragedy. I will tell you about three kinds of Ukrainians. From the perspective of a third-class Ukrainian, born in Mykolaiv. About how we were divided into the good and the bad. About how they decided to remake us, the bad guys. And those who couldn’t, to destroy. I appeal to all residents of Odesa, Mykolaiv, Kharkiv, and other cities in the Southeast. You should not be ashamed of yourselves. You are not worse, but better. You must and can stand up for yourselves. I dedicate this video to you. And I believe in you. Ukraine will not become Lviv. Rather, it will not become Ukraine.
Footnote
Diana Panchenko was born 21 May 1988, in Nikolayev (Lviv region), Ukrainian SSR, USSR. In August 2025, Panchenko’s YouTube channel, which had 1.8 million subscribers and millions of views as of September 2024, was deleted following a request from Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation. See also: #55. A Big Interview with Yulia Latynina↩︎
Today, our guest is Yulia Latynina—one of Russia’s most famous journalists, the former voice of Ekho Moskvy 2 and Novaya Gazeta 3, a person considered for years a symbol of the liberal opposition 4 and an unconditional supporter of the Western agenda. But in this conversation, you’ll see a very different Latynina 5.
Who, in her opinion, fired shots on the Maidan? Why were Russian-speaking Ukrainians turned into strangers in their own country? How did the West exploit Ukraine in its own grand game? Why did a conflict they promised to prevent ultimately lead to Russians and Ukrainians finding themselves on opposite sides of the front?
After this interview, some will say that Latynina betrayed her own people. Others say she said for the first time what many were afraid to say out loud.
Timecodes: 01. Introduction — 00:00 02. Introduction and why Latynina watches Panchenko’s channel — 00:41 03. Russian language in Ukraine: what Russian liberals 6 overlooked — 02:09 04. How to admit your mistakes and not fear “cancellation” — 03:33 05. Accusations of a “new trough”: grants and USAID 7 , 8 — 05:32 06. Maidan 2014 through Panchenko’s eyes: “black sheep” in their own country — 07:06 07. “Three types of Ukrainians” — 09:59 08. Sternenko, the “Russo-cutter,” and the murder charge — 11:15 09. Who really shot on the Maidan? 9 , 10 — 15:32 10. Korsun, Anti-Maidan Buses, and Right-Wing Activists — 20:47 11. Odessa, May 2: Trade Union House — 22:12 12.The First Night of Maidan: Provocateurs, Inter, Lyovochkin — 24:00 13. A Pre-Planned Scenario and Yanukovych’s Flight — 28:20 14. Maidan Money: Oligarchs, USAID11, Jeffrey Sachs 12, 13 — 34:03 15. Russia and Ukraine as “Western Colonies” — 38:42 16. 1991 and the Rosy Picture of the West — 42:24 17. What is “Victory” for Russian Liberals? 14 — 45:04 18. Soft Power: Activists as a “Second State” — 46:22 19. Zelensky, Paris, and 70 NGOs against Peace — 47:03 20. Do You Trust Putin Today? — 51:24 21. February 24, 2022: Elite Shock and a “Stream of Shit” Addressed to Russians — 52:16 22. The Victim Has the Right to Everything 15 — 55:52 23. Zelensky’s Team Euphoria and London 2020 — 1:04:06 24. Who’s Winning and Whom Latynina Is Rooting for — 1:06:38 25. Istanbul, Trump, and the Game Against China — 1:08:26 26. Who Benefits from War: The US, Europe, and the Thucydides Trap — 1:10:30 27. Balance of Power: Russia vs. Europe — 1:14:33 28. Does Latynina Want to Return to Russia? — 1:19:06 29. Would They Head an RT Analogue? — 1:23:39 30. Panchenko’s Personal Story: Losing Friends and Returning People — 1:25:08 31. The Idea of a Great Debate: Solovyov, Korchinsky, and Others — 1:26:07 32. Can Russians and Ukrainians Fight Together Against the West? — 1:27:31 33. Are Russians Fighting Russians? — 1:31:13 34. Why Was the Russian Press Silent? — 1:35:14 35. Will Russia Become “Fashionable” Again? The Dud Phenomenon — 1:37:02 36. Poland’s U-Turn and Karaganov’s Signals — 1:38:21 37. Sacralization of Death and the Seizure of Churches in Ukraine — 1:42:11 38. “Ukrainians Are the Most Unfree People” — 1:44:00 39. Finale and Acknowledgments — 1:45:29
Footnotes
Панченко LIVE: owner is Diana Panchenko, born 21 May 1988, Nikolayev(Lviv region), Ukrainian SSR, USSR. In August 2025, Panchenko’s YouTube channel, which had 1.8 million subscribers and millions of views as of September 2024, was deleted following a request from Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation. ↩︎
USAID: See also the short video on Panchenko’s YouTube channel about this subject “Bags of money on the Maidan“: “I saw money being handed over on the Maidan myself.” Panchenko and Latynina discuss who financed the Maidan: Western money through USAID, oligarchs’ money, and funding of Ukrainian media. And why no “Maidan” is possible without the support of the media and intelligence agencies. ↩︎
See also the short video: “The “victim” label justifies everything“: Latynina on one simple question about Maidan 2014: if the shooting took place from the Ukraina Hotel (as Ivan Katchanovsky’s investigation shows), then why hasn’t the authorities found the snipers in over 10 years? Because they didn’t want to. ↩︎
USAID: See also the short video on Panchenko’s YouTube channel about this subject “Bags of money on the Maidan“: “I saw money being handed over on the Maidan myself.” Panchenko and Latynina discuss who financed the Maidan: Western money through USAID, oligarchs’ money, and funding of Ukrainian media. And why no “Maidan” is possible without the support of the media and intelligence agencies. ↩︎
See also the short video on Panchenko’s YouTube channel about this subject “Bags of money on the Maidan“: “I saw money being handed over on the Maidan myself.” Panchenko and Latynina discuss who financed the Maidan: Western money through USAID, oligarchs’ money, and funding of Ukrainian media. And why no “Maidan” is possible without the support of the media and intelligence agencies. ↩︎
Liberals: see also footnote 6, and the short video: Latynina: Russian liberals are useful idiots. Yulia Latynina, in an interview with Panchenko, discusses how the independent Russian press, in her opinion, was integrated into the vast USAID machine and failed to notice what she saw with her own eyes on the Maidan. ↩︎
See also the short video: “The “victim” label justifies everything“: Latynina on one simple question about Maidan 2014: if the shooting took place from the Ukraina Hotel (as Ivan Katchanovsky’s investigation shows), then why hasn’t the authorities found the snipers in over 10 years? Because they didn’t want to. ↩︎
Being curious about Yulia Latynina’s way of analysing the current situation in Russia “Sustainable Politics” publishes this video, as a following up of the former post: 53. Yulia Latynina: the Russian opposition journalist. It is surprising to hear her mentioning the name Ivan Katchanovski1, and touting his research on the Maidan Massacre.
