The EU’s latest propaganda offensive accuses Russia of historical revisionism ahead of Victory Day, but critics argue it’s Brussels—not Moscow—that’s distorting the truth for political gain.
Ursula’s Propaganda Channels
I discovered this story, as I do so many, by using the Western technocrat-owned Google search engine. I use the biased Google News channel not because it has a virtual monopoly on information dissemination, but because the truth is easily found in a sea of lies. You see, Google chooses to index and prioritize information and news, supposedly by algorithms. However, these models of categorization have been “programmed” to show the world stories and opinions of the European External Action Service (EEAS), which is an arm of the Diplomatic Service of the EU. Or, a copycat of the soon-to-be-defunct Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty run by the U.S. State Department. I shouldn’t have to explain why either of these channels are Russophobic in their essence, or why and how they are the ones spitting out disinformation by the ton.
The story that caught my eye today, “Putin’s History 3.0—historical revisionism in Russia ahead of 9 May,” is a prime example of “gaslighting.” It also uses repetition of the “Putin evil” theme so that more people begin to believe the lies about the Russians and Putin are the truth. Or, as Hitler’s propaganda genius Joseph Goebbels put it, “Repeat a lie often enough, and it becomes the truth.” The EUvsDisinfo story of May 2, 2025, tells information consumers that Russia’s Vladimir Putin is a history revisionist, when the truth is the current fascists running Europe are seeking to make Russia seem barbaric and her president a liar. Since this EUvsDiSiNFO is simple to dissect and disintegrate, I use EU Fuhrer Ursula von der Leyen’s copywriters’ lies against them.
The liars at the EU’s propaganda channel say Vladimir Putin has not one, but three different instances of historical revisionism. The author or authors refer to these as Putin History 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0. Let’s unscramble each in succession.
Twisting History Nazi Style
According to the EEAS media outlet, Putin 1.0 claims Russia’s president at first praised the West’s role in helping the USSR defeat Hitler. This version goes on to include Stalin’s stalling plan the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact between Germany and the Soviets as evidence that Mr. Putin changes views like he does his underwear. What is not factored in is the timeframe and the essence of West-East relations in the early 2000s. This was BEFORE the liberal lunacy in America and Europe to firm hold. So, Mr. Putin was, like all Russians, less defensive and more diplomatic. He was provoked less to point out the USSR’s far more dramatic role in Hitler’s defeat. It’s fair to say the Russians were less pressured and more amiable then.
Now we come to EEAS’ Putin 2.0 nonsense. This phase started after 2010, and the Russians were more defensive, given that Obama was in office and not a conservative. The liberal order’s moves toward defeating Russia for good took shape during this time. However, EEAS claims Mr. Putin just turned on the West and began harping about the Soviet victory. The Russians indeed began reminding the world of the 27 million dead Soviets and the crushing defeats heaped upon Hitler’s mighty blitzkrieg war machine. Let’s look back to 2014 and the D-Day memorials. This was the last time Mr. Putin was even invited to pay tribute to the losses on WW2’s Western Front. Let’s also recall that it was 5 months later that the Euromaidan coup in Kyiv took place. I could go on and on with parallels and justifications, but at the point EEAS is spotlighting, a great deal changed starting in 2008-2010.
Finally, according to EEAS’ storytellers, Putin 3.0 leaves off the Soviet contribution and begins a “Russia only” version of the Great Patriotic War. The EU propagandists cherry-pick needed events and innuendos to show that the Russians beat Hitler all by themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth, so let’s use these disinformation idiots’ own words to unscramble the reality. Under the bold subject line “Delete Ukraine,” these are the words the EU liars chose.
“The new history seems more or less to delete Ukraine from the USSR’s fight against Nazi Germany, dismissing the fact that 6 million Ukrainians fought Nazism and that Ukraine was one of the ‘bloodlands’ the main battlegrounds in WWII.”
For What Cause?
First, from a journalist’s standpoint, using weak words like “seems more or less” tells anyone who took English classes that the author is either stupid or lying. Vladimir Putin never dismissed the contributions of other Soviet Republics, but the facts about Nazi Ukrainians and the idea of the “bloodlands” are truths inserted to appear as revisionist lies. The term “bloodlands” comes from a book by Yale historian Timothy Snyder and refers to mass murder in the territories occupied by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
The problem is, Snyder’s thesis was that Hitler and Stalin were two peas in a totalitarian pod. Despite the rave reviews for Snyder’s work from the same media that runs Western propaganda today, one key The famous historian, Sir Richard John Evans FRSL FRHistS FBA FLSW wrote that because of a lack of causal argument, “Snyder’s book is of no use.”
Causal argument! This is why all propaganda can easily be identified. Vested interests and state departments employ these writers and have no interest in being scientific or using practical argumentative sense. Like Snyder’s contentions about parallels between Hitler and Stalin, the collective West leaves off-key elements of history: the interactions that are causal events, the attitudes that have to be adjusted, and the honest truth of history. The Russians have been shoved into a corner where everything is all about Russia. No one seems to see this.
However, it’s poetic justice that the UK’s state-owned media channel BBC published a story refuting everything the EU’s bullshit bullhorn said. “Russia focuses on Soviet victims of WW2 as officials not invited to Auschwitz ceremony” snatches the veil off Frau von der Leyen’s lie machine. The article is from January of this year. It tells of Vladimir Putin’s unveiling of a remarkable monument to holocaust victims, Soviets and Russians who sacrificed, and the reality of WW2. Of course, the BBC ended the story claiming Putin and the Russians were only trying to play victims because of the conflict in Ukraine. It’s significant to note that this year Vladimir Putin was not invited to the 80th remembrance of the Soviet liberation of the Nazi concentration camp Auschwitz.
Is it just me, or is anyone else thinking it’s not the Russians trying to alter history?
Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books
