But now his message sounds different. It’s no longer the familiar mantras about the “Kyiv junta,” but a far more explosive cocktail: a direct call for armed struggle. Not with Ukraine — with the “internal enemy.”

“Russians are capable of organized resistance and of defending their right to live by their own rules with weapons in their hands… While the war with the external enemy is ongoing, our criminal authorities are waging war against the interests of the country and deliberately against the Russian people,” writes Gubarev.

Ukraine and NATO — no longer the main enemies?

The main sensation is not even that he’s calling to continue the war. But that the enemy of Russia, in his view, is no longer Ukraine or NATO, but the Kremlin itself. Moreover, Gubarev openly claims that the damage caused by “our authorities” is incomparably greater than that caused by Ukraine and NATO combined.

“If we surrender our weapons — we’ll surrender our country!” — a slogan he proposes repeating like a mantra.

This is no longer ultra-patriotism. It’s a direct threat to state sovereignty — and not Ukraine’s, but Russia’s. If we follow his logic, the real war hasn’t even started yet. And it starts — within.

But how exactly is Ukraine harmful to Russia?

Gubarev still routinely calls Ukraine an “external enemy,” but even he no longer tries to explain — why. The question hangs in the air:

• How exactly is Ukraine threatening Russia? By its independence? By its desire to live without the “Russian world”? By the fact it has borders, an army, and foreign policy?
• And how is NATO a threat? Because it didn’t let Moscow erase the Baltic states from the map and now supports Ukraine? Or because it showed the world that Russia can be resisted — and beaten?

So who is the real enemy?

According to Gubarev — not Ukraine. And not even the West. But the Russian authorities themselves, who:

• betrayed the “Russian idea”;
• are looting the country during wartime;
• are suppressing the very “bearers of the Russian spirit.”

“Only the organization of an armed Russian people can save Russia and our nation,” he writes openly.

This no longer sounds like analysis — but like a manifesto of armed insurrection. Like Trotsky on the border between 1916 and 1917. He speaks of an internal front. Of a redistribution of power. Of a new civil war.

The echo of 1917?

Gubarev himself recalls the First World War, which smoothly flowed into a civil one.
And it’s no coincidence. Russia, bogged down in a prolonged war, increasingly resembles a crippled empire before a revolution.

When patriots start to feel constrained by the official agenda, they raise their weapons against those who sent them to the front. When soldiers are told the enemy is defeated — but their lives don’t improve, they return home with weapons and questions.

And one such question has already been asked:

If the Kremlin hasn’t defeated Ukraine, hasn’t restored order, and hasn’t improved life — then who is to blame?

The answer, according to Gubarev, is obvious: “our” authorities.

A question of survival

To say such things amidst dozens of criminal cases for likes and memes is already a challenge. But the greater threat is that such ideas may soon be shared not by the margins, but by frontline soldiers, mobilized men, and the families of the fallen.

They could become the base for a new “insurrection with St. George’s ribbons.”
Not liberal. Not Western. But militarized and patriotic — against those who deceived them.

Final thought

While on paper Russia is still “at war with NATO,” the real front is already opening inside. And the one calling for it isn’t some State Department agent — but Pavel Gubarev, one of the most media-famous figures of the “Russian Spring.”

The story of how the sword of a great empire turns into a civil slaughter is not a historical tale. It is a scenario that seems to be about to escalate into a very real war.

Well then! Good luck to both sides. Let’s hope that none of the participants emerge victorious from this slaughter.