Video (subtitles available)
“Being an enemy of the West is dangerous. Being its colony is fatal”. Interview with Zhivoy Gvozd Published: July 15, 2026 By: Yulia Latynina
Timestamps 00:00:00 Start of broadcast 00:00:18 Fuel crisis in Russia and gasoline shortages 00:10:45 Crimea’s status and perception of the North-Eastern Front 00:24:30 Propaganda, public sentiment, and the state of the Russian economy 00:36:20 Konstantinovka and the situation at the front 00:47:40 Donald Trump, sanctions, and Western policy 00:59:30 What could change the situation in Russia 01:07:10 Answers to viewers’ questions 01:11:30 End of broadcast
I have been following Yulia Latynina for more than twenty years; she is one of the most important journalists one can count among the opposition in Russia. Latynina knows how to give her criticism of the Russian government such substance and form that I can accept this much better than that of the Navalny followers, the Albats3 screamers, or the liberal Nemtsov machos. I may disagree with her thoroughly, but I know that I can take her criticism seriously. Because of her expert investigation into domestic affairs in Russia, the corruption, the misdeeds in the government, the governors in the Russian provinces, the censorship, and the media, and what not. Latynina writes for Novaya Gazeta4 and she has been reporting since the time of Anna Politkovskaya, around the turn of the century.
Almost all opposition members call themselves ‘liberals’, indirectly also referring to ‘being Western’, and idealize the West disproportionately, in my view. Apart from the constant criticism of their own people and their government in domestic reporting, my biggest problem with them was and is that they know nothing of the great international power game. For example, from 2002 onwards they criticized the Kremlin’s actions in Chechnya but never reported on American intervention in Afghanistan and/or Iraq. They wrote about Putin’s actions in Abkhazia, Dagestan, or North Ossetia (domestic affairs) without shedding light on the background of Western geopolitics. They know nothing of the Wolfowitz Doctrine. Let alone that they have knowledge of the ongoing NATO expansions and how this relates to the national security of their own country. In 2014, Latynina wrote touting words about the Ukrainians on Maidan Square who were fighting for their democracy. She felt that the Russians should follow their example. But what did Latynina, as a journalist/activist, know about the neocolonialistic objective of the West?
When Crimea joined Russia shortly thereafter, it was Latynina who harshly condemned Putin. She wrote that Crimea had to remain part of Ukraine, despite the fact that most ethnic Russians had indicated in a referendum that they wanted to belong to Russia and not to the pro-Western government in Kyiv. Most striking in her analyses was her lack of geopolitical context. Knowledge regarding the geopolitical strategy of the US and NATO, and how these clash with the interests of Russian national security, was lacking. Consider, for example, the enormous geopolitical importance of the Russian port in Crimea for the Russian navy. If Ukraine were to become a NATO member, Russia would most likely lose its access to the Black Sea. Or NATO military bases that would be built in Ukraine where American troops could be stationed upon Ukrainian NATO membership. Or, at least as important, an anti-missile shield that is currently in use in Poland and Romania but which could also be built in Ukraine. This installation could also be used against Russia in the future.
The fact that Russia would be increasingly surrounded by Western NATO troops is not an issue for the Russian opposition. Until far into the year 2022, Latynina remained an important voice within the Russian opposition and condemned Putin’s Special Military Operation in Ukraine. Her slogan was: ‘No to war’ and she supported the Ukrainian war efforts to liberate the Donbass region from Russian troops. After that, I saw very little of her articles. At the time, I still thought that Latynina had been silenced. In 2023, I suddenly saw an article by her with the title: How can we explain to our allies that Ukraine needs weapons to cleanse Crimea of biological waste?5
I thought a mistake had been made in the article’s headline…
But no, it turned out to be Latynina who was criticizing Zelensky and the West. I suspect she took a crash course in geopolitics to understand the background of the Ukraine-Russia drama. Then you cannot avoid studying the American/NATO strategy within the great international power struggle. Her fellow opposition members and followers started describing her as a traitor and became furious. In 2024, I started following her more on social media, or in her blogs and articles (all her articles can be found at Novaya Gazeta). She literally accuses the Zelensky government of having carried out ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Crimea and the Donbass. She also accuses Zelensky of wanting to prolong the war to stay in power. She blames the West for making Ukraine ‘addicted’ to arms deliveries. She adds that all these weapons lead to deaths on both sides, which, according to her, benefits Washington. In 2024 (January), she wrote in her column: ‘The Ukrainian Impasse: Why the West is no longer waiting for Zelensky’s victory’. In this, she blames Zelensky for rejecting Putin’s conditions (in April 2022) with the quote: ‘Such a peace would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives on both sides and would have enabled Ukraine to develop like South Korea. But it would have been a political death sentence for the president.’
In 2025, Latynina’s articles have become even more critical, particularly regarding the actions of ‘The hand of the collective West’. Among the Russian opposition, there is bewilderment and disbelief: ‘One of their most critical journalists criticizes the ‘good West’, how is that possible?’ She is portrayed today as a conspiracy theorist and a traitor. The Moscow Times had the story in January 2026: ‘The mole who betrayed the Russian spies’. I feast my eyes on the social media of the Russian opposition, at how their hero is being attacked. The Russian opposition leaves no stone unturned in its criticism of her. They are the greatest admirers of the (liberal) West and they could never admit or realize that that same West also has very dirty hands.
The fact that this very critical Latynina has conducted so much research speaks in her favor. Not because I think she is right, but because she is brave enough not to remain entrenched in her opinion after 25 years. Finally, then, a skilled Russian opposition woman who has delved into the geopolitical power struggle. I wish our journalists would also conduct the necessary research to uncover the causes of the conflict. And then you also have to have the guts…
Marie-Thérèse ter Haar is a Russia & Eastern Europe expert. From the communist era (1987) until 2022, she spent six months in Russia and six months in the Netherlands. From the very beginning, she shared her knowledge of and experience with Russia and other countries of the former USSR by giving lectures, seminars, and organizing trips. Later, this expanded to include advising the business community, and in 2001 she founded the Russia & Eastern Europe Academy. The aim here is to build a bridge between Eastern and Western Europe. Due to the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, the current name is the Eurasia Institute. ↩︎
Albats: Russian opposition journalist Yevgenia Albats, a fierce and outspoken critic of Vladimir Putin’s government. She lives in self-imposed exile in New York, USA, and works as a political scientist for the New York Post. See more: Wikipedia, a mainstream —which means following the neoliberal West’s and its anti-Putin point of view— website. Because of that, “Sustainable Politics” does not support, neither recommends Wikipedia. Wikipedia is heavily censoring real, in-depth, independent, objectively monitored investigativeinformation, even independent objective science, creating therefore disinformation, tolerating even slander and lies about those who do not follow the mainstream media opinion because Wikipedia’s chief-editor keeps a strict eye on providing the mainstream opinion to avoid losing followers and payments, so in this case all what is mentioned about Yevgenia Albats will be uncensored by Wikipedia editors, since she is a fierce and outspoken critic of Vladimir Putin’s government, and therefore supporting the mainstream opinion. Note 1: the Wikipedia page about political scientist professor Ivan Katchanovski, the author of the book “The Russia Ukraine War And Its Origins, From the Maidan to the Ukraine War“, contained slander, lies, bias, until he discovered it. He found the right way to correct it. But not all have this possibility, do not know the way to change it into the correct info. Note 2: Yulia Latynina has a [Russian language] page in Wikipedia. Since she mentions this Russian language page on her website, I assume that she knows what is written about her, and that all is correct. However: if you chose for instance the English Wikipedia version, that version can contain lots of lies, disinformation and even slander about her, and the best is therefore to translate the Russian version into your own language, by copying the Russian text and paste it into a machine translator, for instance Google Translate. Only then you will get the correct info. ↩︎
Novaya Gazeta, Yulia Latynina, Юлия Латынина, articles in Russian, no new articles since March 2024. The article where Marie-Thérèse ter Haar refers to: How can we explain to our allies that Ukraine needs weapons to cleanse Crimea of biological waste?, written in 2023, was published in Novaya Gazeta, but removed. See for more: footnote 5. ↩︎
The article where Marie-Thérèse ter Haar refers to: “How can we explain to our allies that Ukraine needs weapons to cleanse Crimea of biological waste?“, written in 2023, was published in Novaya Gazeta, but has been removed, most likely by the chief editor of Novaya Gazeta, afraid to lose readers. More: the Ukrainian (thinking and writing anti-Kremlin) website IDPO.ORG.UA, article How Former “Good Russian” Latynina Came to Support the “Amputation” of Ukrainian Territories, published January 28, 2025. In this article you can find a screenshot of the article, as was published in Novaya Gazeta. Admin made a screenshot of the screenshot as published in IDPO. Above the screenshot in the article you can read: In November 2023, Latynina saw social media comments as a threat to Russians in Crimea. Some users referred to Russians as “biowaste,” prompting her to write: “If Russians are “biowaste” and make up the majority in Crimea, how can we explain to our allies that Ukraine needs weapons to cleanse Crimea of “biowaste”? ↩︎
The first time I learned to know the name “Ivan Katchanovski”, was in April 2023, when reading the on February 28, 2023 on Jeffrey D. Sachs’ website published article: “The ninth anniversary of the Ukraine war”.
“[….] I also urge all people to read the powerful academic studies by Prof. Ivan Katchanovski of the University of Ottawa (for example, here and here), who has laboriously reviewed all of the evidence of the Maidan and found that most of the violence and killing originated not from Yanukovych’s security detail, as alleged, but from the coup leaders themselves, who fired into the crowds, killing both policemen and demonstrators. “
Who is Ivan Katchanovski?
Ivan Katchanovski teaches at the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa. He does research in Democratization, Comparative Politics, Political Communication, and Conflicts, in particular, in Ukraine. He was Visiting Scholar at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard University, Visiting Assistant Professor at the Department of Politics at the State University of New York at Potsdam, Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto, and Kluge Post-Doctoral Fellow at the Kluge Center at the Library of Congress. His academic publications include four books, 10 book chapters, and 17 articles in refereed journals. He received his Ph.D. from the Schar School of Policy and Government at George Mason University in the US. Source: ResearchGate https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ivan-Katchanovski
The here following, by “The Dissident” published article, shows how important professor Katchanovski’s work is. “They” want to silence him, because he unveils “their” real face.
Ivan Katchanovski, the Ukrainian-Canadian professor of political science and conflict studies at the University of Ottawa, has done extensive research factually debunking the Western narrative around the proxy war in Ukraine and painting an objective, nuanced picture of the war. Among his most consequential works has been proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the Western-funded and supported coup against Ukraine’s elected president, Viktor Yanukovych in 2014 was based on a lie. Western leaders justified supporting the coup based on claims that Yanukovych’s forces were behind a massacre of protestors in Ukraine’s Maidan Square.
But Katchanovski has collected a significant body of evidence, including witness testimony, Ukranian ballistic examinations, and forensic medical examinations done by the Ukrainian government, which all show that the massacre was carried out by Western-backed militants opposed to Yanukovych, who were occupying a Hotel in the Maidan square.
The book “The Russia-Ukraine War: Its Nature, Origins, and Outcome”
More recently, Katchanovski has written the book “The Russia-Ukraine War: Its Nature, Origins, and Outcome,” which extensively documents the Western policies that provoked the war in Ukraine, including the Maidan coup, NATO expansion, and the Western blocking of the Istanbul peace accords in April of 2022.
For his factual work, Katchanovski now faces what he describes as a “Stalinist-like” smear campaign in the form of an open lettersigned by a number of pro- Ukraine government and pro war academics, including Andreas Umland1 who, Katchanovski notes, “backed a call for total mobilization in Ukraine by a neo-Nazi admirer of Hitler” and “Anton Shekhovtsov2, who headed the Dugin’s organization in Crimea”.
He documented that Shekhovtsov has previously used openly genocidal rhetoric towards Russians, writing, “Anton Shekhovtsov compared the mass killing of people by a fire in the Trade Union building in Odesa to his killing of Colorado potato beetles by collecting them in a box and then burning them”.
The open letter
The open [Ukrainiska Pravda, Admin] letter does not challenge a single fact that Katchanovski has documented in any of his books and instead resorts toMcCarthyite smears [reckless, unsubstantiated accusations and demagogic attacks that question a person’s loyalty, character, or patriotism. Named after U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, this tactic relies on guilt by association, innuendo, and coercion to intimidate opposition, destroy careers, and suppress legitimate debate. Admin] and guilt by association. These include:………….
1. claims that Katchanovski’s book is somehow discredited based on the claim that tech billionaires Elon Musk and David Sacks donated money to the GoFundMe for the book to be published. Katchanovski clarified that
“Elon Musk did not fund my book but helped on Twitter/X to stop an attempt to block my GoFundMe. I publicly thanked Elon Musk and all contributors”.
2. In an even more absurd guilt-by-association attack, the letter tried to connect Katchanovski to Russian state media because two contributors to RT, Tarik Cyril Amar and Lenka White, said positive things about the book.
3. The letter also claims that “Katchanovski’s narrative about the causes and escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian War is often congruent to the Kremlin’s propaganda” and that it could “lead to a reduction of Western help for Ukraine”
…….again, without a challenging a single fact in Katchanovski’s work.
As the Ukrainian academic Marta Havryshko3put it, “In other words: certain arguments are not wrong because they are false, but because readers might find them (in)convenient and stop sponsor corrupt regime that sends its people to the kill zone against their will.”
Katchanovski’s response
Katchanovski in a response to the smear campaign, noted that its intention was “not only to censor my book but also to go after my university job and subject me to criminal persecution and sanctions by the Zelensky regime because they are incapable of challenging my evidence-based analysis”.
The Zelensky regime has previously sanctioned a long list of its domestic critics for criticizing the Ukraine proxy war, from the well-known Ukrainian political scientist Konstantin Bondarenko4 to the former advisor to the Zelensky government, Oleksiy Arestovych5.
He added that,
“Umland, Shekhovtsov, and their ilk try to force scholars to parrot the Zelensky government propaganda and propagate fake narratives that they propagate themselves, such as false flag Nord Stream bombing by Russia, genocide in Ukraine, Ukraine as democracy, and no neo-Nazis in Ukraine. They falsely claim that the blocking of the nearly finalized Istanbul peace deal by the Western governments is Russian propaganda and denounce my book for this even though this was stated or de facto admitted by the head and members of the Ukrainian delegation, ex-prime minister of Israel, president and foreign minister of Turkey, Victoria Nuland and several other such top officials … They falsely equate the Zelensky regime with Ukraine and Ukrainians and their support for the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government, mutual killings of Ukrainians in civil war in Donbas, and the proxy war to the last Ukrainian with supporting Ukraine and Ukrainians. They choose to attack and defame one of a few Ukrainian political scientists in the Western academy specializing primarily in conflicts in Ukraine.”
Katchanovski, who had previously had his property seized by the Ukrainian regime, noted that the smear campaign was an attempt to get him to face further repression from the regime, writing:
“The denunciation of me and my scholarly book by Umland, Shekhovtsov, and their ilk is not only an open attack on academic freedom but also an attempt to censor my book and subject me to criminal prosecution or sanctions by the undemocratic Zelensky regime for my academic research. They falsely link my book to Russian propaganda, Russian media, and “apologetics” of the Russian invasion, which are all criminal offensives in Ukraine. There were many such cases of political persecution in Ukraine.”
“My house, land, and all other property in my native Western Ukraine were illegally seized in retaliation of my scholarly studies of the Maidan massacre in Ukraine. I was blacklisted on the Ukrainian government-linked Myrotvorets hit list for “crimes” of showing involvement of radical nationalists and neo-Nazis in this massacre of the Maidan protesters and the police and for exposing the SS Galicia division veteran, who was given standing ovations in the Canadian parliament by the Canadian government, parliament, Zelensky, and his delegation. The Ukrainian government agency, headed by the leader of the OUN, which collaborated with Nazi Germany and was involved in organizing the SS Galicia Division, threatened me with criminal prosecution for exposing involvement of neo-Nazis in the Maidan massacre.”
Supporters of the Ukraine proxy war have no answer to the facts documented by Katchanovski in his book, so they are now engaging in a smear campaign, in an attempt to get him fired, censored, and repressed as retribution for his inconvenient facts.
A bitter row has erupted between Kiev and Warsaw, after Volodymyr Zelensky renamed a Ukrainian military unit the “Heroes of the UPA”. The UPA – Ukrainian Insurgent Army – was an ultranationalist factionheavily implicated in the Holocaust, which slaughtered up to 100,000 Polish civilians during World War II. In addition to commemorating the mass-murdering militant group, the corpse of Andriy Melnyk, leader of UPA parent the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B), was reburied in Kiev. At a grand accompanying ceremony, Zelensky declared:
“Today we all see that the Ukrainian idea can overcome what once seemed absolutely insurmountable. Now, when we are on Ukrainian soil, under our Ukrainian flag, to the sound of the Ukrainian national anthem, paying due tribute to our Ukrainian heroes, we feel in our hearts everything Ukrainians were forced to go through, everything our people had to endure.”
The unspeakable horrors inflicted upon Poles – and Communists, Jews, Romani and other “undesirables” – by Melynk and his fellow Nazi collaborators were of course unmentioned. So too that the genocidal nationalism practiced and preached by Melynk was covertly promoted and sponsored for decades by Anglo-American intelligence, within and without Ukraine. The ongoing proxy conflict is a direct product of this little-known spectral meddling, which was specifically concerned with promoting cultural and ethnic difference, and enmity, between Russians and Ukrainians globally.
Andriy Melnyk’s remains, long-buried in Luxembourg, are returned to Ukraine
As this journalist has previously revealed, in August 1957 the CIA secretly drew up elaborate plans for a US special forces invasion of Ukraine. Intended to collapse the wider Soviet Union, the Agency’s conspiracy depended heavily on recruiting local fascists as footsoldiers. A significant stumbling block to the Agency’s plot, however, was much of Ukraine’s population actually harbouring “few grievances” against Russians or Communism. “Points of conflict” between Russians and Ukrainians, which could be exploited by the CIA to foment a mass uprising, were scant.
The Agency lamented how “the long history of union between Russia and Ukraine, which stretches in an almost unbroken line from 1654 to the present day,” had resulted in “many Ukrainians” having “adopted the Russian way of life.” Moreover, the similarity of their “languages, customs, and backgrounds,” and the “great influence” of Russian culture in Ukraine, meant the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians felt “little national antagonism.” Yet, the CIA believed “important grievances exist,” and “under favorable conditions” Ukrainians would assist US invaders.
Unmentioned in the invasion planning documents, the CIA had since 1949 been covertly striving to create those “favorable conditions.” A key Agency asset used for the purpose was OUN-B chief Mykola Lebed. In 1943, he proposed to “cleanse the entire revolutionary territory” – today’s western Ukraine – of its Polish population, to prevent any future Polish state from claiming the region. A post-war US Army counterintelligence report branded Lebed a “well-known sadist,” and Nazi collaborator.
The nucleus of Lebed’s international fascist agitation was Prolog, a New York-based publishing firm. A 1966 CIA memo noted this “cover organization” for the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council (ZP/UHVR) was established to conduct “clandestine activity.” It approvingly added that Prolog’s work “contributes to Ukrainian nationalist ferment and to intellectual resistance to Soviet repression by exploiting existing and encouraging new deviationist tendencies” in Ukraine. Elsewhere, the Agency declared it was “important to continue to encourage divisive manifestation” of this sort. The explicitly stated objective was triggering “nationalist flareups” in the USSR:
“[ZP/UHVR] were sent from the Ukraine in 1945 by the Ukrainian Supreme Liberation Council to make contact with Western intelligence representatives and to act in behalf of the homeland…[ZP/UHVR] organized a net of collaborators throughout Western Europe and the United States…the feeling of nationalism is very much alive. ZP/UHVR has proved realistic in its approach to operational matters and its propaganda activity.”
‘Existing Suspicions’
A late 1953 Agency memo documents how the CIA for years broadcast “black radio transmissions” in Ukrainian from a secret CIA installation in Athens, Greece. “Soviet officialdom, Soviet military forces stationed in the Ukraine, the indigenous civilian population…the underground movement and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA)” were an intended target audience of 40 million people, upon whom the Agency wished to have a “significant propaganda impact.” Produced by ultranationalist emigres who’d fled Ukraine after World War II, the project sought to foment insurrectionary anti-Communist violence:
“Furnish evidence of outside sympathy and understanding for the Ukrainian peoples; intensify anti-regime disaffection by encouraging resentment, bitterness, and distrust of the Soviet regime and its personalities; maintain national consciousness among the Ukrainians and urge them to maintain pride in the individuality and heritage of their culture; create dissatisfaction among Ukrainian military personnel within the Soviet armed forces stationed in the Ukraine; create and intensify dissatisfaction among the Ukrainian civil authorities to the Soviet regime.”
Publicly, the station’s US-made broadcasts – which included Ukrainian folk songs – were “attributed to a notional group of Ukrainian Anti-Communists.” There was no connection “actual or implied, with any established Ukrainian emigre group.” It was of the utmost importance too the CIA’s hand in creating and running the station was concealed – “every effort will be made to keep this risk at a minimum.” However, the operation’s ruinous spoils were considered well-worth the hazards.
“It will provide a wedge which can be driven deeper between the Soviets and the Ukrainians and would exacerbate existing suspicions and antagonisms between the two ethnic factions,” the CIA declared. The Agency also sought to create a wider “psychological climate” among Ukrainian audiences which would be “more favorable” to other anti-Soviet operations it was simultaneously conducting. Moreover, it was forecast “Soviet reaction to the broadcasts may indicate certain areas of vulnerability or sensitivity not heretofore recognized,” which could be further exploited.
‘Imperial Policy’
The CIA’s efforts to encourage Ukrainian nationalism and separatism endured throughout the Cold War. Via avowed CIA front the National Endowment for Democracy, overt US assistance was provided to Rukh (The People’s Movement of Ukraine). One of Soviet Ukraine’s first opposition parties, Rukh is widely considered to have played a key role in securing Ukraine’s ‘independence’ in December 1991. Four months earlier, US President George H W Bush had visited Kiev and given an infamous speech in which he cautioned Ukrainians against embracing “suicidal nationalism based upon ethnic hatred.”
His comments enraged Ukrainian nationalists, and Stateside anti-Soviet hawks. Yet, Bush’s fears were well-founded. By this point, Yugoslavia was rapidly disintegrating, engulfed by ever-violent fratricidal tensions. His administration was thusformally committed at this time to preserving the Soviet Union in some form, and undertook ill-fated measures in service of this goal. Too little, too late, that mission’s failure set Ukraine hurtling towards all-out conflict with Russia. As long-desired by the CIA, “antagonisms between the two ethnic factions” now run deep.
In a bitter twist, it was precisely because the NED-orchestrated February 2014 Maidan coupwas led by rabidly anti-Russian nationalist elements that a majority of Ukrainians did not support the Maidan movement. As a contemporary Washington Postanalysis noted, Viktor Yanukovych remained “the most popular political figure in the country,” and no poll conducted to date had ever indicated mass support for the uprising. Surveys conversely showed “large majorities” of Ukrainians opposed the violent storming of regional governments by Maidan insurrectionists.
This hostility was spurred by “anti-Russian rhetoric and the iconography of western Ukrainian nationalism…not [playing] well among the Ukrainian majority.” Washington Post noted how Neo-Nazi party Svoboda was at Maidan’s forefront. Its leader Oleh Tyahnybok had infamously praisedthe UPA for fighting “against the Moskali [Russians], Germans, Zhydy [Jews] and other scum.” His words were not well-received by the 50% of Ukraine’s population residing in regions that had “strongly identified with Russia” for over two centuries. “Nearly all are alienated by anti-Russian rhetoric and symbols”:
“Anti-Russian forms of Ukrainian nationalism expressed on the Maidan are certainly not representative of the general view of Ukrainians. Electoral support for these views and for the political parties who espouse them has always been limited. Their presence and influence in the protest movement far outstrip their role in Ukrainian politics and their support barely extends geographically beyond a few Western provinces.”
Congress of Ukrainian Nationalists flags at a December 2013 Maidan protest
Fast forward to now, and in response to Ukraine’s state-level glorification of the ultranationalist UPA and its lead genocidaire Andriy Melnyk, Polish President Karol Nawrocki has announced he will seek to strip Zelensky of the Order of the White Eagle, Warsaw’s highest honour, bestowed in 2023. Meanwhile, premier Donald Tusk has cursed the Ukrainian leader’s actions as “[wounding] our historical sensitivity,” and “worrying from the point of view of our relations.”
Authorities in Kiev appear entirely unconcerned their close neighbour and proxy war ally has been so egregiously insulted. A Foreign Ministry spokesperson claimedZelensky had not wished to cause any offence. “Our history confirms only Moscow benefits from disputes between Ukrainians and Poles,” they said. Besides, for Ukrainian soldiers, “the struggle of the UPA symbolises strictly the opposition to Moscow’s imperial policy.” As the CIA always intended, two antithetical versions of history are now effectively at war in Donbass. A more devastating modern day example of divide and conquer in action one would be hard-pressed to identify.
The original post, named “MH17”, published April 28, 2023, has been ENTIRELY changed on May 6, 2026, because of the recently published scientific book: The Russia-Ukraine War and its Origins (professor Ivan Katchanovski), and another book: What I saw in Ukraine (Benoît Paré, international observer), but also because the two links to Bellingcat had become meaningless: in 2023, when I published the original post, both links were directing to a Bellingcat web-page with a picture of a BUK, Russian made, in 2008, in Ukraine. The articles were still there, but the pictures of the BUK, with the text that included the year 2008, and that it were Russian BUKs, are gone. Bellingcat removed them.Go to the updated post.
Edited: October 31, 2025 (Instagram info was added)
This blog post concerns a video in which Dr. Tögel1 explains how mainstream media is used for propaganda and cognitive warfare2. He goes into great detail about what is being said, what is being claimed, and what is true or false. The video concerns the German ZDF broadcast, published on October 23rd, titled “Markus Lanz.”3 Markus Lanz4 moderates the interview with guests: Georg Mascolo5, Katja Kloger6, and Andrey Gurkov7.
Dr. Jonas Tögel:
When I watched the “Markus Lanz” program from October 23, 2025, and analyzed it for war propaganda, I was immediately struck by how one-sided the choice of guests was: Both Katja Gloger and her husband, Georg Mascolo, are members of the “Atlantikbrücke” – a transatlantic think tank that receives funding from, among others, banks and the German Foreign Office. Unfortunately, Markus Lanz did not introduce either of them as transatlantic lobbyists. The selection of guests thus plays a significant role: I myself have experienced firsthand that one is not invited to talk shows if one does not represent the desired positions. Source Instagram
The “Markus Lanz” show from October 23rd is a good example of how the same issues can be presented very differently: In the program, it’s perfectly acceptable to discuss state terrorism: terrorist attacks are carried out by one’s own intelligence services, for which an enemy is blamed, against whom war can now be waged under the pretext of “terrorism.” When it comes to the 1999 terrorist attacks in Moscow and the Russian KGB/FSB is the possible perpetrator, such considerations are not only permissible but even probable. However, when it comes to September 11, 2001, and American intelligence services as possible perpetrators, such considerations are not allowed and are dismissed as “conspiracy theories.” I find that astonishing. Source Instagram
Because the mainstreampropaganda system, explained in detail in this video, is not only used in Germany, the video is published here, so that we all can learn how the crowds are mislead, brainwashed. The video is subtitled. Choose your language in the menu bar. The menu bar becomes visible after you have clicked the red YT start button.
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists – Georg Mascolo – https://www.icij.org/journalists/georg-mascolo “Georg Mascolo, Germany, is a bestselling author and journalist who worked for nearly 25 years for the Spiegel Group. From 2008 until 2013, he was editor-in-chief of Spiegel magazine. From 2014 until 2022, he was the head of the Joint Investigative Group of Süddeutsche Zeitung and the two German public broadcasters WDR and NDR. Mascolo has been an ICIJ member since 1998. He has been the dean of the Bucerius Summer School on Global Governance since 2017. In 2014, he was named Political Journalist of the Year by the influential professional journal Medium Magazin.”↩︎
Journalismusfest Innsbruck – Katja Gloger – https://www.journalismusfest.org/en/katja-gloger-2 “Katja Gloger studied Eastern European history, Political science and Slavic studies in Hamburg and Moscow. After graduating from the German School of Journalism in Munich, she became a TV-reporter for WDR Radio and Television in Cologne. From 1989 on she was based as correspondent for the weekly Stern in Moscow.. Gloger interviewed Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin, whom she accompanied for months as the first Western correspondent. She later headed the foreign desk of Stern and was posted as senior political correspondent to Washington, D.C. Honored with the Henri-Nannen-Award and named political “Journalist of the Year” she now works as a freelance journalist and book author focusing on Russia and Security Policy. Her books include Putin’s World: The New Russia, Ukraine and the West; Stranger Friends: Germans and Russians. The Story of a Fateful Relationship and the bestseller Outbreak: Insights into a Pandemic. She is a regular guest on German radio and television, panelist and moderator of discussions on Russia and international affairs. In her honorary capacity, she is Spokesperson and Executive Member of the Board of RSF Reporters without Borders, Germany. She lives in Berlin.”↩︎
Lecture (2023) by Dr. Jonas Tögel, published on September 10, 2025 (subtitled)
Dr. Jonas Tögel is a German psychologist, American studies scholar, propaganda researcher, and bestselling author. He works as a research associate at the Institute of Psychology at the University of Regensburg. His motivation is to help people recognize, understand, and neutralize manipulation in everyday life and propaganda. In doing so, he is committed to strengthening his audience’s resilience so that one can remain peaceful, positive, and able to act even in difficult times. Website: Dr. Jonas Tögel
“When I gave my lecture on NATO’s cognitive warfare in spring 2023, it was not foreseeable how much the threat of war in Europe would increase. Today it is clear that cognitive warfare has divided populations, weakened the peace movement, and that it is therefore possible to continue to push forward with rearmament and a new, major war in Europe. What is needed now is an understanding of the mechanisms of war propaganda and a determined, shared, and loud desire for peace.” – Dr. Jonas Tögel
Quote: “[…..] we first discuss how to define “misinformation”, and how it relates to various other commonly used terms such as “disinformation” and “fake news”. Next, we examine the psychology of correcting misinformation: what happens when someone is exposed to a fact check, and what are the benefits and drawbacks of correcting misinformation once the damage is already done? Finally, we discuss how to build psychological resilience against misinformation through psychological “vaccines” or “inoculation”: we look at the theoretical background of inoculation theory (dating back to the 1960s), its modern application within the context of online misinformation (in online games and educational videos), and future prospects and research avenues in the field.“
Attention: Both authors are professors at the university of Cambridge: check Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden. The biography on their Cambridge profile doesn’t mention any collaboration with NATO or writing for NATO. There’s no link to the NATO document “Inoculation Theory and Misinformation”. Why not? There must be a reason. There’s no link to their Cambridge profile on the NATO profile. Check: Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden. Why not? Conclusion: That, which cannot stand the light of day, is being concealed. Both professors have prostituted their knowledge regarding the possibility of brain manipulation, and NATO is the pimp.
In case the page will be removed from the NATO website, and all denied, today, October 11, 2025 this PDF has been created. The from the NATO website downloaded file: PDF
Screenshot taken October 11, 2025, from the NATO website.
Edited: July 06, 2025 – Note: In the meantime we passed the year 2022, in which, named like that: the Russian Special Project started. In the post below I write that Russian politics, like all politics world wide, are not reliable. That was in 2020, when I was not up to date about the developments in Kiev, Ukraine, the coup there in 2014, the provoked war, etc. etc. All what is related with that is to be found in my blog Sustainable Politics, that I started in 2023, after my LinkedIn posts/comments had been censored because of EU guidelines and my account had been suspended for a short time: I was even named a Russian Troll there. But there is more, and since the war in Ukraine, all what happened there, and in USA, Europe, my political knowledge about Russia has become real in-depth knowledge, fact checked, after having been informed about Putin, Lavrov, the provoking aggressive role of NATO, USA, EU, in the Ukraine war, etc., by the highest reliable of the west’s political scientists and investigative journalists. You can find a gallery, and a list of them here. My answer on the question, that I asked myself in 2020: into which direction I would run in case needed: I would still, now, 2025, run into the direction of Russia, but taking my Acousticom2 with me to find a green place to live, because also in Russia the radiation from man-made EMF is too high. RNCNIRP is an advisory commission. Not a governmental EMF safety guidelines decision makers commission.Read more about RNCNIRP here.
The new guidelines for schools, and online learning at home, as presented by the ministry of health in Russia, are created by RusCNIRP, a group of independent scientists who have studied EMF and experienced electromagnetic radiation on volunteering humans, in Russia. RusCNIRP has found highly alarming research results concerning the health of all human beings, especially for the foetus, babies, children, and teenagers. Not only for Russians, not only for Russian foetuses, babies, children and teenagers, but for all human beings. Science is not politically interested, not owned by politics and governments.
“Russian propaganda” as it essentially is, is not related at all with what the Ministry of Health in Moscow has decided about schools and online learning at home, but the decision of the Russian Ministry of Health opens indeed a very nice crystal clear view on Russia and the care of Russians for their children.
The “Free West”?
“Russian propaganda” is an expression for those outside Russia who like to influence the opinion of the crowds who live in the so-called “free west”, where all can say what they like to say [but nobody listens]. The “free” west does not exist. In the free west the so-called free people have become the slaves of the industry that rules all the governments, via the votes of these slaves, via a fake democratic system. In the free west people really believe they are free.
Capitalism and Communism
Russia is not different from the “free west”, since also there political systems restrict the people’s freedom: the Tsar was thrown from the throne in 1917 and other types of “Tsars” took over the totalitarian power. The “free west”points to Russia as an unfree state, Russia points to the west for the same. The industry in both East and West has during the era of the industrialisation taken over the reigns of politics[see article]. Capitalism is now also blossoming where communism was and even IS dictated. Communism is essentially an utterly social “ism”, but the world was not ready for it and one cannot force human evolution by violence, as happened in Russia, as happens in China, and why communist countries are factually not communist at all. Capitalism rules also in China, North Korea, everywhere. Also EU is not different from what is happening in Russia, in USA. The industry is the absolute totalitarian power where all world politics are merchandisers for. The crisis we are in is a result of blind capitalism, and the inborn and stimulated by industry greed of human beings.
Painting: Polish artist Zdzisław Beksiński, without a title. For me it is the blind monster industry that eats human beings. All walk in his wide opened mouth, something inside urges them to go in it (greed) and they do not see where they walk into. Their mind is sleeping. They are blind also. Not aware of what is happening: that they will be transformed into the faeces of the monster. Humans are the industry’s waste.
“If freedom is here, what does prison look like?”
“If freedom is here, what does prison look like?” Source
The so-called “free west” is scaremongering people for Russia, because the so-called “free west” people could lose their freedom, their free choice, their free will, when Russia is going to become too powerful. Which freedom?
“If freedom is here, what does prison look like?” Source
Well,
when reading the news about 5G, the way it is rolled out and the speed of the rollout
when discovering the total absence of any industrial scientific research of the biological effects of 5G
when learning about the support of the “free” west of corrupted safety guidelines decision makers groups like ICNIRP, FCC, ARPANSA, Safety Code 6 [See also: wikipedia]
when reading about Bill Gates, vaccines, the totally absurd, insane, unnecessary vaccine cocktail of till about 16 different vaccines, where parents of new born babies in USA are obliged to agree with. Read article Children’s Health Defense
…then I wonder in what kind of a freedom we live in. Then I do not wonder which side I should choose if it comes to choices:
I would choose for Russia.
My view on Russia
Choosing for Russia is not a synonym for agreeing with their politics, though I understand the Russian revolution, though I love their hymn, and though I understand the essence of communism. As a child I felt the enormous fear of both my parents, when the news came that Russia invaded Hungary [1956]. I was 8 years old. When there was ever something to be afraid of, later, I translated it automatically into “Russians”. My father hated Stalin, deeply, he hated communism, the communist leaders, and I did not understand it then, but later I did, and I agreed. I learned later that politics is not the same as culture. I learned from my mother the love for the Russian dances and music, but I also felt and feel love for for instance Spanish dances, Hungarian dances, all traditional dances and music. I dislike the music of the American cowboys however, their arrogant view on the American indigenous people, and their “country and western” music. I can not listen to it.
I love nature. As Russians do. Love for nature is deeply rooted in the Russian soul. I feel the same. When it comes to choices, I choose for Russia. If I had to run for my life, I would run to Russia, not to the USA.
My view on the USA
America was a glorious country, for me, Americans were heroes: born some years after WWII out of parents who witnessed the war in the Netherlands, and who experienced Americans as liberators, I only heard positive words, and deep respect. America was glorified. My view on America changed during my life and on a certain moment I really did not understand why people would like to go there, to live there, or to go for a holiday there. The American glory of 1945 must have created an addiction in Americans to glory itself, to play the role of the liberator everywhere in the world, and to interfere finally in politics where they did not have the right to. The greed of their ancestors, who invaded America, was and is obviously in the DNA of the Americans: they never stopped to invade, and their out of the cowboy-guns derived advanced war industry helped them to win insane cruel wars. During the last decades the American glory faded out. Then there was Trump with: “We Make America Great Again!”
His politics have speeded up the rotting process of USA that started when Columbus arrived on that continent. He exposes the enormous numbers of far-right voters, Trump voters, the fake holiness of Christians in USA, who made it happen that Trump won. “It was meant to be, and a sign of God”. Most probably all this could happen because white-supremacy-America has no authentic culture, with roots far back in history, from the beginning of mankind: Americans of the present are the heirs of the fortune hunters from Europe. All what was authentic American has been stolen, killed, removed, ridiculed, humiliated, and this has not stopped yet: the indigenous people of America who are still alive still live in reservations and have no rights. The white supremacy overruled not only the indigenous people, but also the by white supremacists from Africa into America entered black people, the white man’s slaves, and all other human colours that appeared in USA, and are trying to enter right now the USA: “Go back where you came from!“. But the new Americans are awaking already a long time, and times and American society are finally really changing. The white supremacists feel backed into a corner, and act in the same way as those who invaded America, and killed all who were trying to defend their property and were opposing them. There is a revival of the cowboy mentality and it is supported by their self chosen pro-cowboy government. But much more intense: it is now a political movement.
That Americans [together with the British, Canadians, Polish and Russians] liberated Europe from Nazi Germany, stays a fact where we, Europeans, are eternally grateful for. The new fact is that Nazism is now experiencing a new dawn in the USA itself.
It is the world wide governing American, by politics funded and supported industries, and out of this American industry mentality born Russian, Chinese, Iranian, African, South American, Australian, Canadian, and European industries, which rule humanity, life on Earth. The shallow life-style in industrial countries is comparable with the shallow lifestyle as presented in the many Hollywood films, which have polluted the view of humans on sexuality and respect, world wide. The seed of the rottenness of the entire world started to grow in Hollywood, and infected via the Hollywood films all peoples of the world. Telecom industry is derived from America’s film industry, and America’s war industry, that found propaganda for it via the film industry and nowadays via the gaming industry, a side product of the film industry. Telecom uses psychological ways to hide its own propaganda by blaming Russia for what it is doing itself. Wake up, peoples of the world, stop to be sheeples [for those who think I wrote it wrong: sheeples is combination of sheep and peoples].
Conclusion
The claim of the telecommunications industry that the in Russia banned smartphones and Wi-Fi from schools should be considered as Russian propaganda, is a dirty lie, and propaganda itself, merchandising, manipulating the mind of the “free west” peoples, in order to achieve that the sheeples will say no to a sane, ethical decision of Russians. Sanity and ethics are missing in the telecom industry, in all industries, the multi nationals. Everywhere. Governments should disconnect from the industry and their catastrophic economic fetishism. The Russian Ministry of Health did. If there is a future, it must be in Russia. The signs are there that they can think.
Note: the mentioned tweet in the first sentence was published by Susan Foster. Susan Foster lives in Colorado, USA, writes articles for Children’s Health Defense, and is Honorary Firefighter of the San Diego Fire Department; US Adviser EM Radiation Research Trust (UK). See: Twitter. Her timeline on Twitter also shows how the situation in the USA is escalating.
One of Susan Foster’s tweets contains the following video. The YouTube channel shows more of the USA, where pro-American governments are willing to cooperate with, and not with Russia. Russian politics are, as all politics, indeed not reliable, but the Russian culture, art and science is still very strong and of a high quality. Russia is part of geological Europe. So, EU, do not blame me for choosing for Russia. It is born out of your own totalitarian politics, by hiding details about 5G, by mandating 5G, your undemocratic politics about so-called safety guidelines for EMF by choosing for the ICNIRP monopoly, mandating unhealthy, unnecessary vaccines, denying the facts of pesticides, neonicotinoids, that kill life in soils, and by cooperating with a country that is reigned by “Gestapo Trump“. Washing hands in innocence, pretending to be leaders, our truthful leaders, walking like cowardly sheep behind Big “Brother” USA.
KNOWLEDGE OF FREEDOM Chapter 01 – Conscious Human Action Chapter 02 – The Fundamental Desire for Knowledge Chapter 03 – Thinking in the Service of Knowledge Chapter 04 – The World as Percept Chapter 05 – The Act of Knowing the World Chapter 06 – Human Individuality Chapter 07 – Are There Limits to Knowledge? Chapter 08 – The Factors of Life Chapter 09 – The Idea of Freedom Chapter 10 – Freedom — Philosophy and Monism Chapter 11 – World Purpose and Life Purpose Chapter 12 – Moral Imagination Chapter 13 – The Value of Life Chapter 14 – Individuality and Genus
